Friday, November 11, 2005

Unintelligent in the Senate and on the 700 Club

Mike and are doing two items from Democracy Now! today because I'm pretty wiped out tonight. Be sure to check out Mikey Likes It! to read Mike's take on the two items.

Senate Votes To Remove Prisoners’ Right to Challenge Detentions (Democracy Now!):
On Capital Hill Thursday, the Senate voted to take away Guantanamo Bay prisoners’ right to challenge their detentions in United States courts. The measure, put forward by Republican Senator Lindsey Graham, would override a Supreme Court decision last year. The New York Times reports the amendment would nullify legal challenges currently filed by nearly 200 of the 500 detainees currently held at Guantanamo. Five Democrats joined 44 Republicans to pass the measure by a vote of 49 to 42. However the New York Times reports the victory may be short-lived as nine senators were absent, and are pushing for a second vote as early as Monday.

C.I. names the five and I agree that they should be ashamed. I don't expect much from Republicans, to be honest. The reasonable ones have enough problems having allowed their party to be hijacked by the American Taliban. (Which didn't happen under Bully Boy. I've heard women complaining for years now, women who continue to identify as Republican.)
But I do expect the party of the people, the Democratic Party, to stand up for what is just fair.
Joe Lieberman should have declared himself a Republican years ago.

You hear a lot of "If Gore would have carried Tenn., then Florida wouldn't have been an issue." If Al Gore had chosen someone else for his running mate, then a lot of things would have been different. As I remember it, anytime I found myself thinking, "Okay, now Gore's coming alive!" I'd just have to wait a day or two for Joementum to show up on TV or in print saying, "Well that's not really what he meant." The two had nothing common politically. And, like C.I., I believe that the recount battle suffered a huge blow (possibly the deciding one) when Joementum went on Meet the Press and instead of being a fighter says, "Oh sure, we'll count any military ballot." Which is how ballots that arrived with postmarks after the election got counted and how ballots that were faxed in got counted and how ballots with no postmark or ballots or that weren't filled out properal were counted.

Joe Lieberman stabbed Al Gore in the back repeatedly. He undercut him constantly.

I voted for Al Gore. I did that in spite of detesting the psuedo Democrat Lieberman.

Robertson Warns Town Over Rejecting "Intelligent Design" Proponents (Democracy Now!):
Christian televangelist Pat Robertson is again drawing controversy for a statement made on his program "The 700 Club." On Thursday, Robertson was asked to comment on a vote in the Pennsylvania town of Dover that removed school board members who advocated "intelligent design". Robertson said: "I'd like to say to the good citizens of Dover: if there is a disaster in your area, don't turn to God, you just rejected Him from your city. And don't wonder why He hasn't helped you when problems begin, if they begin. I'm not saying they will, but if they do, just remember, you just voted God out of your city. And if that's the case, don't ask for His help because he might not be there." In August, Robertson was forced to apologize after he called for the assassination of Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez.

There's no "intelligent design" to Pat Robertson's mind. As he gives what reads like a threat, as usual, he doesn't know what the hell he's talking about.

The school board members were removed in Tuesday's election. By a bi-partisan group of voters. Why? Dover was tired of looking like the nation's idiot. But even so, the votes were very close. At one point on Tuesday night, one of the candidates being removed was losing by only eight votes. I'm not sure whether that held or not but the races were close.

So there were, sadly, a significant amount of people in Dover who "believed" like Pat Robertson and apparently they're doomed to hell or an attack by an act of geography (ordained by Robertson).

The votes were close and his people turned out to show their support. They were a significant part of the voting pool but not enough to keep the members from being driven out of office.
Robertson can't see that or grasp it. So he condems not only his "enemies" but his fellow "believers."

Now my own personal opinion is that the board should have been voted out. I'm happy that they were. But I'm not foolish enough to ignore how close the vote was. But the "spiritual leader" is willing to condemn an entire area including the people who voted the way he wanted.

No peace quote tonight. Instead, I want to note a passage. Eli asked C.I. to note "Democrats and the War" which is an important editorial from The Nation:

Americans are well on their way to a full appreciation of the dimensions of this debacle. In an October CBS news poll, 59 percent of citizens surveyed and 73 percent of Democrats now want an end to US military involvement in Iraq. But this growing majority has made its judgment with virtually no help from our nation's leaders. Most shameful has been the Democratic Party's failure to oppose the war. Indeed, support for it has been bipartisan: A Republican President and Congress made the policy, and almost all of the leading Democrats--most of the honorable exceptions are members of the House of Representatives--supported it from the outset and continue to do so. To their credit, would-be presidential candidate Senator Russell Feingold and former Senator Gary Hart have recently made strong antiwar statements. More recently two other presidential contenders, Senator John Kerry and former Senator John Edwards, have begun to call for a shift in policy, though still in vague and reticent terms. More typical, however, are the other presidential hopefuls, Senators Hillary Clinton, Joseph Biden and Evan Bayh, who continue to huddle for cover in "the center." They offer little alternative to Bush's refrain "We must stay the course!" Nor do the party's Congressional leaders and its head, Howard Dean, once a leader of antiwar sentiment. Can such politicians, who cannot even follow a majority--in the Democratic Party, a large majority--really be considered leaders?
The Nation therefore takes the following stand: We will not support any candidate for national office who does not make a speedy end to the war in Iraq a major issue of his or her campaign. We urge all voters to join us in adopting this position. Many worry that the aftermath of withdrawal will be ugly, but we can now see that the consequences of staying will be uglier still. Fear of facing the consequences of Bush's disaster should not be permitted to excuse the creation of a worse disaster by continuing the occupation.

I will absolutely join them. I hope you will as well. I think it's a stand we need to take. My excerpt is different from C.I.'s so if you're someone who doesn't go to links, hopefully you saw enough here and at The Common Ills to understand how important this editorial is. I'd also suggest that you make a point to read Cedric's "It's not just the young people" which addresses how the elderly in the nursing home he visits have turned against the war and the Bully Boy as well.