Sunday, October 29, 2006

Terry Schiavo's Husband Gets a Little Compassionate Conservatism

Heavy on the "little" and "conservative" and light on the "compassion".

Yet another vivid illustration of why we need to throw the Repugnicants out on their collective asses come the 7th. As if we needed another after all the insane clownery they've subjected us to recently.

My unreal night in Colorado - with radio link
by Michael Schiavo

If it were fiction, you wouldn't believe it.

Sadly, what happened in Colorado on Tuesday is true and unbelievable.

At the conclusion of a three-day, three-state campaign trip to promote candidates who will bring needed new leadership to Washington, I flew to Ft. Collins, Colorado to attend the only "debate" between Congresswoman Marilyn Musgrave and her courageous and forceful challenger Angie Paccione in the Colorado 4th district.

What happened there made the clearest case I could ever imagine for why change isn't just needed - it's required.

That was Tuesday.

But before we even got to Colorado, I had a great meeting with Joe Sestak, who's running an incredible campaign against Republican Curt Weldon in suburban Philadelphia. My PAC gave Sestak's campaign a $1,000 check to assist his efforts in restoring some sanity to Congress.

And I was impressed with Joe's candor, compassion and decency and I have no reservations in saying he'll be a great Congressman - they kind who will have the courage to stand up for our rights and the wisdom to know the difference between national policy and divisive politics.

Back to Tuesday in Colorado...a little background, first. Back in mid-July I travelled to Colorado and delivered a letter to Congresswoman Musgrave's office. asking her why she felt compelled to interfere in my family's personal affairs - questioning, in fact trying to refute the medical facts of my wife's case on the floor of Congress.

Not surprisingly, Marilyn Musgrave never responded to my letter.

So on Tuesday I joined about 1,000 citizens and members of the local and regional media in the Windsor High School Auditorium to hear the debate and try to get an answer to my question from Congresswoman Musgrave.

About twenty minutes before the debate started and after speaking to several reporters about how Musgrave had voted to transform her values into our laws, I took a seat in the front row. As it turned out, I was seated next to the timekeeper who held up yellow and red cards to signal time to the candidates.

But just minutes after taking my seat, I noticed a flurry of activity around my seat including about four uniformed police officers who were - I would learn later - called in by Musgrave staffers and asked to remove me from the building.

At this point, I had made no speeches, I had no signs, had made no attempt to disrupt or cause any commotion. I only came into the auditorium, spoke to a dozen or so reporters and took a seat.

To their credit, the police refused the Musgrave campaign's appeal to have me removed.

There's more to come, but I still can't get over even that part. A sitting member of Congress asked the police to remove me - a taxpaying citizen - from a public debate. Obviously, I misunderstand the concept of a political debate. I thought a debate was a place to share ideas, answer questions, defend your record and tell citizens what you've done and what you will do. Marilyn Musgrave believes, I have to gather, that debates are places to have the police remove people who don't agree with you.

After the police talked with obviously irritated Musgrave staffers and the debate organizer, the Musgrave campaign complained that my seat, next to the timekeeper, was inappropriate because - get this - Marilyn Musgrave would have to look at me. In an effort to appease the Musgrave camp, the debate organizers moved the timekeeper to the other side of the stage - about 15 seats away.

If you need to re-read that again, it's okay. A member of Congress who took to the floor of our Congress to speak about my wife, my family and my values made the debate timekeeper move so she wouldn't have to look at me. Just amazing.

The "debate" went on for an hour and at two points the audience actually broke out into laughter at Musgrave. Once, in response to a question about health care when she said America had the best health care in the world and again when she said the 700 mile immigration fence Congress approved would stop immigrants and protect "our children from drug dealers."

I admit I'm new to politics, but it just can't be a good sign when a home-town crowd is laughing at their Congresswoman. But given who their member of Congress is, I understand it.

As if the evening weren't already strange enough, as the clock wound down on the debate I noticed about half a dozen Musgrave staffers and supporters gathering near the stairs to the stage. They were whispering and forming a line. It stuck me as odd but I soon discovered why they were there.

As soon as the moderator wrapped-up the evening, they rushed in front of me forming a human shield for Congresswoman Musgrave - trying to keep me from speaking to her.

I called out, "Marilyn, why won't you answer my question?" and "It's just one question." But, like before, she ignored me. And as I approached the stage with other debate watchers, Musgrave staffers surrounded me trying their best to shout over me silly things like, "We love you Marilyn" and "Way to Go! Marilyn!"

It was really lame.

And, no kidding, within seconds of the debate ending, three or four other Musgrave staffers ran on stage, took the Congresswoman by the arms and whisked her through a side door and into a waiting car. She not only avoided my question, she didn't take a single comment from a single voter or shake a single hand.

I will give her credit, though, Marilyn Musgrave may have been the first member of Congress with the courage to actually demonstrate for all of us what "cut and run" really looks like. Marilyn Musgrave's display was the sorriest excuse for Democracy I'm likely ever to see.

Angie Paccione, by contrast, acted like a Congresswoman and stayed on stage and in the room for nearly an hour after the debate talking to people and shaking hands.

But underneath it all I'm left with something I can't get past. Congresswoman Marilyn Musgrave, as I said, had no problem at all in speaking about me and my family on the floor of Congress. Yet she can't bring herself to even look at me. She has to seek help from the police to have me removed from a public debate.

It's crystal clear that Marilyn Musgrave not only can't admit she's wrong, she can't even face the consequences of her own actions. She must believe that if she runs away fast enough or surrounds herself with enough people who tell her she's great, it never happened.

Well, Marilyn, it did happen. You were wrong. And that you don't have the decency to admit it or even face me - even to disagree with me - is more than cowardice. It's un-American and disgusting.

Even though you'd rather not see it or hear it, Congresswoman Musgrave, your votes have consequences. What you do impacts real people. And a wall of staffers, police and debate complaints won't hide the truth.

After seeing Marilyn Musgrave in action, I hope more than ever before that voters in Colorado are wise enough to make a change. I just can't think of any better reason to dump her from Congress than her refusal to even see the people she hurts. I just don't know how you can get any worse than that.

Angie Paccione needs your help.

There's more at stake here than just a seat in Congress.

And there are real parallels between Mariyn's outrageous behavior on Tuesday and the course our country is on. Like Marilyn Musgrave, too many of our "leaders" in Washington just refuse to see what's happening in Iraq, they refuse to see the members of Congress in hand-cuffs, they refuse to see people still living in the tragedy of Katrina, they refuse to see our un-insured and homeless.

Like Musgrave, they'd rather run away than face any American who sees what's really going on.

Please, please, please help Angie Paccione.

America needs this Congress to be swept away and take Marilyn Musgrave with it.

UPDATE: Yesterday, I was a guest on the Ed Schultz radio show to talk about the Colorado debate debacle. They have audio of my interview up on their website, here.

Saturday, October 28, 2006

Vox Populi: Our Man in DC....

Washington Post: LETTER FROM THE COURTROOM - In the Libby Case, A Grilling to Remember,

-- Carol D. Leonnig, Friday, October 27, 2006; Page A21

With withering and methodical dispatch, White House nemesis and prosecutor Patrick J. Fitzgerald yesterday sliced up the first person called to the stand on behalf of the vice president's former chief of staff.

If I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby was not afraid of the special counsel before, the former Cheney aide, who will face Fitzgerald in a trial beginning Jan. 11, had ample reason to start quaking after yesterday's Ginsu-like legal performance.

Prosecutor Patrick J. Fitzgerald told a witness that they had met before. (Lauren Victoria Burke - AP)
Politics Trivia

Fitzgerald's target in the witness box was Elizabeth F. Loftus, a professor of criminology and psychology at the University of California at Irvine. For more than an hour of the pretrial hearing, Loftus calmly explained to Judge Reggie B. Walton her three decades of expertise in human memory and witness testimony. Loftus asserted that, after copious scientific research, she has found that many potential jurors do not understand the limits of memory and that Libby should be allowed to call an expert to make that clear to them.

For more than an hour of the pretrial hearing, Loftus calmly explained to Judge Reggie B. Walton her three decades of expertise in human memory and witness testimony. Loftus asserted that, after copious scientific research, she has found that many potential jurors do not understand the limits of memory and that Libby should be allowed to call an expert to make that clear to them.

But when Fitzgerald got his chance to cross-examine Loftus about her findings, he had her stuttering to explain her own writings and backpedaling from her earlier assertions. Citing several of her publications, footnotes and the work of her peers, Fitzgerald got Loftus to acknowledge that the methodology she had used at times in her long academic career was not that scientific, that her conclusions about memory were conflicting, and that she had exaggerated a figure and a statement from her survey of D.C. jurors that favored the defense.

Her defense-paid visit to the federal court was crucial because Libby is relying on the "memory defense" against Fitzgerald's charges that he obstructed justice and lied to investigators about his role in the leaking of a CIA operative's identity to the media. Libby's attorneys argue that he did not lie -- that he was just really busy with national security matters and forgot some of his conversations.

When Fitzgerald found a line in one of her books that raised doubts about research she had cited on the stand as proof that Libby needs an expert to educate jurors, Loftus said, "I don't know how I let that line slip by."

"I'd need to see that again," Loftus said when Fitzgerald cited a line in her book that overstated her research by saying that "most jurors" consider memory to be equivalent to playing a videotape. Her research, however, found that to be true for traumatic events, and even then, only 46 percent of potential jurors thought memory could be similar to a videotape.

There were several moments when Loftus was completely caught off guard by Fitzgerald, creating some very awkward silences in the courtroom.

One of those moments came when Loftus insisted that she had never met Fitzgerald. He then reminded her that he had cross-examined her before, when she was an expert defense witness and he was a prosecutor in the U.S. attorney's office in New York.

Libby's defense team declined to comment.

Just goes to show you: never fuck with an Irishman.

Quote of the Day:

With a host of furious fancies,
Whereof I am commander,
With a burning spear and a horse of air
To the wilderness I wander.

By a knight of ghosts and shadows
I summoned am to tourney
Ten leagues beyond the wide world's end-
Methinks it is no journey.

"Tom O'Bedlam's Song", anonymous, circa 1600

Thursday, October 26, 2006

Bad News for America....

Fuck me. This sent a chill down my spine:

Carlyle Group reportedly among possible bidders for Tribune Co.

Washington Business Journal - 2:58 PM EDT Monday -- The Tribune Co., the embattled publisher of the Los Angeles Times and Chicago Tribune, is mulling an outright sale of the company, asking private-equity firms, including one based in Washington, to submit nonbinding indications of interest by the end of the month, according to a Monday report from The Wall Street Journal.

According to the report, three groups have emerged as possible bidders:

D.C.-based Carlyle Group; Madison Dearborn Partners, Providence Equity Partners, and Apollo Management; Thomas H. Lee Partners and Texas Pacific Group. At the moment, it is unclear whether Carlyle would bid alone or join with a group of buyers.

The report said that some bidders think the Chandler family, the largest shareholder in Tribune after the purchase of Los Angeles' Times Mirror in 2000, would accept a per-share buyout bid in the mid-$30s.

In addition to the Times and Tribune, Chicago-based Tribune Co. (NYSE: TRB) owns Newsday, the Chicago Cubs and 25 television stations.

In case you've just recently crawled out from a post-cold-war bunker, the Carlyle group is the investment banking firm that deals largely in weapons systems and is chaired by such dark luminaries as George Bush Sr., former UK PM John Majors and James Baker. This is pretty much the military-industrial complex personified, and blows even Halliburton (pirate seller, under Dick Cheney, of nuke detonators to Saddam Hussein and Iran) off the scale of evil.

Quote of the Day:

"As a foulness shall ye know Them. Their hand is at your throats, yet ye see Them not; and Their habitation is even one with your guarded threshold.

-- H.P. Lovecraft, "The Dunwich Horror"

Monday, October 23, 2006

Huffington to Host Live Podcast Tuesday

Arianna Huffington will be appearing on BlogTalkRadio on Tuesday, Oct. 24, at 5 p.m. EST/ 2 p.m. PST. BlogTalkRadio is a new "live podcasting" service that lets listeners call in or IM live so hosts can respond to their questions on the air. The call-in number for tomorrow's show is 877-548-3376.

You can read more about the interview on Huffington's host page at, on the BTR blog at, or at the Huffington Post at

Anyone can be a host at BlogTalkRadio -- and it's free. If you're interested, you can learn how it works here:

Friday, October 20, 2006

A Loaves & Fishes/Holy Ghost Victory for the GOP in November?

by Bob Fitrakis & Harvey Wasserman

The polls all point to a Democratic sweep in November. The news pours in about pedophile Republicans and Team Bush contempt for their fundamentalist bedmates. Iraq implodes. Deficits soar. Katrina lingers. Scandal is everywhere.

On the other hand, there are rumors of an "October Surprise." An attack on Iran. A new terror incident. Osama finally captured.

Gas prices are down, the stock market up.

None of it dampens the Democrats' euphoria. They think they are about to win. In conventional terms, they should.

But think again. Please.

It will take just two Biblical fixes for the GOP to keep the Congress, and thus solidify their power in this country, possibly forever: a loaves and fishes vote count, a Holy Ghost turnout.

We coined the phrase "loaves and fishes vote count" to describe the tally in Gahanna, Ohio, 2004. This infamous precinct in suburban Columbus registered 4258 votes for George W. Bush where just 638 people voted. The blessed event occurred at a fundamentalist church run by a close ally of the Reverend Jerry Falwell.

These numbers were later "corrected." But they reflect a much larger reality: the 2004 election was stolen with scores of dirty tricks for whose second coming the Democrats have yet to fully prepare.

In the two years since the fraudulent defeat of John Kerry, we've unearthed an unholy arsenal by which that election was stolen. They include: outright intimidation, wrongful elimination of registered voters, theft, selective deployment of (often faulty) voting machines, absentee ballots without Kerry's name on them, absentee ballots pre-punched for Bush, absentee ballots never mailed, touch screens that lit up for Bush when Kerry was chosen, lines for black voters five hours long while white voters a mile away voted in fifteen minutes, tens of thousands of provisional ballots pitched summarily in the trash, alleged ex-felons illegally told they could not vote, Hispanic precincts with no Spanish-speaking poll workers, deliberate misinformation on official web sites... and that's not even the tip of an iceberg whose bottom we may never see.

Thanks to a federal lawsuit, we have finally been able to look at some of the actual ballots from Ohio 2004. Just for starters, researchers Stuart Wright and Dr. Richard Hayes Phillips have found a precinct in Delaware County where 359 consecutive voters allegedly cast ballots for Bush. Dr. Ron Baiman found another precinct in Clermont County where a random inspection found 36 straight replacement ballots, a phenomenon that can be accomplished only by divine intervention or outright fraud.

These initial snippets have been unearthed with no cooperation or participation from the Democratic Party. The official Democratic spin is that they have "looked into the matter." But public records indicate that they have yet to visit the actual ballot storage facilities to examine the public records from the 2004 election.

In sum, we see no indication that the Democrats are prepared for the inevitable…that Karl Rove will steal again, and more, in 2006.

In Ohio alone, four election boards have already eliminated some 500,000 voters since the 2000 election---ten percent of the state's electorate---from the registration rolls in four Democratic counties. No similar purges have occurred in rural Republican counties. The Democrats have said or done very little about it.

To date there is no logical explanation from John Kerry as to why he conceded with 250,000 votes still uncounted while Bush's alleged margin was just half that. Nor have we heard about Democrat plans to monitor the ever-larger numbers of electronic voting machines deployed throughout the United States with no paper trail and no transparency for programming codes and memory cards that are privately owned, with no public inspection allowed.

Which is brings us to the Holy Ghost turnout. As Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., has reported in Rolling Stone Magazine, in Georgia 2002, U.S. Senate incumbent Max Cleland went into Election Day with a very substantial lead in the polls. He proceeded to allegedly lose by a substantial margin. Church-state operatives like Ralph Reed attributed this astonishing turn-around to an alleged last-minute mass turnout of evangelical voters.

Similar things were said about Florida and Ohio 2004.

But it never happened. There are no visual reports or other reliable indicators of extraordinary lines or massive late-in-the-day crowds at the polls. Throughout all those election days, it was every bit as quick and easy to vote in rural precincts that gave Bush his miraculous victory as it was impossible to do so in your average black neighborhood. But there was no extraordinary turnout of last-minute Bush voters.

What happened instead hearkens to the Holy Ghost, made manifest in electronic voting machines that cannot and will not be monitored. The miraculous pro-Bush margins give new meaning to the phrase "ghost in the machine." While the Democratic vote count was slashed and trashed in urban precincts, the rural voting stations, through the miracle of untrackable electronics, materialized just the right number of GOP votes to keep the Men of God in the White House (where it's recently reported they dare to mock those earthly evangelicals who allegedly gave them their margin of victory).

There's absolutely nothing to prevent this from happening again in 2006. Major studies from the Conyers Committee, the Government Accountability Office, Princeton University, the Brennan Center, the Carter-Baker Commission, and esteemed others, have all come to the same conclusion: it takes just one individual with inside access---or even just a wi-fi machine---to change the outcome of any election anywhere.

Electronic voting machines can be pre-programmed, re-programmed, re-calibrated, electronically adjusted, hacked, jimmied, jammed or otherwise blessed with a few well-placed electrons and---LO AND BEHOLD!---a Democratic landslide can be born again to a Republican deliverance.

We already see the signs. The corporate bloviators predict a last-minute surge for Bush. The Fox/Rove media machine has planted suggestive stories at the New York Times and elsewhere about the alleged hidden powers of the GOP juggernaut. They will, they say, once again turn out those invisible legions of evangelical voters when and where necessary.

Every two years, Rove leaks some story that is implausible and easily refuted: four million new evangelical voters are identified nationwide; or, a late surge of homophobic Old Order Amish rush to the polls in Ohio; or shy and reluctant right-wing Republican women flood the polls at closing and slip out unseen without speaking to exit pollsters (but, they are only shy in the early evening in Republican counties).

And the Democrats? They say they are also turning out voters. But what happens when their names are miraculously gone from the new electronic registration rolls? When there aren't enough machines in their precincts on which to vote? When they press a Democratic name on their touch-screen and an anointed Republican's lights up? Or when techno-gods from private partisan vendors barge in unchallenged to "adjust" the e-machines in the middle of the voting process.

So far, the Democrats have heaped abuse on those who dare to warn of all this.

But as it is written, so it shall be: unless there are armies of trained, dedicated citizens prepared to monitor this upcoming election, electronic and otherwise, the Holy Ghosts will vote, the loaves & fishes will multiply and be counted, and the GOP will once again emerge with total control of the checks and the balances---this time, perhaps, for all Eternity.

Bob Fitrakis & Harvey Wasserman are co-authors, with Steve Rosenfeld, of What Happened in Ohio?, just published by The New Press. Fitrakis is of counsel and Wasserman is a plaintiff in the King-Lincoln lawsuit that has preserved the Ohio 2004 ballots. Fitrakis is an independent candidate for Ohio governor, endorsed by the Green Party; Wasserman is author of Solartopia! Our Green-Powered Earth, A.D. 2030.

Wednesday, October 18, 2006

Muppets With a Message

The Muppets have a little something to say to Houston's finest in regard to their latest debacle.

And scenes like the Houston rampage are only going to become more and more common if we continue to let Chimpboy get away with this kind of shit. Tell me you're going out on the 7th. Here's hoping our numbers are so strong the bastards can't even Diebold us out of a fair election.

Friday, October 13, 2006

Because I just couldn't resist....

Being of a mind that conservatives need to just keep their goddamned fat, grubby hands off of my filthy porn, I couldn't resist a little fun at the expense of the prudes.

Thus, when a cheerful little spam ad arrived on my screen courtesy of NetDog Porn Filter, I sent the following innocent query:


Does your dog porn filter also work against other kinds of porn too?

The reply was admirably swift in coming:


NetDog Porn Filter works against all porn web sites, it can block all porn web sites.
But I had to be sure. So I contacted support, who helpfully added:

Yes, it works against all kinds of porn.
But one can never be too safe, after all:

Not just dog porn?

Yes, it can block all kinds of porn web sites, not only dog porn.

Well, what about horse porn?
The somewhat delayed reply, though still friendly, was a little grammar-challenged, suggesting perhaps our red-white-and-blue protectors of virtue were moonlighting from some dimly-lit third-world office:

It can block too.

Well, what about that really raunchy video where a pair of coed cheerleaders takes it in all three holes at once?


It will block all porn web sites. It was based on the content filtering technology.
So, I just had to ask (I mean wouldn't you want to know?):

But I LIKED that one.

But that one called "My Granny the Tranny Does the Nanny", that was some SICK shit. Please tell me you can block THAT.

It can block. You can have a try with the program.

Well, that's no goddamned fun now, is it?
No reply.

With lame support like that, I'm sure as Hell not gonna buy.

From the Mouths of Ba... er, Crazy Bastards.....

As the fumigation of Congress commences, all manner of odd creatures are skittering out of the cracks into the daylight.

Take for example K.A. "Crazy Eyes" Paul, a friend good and true to all things Republican, pictured above describing his recent impromptu group grovel with human-porcine hybrid Dennis "Pimpin'!" Hastert, along with the gleaming diamond in the turd that Hastahurt promised to step down within a week and a half.

Meanwhile, our own homespun engineers of Armageddon are cheerfully building themselves an army of zealots in the spirit of Al Qaeda.

But these guys are so seriously unglued that even their own dark masters will no longer publicly lay claim to them.

Strange the Republicants'd be so particular, considering the company they're accustomed to keeping. Take, for example, that paradigm of all things wholesome and American, the good Reverend, who's so popular on Capital Hill they threw him a special party -- and, um... CROWNED him KING in the SENATE building with 81 fawning Congressmen (mostly Republican) paying tribute.

But just why are folks like this fellow, the self-proclaimed Resurrection of Christ, who encourages throwing the church's sacred symbols into the trash and "discarding Democracy" in favor of submitting to the rule of the "True Father" (three guesses as to who THAT might be) such a hit at all the swingin' neocon parties?

Gee, who knows?

Quotes of the Day:

"Jesus is Coming! Quick, everyone look busy..."

"I've found Jesus; he was behind the sofa the whole time."

"Jesus saves. But Gretzky scores on the rebound!"

"When the Rapture comes, can I have your car?"

--bumper sticker slogans

Thursday, October 12, 2006

Over Half a Million Deaths After the Fact....

As we learn that -- surprise! the Red House lied to us yet again about how wonderfully our campaign to bring freedom and enlightenment to the swarthy desert savages is going (by double a scale of magnitude, no less) -- it's a good time to again look at why exactly we're slaughtering them so efficiently. Let's just ask:

Mr. Bush, presumably we've now killed half a million CIVILIANS as a punishment or deterrent for their involvement in the attacks of September 11, 2001. So let's recap: what exactly DID the people of Iraq have to do with those attacks?

You don't say....

Oh. Gee; who knew?

Well, aside from these two nobodies.

Quote of the Day:

"You ain't got no money?
He'll get you some
You ain't got no car?
He'll get you one
You ain't have no self-respect,
you feel like an insect
Well don't you worry buddy,
cause here he comes
Through the ghettos and the barrio
and the bowery and the slum
A shadow is cast wherever he stands
Stacks of green paper in his
red right hand."

"You'll see him in your nightmares,
you'll see him in your dreams
He'll appear out of nowhere but
he ain't what he seems
You'll see him in your head,
on the TV screen
And hey buddy, I'm warning
you to turn it off
He's a ghost, he's a god,
he's a man, he's a guru
You're one microscopic cog
in his catastrophic plan
Designed and directed by
his red right hand."

--Nick Cave "Red Right Hand"

Wednesday, October 11, 2006

Censored Bush Assassination Movie Now Online

You'll need to install a (free) bitorrent client like Bitcomet or Bitlord.

Here's where you'll find the movie for downloading (since it's being censored in the US)

Friday, October 06, 2006

Closeted Gay Republicans and a Party in Political Free-Fall

by Lawrence O'Donnell
The LA Times has outed Kirk Fordham today. He will not be the last closeted gay Republican outed by this scandal.

Today's NY Times has a chart that outlines the "key communications" in the House of Representatives about Mark Foley's inappropriate contact with pages. More than one of the names in the chart, which includes Kirk Fordham, are rumored to be closeted gay Republicans who have been working at the highest levels of the Republican leadership.

They have been looking at their names in print for the last couple of days and no doubt fearing for their futures in a Party that is in political free-fall.

Are ambitious closeted gay Republican officials, the most reliable people Speaker Hastert could have delegated the Foley problem to last year? Obviously not. Heat on a closeted gay Republican in the House is heat on all closeted gay Republicans in the House. The most innocent Foley emails were enough to worry the parents of the recipient. They were enough to worry the closeted gay Republicans too. But the closeted gay Republicans were perfectly positioned in the House to make the problem disappear.

Now two Republican staffers are locked in a credibility contest: it's Kirk Fordham v. Scott Palmer, Hastert's chief of staff. Palmer flatly denies that Fordham warned him about Foley. Hastert's political life depends entirely on Scott Palmer's credibility. I can't find anyone in Washington who knows Palmer who thinks his credibility can survive this test.

It's no accident that the first call for Hastert's resignation came from Tony Blankley, Newt Gingrich's former press secretary. Tony knows that the scandal cannot die as long as Hastert and his staff are still in the building.

The Republican base--the Evangelical get-out-the-vote troops--are going to be devastated when they discover how many closeted gay Republicans were involved in policing Mark Foley in the House of Representatives. Republican House members know this. That's why momentum is building for a very quick House cleaning and a new Speaker by next week.

Thursday, October 05, 2006

Foley on America's Most Wanted

Hoo boy! Winceworthy, if ever a clip was.

Wednesday, October 04, 2006

Revenge of the Interns? Mark Foley and the Case of the 'Stop Sex Predators' Blog

By "workingmansblues"

So a little over two months ago this blog pops up on called 'Stop Sex Predators'. Despite being billed as a "clearing house for the public to report sex predators and as a resource for concerned parents and citizens", the owner provided no information about his or herself other than an anonymous Gmail address. Nor did he/she provide any affiliations that would compel someone to report anything to the site. Much less a crime. Strange.

Then there's the tone. In the few writings posted over the first six weeks or so this blog's been in existence, mostly dredging up old stories about old scandals, one is struck by a sense that the author is a teenager. "Semi-literate" one blog called it.

But after only two months online, and with no signs of readership whatsoever, this obscure little blog would scoop ABC News when, on Sep. 21, a full week before ABC broke the story, it posted emails - all claiming to be from different interns who had knowledge of or direct interaction with Mark Foley. On Sep. 24, five days before the story broke, they would post the emails that were alleged to be between Foley himself and the 16 year old page. So who is this Stop Sex Predators blog and how did they beat out ABC on this story?

Prior to this, the new blog had little posting activity, no comments and didn't even register on Google or Blogsearch. And yet we are to believe that suddenly, out of thin air, this blog emerges, does a couple of uninteresting posts on congressional sex scandals, is miraculously discovered by these interns who decide to use this site, which has no readers, to tell their stories - all of which name Mark Foley.

These emails, posted on Sep. 21, are presented as interns who just stumbled on to the SSP blog, identified with the blog's posts on congress and interns, and felt compelled to write in their own stories. How they would find this blog is not revealed. Nor do they inform the recipient if they are aware of each other or not. The emails are just presented as though these three (maybe four) individuals found the site and wrote in.

And then there is the case of WHInternNow who, all the way back on Sep. 5 posted this comment at Daily Kos:

The Real Problem With Foley
It's not that he's gay. It's that he constantly hits on underage interns on The Hill. You guys talk about an "open secret" well Foley's eye for the young boys in the White House and around the Capitol is what has the Republican bosses scared to death. It's just wrong that this guy can hit on young boys and still be in the leadership.

WHInternNow too seems to have miraculously stumbled upon SSP's site as his/her one and only diary entry at Daily Kos indicates:

Congressman Mark Foley Emails to Intern

by WHInternNow

Sun Sep 24, 2006 at 11:25:31 AM PDT

I have been reading with interest the various discussions with regard to Congressman Mark Foley. I am a White House Intern and have been in personal contact with Congressman Foley on numerous occasions.

Today I Googled Congressman Foley and came upon this website:
I was just shocked by what I found. I am especially upset by the dismissive attitudes I found on the web from those who know about Congressman Foley's bad behavior in Washington. I'm sure his conservative base in Florida would not approve of him sending these suggestive and leading emails to underage interns.

Problem is, Google hadn't indexed Stop Sex Predators website on Sep 24. In fact, it still hasn't. So Googling Congressman Foley or Mark Foley would not have led you to SSP's website in a million years.

It's impossible to know just who's behind this website and the "emails", but the events as presented simply do not hold up. A couple of wingers have picked up on this but they assume that the left is behind it. I have a different theory - what if this is the revenge of the interns?

We know that the boy told his parents but they apparently told Rodney Alexander R-La., that they "didn't want [him] to do anything." The Republican leadership appears not to have wanted to pursue the matter either since, as WHInternNow stated in the comment above, they were "scared to death." And we now know the St. Petersburg Times had the story but refused to run it unless the boy was willing to go on the record.

ABC News also reported this little nugget:

One former page tells ABC News that his class was warned about Foley by people involved in the program.
Other pages told ABC News they were hesitant to report Foley because of his power in Congress.

So all this adds up to a good motive for the 16 year old page/intern or interns themselves to take matters into their own hands. There is strong evidence that this site was merely a staging ground for someone to get the story out on the lascivious  behaviour of Mark Foley. It's all just a guess at this point but, while it could be political operatives, it reads like the revenge of the interns.  And if this is a case, then all I can say is touché. Sorry the adult weren't willing to do the job.


Hmmm.... curiouser and curiouser. My money's on the intelligence community.

Tuesday, October 03, 2006

Now THERE'S an Interview worth pursuing....

Whoops! According to the (insufficiently redacted) Congressional Record of June 6, 2002 the young page "John" who paid the highest bid for a private BMW ride and an evening of entertainment with the (known page cyber-stalker) Foley, was none other than John Eunice, who, after his stint in the office of Georgia Republican Senator Saxby Chambliss immediately returned to become the youngest member of Valdosta City Council in the city's history -- before he had even graduated.


Monday, October 02, 2006

A Capital Enterprise

John Avrosis has the scoop.
Not only were Illinois Rep. John Simpkus and Dennis Hastert's office turning a blind eye while they knew Mark Foley was grooming underage male pages, they let him set up soirees.

If these guys walk away scott free from this, the rule of law in America is officially dead.

Quote of the Day:

"I got no patience
And I hate waitin..
Hoe get yo' ass in

And let's RI-I-I-I-I-IDE.. check em out now
RI-I-I-I-I-IDE, yeah
And let's RI-I-I-I-I-IDE.. check em out now
RI-I-I-I-I-IDE, yeah"

--"Big Pimpin'", Jay-Z

While We're At It, Let's Not Forget the Story of Little Jeffy at the White House....

As the shit hits the fan by the truckload for the GOP, let's not forget the story of wee Jeffy, who spent many a night secretly camping at the White House....

And, no, this isn't remotely anti-gay, nor am I equating Foley's Internet grooming of teenage boys with consensual adult sexual relations, but remember this rabid pack of sociopathic opportunists has repeatedly been running on the "family values" platform....

Thus, here is the perfect opportunity to propagate the meme to everyone within earshot that the Republican party, the party of the sanctimonious mule-boners, the rabid anti-gay, closeted boy buggerers, the Jesus-preaching mass murdering torturers, the fetus-at-the-dinner-table family values team, the American-ideals-championing terrorist backers, the free-market-touting plutocrats, the freedom-touting prison wardens, the "pro-life" executioners, the Homeland Security-protecting drunk driving gun nuts, the tough-guy draft dodgers, the governmental honesty-restoring liars and cheats, the "heritage-cherishing" destroyers of our political legacy, the coalition-building destroyers of national and international solidarity, is nothing more than a bunch of hypocritical, repressed deviants.

"Listen, you're either on the side of REAL family values, or you're on the side of $1200 gay hooker sleepovers at the White House, and Congressmen Internet-stalking teenage boys...."

A little cognitive dissonance is good for the soul now and again.

Quote of the Day:

"You got a lotta nerve
To say you are my friend
When I was down
You just stood there grinning

You got a lotta nerve
To say you got a helping hand to lend
You just want to be on
The side that's winning

You say I let you down
You know it's not like that
If you're so hurt
Why then don't you show it

You say you lost your faith
But that's not where it's at
You had no faith to lose
And you know it..."

Positively 4th Street, Bob Dylan