Sen. Ted Stevens declared his innocence Tuesday after his indictment on charges that he concealed hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of gifts and services from a company in his home state.
* * *
In the 28-page indictment, Stevens was charged with seven counts of making false statements on his Senate financial disclosure forms.
* * *
The 84-year-old senator is a former chairman of the Senate Appropriations Committee and is renowned for his prowess in steering federal funds to his vast, sparsely populated state.
Stevens is the oldest Republican senator and second in age only to Sen. Robert Byrd, the 90-year-old Democrat from West Virginia.
He has represented Alaska in Washington since 1968 and is up for re-election in November. He is the longest-serving Republican senator in history.
Rep. Geoff Davis (R-KY) on Obama: “I’m going to tell you something: That boy’s finger does not need to be on the button. He could not make a decision in that simulation that related to a nuclear threat to this country.”
Do you think Judith gets jealous of September 11?
In 1982, in an essay entitled “The Spawn of Annenberg, Part 1”, Harlan Ellison wrote about his visit to San Quentin and the chilling experience of listening to the convicted murderer of a 5-year-old child explain why he couldn’t have done what he obviously had done.
The convict had stomped the boy to death, but explained that he could not have done it because he wears sneakers.
And sneakers are soft.
I would just as soon people leave the Republican party, and do not vote for any Republicans. Among other things, Ron Paul does not believe that women should have the right to their own bodies. If you are a white male Christian, Ron Paul is probably a good candidate for you, but as a white male Christian, I wouldn’t vote for him.
With that said, if you won’t agree then at least I hope you’ll accept that for all my disagreement with Ron Paul, he is honorable to his own beliefs, and it would be preferable that he win the Republican nomination than any of the other candidates running.
Update: Daniel Larison observes the imminent crack-up of the Republican party.
Mr. Craig has staunchly — if not credibly — proclaimed [his] heterosexuality, and therefore he will stay in office regardless of the harm he does to his own party. That’s a subversive way of undermining gay rights: as long as you don’t admit to being gay, you can be convicted of a misdemeanor for a charge related to sex in a public place with another man and still be a senator. But if Larry Craig had done what James McGreevy, the former governor of New Jersey did — admit in public to being a gay American — he’d be back in Idaho trolling for hookups on the internet. It’s the GOP version of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell, and it’s working just about as well for them as it is for the military.
The face of the Senate Republicans.
They are practically singing God Damn America.
(h/t PortlyDyke @ Shakesville)
(h/t Melissa McEwan @ Shakesville)
Rudolph Giuliani, September 5, 2007:
The reality is that I think someone’s private life, someone’s family life is something that you all look into to determine how are they going to conduct themselves in public office, and in my case, you have about 30, 35 years of experience to figure out how I would.
Former NYC Mayor Rudy Giuliani’s personal life has been a mess for quite a while. No one needs to go dumpster diving to learn the details; they’re all out in the open — three marriages (including one to his cousin), repeated extra-marital affairs, left his second wife by way of a press conference (he told reporters before telling his spouse), estranged from his kids. “Family Man of the Year” he is not.
Personally, I’m not so much interested in a pissing match between him and Hillary Clinton. Clearly Rudolph Giuliani does not represent the kind of family values that his party pretends to stand for. Hillary Clinton did stand by her man even after infidelity and deception. I’m not sure I’d want him back in the White House either.
I won’t vote for either of these people, at any rate.
OVERLAND PARK, Kansas (Reuters) – A Kansas military cemetery has run out of space after the burial of another casualty of the Iraq war, officials said on Thursday.
“We are full,” said Alison Kohler, spokeswoman for the Fort Riley U.S. Army post, home of the 1st Infantry Division.
U.S. Sens. Sam Brownback and Pat Roberts, both Kansas Republicans, on Thursday sent a letter to William Tuerk, the under secretary for memorial affairs at the Department of Veterans Affairs, urging for full funding for a new cemetery for Fort Riley.
* * *
Fort Riley can bury bodies on top of other bodies if family members want to share a plot, said Kohler.
Bury the Republican party.
Not so long ago, folks used to brand a guy as gay simply if he had a sashay in his gait, or a soft handshake, or a preference for pink shirts. This kind of prejudicial stereotyping is finally going the way of the dodo bird.
We now know that tracking gay proclivities requires a more sophisticated approach and involves tracking different kinds of tendencies:
For example, if the gentleman in question is a manly mountain state conservative politician who regularly denounces godless homosexuality — there’s a good chance he is gay.
If the gentleman in question is a congressman who continually sponsors bills to declare that marriage can only be between a man and a woman — there’s a good chance he is gay.
If the gentleman in question is a noisy, raspy minister who preaches family values and calls America a modern Sodom and Gomorrah — there’s a good chance he is gay.
Recent evidence for this hypothesis has been manifested by remarkable fellows like: Larry Craig, Mark Foley, Rev. Ted Haggard… and many more. Consider these recent headlines:
- “Rev. Haggard Resigns After Sex With Gay Prostitute”
- “U.S. Rep. Foley Sought Sex With Male Pages”
- “GOP’s Craig Busted In Bathroom Sex Caper”
It’s the hypocrisy of these fellows, rather than the lurid details of their behavior, that makes their stories so intriguing. Their hypocrisy casts a veil of suspicion over all “well-meaning” homophobic politicians and religious leaders. If they protest gays too much — will we suspect they are gay?
Come out of the water closet.
In his long-awaited memoir, to be published tomorrow, Greenspan, a Republican whose 18-year tenure as head of the US Federal Reserve was widely admired, will also deliver a stinging critique of President George W Bush’s economic policies.
However, it is his view on the motive for the 2003 Iraq invasion that is likely to provoke the most controversy. “I am saddened that it is politically inconvenient to acknowledge what everyone knows: the Iraq war is largely about oil,” he says.
Rachel Maddow (h/t Ellroon @ Rants from the Rookery):
David Kurtz has this to say:
Conservative super-lawyer Ted Olson is the front-runner to be President Bush’s pick for attorney general. Senate Dems are less than thrilled, but if last week’s 4th Circuit nominee is any indication (oh, and the last 6 1/2 years), the White House will not be offering a consensus-building nominee. We already know that Senate Democrats are threatening to slow down the nomination until they get responses from the Department of Justice and White House to some of their oversight requests, but will Senate Dems fight this nomination on its merits?
Wikipedia has this to say:
Olson’s third wife, Barbara K. Olson, was a passenger on the hijacked American Airlines Flight 77 that was crashed into the Pentagon on September 11, 2001 (his 61st birthday). The following year Olson met Lady Booth, a tax attorney and native of Kentucky, and the two were married on October 21, 2006 in Napa County, California . Booth has described herself as a Democrat; her only federal campaign contribution has been to $2,300 to Republican presidential candidate Rudy Giuliani . Olson also has contributed nearly $3000 in his own name to Giuliani, as well as to other Republican politicians and PACs. 
Josh Marshall on the difference between Larry Craig and David Vitter:
It’s always good to seek out the larger lesson behind a political scandal. So in this case, it seems to be, If you’re a Republican and you want to misbehave sexually, make sure it’s with a chick.
I think that Larry Craig should be permitted to withdraw his plea and have his day in court.
Hat-tip Ellroon @ Rants from the Rookery.
He will endorse a Republican for president.
There is no question or doubt in my mind that he will do so, because to do otherwise he would have to endorse a Democratic candidate who wants to end the war. All the Democratic candidates want to end the war.
Joe Lieberman does not.
Please read PSoTD.
Glenn Greenwald‘s excellent satire of neoconservative chickenhawk yellow elephant Republicans:
We need to prove to the world how powerful and tough and strong we are by kicking ass and starting wars and putting our boots on the ground and getting our hands dirty and bombing and invading and fighting like the Real Warriors we are because Civilization is at Risk. And the way we should do that is by sending those people — the ones way, way over there — to go and fight and risk their lives in the wars I love.
I am a full-throated Supporter of the Epic War of Civilizations, but I can’t fight in it, because my knee hurts and I need to collect advance checks from Regnery and I want to stay at home and wipe dribble from my baby’s chin. But those people over there can and should fight. And between watching Star Trek on television and playing war video games, I will log off periodically to write articles and posts about how great these wars are and I, too, will therefore be strong and noble and resolute and brave.
I realize that many people are turned off by such analogies. In this case I feel the need to make it because of one crucial aspect of the Bush-Republican movement. It has no interest in maintaining Constitutional freedoms, or in the democratic process of governance. This is a cautious, negative way of stating that Bush and company are actively committed to dismantling the Bill of Rights, and to establising a Presidential power unfettered by any law or standard other than their own political will. Everything they have done, every statement, policy, and initiative, has served the aim of absolute executive power. There has been no compromise. They will defy Congressional subpoenas, while finding ways to ignore and subvert any laws that Congress may pass which they consider a threat to their authority. Their arguments amount to claiming dictatorship over the United States, with perpetual war used as a pretext to refute any legal challenges. That is the simple truth, and everything that this administration has done falls perfectly within this paradigm, while alternative theories fail to adequately explain its behavior.
So in this sense I think it is accurate to characterize the Bush regime as fascist in nature. And the trouble with fascism is that you can’t make deals with it. “No appeasement”—that Cold War rallying cry of the right wing—in fact reveals the only possible response to the right wing movement itself. To think that you can coddle fascism, or somehow use the legislative process to disarm it, is an illusion, one which the Democrats have been too slow in discovering. It has to be rooted out of the body politic by any means necessary. When I’m living in a country where the Nazis or the Ku Klux Klan run the executive, I don’t bother to give serious consideration to anything that the agents of the executive may say. What they say is always already false. They are inherently untrustworthy because their object is the destruction of American freedom and the establishment of dictatorship. No one now says of the Germans, “They did the right thing by respecting Hitler, since he was their commander-in-chief, after all.”
The following is a public statement issued by George Bush today announcing his decision to issue a line-item reprieve of Lewis Libby’s sentence. Hat-tip and thanks to Paul Kiel from whom this text was copied.
The United States Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit today rejected Lewis Libby’s request to remain free on bail while pursuing his appeals for the serious convictions of perjury and obstruction of justice. As a result, Mr. Libby will be required to turn himself over to the Bureau of Prisons to begin serving his prison sentence.
I have said throughout this process that it would not be appropriate to comment or intervene in this case until Mr. Libby’s appeals have been exhausted. But with the denial of bail being upheld and incarceration imminent, I believe it is now important to react to that decision.
From the very beginning of the investigation into the leaking of Valerie Plame’s name, I made it clear to the White House staff and anyone serving in my administration that I expected full cooperation with the Justice Department. Dozens of White House staff and administration officials dutifully cooperated.
After the investigation was under way, the Justice Department appointed United States Attorney for the Northern District of Illinois Patrick Fitzgerald as a Special Counsel in charge of the case. Mr. Fitzgerald is a highly qualified, professional prosecutor who carried out his responsibilities as charged.
This case has generated significant commentary and debate. Critics of the investigation have argued that a special counsel should not have been appointed, nor should the investigation have been pursued after the Justice Department learned who leaked Ms. Plame’s name to columnist Robert Novak. Furthermore, the critics point out that neither Mr. Libby nor anyone else has been charged with violating the Intelligence Identities Protection Act or the Espionage Act, which were the original subjects of the investigation. Finally, critics say the punishment does not fit the crime: Mr. Libby was a first-time offender with years of exceptional public service and was handed a harsh sentence based in part on allegations never presented to the jury.
Others point out that a jury of citizens weighed all the evidence and listened to all the testimony and found Mr. Libby guilty of perjury and obstructing justice. They argue, correctly, that our entire system of justice relies on people telling the truth. And if a person does not tell the truth, particularly if he serves in government and holds the public trust, he must be held accountable. They say that had Mr. Libby only told the truth, he would have never been indicted in the first place.
Both critics and defenders of this investigation have made important points. I have made my own evaluation. In preparing for the decision I am announcing today, I have carefully weighed these arguments and the circumstances surrounding this case.
Mr. Libby was sentenced to thirty months of prison, two years of probation, and a $250,000 fine. In making the sentencing decision, the district court rejected the advice of the probation office, which recommended a lesser sentence and the consideration of factors that could have led to a sentence of home confinement or probation.
I respect the jury’s verdict. But I have concluded that the prison sentence given to Mr. Libby is excessive. Therefore, I am commuting the portion of Mr. Libby’s sentence that required him to spend thirty months in prison.
My decision to commute his prison sentence leaves in place a harsh punishment for Mr. Libby. The reputation he gained through his years of public service and professional work in the legal community is forever damaged. His wife and young children have also suffered immensely. He will remain on probation.The significant fines imposed by the judge will remain in effect. The consequences of his felony conviction on his former life as a lawyer, public servant, and private citizen will be long-lasting.
The Constitution gives the President the power of clemency to be used when he deems it to be warranted. It is my judgment that a commutation of the prison term in Mr. Libby’s case is an appropriate exercise of this power.
Dick Cheney resigns, and is pardoned by George Bush.
John McCain is nominated for vice president and if he is confirmed, George Bush then resigns and is pardoned by John McCain. Of course, John McCain would promise not to do that before he is confirmed, but he would break that promise.
And you’re welcome.
Michael Kamburowski, the Australian immigrant hired as a top official in the California Republican Party, was ordered deported in 2001, jailed three years later for visa violations — and has filed a $5 million wrongful arrest lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, according to U.S. District Court documents.
* * *
Christopher Matthews, a Canadian citizen with no experience in statewide politics, was hired this month after the California Republican party applied for, and received, an H1B visa specifically to fill the role of “political director,” according to U.S. Department of Labor data.
Hat-tip Donna Woodka.
Update: Phoenix Woman has more:
Lordy, the jokes just write themselves, don’t they? (Though I’d rather see an H-1B, which is intended to boost the American economy, go to him rather than to somebody Bill Gates hired at cut-rate wages to be trained here so that particular somebody can then go back to China or India and help Gates finish the job of totally offshoring Microsoft, as it’s all too obvious he intends to do.)
I agree with Charles, we should offshore the Republican party. Maybe they can help out in Iraq?
No, that might be worse than what Bush did to them. They deserve friendship, not our cast-offs.
Daniel Larison of Eunomia:
Newsweek’s latest poll has some interesting numbers. Keeping in mind how little polls mean and how relatively unreliable polls of merely registered voters are, the poll shows that the four named Republican candidates continue to lose against the three named Democratic candidates, no matter the matchup.
It’s a pretty comprehensive poll and I recommend you check it out. Bottom line numbers indicate that unless something expected happens, the Republican party does not have a viable candidate for president in 2008.
Inoculate, impeach, and remove. Don’t wait until 2008.
Do you favor a withdrawal of all United States military from Iraq within the next six months? (Republicans Only)
Do you favor a withdrawal of all United States military from Iraq within the next six months? (Democrats Only)