Care about your first amendment rights? Today is a good day to show it at 4PM at City Hall. James has more details.
I’m a bad activist and can’t leave the computer today.
Care about your first amendment rights? Today is a good day to show it at 4PM at City Hall. James has more details.
I’m a bad activist and can’t leave the computer today.
What a scary country this is. This is what happened at a McCain campaign stop yesterday.
Another man — wondering if an attack on Iran is in the works — wanted to know when America is going to “send an air mail message to Tehran.”
McCain began his answer by changing the words to a popular Beach Boys song. “Bomb bomb bomb, bomb bomb Iran,” he sang to the tune of Barbara Ann. “Iran is dedicated to the destruction of Israel. That alone should concern us but now they are trying for nuclear capabilities. I totally support the President when he says we will not allow Iran to destroy Israel.”
He stopped short of answering the actual question and did not say if he supports an invasion of Iran.
[via Huffington Post]
Update:
Here is a post with a video at TAPPED. It’s pretty funny that the person asking the question thinks there is only one country (Iran) causing all of the “troubles” in the Middle East. He probably drove an SUV to the event.

I see today that The Civilians are listed in Time Out New York as one of eight Off-Off Broadway companies to watch. This reminds me to write about their benefit coming up on April 18, titled Resurrection Vaudeville. James and I are big supporters, and have seen nearly everything they’ve done in the last four years in NYC. Join us for some drinks and entertainment!
Wednesday, April 18, 2007
Arena Nightclub
135 West 41st Street
Between 6th Avenue & Broadway
New York, NY 10036
8pm to 1am, Performance at 9pmEnjoy drinks and dancing in this new Midtown club, surrounded by The Civilians’ artists, friends, and supporters. Includes complimentary drinks from event sponsors Tequila Corazón, Smithwick’s Ale, and Red Stripe Beer; full cash bar; silent auction; and raffle.
Members of The Civilians will perform songs from the company’s new show about Evangelical Christianity—along with a few favorites by Michael Friedman.
In a lucky bit of timing, they were in Colorado Springs visiting Ted Haggard’s church as part of their research when all the excitement broke.
I’m a few days late on this. Is it just me, or does having President Bush make a major speech related to the war in Iraq to the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association have “banana republic” written all over it?
Related: Bush was wrong when he said that the spending bills intended to set a withdrawal date contain spending provisions not related to war and security. Of course, the media didn’t bother to report that.
The message is “Healthcare for all.” See James and the Visual AIDS blog for more information.
·
An AP story from Saturday on Hillary Clinton’s campaign trip to New Hampshire includes these gems (emphasis mine):
Clinton acknowledged “a great deal of frustration and anger and outrage” over the war, and said she was working hard in the Senate to pass legislation capping troop levels in Iraq. She also vowed to try to bring to a vote a resolution disapproving of President Bush’s planned troop increase.
“I’m still in the arena,” she said — an apparent riposte to a Democratic rival, former North Carolina Sen. John Edwards. Like Clinton, Edwards voted to authorize the invasion, but he has become a staunch war critic since leaving the Senate in 2004.
“It’s very easy to go around and say, ‘Let’s end the war,’” Clinton added. “If we had a Democratic president we would end the war.”
Her toughest question came in Berlin, a struggling mill town in northern New Hampshire.
Roger Tilton, 46, a financial adviser from Nashua, N.H., told Clinton that unless she recanted her vote, he was not in the mood to listen to her other policy ideas.
“I want to know if right here, right now, once and for all and without nuance, you can say that war authorization was a mistake,” Tilton said. “I, and I think a lot of other primary voters — until we hear you say it, we’re not going to hear all the other great things you are saying.”
In response, Clinton repeated her assertion that “knowing what we know now, I would never have voted for it,” and said voters would have to decide for themselves whether her position was acceptable.
“The mistakes were made by this president, who misled this country and this Congress,” Clinton said to loud applause.
Does she really expect us to believe that she was misled by the Bush/Cheney administration, and she actually thought Iraq was a danger to us, with its supposed WMDs?
Also, she says “If we had a Democratic president we would end the war.” I wasn’t aware that the Constitution had been changed so that we now elect a dictator for four years and Congress has no say over any of his decisions. The Democratic party has a slim majority (counting Lieberman) in the Senate, and a larger majority in the House than the GOP had before November. A majority of Americans support a withdrawal from Iraq within the next year. If we’re going to have to wait for a new President to withdraw, what’s the point of pretentding to be a republic? Shouldn’t we use all of the money we spend on the huge Congressional apparatus on some better use?
A lot of friends seemed surprised that we weren’t more excited after the last election, when the Democrats took back both houses of Congress. That’s because we were expecting Congress to behave as it is now.
Senate votes not to debate Iraq proposal
My first comment upon reading this was: “It’s bad for troop morale to talk about not adding more troops, but getting them all killed for no effective purpose is supporting them?”
Meanwhile, yes we have raised the minimum wage, but the Democrats have done nothing on the suspension of habeas corpus, torture, CIA black sites, illegal eavesdropping, and Guantanamo Bay. Color me not impressed.
Related: Another reason why I rarely link to Daily Kos. His reaction is that this event in the Senate is helpful for the 2008 elections. I think things might get a bit worse before then. This isn’t just about electoral tactics.
Bush puts ‘ic’ back in ‘Democrat Party’
It’s pretty funny that the party that has given us a suspension of habeas corpus, and that believes the President can ignore Congress if he decides that it “voted the wrong way” is trying to imply the Democratic party is acting undemocratically.
·
From the BBC:
Downing Street has said there will be no exemption from anti-discrimination laws for Catholic adoption agencies.
But Tony Blair said they would get 21 months to prepare for change, calling this a “sensible compromise”.
Adoption agencies had warned they would close rather than place children with gay couples, saying that went against their beliefs.
…
The proposed measures are likely to face a vote in Parliament next month before coming into effect on 6 April.
Mr Blair said he believed ministers had found a “way through” to prevent discrimination and protect the interests of children, which all “reasonable people” should be able to accept.
“There is no place in our society for discrimination. That’s why I support the right of gay couples to apply to adopt like any other couple.
“And that way there can be no exemptions for faith-based adoption agencies offering public funded services from regulations that prevent discrimination.”
This sort of thing seems pretty unlikely in the USA, and we don’t even have a head of state who is also the head of the official church!
Notifications