Judiciary Committee Votes Tomorrow on Alito; Filibuster Possible, Says Durbin
Tomorrow, two days after the 33rd anniversary of Roe v Wade, the Senate Judiciary Committee will vote on Samuel Alito, a Supreme Court nominee who in 1985 wrote that the Constitution does not protect a woman's right to an abortion. Women's rights leaders and activists rallied last night at the Supreme Court in support of the landmark Supreme Court ruling.
"Since we last gathered to commemorate Roe v. Wade, two seats have opened up on the Supreme Court, and George W. Bush has used both opportunities to nominate judges whose records show a disdain for privacy rights and individual liberties," said Kim Gandy, president of the National Organization for Women. "The Senate is poised to vote on confirming Samuel Alito, who would replace Sandra Day O'Connor, a justice whose vote has upheld women's rights for nearly 25 years. How quickly the fate of women's reproductive rights could turn in this nation."
Already, at least nine Senators have come out publicly and strongly against Alito's confirmation, including four who voted in favor of confirming John Roberts as chief justice. In an interview with the Chicago Sun-Times, Senator Richard Durbin (D-IL), the Democratic Whip, said that a filibuster was possible.
"A week ago, I would have told you it's not likely to happen," Durbin said. "As of [Wednesday], I just can't rule it out. I was surprised by the intensity of feeling of some of my colleagues. It's a matter of counting. We have 45 Democrats, counting [Vermont independent] Jim Jeffords, on our side. We could sustain a filibuster if 41 Senators ... are willing to stand and fight."
GET THE INSIDE SCOOP
with The Smeal Report and the New Leif blogs at MsMagazine.com
TAKE ACTION
Call your Senators and urge them to oppose Alito
DONATE
Make an emergency contribution to the Feminist Majority's Save Roe Campaign. We must be a strong voice in this crucial fight to save Roe and the Supreme Court for women’s rights.
Media Resources: Feminist Majority; NOW statement 1/22/06; Chicago Sun-Times 1/20/06
that's from today's feminist wire.
c.i.'s noted it, elaine's noting it, mike's noting it. elaine's trying to be sure we all note it because we need to get the word out. they need to hear from us tomorrow, the senators. they need to hear from us before they vote, while they're voting and after they've voted.
they need to get that this isn't a minor thing or something we're going to forget.
it's past time to light a fire under them and make them show that they're representing us and not just taking our votes and money.
'what if they stab us in the back?' that's what jodi wondered in an e-mail. if the people who have counted on our support aren't there for us tomorrow then we've learned who we can count and who we can't. we've learned that even with people concerned about civil rights, civil liberties, reproductive rights and seperation of power screaming for their senators to stand up, that we won't be listened to, that our concerns and rights are of no interest to them.
will it make the loss any better? hell no.
but if they won't wake up, the people who are supposed to represent us, we still will.
if they're not going to be there for us yet again, empty words about what they'll do after the november elections will be revealed as empty words.
maybe that means some of us will vote green? or maybe we'll run other candidates against them in the primaries?
but we won't be fooled and we won't fool ourselves into thinking they're there for us.
1/23/2006
1/20/2006
shake the mountain, stop the confirmation of alito
More Senators Announce Opposition to Alito
More Senators have announced their opposition to Samuel Alito for the Supreme Court. Encouragingly, no additional Democrats have announced support for Alito since Ben Nelson (NE). Senator Richard Durbin (D-IL), the Democratic Whip, announced his opposition to a packed auditorium at Northwestern University School of Law.
"In the record, the writings, the words, and the life of Samuel Alito, I searched for evidence of his caring heart -- evidence that for the next two or three decades he would use his position on the Supreme Court to enlarge our freedom, protect our privacy, and respect the delicate balance of power and responsibility our Constitution creates," said Senator Durbin. "At the end of the day, at this historic moment, I cannot say with confidence that Samuel Alito meets that test."
Senator Tom Harkin (D-IA), in announcing his opposition, said, "Based on his record, I am gravely concerned that Judge Alito does not believe the Congress has the authority to protect the fundamental rights of all Americans."
Other Senators who have announced publicly their opposition to Alito include Patrick Leahy (D-VT) (the Ranking Democrat on the Judiciary Committee), Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) (the only woman on the Judiciary Committee), Ted Kennedy (D-MA), Ken Salazar (D-CO), and Max Baucus (D-MT). Senators Leahy, Baucus, and Salazar all voted for John Roberts in September.
GET THE INSIDE SCOOP
with The Smeal Report and the New Leif blogs at MsMagazine.com
TAKE ACTION
Call your Senators and urge them to oppose Alito
DONATE
Make an emergency contribution to the Feminist Majority's Save Roe Campaign. We must be a strong voice in this crucial fight to save Roe and the Supreme Court for women's rights.
that's from the feminist wire.
do you get what's happening? we're shaking that mountain. we just have to keep shaking and we can move it. keep shaking, keep speaking out, keep pressuring your senators.
i spent 9 hours at t's salon today. every woman that came in got stopped by me. more than a few asked me, 'you're not a jehovah's witness are you?' i must have had a zeal about me because i doubt they show cleavage.
64 women and 2 guys. that's 66 people who called their senators (2 calls each) on my cell phone today. i'm going to do it on monday as well. t said it doesn't put her out at all and if some 1 has a problem with abortion, they're probably not keen on an african-american lesbian doing their hair so better they should find another salon.
tomorrow, t's getting a group of friends together, a large group, for brunch and i'm going to talk to them as well. i want to give a big shout out to t who has more than done her part on the alito nomination but keeps going and thinking up new ideas.
monday she's doing a 1/2 price special at the salon for any 1 who calls both senators while they're in the salon.
so what are you doing?
i heard from some of my older readers and i'm glad to know they're talking to their friends. that's great as a start. but you have to follow up. they may mean to call but then forget. they may be nervous about calling and need you there to reassure them.
don't think that because they agree with you they're making the call. follow up and be sure.
let me guilt trip you. c.i. will have given 3 speeches on the importance of filibustering alito tonight. then c.i. will hop on the plane tomorrow morning and give more speeches. have you checked out the common ills? do you realize that you've got entries there and you've got all the work c.i.'s done for the daily round-robins?
i know most of my readers are members of the common ills community so let me guilt you into doing more. the vote is tuesday. we have to stay focused. c.i.'s tired but keeps pressing on. so what are you doing?
we've got to shake the mountain, we've got to move the mountain and that's going to take all of us and then some. so get active and stay active.
i think i'm tired and then i think about c.i. and realize i can give more. that's true of all of us. if this is important, we can give and give and give until the vote. it's not that far away.
you don't want to wake up wednesday to find that alito was confirmed and wonder if you had done everything that you could have. you want to know you gave everything you had to this fight.
hopefully wednesday's papers will bear the headline 'alito defeated in senate vote' or 'alito filibustered'. if that happens, you can take pride in the work you did and realize that politics isn't about somebody in d.c., it's about us, it is our lives. but if the headlines say 'alito confirmed' you are going to feel guilty if you didn't dig deep and pull it out for the last round.
don't let yourself feel guilty. use the links at the top of this post. or go to now and planned parenthood and use their resources. go to all of them.
call your senators on monday. say you want to know if they are going to vote 'no' and if they are prepared to 'filibuster.'
1 reader scheduled an appointment. she wasn't able to meet with her senator but she did meet with the woman who runs the office. and she didn't go alone. she took 4 friends with her. that was 5 women saying vote no and filibuster. that's amazing. congratulations to kim!
let's move the mountain.
the common ills
samuel alito
supreme court
feminist wire
More Senators have announced their opposition to Samuel Alito for the Supreme Court. Encouragingly, no additional Democrats have announced support for Alito since Ben Nelson (NE). Senator Richard Durbin (D-IL), the Democratic Whip, announced his opposition to a packed auditorium at Northwestern University School of Law.
"In the record, the writings, the words, and the life of Samuel Alito, I searched for evidence of his caring heart -- evidence that for the next two or three decades he would use his position on the Supreme Court to enlarge our freedom, protect our privacy, and respect the delicate balance of power and responsibility our Constitution creates," said Senator Durbin. "At the end of the day, at this historic moment, I cannot say with confidence that Samuel Alito meets that test."
Senator Tom Harkin (D-IA), in announcing his opposition, said, "Based on his record, I am gravely concerned that Judge Alito does not believe the Congress has the authority to protect the fundamental rights of all Americans."
Other Senators who have announced publicly their opposition to Alito include Patrick Leahy (D-VT) (the Ranking Democrat on the Judiciary Committee), Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) (the only woman on the Judiciary Committee), Ted Kennedy (D-MA), Ken Salazar (D-CO), and Max Baucus (D-MT). Senators Leahy, Baucus, and Salazar all voted for John Roberts in September.
GET THE INSIDE SCOOP
with The Smeal Report and the New Leif blogs at MsMagazine.com
TAKE ACTION
Call your Senators and urge them to oppose Alito
DONATE
Make an emergency contribution to the Feminist Majority's Save Roe Campaign. We must be a strong voice in this crucial fight to save Roe and the Supreme Court for women's rights.
that's from the feminist wire.
do you get what's happening? we're shaking that mountain. we just have to keep shaking and we can move it. keep shaking, keep speaking out, keep pressuring your senators.
i spent 9 hours at t's salon today. every woman that came in got stopped by me. more than a few asked me, 'you're not a jehovah's witness are you?' i must have had a zeal about me because i doubt they show cleavage.
64 women and 2 guys. that's 66 people who called their senators (2 calls each) on my cell phone today. i'm going to do it on monday as well. t said it doesn't put her out at all and if some 1 has a problem with abortion, they're probably not keen on an african-american lesbian doing their hair so better they should find another salon.
tomorrow, t's getting a group of friends together, a large group, for brunch and i'm going to talk to them as well. i want to give a big shout out to t who has more than done her part on the alito nomination but keeps going and thinking up new ideas.
monday she's doing a 1/2 price special at the salon for any 1 who calls both senators while they're in the salon.
so what are you doing?
i heard from some of my older readers and i'm glad to know they're talking to their friends. that's great as a start. but you have to follow up. they may mean to call but then forget. they may be nervous about calling and need you there to reassure them.
don't think that because they agree with you they're making the call. follow up and be sure.
let me guilt trip you. c.i. will have given 3 speeches on the importance of filibustering alito tonight. then c.i. will hop on the plane tomorrow morning and give more speeches. have you checked out the common ills? do you realize that you've got entries there and you've got all the work c.i.'s done for the daily round-robins?
i know most of my readers are members of the common ills community so let me guilt you into doing more. the vote is tuesday. we have to stay focused. c.i.'s tired but keeps pressing on. so what are you doing?
we've got to shake the mountain, we've got to move the mountain and that's going to take all of us and then some. so get active and stay active.
i think i'm tired and then i think about c.i. and realize i can give more. that's true of all of us. if this is important, we can give and give and give until the vote. it's not that far away.
you don't want to wake up wednesday to find that alito was confirmed and wonder if you had done everything that you could have. you want to know you gave everything you had to this fight.
hopefully wednesday's papers will bear the headline 'alito defeated in senate vote' or 'alito filibustered'. if that happens, you can take pride in the work you did and realize that politics isn't about somebody in d.c., it's about us, it is our lives. but if the headlines say 'alito confirmed' you are going to feel guilty if you didn't dig deep and pull it out for the last round.
don't let yourself feel guilty. use the links at the top of this post. or go to now and planned parenthood and use their resources. go to all of them.
call your senators on monday. say you want to know if they are going to vote 'no' and if they are prepared to 'filibuster.'
1 reader scheduled an appointment. she wasn't able to meet with her senator but she did meet with the woman who runs the office. and she didn't go alone. she took 4 friends with her. that was 5 women saying vote no and filibuster. that's amazing. congratulations to kim!
let's move the mountain.
the common ills
samuel alito
supreme court
feminist wire
1/19/2006
get active, stay active, stop alito from being confirmed to the court
so my high school readers are telling me that they're writing their senators. 11 of them also called their senators. what are my older readers doing to stop alito from getting crowned as a supreme court justice?
i hope you're being active and that it's just that this is something you're used to doing. my high school readers are amazing me with their e-mails. courtney wrote about how she called and was put on hold and she was nervous and almost hung up but kept telling herself she could do this.
a staff member got back on the phone and courtney read from the piece of paper she'd written her thoughts down on. that was a big deal courtney and i'm so proud of you!
there are so many great e-mails and i need to note jackie too because she's circulated 2 petitions, 1 for each of her senators, at her high school and her mother's picking her up from school early friday so that they can deliver it to the offices of their senators. good for you jackie! and good for your mother too!
i'm going to go into this in the roundtable tonight that will be in friday's gina & krista round-robin and i'm also going to write a thing about the 1st time something moved me enough to get active because my high school readers' excitement has made me remember what that felt like.
let me say it again, i hope my older readers are being as active as the younger 1s.
this is so important. i think we can force them to filibuster in the senate.
but that's going to mean reaching in and pulling out all the stops for the next days. we have between now and the 24th to move a mountain and i think we're shaking it.
i'm going to join c.i. and elaine in noting this good news from the feminist wire because if there's any 1 thinking 'well if we stood a chance, i might do something . . .' maybe this will get you off the couch, futon, et al:
January 19, 2006
No on Alito Momentum Building
The momentum to stop the confirmation of Samuel Alito to the Supreme Court is growing. Several Democratic Senators have already announced their intention to oppose Alito.
These Senators include Patrick Leahy (VT), Ranking Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee; Judiciary Committee member Ted Kennedy (MA); Barbara Mikulski (MD); and Max Baucus (MT). Senators Leahy and Baucus had voted to confirm John Roberts in September. The option for a filibuster to block Alito is still on the table.
GET THE INSIDE SCOOP
with The Smeal Report and the New Leif blogs at Ms Magazine.com
TAKE ACTION
Call your Senators and urge them to oppose Alito
DONATE
Make an emergency contribution to the Feminist Majority’s Save Roe Campaign. We must be a strong voice in this crucial fight to save Roe and the Supreme Court for women’s rights.Media Resources: Feminist Majority
we can do this if we all dig deep. if you haven't done anything yet, get motivated and get active. if you're some 1 who's done everything this week, do it again. or do the 10 people each day that c.i.'s been stressing. that's where each day you tell 10 people about this. you have your senators' phone numbers with you and when some 1 says, 'yeah, i should do something,' you dial the number and hand the phone over.
people always mean to get involved. you need to make it as easy for them as you can. and if you don't have a cell phone, use your home phone. invite some people over and use the home phone or use a pay phone. but the point isn't just that you get the word out, the point is that when some 1 says 'no i haven't done anything but i should' you're right there ready to help them at that moment.
i'm not just tossing out things for other's today. t saw c.i.'s thing and we were talking about so tomorrow i will be at her salon talking to every 1 who comes in and i'll have the cell phone ready.
we're shaking the mountain. can we move it? not if we sit on our butts and wait for our senators to come to their senses or for some 1 else to do the work. get active. for those who already have gotten active, stay active.
the common ills
like maria said paz
samuel alito
supreme court
alito hearings
i hope you're being active and that it's just that this is something you're used to doing. my high school readers are amazing me with their e-mails. courtney wrote about how she called and was put on hold and she was nervous and almost hung up but kept telling herself she could do this.
a staff member got back on the phone and courtney read from the piece of paper she'd written her thoughts down on. that was a big deal courtney and i'm so proud of you!
there are so many great e-mails and i need to note jackie too because she's circulated 2 petitions, 1 for each of her senators, at her high school and her mother's picking her up from school early friday so that they can deliver it to the offices of their senators. good for you jackie! and good for your mother too!
i'm going to go into this in the roundtable tonight that will be in friday's gina & krista round-robin and i'm also going to write a thing about the 1st time something moved me enough to get active because my high school readers' excitement has made me remember what that felt like.
let me say it again, i hope my older readers are being as active as the younger 1s.
this is so important. i think we can force them to filibuster in the senate.
but that's going to mean reaching in and pulling out all the stops for the next days. we have between now and the 24th to move a mountain and i think we're shaking it.
i'm going to join c.i. and elaine in noting this good news from the feminist wire because if there's any 1 thinking 'well if we stood a chance, i might do something . . .' maybe this will get you off the couch, futon, et al:
January 19, 2006
No on Alito Momentum Building
The momentum to stop the confirmation of Samuel Alito to the Supreme Court is growing. Several Democratic Senators have already announced their intention to oppose Alito.
These Senators include Patrick Leahy (VT), Ranking Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee; Judiciary Committee member Ted Kennedy (MA); Barbara Mikulski (MD); and Max Baucus (MT). Senators Leahy and Baucus had voted to confirm John Roberts in September. The option for a filibuster to block Alito is still on the table.
GET THE INSIDE SCOOP
with The Smeal Report and the New Leif blogs at Ms Magazine.com
TAKE ACTION
Call your Senators and urge them to oppose Alito
DONATE
Make an emergency contribution to the Feminist Majority’s Save Roe Campaign. We must be a strong voice in this crucial fight to save Roe and the Supreme Court for women’s rights.Media Resources: Feminist Majority
we can do this if we all dig deep. if you haven't done anything yet, get motivated and get active. if you're some 1 who's done everything this week, do it again. or do the 10 people each day that c.i.'s been stressing. that's where each day you tell 10 people about this. you have your senators' phone numbers with you and when some 1 says, 'yeah, i should do something,' you dial the number and hand the phone over.
people always mean to get involved. you need to make it as easy for them as you can. and if you don't have a cell phone, use your home phone. invite some people over and use the home phone or use a pay phone. but the point isn't just that you get the word out, the point is that when some 1 says 'no i haven't done anything but i should' you're right there ready to help them at that moment.
i'm not just tossing out things for other's today. t saw c.i.'s thing and we were talking about so tomorrow i will be at her salon talking to every 1 who comes in and i'll have the cell phone ready.
we're shaking the mountain. can we move it? not if we sit on our butts and wait for our senators to come to their senses or for some 1 else to do the work. get active. for those who already have gotten active, stay active.
the common ills
like maria said paz
samuel alito
supreme court
alito hearings
1/18/2006
tell your senators to filibuster
a lot of e-mails about c.i.'s "NYT: '2002 Memo Doubted Uranium Sale Claim' (Eric Lichtblau)" which seems to have fired up a lot of you to fight alito.
you're seeing a connection that's obvious to you but i had to think about it.
i'm guessing that c.i.'s righteous anger over iraq made us all realize how much we have to fight on so many topics.
this isn't 1 we expected to have to fight on. we didn't expect weak willed senate democrats to attempt to stab us in the back. besides the anger, i think we're also shocked.
we've given the democratic party our money, our time and our votes. to be treated this way, where they won't even fight for us, is a shock.
i think the lesson here is a politician won't do a damn thing for you out of loyalty or the goodness of their heart or fairness. you have to press your issues and you have to keep pressing them. they'll sell you out if they think they can get away with it.
so let's show them what's at stake. you can use the action lists in the gina & krista round-robins that are going out every day between now and the 24th or you can use this from now:
Alito Must Not Be Confirmed -
Demand a Filibuster Today
Call Your Senators
By the time the Senate Judiciary Committee hearings on Samuel Alito ended last week, Judge Alito had dodged so many questions that we knew little more about his judicial philosophy than we had before they started. Even so, Judge Alito's unwillingness to stipulate that Roe v. Wade is "settled law", as recently confirmed Chief Justice Roberts had, puts a woman's right to choose in great peril. This factor alone should be enough for Senators to vote against his nomination.
Due to the current balance of power in the Senate (55 Republicans, 44 Democrats), we do not have the necessary 51 "no" votes to defeat Alito outright. So the only way for senators to block confirmation is for them to launch a filibuster -- which can only be ended if 60 of the 100 senators vote to stop the filibuster and proceed to a vote on the nomination. In other words, IF there is a filibuster, 41 senators can block the nomination. But without a filibuster, those same 41 votes would not be sufficient to stop Alito -- so the "no" votes are meaningless in terms of the final outcome, unless there is a filibuster.
Make the message to your senators clear: Our nation needs them to do more than vote no. They must support a filibuster in order to prevent Alito's confirmation to the Supreme Court.
Please call your Senators today and ask them to support a filibuster in opposition to this nomination. A no vote without a filibuster is a meaningless gesture. Our Senators' commitment to women's rights is a hollow shell if they will not fight to preserve them.
Talking Points for CallsIt is very clear that Judge Alito does not consider Roe v. Wade "settled law".
This factor alone should be enough for Senators to vote against his nomination.
We need them to do more than vote no.
Ask them to support a filibuster in opposition to this nomination.
A "no" vote without a filibuster is a meaningless gesture.
Our Senators' commitment to women's rights is a hollow shell if they will not fight to preserve them.
More information on Alito's record is available online.
If you're having trouble getting through at the local number, try the Senate Switchboard at (202) 224-3121
Call your Senators
or you can use everything. and schedule time to meet with your senator or their staff. face to face express how you feel. tell them to filibuster!
you're seeing a connection that's obvious to you but i had to think about it.
i'm guessing that c.i.'s righteous anger over iraq made us all realize how much we have to fight on so many topics.
this isn't 1 we expected to have to fight on. we didn't expect weak willed senate democrats to attempt to stab us in the back. besides the anger, i think we're also shocked.
we've given the democratic party our money, our time and our votes. to be treated this way, where they won't even fight for us, is a shock.
i think the lesson here is a politician won't do a damn thing for you out of loyalty or the goodness of their heart or fairness. you have to press your issues and you have to keep pressing them. they'll sell you out if they think they can get away with it.
so let's show them what's at stake. you can use the action lists in the gina & krista round-robins that are going out every day between now and the 24th or you can use this from now:
Alito Must Not Be Confirmed -
Demand a Filibuster Today
Call Your Senators
By the time the Senate Judiciary Committee hearings on Samuel Alito ended last week, Judge Alito had dodged so many questions that we knew little more about his judicial philosophy than we had before they started. Even so, Judge Alito's unwillingness to stipulate that Roe v. Wade is "settled law", as recently confirmed Chief Justice Roberts had, puts a woman's right to choose in great peril. This factor alone should be enough for Senators to vote against his nomination.
Due to the current balance of power in the Senate (55 Republicans, 44 Democrats), we do not have the necessary 51 "no" votes to defeat Alito outright. So the only way for senators to block confirmation is for them to launch a filibuster -- which can only be ended if 60 of the 100 senators vote to stop the filibuster and proceed to a vote on the nomination. In other words, IF there is a filibuster, 41 senators can block the nomination. But without a filibuster, those same 41 votes would not be sufficient to stop Alito -- so the "no" votes are meaningless in terms of the final outcome, unless there is a filibuster.
Make the message to your senators clear: Our nation needs them to do more than vote no. They must support a filibuster in order to prevent Alito's confirmation to the Supreme Court.
Please call your Senators today and ask them to support a filibuster in opposition to this nomination. A no vote without a filibuster is a meaningless gesture. Our Senators' commitment to women's rights is a hollow shell if they will not fight to preserve them.
Talking Points for CallsIt is very clear that Judge Alito does not consider Roe v. Wade "settled law".
This factor alone should be enough for Senators to vote against his nomination.
We need them to do more than vote no.
Ask them to support a filibuster in opposition to this nomination.
A "no" vote without a filibuster is a meaningless gesture.
Our Senators' commitment to women's rights is a hollow shell if they will not fight to preserve them.
More information on Alito's record is available online.
If you're having trouble getting through at the local number, try the Senate Switchboard at (202) 224-3121
Call your Senators
or you can use everything. and schedule time to meet with your senator or their staff. face to face express how you feel. tell them to filibuster!
1/17/2006
let your senators hear you scream 'no!' to alito
Alito Committee Vote Scheduled for January 24
Senate Judiciary Committee Democrats won a victory in delaying the committee vote on Supreme Court nominee Samuel Alito to January 24. Women's rights and civil rights leaders are extremely concerned about press reports and statements made by Senate Democrats over the weekend indicating that the filibuster option is highly unlikely.
"Women must refuse to take no for an answer," said Eleanor Smeal, president of the Feminist Majority. "Too much is at stake for women's rights and civil rights to give up on stopping Alito. The Feminist Majority and other groups committed to preserving the past 40 years of progress for women and people of color will intensify our efforts to block Alito and save the Supreme Court."
GET THE INSIDE SCOOP with The Smeal Report and the New Leif blogs at MsMagazine.com
TAKE ACTION Call your Senators and urge them to oppose Alito
DONATE Make an emergency contribution to the Feminist Majority’s Save Roe Campaign. We must be a strong voice in this crucial fight to save Roe and the Supreme Court for women’s rights.
Media Resources: Feminist Majority
that's from the feminist wire, 'alito committee vote scheduled for january 24.' can we move mountains in little over a week?
we've done it in less time before.
i've got a column in tomorrow's round-robin. i didn't know c.i. was working with gina & krista on a special round-robin until i checked my e-mail this morning. good for all 3 of them for digging deep to find the strength for more fighting.
from now until the 24th, there will be a daily round-robin. this will include contact information and anything members want to share about what they are doing in their areas.
it will also list resources like now and planned parenthood and the feminist majority foundation.
speaking of now, let's note this from them:
Don't Confirm Anti-Roe Nominee to Supreme CourtSenators Must Filibuster Samuel Alito
TAKE ACTION
These are the faces of women who died because they could not obtain safe and legal abortions.
If Roe v. Wade is overturned, these pictures could include your daughter, sister, mother, best friend, granddaughter . . .
Don't let George W. Bush and the U.S. Senate put another anti-abortion justice on the Supreme Court. Read More
Take Action NOW
Support NOW's Emergency Workto Save the Court
Tell A Friend to Take Action to Save the Court
we need to be doing everything on our part to stop alito.
the democrats want to screw us. that's obvious.
we need to make sure they realize how much is at stake.
i think women (and a lot of men) get how much is at stake if alito is confirmed. what we need to do between now and the 24th is make sure our senators grasp how much is at stake if they betray us.
so that's my main message for tonight. if you need some motivation to get active, check out this from c.i. on dianne feinstein performance at last week's hearings and since:
She seemed to do just barely enough to say, "I touched my bases!" She did touch on all of her constituents concerns, she just didn't argue for them. If you cared about the environment or abortion or other issues (or all), expect the announcement in the mail of how she asked about those issues. She didn't ask any questions well -- which the mailing won't note as it hits you up for money.
It's called cover your own ass and she did that. And apparently she won't be called on her actions by too many. (Good for Michelman for saying something.)
I never need to suffer through "Miss Diane, Girl Senator" and her "I know nothing about lawyering" remarks as she embarrasses herself repeatedly (and embarrasses more than herself since she's the only woman on the committee) with "What kind of a judge do you think Judge Alito will be?" type questions that are possibly a notch below Barbara Walters asking, "If you were a tree, what sort of tree would you be?"
As with so many of her questions, they were abstract ones, the replies to which could be imagined ahead of time. Alito wiggled around every question but let's not kid that Feinstein's questions to him and on him did not come with plenty of wiggle room built in.
She compared him to Scalia (on Face the Nation, if you read the article) but doesn't think that he shouldn't be on the Court because they disagree. Since the beginning, Feinstein's gotten a lot of money from women's groups (not on the right) and always presented herself as a friend to abortion. The question some should ask now is, "That's friendship?"
The emergence of "Miss Diane, Girl Senator" ("Donna Reed had more bite" as Trina's sister-in-law noted) is a surprise because she seems to get more gauzey and soft focus with each year. Hopefully her donations will get more gauzey and soft focus as well. (Her state support is already in question and has been since she supported the war. She thinks she can "big tent" it but seems to fail to grasp the concerns of the people whose votes she needs.)
"Miss Diane, Girl Senator" (and yes, that's a mispelling of her name and no, I'm not concerned -- maybe she lost the additional "n" when she forgot how to fight?) actions call to mind Florida, 1972 for anyone who wants to remember the feelings of betrayal then. Time and energy was poured in and the plank was pulled. (Those who still have their "Make Policy Not Coffee" buttons will remember that time well.) (And possibly some of those buttons could be sent to Feinstein? Or create a new button just for her: "Come To The Commitee Table As An Equal Or Don't Bother To Show") As was noted then, we have to know our enemies. We should also know our friends and Feinstein's conduct (on the hearings and apparently on Face the Nation as well) were not the actions of a friend.
Michelman on Friday was more professional, a stronger voice, more to the point, than Feinstein at any minute in the hearings. If those were the actions of a friend, she owes a big apology and words alone won't cut it. It's not bad enough that she was ineffecutal in the hearings (that's being generous), she's now sending out the message that it's over and stop fighting it.
The Dems, after the 2004 election, used the myth of the "values voters" to run for cover (not from our money, never from our money). The party we've turned out for consistently in large numbers made a tactical decision (witness their running of Casey Junior). We need to stop mistaking that our visit to senators offices while they nod with a concerned look means we have a voice in the party. We don't. It's 1972 all over again where we'll be promised anything ahead of time and then be stabbed in the back while offered the rationalization of "That's how it had to be."
Instead of making nice, we need to make demands. This is ridiculous and Feinstein shouldn't be given a pass because she's been perceived as "a friend" (her conduct in the hearings alone should bury that notion). She has a place on the committee only because we made demands. Silencing criticism of the war in 2004 to get behind Kerry (I supported Kerry) was a mistake. It allowed him to posture as Bush-lite on the war. Silencing criticism of what went on last week would be the same mistake. It will only embolden those pushing the party to go right.
We have been taken for granted (the same way others have been but some have a hard time seeing that it's happening to us due to our large numbers) and we got screwed last week repeatedly. That includes by our "friend" Feinstein. Whether we can stop Alito or not, I honestly don't know. But at a time when so many elected officials have backed off everything the Democratic Party was supposed to stand for to the point that abortion rights were the last large difference, we can say clearly, "Want my vote? Earn it."
Feinstein was the worst. She conducted herself poorly when she was questioning. She stepped on Ted Kennedy's questioning (in a cutesy manner) when he was making strong points. She only sits on the commmittee because of the gender quake. If she can't get it together, get off the committee.
so are we going to let some 1 like dianne feinstein, who is the 1st to desert us, determine how the alito vote will go or are we going to say 'no!' i say we say 'no!' i say we scream 'no!' get active and let your senators know that this isn't a game and they can't put alito on the court without fallout. we will not make nice, we will not say 'oh well.' you stand up for us, you stand by the promises you made us, or you be prepared to go it alone. women (and many men) aren't going to put up with this crap.
dianne feinstein
abortion
reproductive rights
planned parenthood
now
feminist majority foundation
ms.
the common ills
supreme court
Senate Judiciary Committee Democrats won a victory in delaying the committee vote on Supreme Court nominee Samuel Alito to January 24. Women's rights and civil rights leaders are extremely concerned about press reports and statements made by Senate Democrats over the weekend indicating that the filibuster option is highly unlikely.
"Women must refuse to take no for an answer," said Eleanor Smeal, president of the Feminist Majority. "Too much is at stake for women's rights and civil rights to give up on stopping Alito. The Feminist Majority and other groups committed to preserving the past 40 years of progress for women and people of color will intensify our efforts to block Alito and save the Supreme Court."
GET THE INSIDE SCOOP with The Smeal Report and the New Leif blogs at MsMagazine.com
TAKE ACTION Call your Senators and urge them to oppose Alito
DONATE Make an emergency contribution to the Feminist Majority’s Save Roe Campaign. We must be a strong voice in this crucial fight to save Roe and the Supreme Court for women’s rights.
Media Resources: Feminist Majority
that's from the feminist wire, 'alito committee vote scheduled for january 24.' can we move mountains in little over a week?
we've done it in less time before.
i've got a column in tomorrow's round-robin. i didn't know c.i. was working with gina & krista on a special round-robin until i checked my e-mail this morning. good for all 3 of them for digging deep to find the strength for more fighting.
from now until the 24th, there will be a daily round-robin. this will include contact information and anything members want to share about what they are doing in their areas.
it will also list resources like now and planned parenthood and the feminist majority foundation.
speaking of now, let's note this from them:
Don't Confirm Anti-Roe Nominee to Supreme CourtSenators Must Filibuster Samuel Alito
TAKE ACTION
These are the faces of women who died because they could not obtain safe and legal abortions.
If Roe v. Wade is overturned, these pictures could include your daughter, sister, mother, best friend, granddaughter . . .
Don't let George W. Bush and the U.S. Senate put another anti-abortion justice on the Supreme Court. Read More
Take Action NOW
Support NOW's Emergency Workto Save the Court
Tell A Friend to Take Action to Save the Court
we need to be doing everything on our part to stop alito.
the democrats want to screw us. that's obvious.
we need to make sure they realize how much is at stake.
i think women (and a lot of men) get how much is at stake if alito is confirmed. what we need to do between now and the 24th is make sure our senators grasp how much is at stake if they betray us.
so that's my main message for tonight. if you need some motivation to get active, check out this from c.i. on dianne feinstein performance at last week's hearings and since:
She seemed to do just barely enough to say, "I touched my bases!" She did touch on all of her constituents concerns, she just didn't argue for them. If you cared about the environment or abortion or other issues (or all), expect the announcement in the mail of how she asked about those issues. She didn't ask any questions well -- which the mailing won't note as it hits you up for money.
It's called cover your own ass and she did that. And apparently she won't be called on her actions by too many. (Good for Michelman for saying something.)
I never need to suffer through "Miss Diane, Girl Senator" and her "I know nothing about lawyering" remarks as she embarrasses herself repeatedly (and embarrasses more than herself since she's the only woman on the committee) with "What kind of a judge do you think Judge Alito will be?" type questions that are possibly a notch below Barbara Walters asking, "If you were a tree, what sort of tree would you be?"
As with so many of her questions, they were abstract ones, the replies to which could be imagined ahead of time. Alito wiggled around every question but let's not kid that Feinstein's questions to him and on him did not come with plenty of wiggle room built in.
She compared him to Scalia (on Face the Nation, if you read the article) but doesn't think that he shouldn't be on the Court because they disagree. Since the beginning, Feinstein's gotten a lot of money from women's groups (not on the right) and always presented herself as a friend to abortion. The question some should ask now is, "That's friendship?"
The emergence of "Miss Diane, Girl Senator" ("Donna Reed had more bite" as Trina's sister-in-law noted) is a surprise because she seems to get more gauzey and soft focus with each year. Hopefully her donations will get more gauzey and soft focus as well. (Her state support is already in question and has been since she supported the war. She thinks she can "big tent" it but seems to fail to grasp the concerns of the people whose votes she needs.)
"Miss Diane, Girl Senator" (and yes, that's a mispelling of her name and no, I'm not concerned -- maybe she lost the additional "n" when she forgot how to fight?) actions call to mind Florida, 1972 for anyone who wants to remember the feelings of betrayal then. Time and energy was poured in and the plank was pulled. (Those who still have their "Make Policy Not Coffee" buttons will remember that time well.) (And possibly some of those buttons could be sent to Feinstein? Or create a new button just for her: "Come To The Commitee Table As An Equal Or Don't Bother To Show") As was noted then, we have to know our enemies. We should also know our friends and Feinstein's conduct (on the hearings and apparently on Face the Nation as well) were not the actions of a friend.
Michelman on Friday was more professional, a stronger voice, more to the point, than Feinstein at any minute in the hearings. If those were the actions of a friend, she owes a big apology and words alone won't cut it. It's not bad enough that she was ineffecutal in the hearings (that's being generous), she's now sending out the message that it's over and stop fighting it.
The Dems, after the 2004 election, used the myth of the "values voters" to run for cover (not from our money, never from our money). The party we've turned out for consistently in large numbers made a tactical decision (witness their running of Casey Junior). We need to stop mistaking that our visit to senators offices while they nod with a concerned look means we have a voice in the party. We don't. It's 1972 all over again where we'll be promised anything ahead of time and then be stabbed in the back while offered the rationalization of "That's how it had to be."
Instead of making nice, we need to make demands. This is ridiculous and Feinstein shouldn't be given a pass because she's been perceived as "a friend" (her conduct in the hearings alone should bury that notion). She has a place on the committee only because we made demands. Silencing criticism of the war in 2004 to get behind Kerry (I supported Kerry) was a mistake. It allowed him to posture as Bush-lite on the war. Silencing criticism of what went on last week would be the same mistake. It will only embolden those pushing the party to go right.
We have been taken for granted (the same way others have been but some have a hard time seeing that it's happening to us due to our large numbers) and we got screwed last week repeatedly. That includes by our "friend" Feinstein. Whether we can stop Alito or not, I honestly don't know. But at a time when so many elected officials have backed off everything the Democratic Party was supposed to stand for to the point that abortion rights were the last large difference, we can say clearly, "Want my vote? Earn it."
Feinstein was the worst. She conducted herself poorly when she was questioning. She stepped on Ted Kennedy's questioning (in a cutesy manner) when he was making strong points. She only sits on the commmittee because of the gender quake. If she can't get it together, get off the committee.
so are we going to let some 1 like dianne feinstein, who is the 1st to desert us, determine how the alito vote will go or are we going to say 'no!' i say we say 'no!' i say we scream 'no!' get active and let your senators know that this isn't a game and they can't put alito on the court without fallout. we will not make nice, we will not say 'oh well.' you stand up for us, you stand by the promises you made us, or you be prepared to go it alone. women (and many men) aren't going to put up with this crap.
dianne feinstein
abortion
reproductive rights
planned parenthood
now
feminist majority foundation
ms.
the common ills
supreme court
1/16/2006
the day and the dems
mike called and asked if i was blogging today?
yeah, i'd just taken time today to catch up with friends. i went into the city and hung out with t for a couple of hours, we went to lunch, then i caught up with some other friends. a friend has a birthday coming up and i had to shop for a gift. it was just a catch up and run errands day.
so it was just me and the guy who looks like an extra from the godfather on steroids. i'm glad i've got a guest room here or i guess he's have to sleep on the couch. i already told him that tomorrow morning let me have my coffee before saying anything.
i don't care who you are, friend, lover or, in his case, bodyguard, don't say a word until i get that 1st sip of coffee. it's always amazed me how many people i know do not drink coffee. c.i. has never drank coffee. ever. mormon!
i'm joking, c.i.'s not a mormon. the family dog got into the coffee when c.i. was a small child and c.i. was the 1 who found him, dead, so coffee isn't a fond smell for c.i. elaine's jittery in the morning until she has her 1st cup but she's always rushing around so that probably helps that she avoids it until she's almost out the door. you'd never know it to look at her, she's always the picture of sophistication and impeccably dressed, but she's pulling everything on while in motion. to look at her, you'd think, 'oh she must be this ocean of calm each morning carefully selecting each outfit and accessory.' she's like a cyclone. she's rushing around, brushing her teeth, looking for what to wear, all at once. she hits the shower and that's probably the only time she's standing moderately still, the minutes she comes out of the shower, she's madness in motion. anytime i'm present, i just sip my coffee and stay out of her way. and it never fails that when she finally grabs her cup of coffee and takes that first sip, she'll ask, 'ready to go?'
i like to begin the day slowly.
that's why i'm not a morning blogger.
so the bodyguard's watching tv and i'm in the bedroom doing this entry and listening to james blunt. i picked that up for myself. kat and jess and ty especially have been high on that cd and i kept meaning to check it out but i hadn't had time to shop since christmas. (or hadn't made time.) (and apologies to a friend who had a birthday during the hearings. i ordered a gift, at the last minute, online. i was focused on the hearings and didn't even realize it was a best friend's birthday until that day around five.) if you missed kat's review of james blunt's back to bedlham, please check that out.
i was looking for bright eyes motion sickness as well but couldn't find it. i'll probably look again later this week. i feel like i have to provide field trips or else the bodyguard will be sitting around bored.
at lunch t and i were both saying to sit with us and he kept saying no, he was 'on duty.' so he sat at the table next to us.
i feel like judith miller with a minder.
okay, my favorite song by james blunt just came on (i've listened to this cd over and over this evening). it's the piano ballad. 'goodbye my lover' is the name of the song.
ty played this track over the phone to get me hooked on the album. ty was telling me i had to hear it. it's a great song but the whole 'you have to listen to this' reminded me of when c.i. played liz phair's 'divorce song' over the phone to me once. i'm not really impressed with liz anymore. exile in guyville was an incredible cd. then she lost me. i hope the new teeny bopper/sex pot phase pays the rent and brings her new fans but if i wanted to listen to avril, i'd listen to avril.
so alito. if you read the common ills yesterday or today, c.i.'s said it better than i could. we were screwed. it's that simple.
by the way, it's 'dianne' feinstein. we were sure it was 'diane.' well, c.i. kept saying 'i believe it has 2 "n"s in it' but like c.i. said this morning, i won't lose any sleep over it.
that extra 'n' was probably too heavy for delicate diane.
let me pull from c.i.'s entry because kate michelman had the guts to say what needed to be said:
"Since the last election there seems to be less comfort, if you will, or less willingness to be very forthright or strong on a woman's right to choose," Ms. Michelman said in a telephone interview on Sunday. "It is worrisome that there wasn't more strength behind their questioning" of Judge Alito's views on abortion.
i feel stabbed in the back and betrayed by a party that doesn't want to fight for my rights.
i'm furious about the whole thing.
i was wondering how many people felt that way so while i was hanging out at t's salon today, i asked that and there wasn't a woman there who didn't express rage over the hearings and dianne's declaration of no filibuster. old, young, women of all colors and ethnicities, we are disgusted with the senate democrats.
they really tore into dianne. (including that ridiculous hair 'do' she insists upon wearing.) t told them about 'miss diane, girl senator' and they wanted to hear all about that. she was just disgraceful in the hearings.
i hope we're sharing our rage with 1 another but i also hope we're sharing it with our senators. they need to grasp how angry we are with them, how disgusted we are.
i can't believe how dianne and the committee acted. (there were exceptions of life but overall the committee was dead.) they really did screw us over. and they seem to think that they can get away with it. they can't.
i don't care if they're the only game in town, they're going to find that this performance is going to haunt them.
that's all i'm going to write tonight. just thinking about the hearings depresses me. but i'm not sitting on my feelings and doing nothing about them and you shouldn't either. call, schedule meetings with your senator or her/his staff. let them know how offended you are. and remember that now has Take Action: Call Your Senators Today.
yeah, i'd just taken time today to catch up with friends. i went into the city and hung out with t for a couple of hours, we went to lunch, then i caught up with some other friends. a friend has a birthday coming up and i had to shop for a gift. it was just a catch up and run errands day.
so it was just me and the guy who looks like an extra from the godfather on steroids. i'm glad i've got a guest room here or i guess he's have to sleep on the couch. i already told him that tomorrow morning let me have my coffee before saying anything.
i don't care who you are, friend, lover or, in his case, bodyguard, don't say a word until i get that 1st sip of coffee. it's always amazed me how many people i know do not drink coffee. c.i. has never drank coffee. ever. mormon!
i'm joking, c.i.'s not a mormon. the family dog got into the coffee when c.i. was a small child and c.i. was the 1 who found him, dead, so coffee isn't a fond smell for c.i. elaine's jittery in the morning until she has her 1st cup but she's always rushing around so that probably helps that she avoids it until she's almost out the door. you'd never know it to look at her, she's always the picture of sophistication and impeccably dressed, but she's pulling everything on while in motion. to look at her, you'd think, 'oh she must be this ocean of calm each morning carefully selecting each outfit and accessory.' she's like a cyclone. she's rushing around, brushing her teeth, looking for what to wear, all at once. she hits the shower and that's probably the only time she's standing moderately still, the minutes she comes out of the shower, she's madness in motion. anytime i'm present, i just sip my coffee and stay out of her way. and it never fails that when she finally grabs her cup of coffee and takes that first sip, she'll ask, 'ready to go?'
i like to begin the day slowly.
that's why i'm not a morning blogger.
so the bodyguard's watching tv and i'm in the bedroom doing this entry and listening to james blunt. i picked that up for myself. kat and jess and ty especially have been high on that cd and i kept meaning to check it out but i hadn't had time to shop since christmas. (or hadn't made time.) (and apologies to a friend who had a birthday during the hearings. i ordered a gift, at the last minute, online. i was focused on the hearings and didn't even realize it was a best friend's birthday until that day around five.) if you missed kat's review of james blunt's back to bedlham, please check that out.
i was looking for bright eyes motion sickness as well but couldn't find it. i'll probably look again later this week. i feel like i have to provide field trips or else the bodyguard will be sitting around bored.
at lunch t and i were both saying to sit with us and he kept saying no, he was 'on duty.' so he sat at the table next to us.
i feel like judith miller with a minder.
okay, my favorite song by james blunt just came on (i've listened to this cd over and over this evening). it's the piano ballad. 'goodbye my lover' is the name of the song.
ty played this track over the phone to get me hooked on the album. ty was telling me i had to hear it. it's a great song but the whole 'you have to listen to this' reminded me of when c.i. played liz phair's 'divorce song' over the phone to me once. i'm not really impressed with liz anymore. exile in guyville was an incredible cd. then she lost me. i hope the new teeny bopper/sex pot phase pays the rent and brings her new fans but if i wanted to listen to avril, i'd listen to avril.
so alito. if you read the common ills yesterday or today, c.i.'s said it better than i could. we were screwed. it's that simple.
by the way, it's 'dianne' feinstein. we were sure it was 'diane.' well, c.i. kept saying 'i believe it has 2 "n"s in it' but like c.i. said this morning, i won't lose any sleep over it.
that extra 'n' was probably too heavy for delicate diane.
let me pull from c.i.'s entry because kate michelman had the guts to say what needed to be said:
"Since the last election there seems to be less comfort, if you will, or less willingness to be very forthright or strong on a woman's right to choose," Ms. Michelman said in a telephone interview on Sunday. "It is worrisome that there wasn't more strength behind their questioning" of Judge Alito's views on abortion.
i feel stabbed in the back and betrayed by a party that doesn't want to fight for my rights.
i'm furious about the whole thing.
i was wondering how many people felt that way so while i was hanging out at t's salon today, i asked that and there wasn't a woman there who didn't express rage over the hearings and dianne's declaration of no filibuster. old, young, women of all colors and ethnicities, we are disgusted with the senate democrats.
they really tore into dianne. (including that ridiculous hair 'do' she insists upon wearing.) t told them about 'miss diane, girl senator' and they wanted to hear all about that. she was just disgraceful in the hearings.
i hope we're sharing our rage with 1 another but i also hope we're sharing it with our senators. they need to grasp how angry we are with them, how disgusted we are.
i can't believe how dianne and the committee acted. (there were exceptions of life but overall the committee was dead.) they really did screw us over. and they seem to think that they can get away with it. they can't.
i don't care if they're the only game in town, they're going to find that this performance is going to haunt them.
that's all i'm going to write tonight. just thinking about the hearings depresses me. but i'm not sitting on my feelings and doing nothing about them and you shouldn't either. call, schedule meetings with your senator or her/his staff. let them know how offended you are. and remember that now has Take Action: Call Your Senators Today.
1/12/2006
alito hearings: like really bad sex
it started with a whimper, then it picked up a little, then it whimpered to an end.
no climax. if the alito hearings had been a lover, you'd have been smart to kick it out of bed.
this is the oppostion party? this is how they do the brave stands?
i'm not talking about a filbuster. 1 of the nelsons brothers (that's how i see the 2 senators named nelson, they're like the really bad pop band of the 80s) has already given indications that he's willing to vote for alito.
so i'm not talking about that. i'm talking about asking tough questions and then asking follow ups. too often i felt like i was watching toy poodles who'd been housebroken long ago.
they'd bark a little at you while you were sitting on the couch but if you stood, they'd whimper and run out of the room.
that's not an opposition party.
it's sad that the democrats think that makes 1.
when alito kept fudging and refusing to answer, they should have treated him like a hostile witness. by the last day, every 1 of them should have used their time to hit on the same issues.
over and over.
diane feinstein, to name 1 of the worst offenders, could shoot scattershot (although she acted as though she were tossing out lillies throughout the hearings) in the other days but on the final day, she didn't need to be bringing up new issues. this is where you make the case to the people.
not where you suddenly introduce a new topic.
and for some 1 who interrupted ted kennedy repeatedly the day prior as he asked about caps, wasn't it strange that she didn't have a question on that? when kennedy was speaking yesterday, she couldn't stop interrupting. today? she's moved on.
miss diane gets my vote for most useless and i'm not fan of kohl. but miss diane was supposed to be fighting for women and instead we got a timid school marm trying to get the rowdy class to like her.
it's not just her. that's a point c.i. made tonight in the roundtable. c.i. pointed out that arlen specter couldn't stop treating her like she was a 'special' and not a real senator. he referred to her 'dramatic entrance.' there was another specific example c.i. brought up but i'm forgetting it now. but the point is, she is treated that way by others on the committee.
as an adult, she should ask them to cut it out. instead she seems tickled by the patronizing attitude.
i'm looking for the non-action figure miss diane. she comes non-fully poseable. she's in a seated postion. you can extend her legs or bend them depending upon whether you want her to sit in a chair or to sit on the floor. she wears a lovely dress with several layers. she comes with white gloves and the cutest little purse that matches her hat, her belt and her shoes. the non-action figure has a silly grin pasted on its face and is called 'miss diane, girl senator.'
the tea set is purchased separately.
so where we are we?
in it by ourselves. we can Take Action: Call Your Senators Today (link from now, the national organization for women). but let's not make the mistake of thinking our opposition party will fight or even knows how to.
'good sports,' they want the press to fight their battles.
that's the sort of thinking that's led them to the huge defeat of 2002, a history breaking moment as the repubes took control of the white house, the senate and the house.
but they just can't learn.
'what if the press gives us a mean editorial?' well they have. but even when they give the dems a nice editorial, it doesn't really have any effect.
people need to know that you will fight for them. not that an editorial board thinks you are all 'swell guys' and 'a respectable lady.' you're not trying to gain admittance to a country club, you're trying to reassure voters that you have what it takes.
they blew it on the alito hearings.
i could note the exceptions like charles schumer, ted kennedy and russ feingold. but what's the point?
i don't mean that in a defeatist mode. really, what's the point?
the democrats can have many strong fighters but it is meaningless if they can't get behind the fighters. instead they run from murtha, for instance, or they leave barbara boxer out to dry.
it's stupid.
i think every 1's getting the idea that tom delay isn't that popular in his own party. but until the all scandals, did they break ranks and say 'tom delay is crazy!'?
no, they supported their strong members. (i think tom delay is nuts but for his party he is a strong member.) a democrat takes a stand and there's no natural tendency to say 'yeah! me too!' instead the other elected members rush to distance themselves from murtha, or howard dean, or barbara boxer, or . . . go down the damn list.
let's put it in sports terms since that's the only thing many seem able to understand. you can have some 1 who can slam dunk the ball everytime they make it down the court. but if the rest of the team can't do defense, you're not a championship team. the la lakers were unbeatable when they worked as a team. when that fell apart, so did their winning streak.
dick durbin, i'll single out. he was strong. i'll note that today because i might not tomorrow since he's another example of a problem. he takes a strong stand and then, under pressure from astroturf and the echo chamber, apologizes. if the criticism isn't coming from your base, tough it out. that's what the republicans do.
democrats and republicans stand for different things.
the vision of the 2 parties is different (or is supposed to be). instead of realizing that they had acted weak repeatedly and that's what hurt their election turnout, they've made a point to seek out 1 guru after another to help them craft a message or some other nonsense.
the message matters somewhat. how you present it, this is coming from some 1 who made a living in public relations, matters even more. you can sell tons of crap, and it happens every day, not because it's any good, but because you present it effectively.
part of that requires showing strength. the democrats can line up 1 guru after another and it won't make a damn bit of difference. they can frame until their little heart's content. or they can demonstrate repeatedly 'we support religion too!' none of it matters if you come off as weak.
there needs to be some discipline in the senate and in the house.
the hearings demonstrated that there's not even any discipline from a small group serving on a committee.
that doesn't mean overdose on the macho. (the way the republicans do.) that does mean that diane feinstein, for instance, could have tried channeling a little marcia clark in her questioning.
and a single topic should have been agreed upon for the final day of the hearings. 'we'll hit on this over and over.'
feinstein may have thought her 'oh here's another thing' questioning today was helpful. if the issue mattered to you (and it did matter to me, i just wish she had been effective and pressed alito on it), you're thinking, 'why hasn't she brought this up before?' it's a distraction. this was the summing up to the jury, closing the sale day. they treated it like the 1st day of the hearings.
let me close by quoting c.i. because we all agreed that c.i. captured the final day of the hearings perfectly:
So what has today been like? Not as lively as yesterday. "Enough of that. Let me move on." Who said that? Which Democrat? Does it matter? Doesn't that seem like those two sentences summed up much of what's gone on so far today? (Diane Feinstein said it today to Alito, for those who missed it.)
and check out kat who wrote something yesterday that can make you laugh as you cry.
the common ills
samuel alito
supreme court
alito hearings
kats korner
diane feinstein
now
no climax. if the alito hearings had been a lover, you'd have been smart to kick it out of bed.
this is the oppostion party? this is how they do the brave stands?
i'm not talking about a filbuster. 1 of the nelsons brothers (that's how i see the 2 senators named nelson, they're like the really bad pop band of the 80s) has already given indications that he's willing to vote for alito.
so i'm not talking about that. i'm talking about asking tough questions and then asking follow ups. too often i felt like i was watching toy poodles who'd been housebroken long ago.
they'd bark a little at you while you were sitting on the couch but if you stood, they'd whimper and run out of the room.
that's not an opposition party.
it's sad that the democrats think that makes 1.
when alito kept fudging and refusing to answer, they should have treated him like a hostile witness. by the last day, every 1 of them should have used their time to hit on the same issues.
over and over.
diane feinstein, to name 1 of the worst offenders, could shoot scattershot (although she acted as though she were tossing out lillies throughout the hearings) in the other days but on the final day, she didn't need to be bringing up new issues. this is where you make the case to the people.
not where you suddenly introduce a new topic.
and for some 1 who interrupted ted kennedy repeatedly the day prior as he asked about caps, wasn't it strange that she didn't have a question on that? when kennedy was speaking yesterday, she couldn't stop interrupting. today? she's moved on.
miss diane gets my vote for most useless and i'm not fan of kohl. but miss diane was supposed to be fighting for women and instead we got a timid school marm trying to get the rowdy class to like her.
it's not just her. that's a point c.i. made tonight in the roundtable. c.i. pointed out that arlen specter couldn't stop treating her like she was a 'special' and not a real senator. he referred to her 'dramatic entrance.' there was another specific example c.i. brought up but i'm forgetting it now. but the point is, she is treated that way by others on the committee.
as an adult, she should ask them to cut it out. instead she seems tickled by the patronizing attitude.
i'm looking for the non-action figure miss diane. she comes non-fully poseable. she's in a seated postion. you can extend her legs or bend them depending upon whether you want her to sit in a chair or to sit on the floor. she wears a lovely dress with several layers. she comes with white gloves and the cutest little purse that matches her hat, her belt and her shoes. the non-action figure has a silly grin pasted on its face and is called 'miss diane, girl senator.'
the tea set is purchased separately.
so where we are we?
in it by ourselves. we can Take Action: Call Your Senators Today (link from now, the national organization for women). but let's not make the mistake of thinking our opposition party will fight or even knows how to.
'good sports,' they want the press to fight their battles.
that's the sort of thinking that's led them to the huge defeat of 2002, a history breaking moment as the repubes took control of the white house, the senate and the house.
but they just can't learn.
'what if the press gives us a mean editorial?' well they have. but even when they give the dems a nice editorial, it doesn't really have any effect.
people need to know that you will fight for them. not that an editorial board thinks you are all 'swell guys' and 'a respectable lady.' you're not trying to gain admittance to a country club, you're trying to reassure voters that you have what it takes.
they blew it on the alito hearings.
i could note the exceptions like charles schumer, ted kennedy and russ feingold. but what's the point?
i don't mean that in a defeatist mode. really, what's the point?
the democrats can have many strong fighters but it is meaningless if they can't get behind the fighters. instead they run from murtha, for instance, or they leave barbara boxer out to dry.
it's stupid.
i think every 1's getting the idea that tom delay isn't that popular in his own party. but until the all scandals, did they break ranks and say 'tom delay is crazy!'?
no, they supported their strong members. (i think tom delay is nuts but for his party he is a strong member.) a democrat takes a stand and there's no natural tendency to say 'yeah! me too!' instead the other elected members rush to distance themselves from murtha, or howard dean, or barbara boxer, or . . . go down the damn list.
let's put it in sports terms since that's the only thing many seem able to understand. you can have some 1 who can slam dunk the ball everytime they make it down the court. but if the rest of the team can't do defense, you're not a championship team. the la lakers were unbeatable when they worked as a team. when that fell apart, so did their winning streak.
dick durbin, i'll single out. he was strong. i'll note that today because i might not tomorrow since he's another example of a problem. he takes a strong stand and then, under pressure from astroturf and the echo chamber, apologizes. if the criticism isn't coming from your base, tough it out. that's what the republicans do.
democrats and republicans stand for different things.
the vision of the 2 parties is different (or is supposed to be). instead of realizing that they had acted weak repeatedly and that's what hurt their election turnout, they've made a point to seek out 1 guru after another to help them craft a message or some other nonsense.
the message matters somewhat. how you present it, this is coming from some 1 who made a living in public relations, matters even more. you can sell tons of crap, and it happens every day, not because it's any good, but because you present it effectively.
part of that requires showing strength. the democrats can line up 1 guru after another and it won't make a damn bit of difference. they can frame until their little heart's content. or they can demonstrate repeatedly 'we support religion too!' none of it matters if you come off as weak.
there needs to be some discipline in the senate and in the house.
the hearings demonstrated that there's not even any discipline from a small group serving on a committee.
that doesn't mean overdose on the macho. (the way the republicans do.) that does mean that diane feinstein, for instance, could have tried channeling a little marcia clark in her questioning.
and a single topic should have been agreed upon for the final day of the hearings. 'we'll hit on this over and over.'
feinstein may have thought her 'oh here's another thing' questioning today was helpful. if the issue mattered to you (and it did matter to me, i just wish she had been effective and pressed alito on it), you're thinking, 'why hasn't she brought this up before?' it's a distraction. this was the summing up to the jury, closing the sale day. they treated it like the 1st day of the hearings.
let me close by quoting c.i. because we all agreed that c.i. captured the final day of the hearings perfectly:
So what has today been like? Not as lively as yesterday. "Enough of that. Let me move on." Who said that? Which Democrat? Does it matter? Doesn't that seem like those two sentences summed up much of what's gone on so far today? (Diane Feinstein said it today to Alito, for those who missed it.)
and check out kat who wrote something yesterday that can make you laugh as you cry.
the common ills
samuel alito
supreme court
alito hearings
kats korner
diane feinstein
now
1/11/2006
alito hearings: the mint julup exploded on my best dress! starring lindsey graham and diane feinstein
let me say what i'm willing to bet everyone wants to but no one wants to be the 1st to do so: diane feinstein, are you trying to help or hurt?
over and over she plays 'miss diane' with the white gloves and 'oh my's.
miss diane, it's the 21st century. you are a us senator. try acting like 1.
now maybe she's confused because she's got lindsey graham playing like the heroine to a tennessee williams play that he never had time to write: the mint julup exploded on my best dress!
'i am sorry,' blanche, er, lindsey sobbed to alito, 'that you had to go through this. i'm sorry that your family had to sit here . . .'
oh the tragedy! oh the drama!
poor alito! asked questions!
i can barely hear lindsey crying due to the rustle from his crinoline petticoat.
but diane feinstein was worse than a joke, she was a distraction.
yesterday it was all 'miss diane you are so pretty' nonsense. and she basked in it.
today, ted kennedy's reading an article by a cap member. what's being read is pretty shocking.
he's leading to a question and the thing has soundbyte written all over it.
what happens?
miss diane interrupts him. 'read the last sentence.'
twice.
miss diane, in your own time, where you 'let things pass,' and you have no follow ups, you can read that last sentence. (it applied to women.)
what you shouldn't do is step on someone's powerful moment.
i was listening to the hearings on pacifica and hope you were too.
but i wondered what ted kennedy's face looked like during that?
did he realize his soundbyte was blown?
and did everyone get that diane thought she was being silly. 'read the last sentence.'
twice she interrupts and sounds so delighted.
as though teddy were given a toast and she'd just cut him off to say, 'oh look, the grants brought baked beans! yoo hoo! over here!'
can someone have a talk with diane feinstein?
from a p.r. perspective, she needs it explained to her that she didn't just butt into ted kennedy's time, she destroyed a soundbyte that could have been on all the news networks - well, not fox 'news.'
it was a powerful moment - until she piped off. twice.
now in her own time, she wastes everyone's. she won't follow up on anything. she wastes time playing the 'girl' which is embarrassing from any senator but especially 1 of her advanced years.
so i'll ask it, is she trying to help us or trying to hurt us?
if she's trying to help us, she needs some 1 to explain to her the importance of not butting in on some 1's sound byte.
the importance of not being 'cute' in the hearings but instead doing your job.
this isn't a social, it's not a dance. conduct yourself like a senator or get off the committee.
there are many reasons to sing barbara boxer's praises. 1 of them is that she can lay it out without trying to pour on the filigree. she doesn't need to 'girl' it up. she's a strong woman, a confident 1. that's how she conducts herself and that's 1 reason so many respect her.
diane feinstein needs to be diane feinstein. but if she thinks playing it like shirley temple is appropriate, she needs to rethink being on the committee.
for a summary of the hearings as of early into them this morning, see c.i.'s entry.
i know it's important to follow the hearings (if you're able to, they can be very frustrating, i've got friends over to listen) but i hope you're making time for democracy now as well. here's a headline from them today:
NSA Denies Whistleblower's Demand To Testify Before Congress
Meanwhile, ABC News is reporting the National Security Agency has denied the request of whistleblower Russell Tice to testify before Congress. Tice, a former intelligence agent at the NSA and Defense Intelligence Agency who has spoken out against the domestic spy program, was told he is not free to testify because staff members on Capitol Hill do not have high enough security clearance to hear the secrets he has to tell. Tice first spoke out on record on Democracy Now last week.
democracy now
the common ills
pacifica
samuel alito
supreme court
alito hearings
over and over she plays 'miss diane' with the white gloves and 'oh my's.
miss diane, it's the 21st century. you are a us senator. try acting like 1.
now maybe she's confused because she's got lindsey graham playing like the heroine to a tennessee williams play that he never had time to write: the mint julup exploded on my best dress!
'i am sorry,' blanche, er, lindsey sobbed to alito, 'that you had to go through this. i'm sorry that your family had to sit here . . .'
oh the tragedy! oh the drama!
poor alito! asked questions!
i can barely hear lindsey crying due to the rustle from his crinoline petticoat.
but diane feinstein was worse than a joke, she was a distraction.
yesterday it was all 'miss diane you are so pretty' nonsense. and she basked in it.
today, ted kennedy's reading an article by a cap member. what's being read is pretty shocking.
he's leading to a question and the thing has soundbyte written all over it.
what happens?
miss diane interrupts him. 'read the last sentence.'
twice.
miss diane, in your own time, where you 'let things pass,' and you have no follow ups, you can read that last sentence. (it applied to women.)
what you shouldn't do is step on someone's powerful moment.
i was listening to the hearings on pacifica and hope you were too.
but i wondered what ted kennedy's face looked like during that?
did he realize his soundbyte was blown?
and did everyone get that diane thought she was being silly. 'read the last sentence.'
twice she interrupts and sounds so delighted.
as though teddy were given a toast and she'd just cut him off to say, 'oh look, the grants brought baked beans! yoo hoo! over here!'
can someone have a talk with diane feinstein?
from a p.r. perspective, she needs it explained to her that she didn't just butt into ted kennedy's time, she destroyed a soundbyte that could have been on all the news networks - well, not fox 'news.'
it was a powerful moment - until she piped off. twice.
now in her own time, she wastes everyone's. she won't follow up on anything. she wastes time playing the 'girl' which is embarrassing from any senator but especially 1 of her advanced years.
so i'll ask it, is she trying to help us or trying to hurt us?
if she's trying to help us, she needs some 1 to explain to her the importance of not butting in on some 1's sound byte.
the importance of not being 'cute' in the hearings but instead doing your job.
this isn't a social, it's not a dance. conduct yourself like a senator or get off the committee.
there are many reasons to sing barbara boxer's praises. 1 of them is that she can lay it out without trying to pour on the filigree. she doesn't need to 'girl' it up. she's a strong woman, a confident 1. that's how she conducts herself and that's 1 reason so many respect her.
diane feinstein needs to be diane feinstein. but if she thinks playing it like shirley temple is appropriate, she needs to rethink being on the committee.
for a summary of the hearings as of early into them this morning, see c.i.'s entry.
i know it's important to follow the hearings (if you're able to, they can be very frustrating, i've got friends over to listen) but i hope you're making time for democracy now as well. here's a headline from them today:
NSA Denies Whistleblower's Demand To Testify Before Congress
Meanwhile, ABC News is reporting the National Security Agency has denied the request of whistleblower Russell Tice to testify before Congress. Tice, a former intelligence agent at the NSA and Defense Intelligence Agency who has spoken out against the domestic spy program, was told he is not free to testify because staff members on Capitol Hill do not have high enough security clearance to hear the secrets he has to tell. Tice first spoke out on record on Democracy Now last week.
democracy now
the common ills
pacifica
samuel alito
supreme court
alito hearings
1/10/2006
pacifica continues bringing you live coverage of alito hearings while npr's gas air provides you with paul bremmer
if you listened to pacifica's live coverage of the alito hearings, you were informed. if you listened to npr you got gas air as terry 'that's so gross!' interviewing paul bremer. i hope someone's planning to fact check that interview because terry's all about exploring feels and moods and seems lost when dealing with any topic not taught in art history.
day 2 of the hearings and npr still doesn't think they're worthy of live coverage. remember that when they beg money for next time. pacifica, or at least 1 station, is having a 1 day fundraisher on mlk day so remember who provided you with live coverage.
ruth told me about the fundraiser. she had a ruth's morning edition report during the week - today, in fact. i asked her about that because it's always great when she does 1 of her reports.
she said due to the screw ups with the e-mail accounts, she's been dictating today and sunday's to c.i. over the phone. she feels bad about that because she knows c.i. is pressed for time as it is.
we talked about the hearings and we've got some points we'll both be making tonight during the roundtable for the gina & krista round-robin.
but 1 point i'll make now is that monday it sure was sweet - sarcasm - to listen to white men rush to say that sandra day o'connor can be replaced by a man and that it's practically reverse discrimination to suggest otherwise.
why there's no difference that a woman could bring.
which was blown out of the water this morning when some 1 made some stupid comment about diane feinstein's looks and then it was turned into a mini joke to be picked up on. if there were several women on the committee, instead of just 1, would that have happened?
i don't think so.
there were so many overtones of 'the little lady' during these 'jokes.'
as c.i. noted:
If you're following the hearings, you know that poor little Alito can't remember membership in a group he saw fit to list on his resume in the eighties.
that was a big theme. that and the press lies. knight ridder got it wrong, this news source got it wrong. why if alito wasn't in the mainstream, picking up on that again, would they all be for him?
yes, because republicans close ranks.
diane feinstein? i'll blog on her tomorrow night. i wasn't impressed.
c.i. also noted the upcoming issue of ms. featuring jane fonda on the cover:
Ms. Winter 2006 Issue
Available on 7,757 newsstands across the country January 17. Exclusive: Jane Fonda Talks Sex, Politics & Religion with Robin Morgan
The renowned actor/activist sat down with her friend, Ms. editor Morgan, to take on the "most impolite dinner-conversation subjects." Listen in on their lively discussion.
jane fonda alone makes it worth checking out. but robin morgan doing the interview means even more so. robin morgan was addressing the issue of terrorism long before 9-11. addressing realities for women that the adminstration still doesn't want to touch.
so be sure to look for that issue on january 17th. there's more in it but i've got to run an errand before we start the roundtable tonight.
day 2 of the hearings and npr still doesn't think they're worthy of live coverage. remember that when they beg money for next time. pacifica, or at least 1 station, is having a 1 day fundraisher on mlk day so remember who provided you with live coverage.
ruth told me about the fundraiser. she had a ruth's morning edition report during the week - today, in fact. i asked her about that because it's always great when she does 1 of her reports.
she said due to the screw ups with the e-mail accounts, she's been dictating today and sunday's to c.i. over the phone. she feels bad about that because she knows c.i. is pressed for time as it is.
we talked about the hearings and we've got some points we'll both be making tonight during the roundtable for the gina & krista round-robin.
but 1 point i'll make now is that monday it sure was sweet - sarcasm - to listen to white men rush to say that sandra day o'connor can be replaced by a man and that it's practically reverse discrimination to suggest otherwise.
why there's no difference that a woman could bring.
which was blown out of the water this morning when some 1 made some stupid comment about diane feinstein's looks and then it was turned into a mini joke to be picked up on. if there were several women on the committee, instead of just 1, would that have happened?
i don't think so.
there were so many overtones of 'the little lady' during these 'jokes.'
as c.i. noted:
If you're following the hearings, you know that poor little Alito can't remember membership in a group he saw fit to list on his resume in the eighties.
that was a big theme. that and the press lies. knight ridder got it wrong, this news source got it wrong. why if alito wasn't in the mainstream, picking up on that again, would they all be for him?
yes, because republicans close ranks.
diane feinstein? i'll blog on her tomorrow night. i wasn't impressed.
c.i. also noted the upcoming issue of ms. featuring jane fonda on the cover:
Ms. Winter 2006 Issue
Available on 7,757 newsstands across the country January 17. Exclusive: Jane Fonda Talks Sex, Politics & Religion with Robin Morgan
The renowned actor/activist sat down with her friend, Ms. editor Morgan, to take on the "most impolite dinner-conversation subjects." Listen in on their lively discussion.
jane fonda alone makes it worth checking out. but robin morgan doing the interview means even more so. robin morgan was addressing the issue of terrorism long before 9-11. addressing realities for women that the adminstration still doesn't want to touch.
so be sure to look for that issue on january 17th. there's more in it but i've got to run an errand before we start the roundtable tonight.
1/09/2006
skip gas air terry 'that's gross' and listen to the alito hearings on pacifica
did you catch pacifica's live coverage of the alito hearings?
if you are following them or want to the follow them, i hope you're using pacifica. npr isn't providing the live coverage.
gas air? terry 'that's gross' had 2 guests, a historian and some 1 to discuss classical music. both white, by the way. no, i didn't listen to npr.
i did visit the site to see if they'd rethought their decision that hearings on a potential supreme court justice was just another day in the senate?
they didn't.
and that's too bad.
for a number of reasons.
1) they are supposed to be public radio and this is of public interest.
remember how they took their bows and tried to act modest when they aired the party conventions that the networks wouldn't?
all that talk about obligations to the public?
somehow the supreme court, lifetime appointment, isn't an obligation.
2) best reason they should have covered?
if gas air's terry 'that's gross' had been present when john cornyn was speaking, i think the senate building would have floated right off the ground.
common ills community member billie has talked a lot about cornyn, he's her senator, and his cornyisms.
i enjoy it anytime c.i. posts any of billie's 'look, here he goes with another cornyism!' comments. but i wasn't prepared for him.
as i listened to him ramble from 1 topic to another, i would have thought the man insane if i honestly believed he meant a word he said.
at 1 point, he was speaking of school prayer and working himself into a case of the dry heaves over students wanting to pray at a school football game when all the sudden something else caught his attention and he started ranting that depictions of sex and violence are allowed but public expressions of religion are not.
okay, help me out here, but are students allowed to depict sex at a sporting event? i'm remembering get balled out by an assistant principal just for kissing in the bleachers. and violence?
is corny calling football violent? i thought he was from the state of texas?
if you're looking for easy laughs, always stand within ear range of john cornyn because his cornyisms will have you rolling on the floor.
the other thing was hearing christine todd whitman tell the senate how to vote and how to do their job. unless i'm remembering wrongly, todd whitman could have used some 1 explaining what an epa administrator does?
but there she was, doing the bully boy's bidding yet again, telling congress not only that they should vote for alito, but also the meaning of the senate.
has christy forgotten that she never won that senate race? she challenged bill bradley and she lost.
but she's always been the insider playing outsider so maybe this time she confused herself?
1 thing i was pushing to get highlighted at the third estate sunday review this weekend was c.i.'s 'NYT: Dexy & John will never forget that summer when . . ." so if you missed it, check that out. it's an important read. another heads up i want to note is that trina has started her own site, trina's kitchen. trina is a member of the common ills community and she is also mike's mother. she's also a really great person so look forward to her posting at trina's kitchen on saturdays.
let me do 1 more shout out. if you're a common ills community member, read your round-robins. gina and krista do an incredible job on those and this week, it's not weekly, it's day by day by day . . . throughout the alito hearing.
mikey likes it
the common ills
trinas kitchen
pacifica
alito
if you are following them or want to the follow them, i hope you're using pacifica. npr isn't providing the live coverage.
gas air? terry 'that's gross' had 2 guests, a historian and some 1 to discuss classical music. both white, by the way. no, i didn't listen to npr.
i did visit the site to see if they'd rethought their decision that hearings on a potential supreme court justice was just another day in the senate?
they didn't.
and that's too bad.
for a number of reasons.
1) they are supposed to be public radio and this is of public interest.
remember how they took their bows and tried to act modest when they aired the party conventions that the networks wouldn't?
all that talk about obligations to the public?
somehow the supreme court, lifetime appointment, isn't an obligation.
2) best reason they should have covered?
if gas air's terry 'that's gross' had been present when john cornyn was speaking, i think the senate building would have floated right off the ground.
common ills community member billie has talked a lot about cornyn, he's her senator, and his cornyisms.
i enjoy it anytime c.i. posts any of billie's 'look, here he goes with another cornyism!' comments. but i wasn't prepared for him.
as i listened to him ramble from 1 topic to another, i would have thought the man insane if i honestly believed he meant a word he said.
at 1 point, he was speaking of school prayer and working himself into a case of the dry heaves over students wanting to pray at a school football game when all the sudden something else caught his attention and he started ranting that depictions of sex and violence are allowed but public expressions of religion are not.
okay, help me out here, but are students allowed to depict sex at a sporting event? i'm remembering get balled out by an assistant principal just for kissing in the bleachers. and violence?
is corny calling football violent? i thought he was from the state of texas?
if you're looking for easy laughs, always stand within ear range of john cornyn because his cornyisms will have you rolling on the floor.
the other thing was hearing christine todd whitman tell the senate how to vote and how to do their job. unless i'm remembering wrongly, todd whitman could have used some 1 explaining what an epa administrator does?
but there she was, doing the bully boy's bidding yet again, telling congress not only that they should vote for alito, but also the meaning of the senate.
has christy forgotten that she never won that senate race? she challenged bill bradley and she lost.
but she's always been the insider playing outsider so maybe this time she confused herself?
1 thing i was pushing to get highlighted at the third estate sunday review this weekend was c.i.'s 'NYT: Dexy & John will never forget that summer when . . ." so if you missed it, check that out. it's an important read. another heads up i want to note is that trina has started her own site, trina's kitchen. trina is a member of the common ills community and she is also mike's mother. she's also a really great person so look forward to her posting at trina's kitchen on saturdays.
let me do 1 more shout out. if you're a common ills community member, read your round-robins. gina and krista do an incredible job on those and this week, it's not weekly, it's day by day by day . . . throughout the alito hearing.
mikey likes it
the common ills
trinas kitchen
pacifica
alito
1/06/2006
pacifica will cover the alito hearings live & the round-robin schedule
Mon., Jan. 9 through Fri., Jan. 13The Pacifica Radio Network is bringing you the Samuel Alito Senate Hearing for nomination to the United States Supreme Court live!Verna Avery Brown teams with Mitch Jeserich from Free Speech Radio News and Pacifica National Affairs correspondent, Larry Bensky, to bring you the controversial nomination hearing of Samuel Alito for United States Supreme Court, live.
Anchors: Larry Bensky, KPFA; Verna Avery Brown, WPFW; Mitch Jesserich, FSRN.The schedule of hearings includes a one hour pre-show on the opening day, and an half-hour wrap-up show each evening. Live analysts will join us in the booth and via telephone throughout the hearings.
Pacifica will be bringing you live coverage (as they did during the Roberts' confirmation hearings). That's great if you live in an area Pacifica broadcasts in, right? Well, online access permitting, many people live in areas where Pacifica broadcasts because they provide live webcasts (as well as archived ones). This isn't Renee and Steve yucking it up with Cokie on NPR Monday where maybe you'll get a (canned) story about the hearings that day. This is live coverage. No cutting to "cute" stories about a fisherman who . . . (fill in the anecdote, NPR loves their "cute" fisherman stories). So this starts Monday (unless the hearings are postponed for some reason). You can listen via webcast, live streaming (which you can use any day of the week, at any hour, to listen to Pacifica programming, live or archived programming).
ruth saw the announcement (italics) and c.i. posted it as a heads up. pacifica is public radio. they see it as a public service, broadcasting the hearings. and npr? they'll be offering their usual soft talk and crappy music. so if you're interested in hearing the hearings, you won't hear them on npr, not live. but you can hear it on pacifica. so if you're interested in following closely, please listen.
(i say 'if' because as a woman who's had an abortion, i'm honestly scared to death that alito will be confirmed and that reproductive rights will be destroyed. i'll listen because i have to hear and try to figure out how it's going. but i can understand if some 1's so frightened that they need the distance that following it in the next day's paper will provide.)
the democrats in the senate have already hinted that this isn't something important enough to filibuster.
it's just a lifetime appointment to the highest court in the land. nothing big there.
they think they need to save the ammo for something really important. maybe funding wild flowers on the side of arizona highways? but this, it's not a biggie. if you wonder why the democrats are in the minority party, look no further than the fact that going into a confirmation hearing for the biggest appointment congress can make, the most long lasting, they're rushing to offer whispers that they're taking the filibuster offer off the table.
check out buzzflash's "Thank God our current Senate Democrats weren't at Lexington and Concord!":
If the patriots had held their powder at Lexington and Concord, this nation might still be under a monarchy. (Well, in a way we do still have King George in power, but that's another story.)
This thought comes to mind because the Democrats in the senate are now thinking of "keeping their powder dry" and letting Sam Alito, who believes in unbridled executive branch power (aka, monarchy, dictatorship, etc.) get greenlighted to a seat on the Supreme Court. Forget, for a moment, that Alito is opposed to the fundamental principles of the Democratic Party platform; Alito is opposed to democracy.
Scalito, as he is called, believes in having a Republican president violate the Constitution by simply making a statement giving his interpretation of any law passed by Congress when he signs it. According to Scalito, this Republican presidential interpretation then becomes the law, not the "intent of Congress."
The man who Bush would have join the other absolute power of the Republican executive branch supporters on the Supreme Court came up with this idea while serving in the Reagan Administration. He urged adopting the "executive branch statement of interpretation" quietly and gradually, so it wouldn't draw much press or legal attention.
that pretty much sums it all up, doesn't it? i try not to pick on john kerry but was it just last week that he sent out that e-mail asking for donations to the 2006 races? the 1 that said we needed to reach into our pocketbooks because the democrats will fight?
maybe we should demand a test drive 1st?
as with the tragedy of john roberts jr. being confirmed, the gina & krista round-robin will have daily special editions. c.i. posted a schedule and there are some additions. i'm printing c.i.'s schedule but adding to it and since i use lowercase. this is the schedule for when the roundtabls will take place. the friday roundtable (if the hearings go on that long) will run in a special round-robin on monday morning. (and the round-robin monday will feature a roundtable because we participated in 1 tonight. it's mainly predicitions.) here's the line up:
Monday: Francisco, Susan, Eli, Shirley and Martha, c.i., ruth, tracey, ava, jess, jim, ty, dona, elaine, wally, mike, nina, cedric, betty, kat, mia, and me
Tuesday: Marcia, Charlie, Keesha, Eli, Eddie, Billie, Rob, Kara, Brad, Beth, Keshawn and Liang, c.i., ruth, tracey, ava, jess, ty, elaine, wally, mike, cedric, betty, wally, mike, nina, dominic and me
Wednesday: Bonnie, Eli, Joan, Maria, c.i., ruth, tracey, jayson (ruth's grandson), ava, jess, dona, jim, elaine, wally, mike, kat, kayla, kendrick, and me
Thursday: Erika, Eli, Brady, c.i., ruth, tracey, jayson, ava, jess, ty, dona, cedric, betty, elaine, wally, mike, nina, kat, zach, and me
Friday: Miguel, Eli, Lynda, Keesha, c.i., ruth, tracey, ava, jess, jim, wally, betty, elaine, kat, mia, cindy and me
so you can look forward to that. other names may be added but as of right now, that's the way that the schedule stands. wally decided to do every night because eli was. we're all pretty impressed with eli. he's not just the oldest member of the common ills community, he's also 1 of the sweetest and 1 of the wisest. there are other people who will participate in other ways in the special editions. and 'judge' will give us a peak at strategies like last time.
pacifica
the common ills
like maria said paz
sex and politics and screeds and attitude
the third estate sunday review
the daily jot
ruths morning edition report
mikey likes it
thomas friedman is a great man
kats korner
cedrics big mix
buzzflash
Anchors: Larry Bensky, KPFA; Verna Avery Brown, WPFW; Mitch Jesserich, FSRN.The schedule of hearings includes a one hour pre-show on the opening day, and an half-hour wrap-up show each evening. Live analysts will join us in the booth and via telephone throughout the hearings.
Pacifica will be bringing you live coverage (as they did during the Roberts' confirmation hearings). That's great if you live in an area Pacifica broadcasts in, right? Well, online access permitting, many people live in areas where Pacifica broadcasts because they provide live webcasts (as well as archived ones). This isn't Renee and Steve yucking it up with Cokie on NPR Monday where maybe you'll get a (canned) story about the hearings that day. This is live coverage. No cutting to "cute" stories about a fisherman who . . . (fill in the anecdote, NPR loves their "cute" fisherman stories). So this starts Monday (unless the hearings are postponed for some reason). You can listen via webcast, live streaming (which you can use any day of the week, at any hour, to listen to Pacifica programming, live or archived programming).
ruth saw the announcement (italics) and c.i. posted it as a heads up. pacifica is public radio. they see it as a public service, broadcasting the hearings. and npr? they'll be offering their usual soft talk and crappy music. so if you're interested in hearing the hearings, you won't hear them on npr, not live. but you can hear it on pacifica. so if you're interested in following closely, please listen.
(i say 'if' because as a woman who's had an abortion, i'm honestly scared to death that alito will be confirmed and that reproductive rights will be destroyed. i'll listen because i have to hear and try to figure out how it's going. but i can understand if some 1's so frightened that they need the distance that following it in the next day's paper will provide.)
the democrats in the senate have already hinted that this isn't something important enough to filibuster.
it's just a lifetime appointment to the highest court in the land. nothing big there.
they think they need to save the ammo for something really important. maybe funding wild flowers on the side of arizona highways? but this, it's not a biggie. if you wonder why the democrats are in the minority party, look no further than the fact that going into a confirmation hearing for the biggest appointment congress can make, the most long lasting, they're rushing to offer whispers that they're taking the filibuster offer off the table.
check out buzzflash's "Thank God our current Senate Democrats weren't at Lexington and Concord!":
If the patriots had held their powder at Lexington and Concord, this nation might still be under a monarchy. (Well, in a way we do still have King George in power, but that's another story.)
This thought comes to mind because the Democrats in the senate are now thinking of "keeping their powder dry" and letting Sam Alito, who believes in unbridled executive branch power (aka, monarchy, dictatorship, etc.) get greenlighted to a seat on the Supreme Court. Forget, for a moment, that Alito is opposed to the fundamental principles of the Democratic Party platform; Alito is opposed to democracy.
Scalito, as he is called, believes in having a Republican president violate the Constitution by simply making a statement giving his interpretation of any law passed by Congress when he signs it. According to Scalito, this Republican presidential interpretation then becomes the law, not the "intent of Congress."
The man who Bush would have join the other absolute power of the Republican executive branch supporters on the Supreme Court came up with this idea while serving in the Reagan Administration. He urged adopting the "executive branch statement of interpretation" quietly and gradually, so it wouldn't draw much press or legal attention.
that pretty much sums it all up, doesn't it? i try not to pick on john kerry but was it just last week that he sent out that e-mail asking for donations to the 2006 races? the 1 that said we needed to reach into our pocketbooks because the democrats will fight?
maybe we should demand a test drive 1st?
as with the tragedy of john roberts jr. being confirmed, the gina & krista round-robin will have daily special editions. c.i. posted a schedule and there are some additions. i'm printing c.i.'s schedule but adding to it and since i use lowercase. this is the schedule for when the roundtabls will take place. the friday roundtable (if the hearings go on that long) will run in a special round-robin on monday morning. (and the round-robin monday will feature a roundtable because we participated in 1 tonight. it's mainly predicitions.) here's the line up:
Monday: Francisco, Susan, Eli, Shirley and Martha, c.i., ruth, tracey, ava, jess, jim, ty, dona, elaine, wally, mike, nina, cedric, betty, kat, mia, and me
Tuesday: Marcia, Charlie, Keesha, Eli, Eddie, Billie, Rob, Kara, Brad, Beth, Keshawn and Liang, c.i., ruth, tracey, ava, jess, ty, elaine, wally, mike, cedric, betty, wally, mike, nina, dominic and me
Wednesday: Bonnie, Eli, Joan, Maria, c.i., ruth, tracey, jayson (ruth's grandson), ava, jess, dona, jim, elaine, wally, mike, kat, kayla, kendrick, and me
Thursday: Erika, Eli, Brady, c.i., ruth, tracey, jayson, ava, jess, ty, dona, cedric, betty, elaine, wally, mike, nina, kat, zach, and me
Friday: Miguel, Eli, Lynda, Keesha, c.i., ruth, tracey, ava, jess, jim, wally, betty, elaine, kat, mia, cindy and me
so you can look forward to that. other names may be added but as of right now, that's the way that the schedule stands. wally decided to do every night because eli was. we're all pretty impressed with eli. he's not just the oldest member of the common ills community, he's also 1 of the sweetest and 1 of the wisest. there are other people who will participate in other ways in the special editions. and 'judge' will give us a peak at strategies like last time.
pacifica
the common ills
like maria said paz
sex and politics and screeds and attitude
the third estate sunday review
the daily jot
ruths morning edition report
mikey likes it
thomas friedman is a great man
kats korner
cedrics big mix
buzzflash
1/05/2006
reply to e-mails
i had some e-mail about yesterday's entry which was a joint entry c.i. and i worked on together.
first question was 'why did it post so late?' i got the idea late in the day. i wanted to work on it with c.i. because i do think there need to be more joint entries. things are really busy for c.i. right now and i left a ton of messages and noted in all of them, 'call me when you get this, no matter what time it is' which did happen.
i explained what i wanted to do and c.i. was cool with it. we discussed songs and i was really pushing for 'american pie'. c.i. pointed out 'it's so long!' and it is. it was also late and i wish that hadn't been the case. but we worked and worked on it.
some of it we just tossed in hoping to go back and fix it later.
then it was so late and i said 'i'm too tired' and c.i. said, 'you know what? that's cool. ellie greenwich and barry mann often ended up with something people liked when they threw something in and weren't able to fix it later.'
my favorite line (6 e-mails asked that) is the 1 about 'naomi and the book of baghdad' which c.i. came up with. c.i. said 'baghdad' like they do on the bbc and it just sounds so much better that way 'naomi and the book of baghdad.'
was it fun?
hell yes. if we hadn't had fun, it would have been awful. it was late but the time flew.
why did we do it together?
because the lack of disclosure on the part of you know who 1st surfaced together.
c.i. was contacted by a man wanting my phone number. why? i have no idea. he didn't seem to read what i wrote. so i'm guessing he saw 'sex' and thought 'score.'
i didn't know him. i was on vacation. c.i. called and i checked my e-mail throughout as most of my regular readers know. but the 1st time c.i. called i got told about the e-mail and how the guy, who doesn't know me and doesn't know c.i., is asking c.i. to give out my phone number.
that was sort of freaky and everything that followed was as well.
but we both got drug into this and i felt we should write it together.
it was so late and i made the mistake of saying 'i wish you'd write something about it' and then called back because mine was up and c.i.'s wasn't. c.i. was trying to write something. c.i. reads some of it to me and i say 'okay, that's a book.'
and turns out that c.i. worked and worked on it. no sleep at all last night and i honestly feel bad about that.
i know c.i. was tired all day and i urged that there be no posts tonight.
i hope that's the case.
so why 'american pie.' for a number of reasons. but 1 is that the daily howler died.
i'm sorry that's the case.
i'm sorry bob somerby goes out the way he does.
but that's the way it goes sometimes.
1 e-mail asked 'is kim gandy screamed' a knock at kim gandy?
no. 'dreamed' and 'screamed' rhymed which was the main reason we came up with it. c.i. did raise that after we came up with the line: 'people won't think this is an insult, will they?'
so we debated that line last night and then decided that these are times when you scream, that you scream when you're in pain and that 'the scream' is a famous work of art.
most of all, kim gandy will not go quietly into the night. she is going to fight for what is right with everything she has. (she seems like a giant on tv because she's so strong but she's actually not that tall.) if you're smart, you seem her as the warning system. when something's wrong, she says so. she doesn't sugar coat and she doesn't sit there with a silly grin on her face when she's interviewed. if it's wrong, she says it's wrong.
she's an important voice and 1 that i'm glad exists because she's a fighter and we need her so badly now. sometimes we have to fight and feel like we're on our own. with kim gandy heading now, we aren't. she's a real leader and 1 that this country needs now more than ever. she's an inspiration. if you don't read her column regularly, you should start reading it. you can find it and other things at now's website.
if you know about her, you know what i'm talking about. i don't know what to make of the naacp yet. they have a new leader and i'm waiting to see how that goes. but julian bond is a brave voice and hopefully the new leadership will follow in his footsteps.
there are so few really brave voices. there are a lot of people who try to appease the bully boy and then a year or 2 later they whine that they were tricked or they were fooled. when you're dealing with a bully, you have to fight. kim gandy knows how to fight.
what other songs did we consider? c.i. named some carly simon songs and they were good choices. we also thought about the beatles 'i am the walrus' and jefferson airplane's 'plastic fantastic lover' for melodies.
the other big question was from people who laughed and they were wondering if that was okay?
yes, it's supposed to be funny. but considering the way the world is today, i would urge you to laugh anytime you see the chance.
there was a lot of feedback on this and i'm so glad that so many enjoyed it.
first question was 'why did it post so late?' i got the idea late in the day. i wanted to work on it with c.i. because i do think there need to be more joint entries. things are really busy for c.i. right now and i left a ton of messages and noted in all of them, 'call me when you get this, no matter what time it is' which did happen.
i explained what i wanted to do and c.i. was cool with it. we discussed songs and i was really pushing for 'american pie'. c.i. pointed out 'it's so long!' and it is. it was also late and i wish that hadn't been the case. but we worked and worked on it.
some of it we just tossed in hoping to go back and fix it later.
then it was so late and i said 'i'm too tired' and c.i. said, 'you know what? that's cool. ellie greenwich and barry mann often ended up with something people liked when they threw something in and weren't able to fix it later.'
my favorite line (6 e-mails asked that) is the 1 about 'naomi and the book of baghdad' which c.i. came up with. c.i. said 'baghdad' like they do on the bbc and it just sounds so much better that way 'naomi and the book of baghdad.'
was it fun?
hell yes. if we hadn't had fun, it would have been awful. it was late but the time flew.
why did we do it together?
because the lack of disclosure on the part of you know who 1st surfaced together.
c.i. was contacted by a man wanting my phone number. why? i have no idea. he didn't seem to read what i wrote. so i'm guessing he saw 'sex' and thought 'score.'
i didn't know him. i was on vacation. c.i. called and i checked my e-mail throughout as most of my regular readers know. but the 1st time c.i. called i got told about the e-mail and how the guy, who doesn't know me and doesn't know c.i., is asking c.i. to give out my phone number.
that was sort of freaky and everything that followed was as well.
but we both got drug into this and i felt we should write it together.
it was so late and i made the mistake of saying 'i wish you'd write something about it' and then called back because mine was up and c.i.'s wasn't. c.i. was trying to write something. c.i. reads some of it to me and i say 'okay, that's a book.'
and turns out that c.i. worked and worked on it. no sleep at all last night and i honestly feel bad about that.
i know c.i. was tired all day and i urged that there be no posts tonight.
i hope that's the case.
so why 'american pie.' for a number of reasons. but 1 is that the daily howler died.
i'm sorry that's the case.
i'm sorry bob somerby goes out the way he does.
but that's the way it goes sometimes.
1 e-mail asked 'is kim gandy screamed' a knock at kim gandy?
no. 'dreamed' and 'screamed' rhymed which was the main reason we came up with it. c.i. did raise that after we came up with the line: 'people won't think this is an insult, will they?'
so we debated that line last night and then decided that these are times when you scream, that you scream when you're in pain and that 'the scream' is a famous work of art.
most of all, kim gandy will not go quietly into the night. she is going to fight for what is right with everything she has. (she seems like a giant on tv because she's so strong but she's actually not that tall.) if you're smart, you seem her as the warning system. when something's wrong, she says so. she doesn't sugar coat and she doesn't sit there with a silly grin on her face when she's interviewed. if it's wrong, she says it's wrong.
she's an important voice and 1 that i'm glad exists because she's a fighter and we need her so badly now. sometimes we have to fight and feel like we're on our own. with kim gandy heading now, we aren't. she's a real leader and 1 that this country needs now more than ever. she's an inspiration. if you don't read her column regularly, you should start reading it. you can find it and other things at now's website.
if you know about her, you know what i'm talking about. i don't know what to make of the naacp yet. they have a new leader and i'm waiting to see how that goes. but julian bond is a brave voice and hopefully the new leadership will follow in his footsteps.
there are so few really brave voices. there are a lot of people who try to appease the bully boy and then a year or 2 later they whine that they were tricked or they were fooled. when you're dealing with a bully, you have to fight. kim gandy knows how to fight.
what other songs did we consider? c.i. named some carly simon songs and they were good choices. we also thought about the beatles 'i am the walrus' and jefferson airplane's 'plastic fantastic lover' for melodies.
the other big question was from people who laughed and they were wondering if that was okay?
yes, it's supposed to be funny. but considering the way the world is today, i would urge you to laugh anytime you see the chance.
there was a lot of feedback on this and i'm so glad that so many enjoyed it.
so bye, bye bob somerby
the following is the tune of don mclean's 'american pie' and was written by c.i. and myself. we've grown tired of the conflicts of bob somerby. there's more i could say but i'll leave it at this tonight. it says it all and if it's a puzzle to you, trust that the person its here for fully gets it.
a long, long time ago ... i can still remember how
that howler used to make me smile.
and i knew if i clicked the link,
that it could make me think,
and maybe make me laugh for awhile.
but larry summers made me shiver,
new republicans you'd prop and deliver,
depressing my morning routine ....
i couldn't take another read.
i can't remember if i cried
when i heard about your conflict inside
but something ended the crazy ride
the day the howler died.
so ... bye, bye bob somerby
checked out the conflict and the conflict was inside (of you)
and like cokie and tim you took people for a ride
singing 'you shall never see me clown
you shall never see me clown.'
did you write the (slam) book on joe (wilson)
and did you sell your soul?
if a buddy tells you so
do you repeat GOP spin?
who will save your mortal soul
who will walk through you slow?
well i know you're friends with him
cause i saw you dancing in the gym
you both took out your knives
went after joe wilson with spin and lies.
i was a depressed woman in a funk
pissed off at the election and the bully punk
and i knew that the howler was sunk
the day the howler died.
so ... bye, bye bob somerby
checked out the conflict and the conflict was inside (of you)
and like cokie and tim you took people for a ride
singing 'you shall never see me clown
you shall never see me clown.'
now for the next election cycle we're on our own
and that might make some moan and groan
but you're off in the dlc zone
the jester jumping the king to push the queen
in a coat borrowed from time magazine
in a voice that came from you and you know who
and while the queen was acting a hawk
you were silent on iraq
you were clowning to the max
self-disclosure was real lax.
while naomi read from the book of baghad
we were gathered in central park
but you were somewhere in the dark
the day the howler died.
so ... bye, bye bob somerby
checked out the conflict and the conflict was inside (of you)
and like cokie and tim you took people for a ride
singing 'you shall never see me clown
you shall never see me clown.'
new york times in the summer scandal
judy miller left without shelter
kicked off her peerch and falling fast
she landed foul upon the grass.
but you never wrote of her or him
and in the end that did you in
now you're the daily fool
who broke his own rules
a crank, no longer cool.
as the truth tried to take the field
spin, you refused to yield
even so you've been revealed
the day the howler died.
so ... bye, bye bob somerby
checked out the conflict and the conflict was inside (of you)
and like cokie and tim you took people for a ride
singing 'you shall never see me clown
you shall never see me clown.'
there we were all in defeat
no time left to clown on the beat
the constitution taking heat
but bob be obtuse
bob be a bore
bob tell us about 99 once more
cause you've got so little to say about today.
as i watched you divert from the stage
my hands were clenched in fists of rage
not even joan baez speaking real
could break your faustian deal
and as smoke poured from the screen
robert novak wasn't that mean
the day the howler died.
there was a time when i sang the blues
but you could cheer me up with your views
those days have long faded away
i went back to the source within
where i found strength to begin
and no sexists were allowed
and in the streets kim gandy screamed
the women gathered and the women dreamed
not a word of you was spoken
your promise had long been broken
and the three women i admire the most
naomi, gandy and gloria the most
said that this was no time to coast
and the howler died.
so ... bye, bye bob somerby
checked out the conflict and the conflict was inside (of you)
and like cokie and tim you took people for a ride
singing 'you shall never see me clown
you shall never see me clown.'
a long, long time ago ... i can still remember how
that howler used to make me smile.
and i knew if i clicked the link,
that it could make me think,
and maybe make me laugh for awhile.
but larry summers made me shiver,
new republicans you'd prop and deliver,
depressing my morning routine ....
i couldn't take another read.
i can't remember if i cried
when i heard about your conflict inside
but something ended the crazy ride
the day the howler died.
so ... bye, bye bob somerby
checked out the conflict and the conflict was inside (of you)
and like cokie and tim you took people for a ride
singing 'you shall never see me clown
you shall never see me clown.'
did you write the (slam) book on joe (wilson)
and did you sell your soul?
if a buddy tells you so
do you repeat GOP spin?
who will save your mortal soul
who will walk through you slow?
well i know you're friends with him
cause i saw you dancing in the gym
you both took out your knives
went after joe wilson with spin and lies.
i was a depressed woman in a funk
pissed off at the election and the bully punk
and i knew that the howler was sunk
the day the howler died.
so ... bye, bye bob somerby
checked out the conflict and the conflict was inside (of you)
and like cokie and tim you took people for a ride
singing 'you shall never see me clown
you shall never see me clown.'
now for the next election cycle we're on our own
and that might make some moan and groan
but you're off in the dlc zone
the jester jumping the king to push the queen
in a coat borrowed from time magazine
in a voice that came from you and you know who
and while the queen was acting a hawk
you were silent on iraq
you were clowning to the max
self-disclosure was real lax.
while naomi read from the book of baghad
we were gathered in central park
but you were somewhere in the dark
the day the howler died.
so ... bye, bye bob somerby
checked out the conflict and the conflict was inside (of you)
and like cokie and tim you took people for a ride
singing 'you shall never see me clown
you shall never see me clown.'
new york times in the summer scandal
judy miller left without shelter
kicked off her peerch and falling fast
she landed foul upon the grass.
but you never wrote of her or him
and in the end that did you in
now you're the daily fool
who broke his own rules
a crank, no longer cool.
as the truth tried to take the field
spin, you refused to yield
even so you've been revealed
the day the howler died.
so ... bye, bye bob somerby
checked out the conflict and the conflict was inside (of you)
and like cokie and tim you took people for a ride
singing 'you shall never see me clown
you shall never see me clown.'
there we were all in defeat
no time left to clown on the beat
the constitution taking heat
but bob be obtuse
bob be a bore
bob tell us about 99 once more
cause you've got so little to say about today.
as i watched you divert from the stage
my hands were clenched in fists of rage
not even joan baez speaking real
could break your faustian deal
and as smoke poured from the screen
robert novak wasn't that mean
the day the howler died.
there was a time when i sang the blues
but you could cheer me up with your views
those days have long faded away
i went back to the source within
where i found strength to begin
and no sexists were allowed
and in the streets kim gandy screamed
the women gathered and the women dreamed
not a word of you was spoken
your promise had long been broken
and the three women i admire the most
naomi, gandy and gloria the most
said that this was no time to coast
and the howler died.
so ... bye, bye bob somerby
checked out the conflict and the conflict was inside (of you)
and like cokie and tim you took people for a ride
singing 'you shall never see me clown
you shall never see me clown.'
1/03/2006
2006 focus
RUSSELL TICE: Well, the National Security Agency is an agency that deals with monitoring communications for the defense of the country. The charter basically says that the N.S.A. will deal with communications of -- overseas. We're not allowed to go after Americans, and I think ultimately that's what the big fuss is now. But as far as the details of how N.S.A. does that, unfortunately, I'm not at liberty to say that. I don’t want to walk out of here and end up in an F.B.I. interrogation room.
AMY GOODMAN: Russell Tice, you have worked for the National Security Agency. Can you talk about your response to the revelations that the Times, you know, revealed in -- perhaps late, knowing the story well before the election, yet revealing it a few weeks ago -- the revelation of the wiretapping of American citizens?
RUSSELL TICE: Well, as far as an intelligence officer, especially a SIGINT officer at N.S.A., we're taught from very early on in our careers that you just do not do this. This is probably the number one commandment of the SIGINT Ten Commandments as a SIGINT officer. You will not spy on Americans. It is drilled into our head over and over and over again in security briefings, at least twice a year, where you ultimately have to sign a paper that says you have gotten the briefing. Everyone at N.S.A. who's a SIGINT officer knows that you do not do this. Ultimately, so do the leaders of N.S.A., and apparently the leaders of N.S.A. have decided that they were just going to go against the tenets of something that’s a gospel to a SIGINT officer.
i love democracy now and think it's 'always worth watching' like marcia always quoted saying at the common ills (i think her new phrase is 'always informing you' for 2006 judging by c.i.'s latest entry). but i figure that most of you are already watching. i watch. but you can also listen to the show or you can read the transcripts. i'm pulling from a transcript, in fact.
so if you can't watch it and maybe can't get listen either through radio or the net, you can read the transcripts. here's 1 that you should, 'National Security Agency Whistleblower Warns Domestic Spying Program Is Sign the U.S. is Decaying Into a "Police State."'
this is your country. are you going to go through 2006 wasting your time and the time of people around you focusing on trivia or are you going to take part in your country?
did you make some resolutions on 2005? i think they're pretty useless. but maybe you do that.
how are they going? have you stuck by them? if so good for you. if not, well start over. and regardless we can make a resolution, even me, to be better informed in 2006. that requires information, access to it, and it requires paying attention.
democracy now is one hour a day monday through friday. don't have an hour to give? are you a speed reader? you can probably read the transcripts quickly.
janeane garofalo often tells people that they can spare ten minutes a day and with just that they can watch or listen to or read the daily headlines at democracy now. so listen to janeane if you won't listen to me.
but we saw huge changes in 2005. i don't just mean the crimes of the bully boy. we know about that. we've discussed that. but we saw the people get involved in large numbers. we need to keep that trend going in 2006.
for my high school readers (and my now 3 middle school readers), you do a wonderful job. you talk about the events and get the word out. you put some adults in this country to shame. if you're an adult and you're reading this, have you wasted 2005 talking about trivia or have you made a point to use time with your friends to talk about things that matter to you and to the country?
everybody likes to have fun. i like to have fun. but there's a place for that and there's a place for doing things that matter. in 2006, we'll have fun here. we'll talk about men's bodies, we'll laugh, we'll joke, we'll dish. but we'll also continue to address important issues. that includes railing against sexism because sexism is still very real and still with us. we'll talk about the bully boy and the war.
we can do that and much more.
but a lot of e-mails came in, usually after people spent the holidays with their families, about how they were surrounded by trivia.
if that's a problem facing you, take the lead and make the change. don't wait for someone to talk about something that matters, bring it up yourself.
that's how we'll make a difference. that's how we'll participate in the world around us.
that doesn't mean you can't talk music. kat does. but she's not whining that britney's pregnant or some such nonsense. she's talking about how music matters to us, how it can matter to us, what it can say and the reality that these days there's a lot of crap out there.
are you a couch potato? c.i. and ava, who aren't couch potatoes, take on tv every week in their reviews at the third estate sunday review. but, unlike the pristine types, they aren't blindly gushing over tv shows. they don't, for instance, see a woman, usually in a push up bra, and think it's a break through for feminism. they're looking at what the show's saying and what it isn't saying. they're looking at representation, and if you read their latest you know that african-americans are still under represented in the midseason replacement shows. you can discuss entertainment and do it in a way that matters as opposed to blindly shouting out 'watch veronica mars it is so cool and it's like my hero joss is back!' now hearing that from a teenager would be sad enough but from a middle aged woman? but, as readers know, there exists such a woman who apparently suffered through high school and therefore the country must suffer as she desparately searches for a tv show aimed at teenagers that can restore her wounded ego by allowing her to relive high school her way.
my young readers are too young to remember this in real time but hopefully they've heard it. bill clinton was elected in 1992 and 1 of his campaign promises was to lift the ban on gays and lesbians serving in the military. guess what? didn't happen. huge b.s. from the right and colin powell throwing road blocks. oh it would destroy the military! oh the military has to be beyond sexual relations and gays and lesbians would harm that! oh the fears in the showers! forget that gays and lesbians have always made up a part of the armed services. that was the lie repeated over and over. so bill did the best that he could do (i hope it was the best that he could do at that time) for the time and created the don't ask don't tell policy. that says that no 1 can be asked what their sexuality is and that you don't tell. as long as you keep your head down (and continue the message of shame - the compromise was a deal with the devil), you can serve.
so when ava and c.i. looked at navy ncis, which is t's favorite of all their reviews, they noticed when the show opened with two officers, a male and a female, rolling around on top of each other. pretending to have sex. the show has military advisors and they didn't object. so the whole sex issue is phoney. it's only an issue when it's same-sex. and that's the approach ava and c.i. took in discussing the show. that's how you can talk intelligently about entertainment, that's called perspective. a middle aged woman typing 'joss is so dreamy' isn't contributing anything but to her further decline as a semi-rational adult.
so let's all try to be as mature as my high school (and 3 middle school) readers are. i think we can pull that off. let's look at the world around us and talk about it. we can still have fun. and we can have blow off days where all we do is have fun. but let's make 2006 about something more than trivia.
"The Common Ills Year in Review 2005" is a must read and so is kat's "Kat's Korner: 2005 in Music" but tonight i want to make a comment about "Ruth's Year End Report" because i had some e-mails on that. ruth is talking about when kenny tomlinson was out to destroy npr and pbs. my attitude, and it's up here in real time, was 'what's the point?' ruth and i have discussed it back then and since. there isn't a problem between ruth and i; however, some who didn't know the history read it today and e-mailed to ask me why ruth was mad at me? she's not.
and it's not that she suddenly agrees with my point of view. she just remembers what happens everytime the left fights a brave battle to 'save' npr or pbs. we give our time, we give our money and after it's over npr and pbs give us shit in return. they don't make a point to say 'hey, the left fought for us so they are out there. maybe we should put some more of them on as guests?' they keep doing the same crap they did before which is center-right and right guests who are officials from the government or elected officials or from center and center-right think tanks and the people, all the people not just the left, are once again left out in the cold.
that's why my attitude was 'what's the point?'
pbs espeically. they're about to turn their back on the public. the transfer to digital broadcast, when complete, will mean the 'public' will have to pay for cable or digital tv to receive pbs. that's not 'public television' - not when over 73 million americans do not currently have cable or digital tv. not when a healthy portion of the public won't be able to afford it.
they take all this corporate money and it keeps them from airing anything to hard hitting, no matter how true the thing is. so quit calling yourself 'public television.' you're not public television. and does the public really need to see suze orman at 1 of her fundraiser/workshops spouting her easy nonsense into a microphone while she works the room? that's good television? that's an informercial and pbs hawks her tapes, her books, her videos.
so my attitude is if they go away i won't cry. i'll watch if something interesting is on (which is about once every three months) but i don't 'pledge.' my tax payer dollars already take care of my 'pledge' and their programming doesn't reflect my interests.
npr is even worse with their silly shows on the morning that straddle the fence between pure waste of time and a few morsels of information.
i've done the pbs/npr battle before and learned then that they didn't give a damn about the public. they care about not offending the right wing members of congress. that's the basis of every decision, 'how much can we do and not upset the republicans' and that makes for crummy broadcasting. it doesn't make for public television or public radio.
but that was my opinion back then and i was open about it. ruth knew it and we talked about it then. i also, because ruth has become a good friend, made a point to note a few 'save pbs' and 'save npr' things while noting that i was doing that out of respect for ruth.
we have no problem, ruth and i. but to some readers who didn't know the background, there was a question of 'is ruth mad at you' and she's not. people can disagree and get along. back then ruth and i disagreed on the need to save npr and pbs. we didn't hate each other. i didn't pull a pristine and slam ruth's writing and suggest that she's a no talent the way pristine did when she attacked kat. ruth and i and it was on a topic that was important to ruth so i tossed out a few links to help out a friend on a cause they were supporting. i don't regret that. i doubt ruth does. and she shouldn't regret trying to defend npr and pbs because that was her honest reaction and where she was at. she's no longer at the same place and that's fine too.
she mentioned me, i think, largely because we are friends and she was attempting to give me a link but also because she was talking about realizing how you can fight and fight for pbs and npr and they never appreciate you. that's why she uses the word 'manipulated' to describe how she feels since the last big battles.
hope that clears it up for the readers who had missed the original discussions on npr and pbs.
AMY GOODMAN: Russell Tice, you have worked for the National Security Agency. Can you talk about your response to the revelations that the Times, you know, revealed in -- perhaps late, knowing the story well before the election, yet revealing it a few weeks ago -- the revelation of the wiretapping of American citizens?
RUSSELL TICE: Well, as far as an intelligence officer, especially a SIGINT officer at N.S.A., we're taught from very early on in our careers that you just do not do this. This is probably the number one commandment of the SIGINT Ten Commandments as a SIGINT officer. You will not spy on Americans. It is drilled into our head over and over and over again in security briefings, at least twice a year, where you ultimately have to sign a paper that says you have gotten the briefing. Everyone at N.S.A. who's a SIGINT officer knows that you do not do this. Ultimately, so do the leaders of N.S.A., and apparently the leaders of N.S.A. have decided that they were just going to go against the tenets of something that’s a gospel to a SIGINT officer.
i love democracy now and think it's 'always worth watching' like marcia always quoted saying at the common ills (i think her new phrase is 'always informing you' for 2006 judging by c.i.'s latest entry). but i figure that most of you are already watching. i watch. but you can also listen to the show or you can read the transcripts. i'm pulling from a transcript, in fact.
so if you can't watch it and maybe can't get listen either through radio or the net, you can read the transcripts. here's 1 that you should, 'National Security Agency Whistleblower Warns Domestic Spying Program Is Sign the U.S. is Decaying Into a "Police State."'
this is your country. are you going to go through 2006 wasting your time and the time of people around you focusing on trivia or are you going to take part in your country?
did you make some resolutions on 2005? i think they're pretty useless. but maybe you do that.
how are they going? have you stuck by them? if so good for you. if not, well start over. and regardless we can make a resolution, even me, to be better informed in 2006. that requires information, access to it, and it requires paying attention.
democracy now is one hour a day monday through friday. don't have an hour to give? are you a speed reader? you can probably read the transcripts quickly.
janeane garofalo often tells people that they can spare ten minutes a day and with just that they can watch or listen to or read the daily headlines at democracy now. so listen to janeane if you won't listen to me.
but we saw huge changes in 2005. i don't just mean the crimes of the bully boy. we know about that. we've discussed that. but we saw the people get involved in large numbers. we need to keep that trend going in 2006.
for my high school readers (and my now 3 middle school readers), you do a wonderful job. you talk about the events and get the word out. you put some adults in this country to shame. if you're an adult and you're reading this, have you wasted 2005 talking about trivia or have you made a point to use time with your friends to talk about things that matter to you and to the country?
everybody likes to have fun. i like to have fun. but there's a place for that and there's a place for doing things that matter. in 2006, we'll have fun here. we'll talk about men's bodies, we'll laugh, we'll joke, we'll dish. but we'll also continue to address important issues. that includes railing against sexism because sexism is still very real and still with us. we'll talk about the bully boy and the war.
we can do that and much more.
but a lot of e-mails came in, usually after people spent the holidays with their families, about how they were surrounded by trivia.
if that's a problem facing you, take the lead and make the change. don't wait for someone to talk about something that matters, bring it up yourself.
that's how we'll make a difference. that's how we'll participate in the world around us.
that doesn't mean you can't talk music. kat does. but she's not whining that britney's pregnant or some such nonsense. she's talking about how music matters to us, how it can matter to us, what it can say and the reality that these days there's a lot of crap out there.
are you a couch potato? c.i. and ava, who aren't couch potatoes, take on tv every week in their reviews at the third estate sunday review. but, unlike the pristine types, they aren't blindly gushing over tv shows. they don't, for instance, see a woman, usually in a push up bra, and think it's a break through for feminism. they're looking at what the show's saying and what it isn't saying. they're looking at representation, and if you read their latest you know that african-americans are still under represented in the midseason replacement shows. you can discuss entertainment and do it in a way that matters as opposed to blindly shouting out 'watch veronica mars it is so cool and it's like my hero joss is back!' now hearing that from a teenager would be sad enough but from a middle aged woman? but, as readers know, there exists such a woman who apparently suffered through high school and therefore the country must suffer as she desparately searches for a tv show aimed at teenagers that can restore her wounded ego by allowing her to relive high school her way.
my young readers are too young to remember this in real time but hopefully they've heard it. bill clinton was elected in 1992 and 1 of his campaign promises was to lift the ban on gays and lesbians serving in the military. guess what? didn't happen. huge b.s. from the right and colin powell throwing road blocks. oh it would destroy the military! oh the military has to be beyond sexual relations and gays and lesbians would harm that! oh the fears in the showers! forget that gays and lesbians have always made up a part of the armed services. that was the lie repeated over and over. so bill did the best that he could do (i hope it was the best that he could do at that time) for the time and created the don't ask don't tell policy. that says that no 1 can be asked what their sexuality is and that you don't tell. as long as you keep your head down (and continue the message of shame - the compromise was a deal with the devil), you can serve.
so when ava and c.i. looked at navy ncis, which is t's favorite of all their reviews, they noticed when the show opened with two officers, a male and a female, rolling around on top of each other. pretending to have sex. the show has military advisors and they didn't object. so the whole sex issue is phoney. it's only an issue when it's same-sex. and that's the approach ava and c.i. took in discussing the show. that's how you can talk intelligently about entertainment, that's called perspective. a middle aged woman typing 'joss is so dreamy' isn't contributing anything but to her further decline as a semi-rational adult.
so let's all try to be as mature as my high school (and 3 middle school) readers are. i think we can pull that off. let's look at the world around us and talk about it. we can still have fun. and we can have blow off days where all we do is have fun. but let's make 2006 about something more than trivia.
"The Common Ills Year in Review 2005" is a must read and so is kat's "Kat's Korner: 2005 in Music" but tonight i want to make a comment about "Ruth's Year End Report" because i had some e-mails on that. ruth is talking about when kenny tomlinson was out to destroy npr and pbs. my attitude, and it's up here in real time, was 'what's the point?' ruth and i have discussed it back then and since. there isn't a problem between ruth and i; however, some who didn't know the history read it today and e-mailed to ask me why ruth was mad at me? she's not.
and it's not that she suddenly agrees with my point of view. she just remembers what happens everytime the left fights a brave battle to 'save' npr or pbs. we give our time, we give our money and after it's over npr and pbs give us shit in return. they don't make a point to say 'hey, the left fought for us so they are out there. maybe we should put some more of them on as guests?' they keep doing the same crap they did before which is center-right and right guests who are officials from the government or elected officials or from center and center-right think tanks and the people, all the people not just the left, are once again left out in the cold.
that's why my attitude was 'what's the point?'
pbs espeically. they're about to turn their back on the public. the transfer to digital broadcast, when complete, will mean the 'public' will have to pay for cable or digital tv to receive pbs. that's not 'public television' - not when over 73 million americans do not currently have cable or digital tv. not when a healthy portion of the public won't be able to afford it.
they take all this corporate money and it keeps them from airing anything to hard hitting, no matter how true the thing is. so quit calling yourself 'public television.' you're not public television. and does the public really need to see suze orman at 1 of her fundraiser/workshops spouting her easy nonsense into a microphone while she works the room? that's good television? that's an informercial and pbs hawks her tapes, her books, her videos.
so my attitude is if they go away i won't cry. i'll watch if something interesting is on (which is about once every three months) but i don't 'pledge.' my tax payer dollars already take care of my 'pledge' and their programming doesn't reflect my interests.
npr is even worse with their silly shows on the morning that straddle the fence between pure waste of time and a few morsels of information.
i've done the pbs/npr battle before and learned then that they didn't give a damn about the public. they care about not offending the right wing members of congress. that's the basis of every decision, 'how much can we do and not upset the republicans' and that makes for crummy broadcasting. it doesn't make for public television or public radio.
but that was my opinion back then and i was open about it. ruth knew it and we talked about it then. i also, because ruth has become a good friend, made a point to note a few 'save pbs' and 'save npr' things while noting that i was doing that out of respect for ruth.
we have no problem, ruth and i. but to some readers who didn't know the background, there was a question of 'is ruth mad at you' and she's not. people can disagree and get along. back then ruth and i disagreed on the need to save npr and pbs. we didn't hate each other. i didn't pull a pristine and slam ruth's writing and suggest that she's a no talent the way pristine did when she attacked kat. ruth and i and it was on a topic that was important to ruth so i tossed out a few links to help out a friend on a cause they were supporting. i don't regret that. i doubt ruth does. and she shouldn't regret trying to defend npr and pbs because that was her honest reaction and where she was at. she's no longer at the same place and that's fine too.
she mentioned me, i think, largely because we are friends and she was attempting to give me a link but also because she was talking about realizing how you can fight and fight for pbs and npr and they never appreciate you. that's why she uses the word 'manipulated' to describe how she feels since the last big battles.
hope that clears it up for the readers who had missed the original discussions on npr and pbs.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)