Two low level clerks under contract to the State Department have been let go for snooping in Barack Obama’s passport files on at least 3 separate occasions. Another State Department employee has been disciplined as a result of the incidents.

This is what is known at the moment. But does that stop our intrepid internet paranoids, goofballs, nitwits, and other denizens of the left from creating a grand conspiracy involving evil Bush and his evil minions out of the thinnest of news items?

The ever rational and reasonable Americablog:

This is not good. We know how much we can trust anyone who works for George Bush. NOT AT ALL.

The first Bush administration did the same thing to Bill Clinton.

Please note the absolute, rock solid, dead certainty that the 2nd Bush Administration is guilty. Based on nothing except the paranoid delusions of the author.

The towering intellects at Firedoglake:

They are not saying yet who these people are, which Halliburton subsidiary is involved who the contractor is, and therefore we have no idea which Party they belong to—“The War Mongering Republicans” or the “Rapture Republicans”. However, for each of these two groups the last seven years “imprudent curiosity” usually manifests itself at airport bathrooms or donkey shows. So we really have no idea how this will play out.

This one gets an “A” for mentioning Haliburton and donkey shows in the same post.

Shakesville also gets high marks for including a Yakov Smirnoff joke:

Evidently some low-level patsies staffers were fired for their role in looking for that one time Obama flew to Afghanistan to meet with his al Qaeda overlords. One can only assume they’ve also looked carefully to find all the times Hillary Clinton flew to Novosibirsk in her youth. And if those visits didn’t exist before, they probably do now.

As Yakov Smirnoff might say: “In Soviet Russia, government reads secret passport files on political opponents. But in America, same thing! What a country!”

Sorry if I whetted your appetite for a “joke.” Unless you’re a liberal, such incandescent humor seems to elude the rational among us.

And don’t forget the “patsies!” (Why does the left use so man strike-throughs?) All that’s missing is the grassy knoll and Woody Harrleson’s dad.

In truth, gentle readers, there is a much more mundane explanation than George Bush is lifting a finger to help John McCain; Hillary did it:

I remember hearing their charge that Obama had only visited one NATO country in his life and it seemed pretty hard to believe… out of countries like Canada, the United Kingdom, Germany, France, Spain, Italy, Turkey, etc., Obama had only been to one? The boy who grew up in Indonesia, and visited relatives in Africa, never made it to any of those European countries? The guy who lived in Chicago and went to Harvard never made it to Canada? (I presume Canada wasn’t the site of the brief stopover trip.)

Now, I’m not saying that the Hillary camp did the snooping in the passport file. But in asking that question, they seemed awfully certain that Obama had never been to one of those countries earlier in his life, didn’t they? Note they didn’t say, “you have traveled to only one NATO country as a senator”, (it wouldn’t be all that surprising that Obama had only taken a few foreign trips since taking office in January 2005); they worded the question so that it encompasses his entire life.

The question came from the Hillary camp on March 12; two of the breaches were before that date. One breach occurred two days later.

Maybe Hillary and Bush are working together. Maybe Bush is using Hillary as a cut out to carry out his nefarious plans. Maybe Hillary wears army boots.

Or maybe there’s nothing there. From Hillary booster and spouse of world famous super spy Valerie Plame:

Folks, this is really a non-story. ... .. We know he has not visited Europe. His only real overseas travel before joining the Senate was to Africa. And the passport records do not contain info about that trip, other than the date he made the trip. People with no need to know should not have been checking out his documents, but at the end of the day there is no there there.

The above via Taylor Marsh who adds “No kidding.” Which actually is more to the point.

No one can be this stupid, can they? No one can be paranoid enough to take these two schmucks who were poking around in Obama’s private files and turn them into GOP operatives or even Hillary boosters for that matter, can they?

Whether out of curiosity or, more likely, hoping to find something they could sell to the press or perhaps Obama’s opponents, for a conspiracy to reach down in the bowels of the State Department and pluck these two non entities from total obscurity and charge them with carrying out a super secret operation (where they failed miserably because the computer caught the intrusions right away) is beyond belief, beyond reasonableness, and makes the purveyors of such claptrap beyond hope.

At the end of the day, we will find the State Department isn’t run very well. The fact that it has taken weeks for this to come to light is more a function of the crushing bureaucracy that paralyzes that department than any deliberate attempt to hide or cover up the truth.

By all means let’s have a thorough investigation of the clerks and especially their immediate supervisors who apparently didn’t think it important enough to inform management that Obama’s privacy had been shredded. The fact that a reporter was the person to break the news to the upper levels of the State Department points right back to those two clerks who were so inept at their spying they didn’t seem to know that they had been discovered the minute Obama’s file was breached.

Some conspirators.

Conspiracies are for the weak minded. They are a lazy substitute for reasoned, rational thought. Even a cursory examination of this matter reveals the chances that the Bush Administration or even the Hillary campaign being involved to be next to zero since the perpetrators were identified and caught so easily.

If I were the left, I’d stick with conspiracies involving aliens and Area 51. At least those plots are halfway entertaining.

Whenever I’m stuck and can’t figure out why I believe what I actually believe as a conservative, there’s only one thing I can do.

No, don’t be silly. I don’t sit down, carefully and systematically analyzing the underlying assumptions that make up my beliefs, testing them against the available facts, buttressing or weakening my arguments as the case may be and arrive at an intelligent, intellectually coherent position.

Instead, I ask Lambchop.

Conservatives love to claim that Obama supporters have excess reverence for their candidate and see him as some sort of transcendent messiah figure. There is a small minority of Obama supporters—as is true for most candidates and political movements—who probably expect more from Obama than it is healthy to expect from political leaders generally.

But listening to this objection from the right-wing movement is the ultimate irony. There has not been a political figure in a long, long time who was revered, worshiped and transformed into a grotesque Icon of Transcendent Greatness the way the Commander-in-Chief, George W. Bush, has been. For years and years, the Right sustained itself as little more than a glorified Cult of Personality around the Great, Conquering War Hero.

Mr. Ellison’s post is entitled “Why do conservatives really find the Obama campaign scary?” Unfortunately, the World Famous Sock Puppet never quite gets around to answering that question. This proved a huge disappointment to me as I am always interested in bettering myself by having my fears allayed by someone whose stock in trade is portraying conservatives in the scariest, the lowest, the most hyperbolically evil manner possible.

No matter. Instead of telling me why I’m scared of Obama, Lambchop gravely informs me that I harbor the same messianic delusions about George Bush as millions of Democrats and liberals believe of Barack Obama.

This is very comforting – if it were true. The fact is, although George Bush is a handsome fellow (in a “Bushy” sort of way) he could be said to have the charisma of a goat and the rhetorical gifts of a Macaw. He does not engender the same fawning, fainting, chest heaving, breathless, hyper-sexual responses to his presence as Barack Obama.

But does that singular fact stop our favorite sock puppet from reaching for the stars in trying to compare the reaction of supporters to the two men?

Don’t bet on it:

When introducing the Commander-in-Chief at the 2004 GOP Convention—that Orwellian orgy of unprecedentedly creepy, relentless hero worship—Gov. George Pataki said: “He is one of those men God and fate somehow led to the fore in times of challenge.” The righteous Gen. Boykin said: “The majority of Americans did not vote for him. He’s in the White House because God put him there for a time such as this.” Rudy Giuliani added: “I say it—I say it again tonight—I say it again tonight: Thank God that George Bush is our President.”

Politicians are funny, aren’t they? They can dress a pig up in a prom dress and swear on a stack of bibles that Porky is the belle of the ball. Lambchop’s problem in evaluating the relative enthusiasm and love directed at Obama and Bush appears to be one of (big surprise) proportion. For one so hysterically inclined to exaggerate, to denigrate, to posit the most outrageously ignorant motivations for conservative actions, our man Mr. Ellison simply lacks the ability to evaluate anything in an adult manner. Instead, he reminds me of a teenage girl in the way he dramatizes the most insignificant events and statements from conservatives as sinister and evil. A true drama queen of the left, he is incapable of the kind of balanced, nuanced judgement ascribed to most grown ups who write about politics and politicians.

Lambchop cannot tell the difference between political hyperbole as given by politicians above and the raw, emotional, slavish, worshipful, and fervent idolatry that millions of Obama supporters demonstrate on a regular basis. They can’t tell you why they are for him. They can’t tell you why they faint and weep in his presence. They can’t tell you why they believe he can “change the world” when he can’t even change the politics of Chicago.

All they can tell you is that they love him and will follow his “movement.” Does this sound like something George Bush supporters would be saying?

Describing various encounters with Obama supporters, she writes, “Excuse me, but this sounds more like a cult than a political campaign. The language used here is the language of evangelical Christianity – the Obama volunteers speak of ‘coming to Obama’ in the same way born-again Christians talk about ‘coming to Jesus.’...

Even someone as juvenile as Lambchop – James Wolcott – can tell the difference between party loyalists and those who genuflect at the altar of Obama:

The always interesting James Wolcott writes that “(p)erhaps it’s my atheism at work but I found myself increasingly wary of and resistant to the salvational fervor of the Obama campaign, the idealistic zeal divorced from any particular policy or cause and chariot-driven by pure euphoria. I can picture President Hillary in the White House dealing with a recalcitrant Republican faction; I can’t picture President Obama in the same role because his summons to history and call to hope seems to transcend legislative maneuvers and horse-trading; his charisma is on a more ethereal plane, and I don’t look to politics for transcendence and self-certification.”

No one has ever accused George Bush of being a rock star. No one has ever said that Bush causes the hearts of women to palpitate uncontrollably thus causing them to pass out.

And yet Lambchop, in what can only be described as one of his more desperate leaps of illogic, tries to assign equal value to the Obama phenomena and the small number of Bush-bots who I’ll bet never thought any impure thoughts about George.

It’s silly, of course. It proves that Lambchop is a very silly man with the singular inability to be rational in discourse and temperate in his analysis.

Why this continues to qualify Mr. Ellison as a lion of the left escapes me.

Holy Mother! I knew Matt Stoller was a crass, spiteful, hate filled partisan hack whose rants against Bush, Republicans and conservatives are usually tinged with a touch of deranged wackiness that causes the reader to giggle while wondering about his mental health.

But his latest is truly a masterpiece of looniness.

Reagan was a psychotic man who nearly blew up the world and used paranoia and fear to change our culture and government in horrible ways. He also wasn’t particularly popular, though as a politician, he’s worth admiring for his raw political skill. Conservative ideology is based on greed and fear. There’s no such thing as a good conservative leader, period. It is a fundamentally bankrupt, corrupt, and fraudulent ideology, and there is nothing laudable about people like Reagan who tap into the worst of America.

There’s no sense trying parse any of that for the simple reason that Stoller is beyond rationality, beyond reason, and beyond hope. I assume even most liberals – classical liberals rather than the unbalanced internet variety of Stalinist mongrels – would find much to disagree with as far as his personal bric-a-bracs tossed at conservatives. As far as conservative ideology, I know several liberals who admire Locke and who find much to think about and are not entirely dismissive of Kirk. And, of course, there are many liberals who admire Reagan for a variety of reasons – even though they disagree strenuously with many of his policies.

The point being is that Stoller and the grumpy cohort of internet “progressives” who cheer him on still believe themselves to be tolerant, enlightened, mature members of the human race. And yet, to agree with someone so wildly out of touch with human decency and devoid of empathy brands Stoller and his cheering section as spoiled, petulant, bratty children whose emotional growth stopped at around age 6.

Stoller offers not a shred of proof for any of his charges against Reagan or conservatives in his diatribe. Neither do small children when ranting about not getting that flexible flyer sled for which they asked Santa. It is not necessary to offer proof when spouting emotionally charged epithets on the left. What’s important is the emoting itself – as if sticking out your tongue and calling people names is an important act in and of itself. You’re speaking truth to power, man. Why bother with rational thought when screaming like a kid with wet diapers gets just as much attention?

Yes, I know there are so many more important things to write about. But the next time Stoller goes off on a conservative Republican for being “hateful,” most of the rest of us will remember this little screed and smile a wry smile of satisfied amusement.

In what will surely be seen as a defining moment for the 9/11 truther movement, the History Channel has delivered a blow for sanity and rationalism by airing a superior documentary entitled 9/11 Conspiracies: Fact or Fiction.

There’s no other way to say it; the truthers got reamed.

They got reamed to the point that the truthers who produced the internet video Loose Change are scrambling to alter the third version of their conspiracy mongering tripe, even going so far as to drop any reference to the twin towers being blown up by the government (they continue to insist WTC #7 was brought down by explosives).

The documentary took no prisoners as it destroyed almost all of the major conspiracy theories associated with 9/11 while revealing the real motivations of the truthers; that they are part of a political movement driven by raw, unreasoning hatred of George Bush, the American government, and to some extent, America itself.

Prominently featured were historians like David Brinkley, Editor in Chief of Popular Mechanics James Meigs, and structural engineers, explosives experts, and a host of scientists, military experts, and eyewitnesses to the disaster. The cumulative effect of the testimony of the anti-conspiracists was absolutely devastating. The show left little doubt of the unhinged nature of the truthers, showing many of them – including radio host Alex Jones who has given vast amounts of air time to every kook, crazy, and nutcase with a theory on 9/11 – looking like the anti-intellectual fruitcakes they truly are.

The format was perfect. A truther would lay out a conspiracy theory which was then immediately debunked by 2 or 3 experts. Over two hours, a couple of dozen myths associated with 9/11 were laid to rest permanently including the “missile” that hit the Pentagon, the shoot down of Flight 93, the “implosion” of the towers,” and other theories not based on fact.

The implosion theory was debunked several times over. First, by the best forensic structural engineer in the country who, with the help of some excellent graphics and animation, showed exactly how the planes caused the towers to fall. An explosives expert (a young guy who was flabbergasted at the ignorance of the truthers regarding demolition) pointed out it would have taken weeks to rig the buildings for implosion and would have involved stripping drywall and ripping out walls. The nail in the coffin was supplied by one of the engineers who prepared the final report (working for the independent American Society of Civil Engineers) who showed how the collapse of the towers accounted for such things as the puffs of smoke seen in lower floors as the collapse was occurring as well as the speed of the collapse.

By the end of their presentation, I was on my feet cheering.

The emotional highlight of the documentary occurred when they had members of the victims families responding to the truthers. A confrontation at Ground Zero on the anniversary of 9/11 with the truthers screaming at family members who disagreed with them was shocking. One family member said every time she heard one of the conspiracy nuts it was like “a stab in the heart.”

Not that these nutcases care much. As the documentary showed, the truthers real goal is to blame Bush. And the disturbing poll numbers showing that 46% of the country believing the whole truth about 9/11 is being hidden by the government shows why this documentary should be viewed by everyone.

You can tell how deeply this program hurt the truther movement by the fact that they didn’t try to answer any of the points made by the piece but rather attacked the source:

An upcoming documentary entitled The 9/11 Conspiracies, to be aired on the History Channel, may represent the biggest hit piece to date on the 9/11 truth movement and is rife with bias, cronyism and conflicts of interest

The so-called documentary promises not to look at the flaws in the official story from a neutral perspective but to start out by suggesting that any deviation from the official line is “outrageous”.

The program also features so called independent “experts” who are actually in the employ of the program makers themselves who in turn rely on scores of multi-million dollar contracts with the government and the military-industrial complex.

Hit piece? It is hard to see how much more fair minded the History Channel could have been. They allowed the truthers to spout their conspiracy theories to their hearts content and then rationally, reasonably, calmly poked so many holes in them they resembled a piece of swiss cheese.

Pat Curley of the excellent truther debunking site Screw Loose Change called the documentary “the dream debunking piece. It’s Hiroshima for the Truthers.” One might throw in Nagasaki as well.

Pat concludes:

Overall: Devastating blow for most of the kooks; ironically the CIT nuts get a little thrill as their theory at least gets a little boost. The cumulative effect is pretty overwhelming. The voicemorphed calls thing gets smashed in their faces. Awesome, absolutely the most satisfying moment in a very satisfying two hours!

He is referring to the jaw dropping theory that all the communications from passengers on the doomed planes were faked! Family members tearfully rebutted those outrageous charges. And the young editor of Popular Mechanics, who tried very hard not to laugh when he was debunking some of the more unbelievable theories, actually said he was personally disgusted by the implication that family members were somehow involved in the conspiracy by covering up the fact that the phone calls were not really from their loved ones.

The show will air again this weekend. Check your local listings but I have it in the Chicago area airing at 7:00 PM central Saturday night and 11:00 AM central on Sunday morning.

Don’t miss it.

UPDATE

Due to some outrageously obscene comments by the you-know-whos, comments are now being moderated.

Bein’ a vetran, I suppose it’s possible you could both be hatin’ the war and hatin’ the military if you were of a mind to. But that there just doesn’t play in flyover country where us goober chewin’ yahoos with a bible in one hand and a Winchester in t’other don’t appreciate you insultin’ me nor my cousin…who’s also my uncle and could be my daddy if we paid any mind to those kinds of thangs here in Jesusland.

But this here writin’ over at that Kos place on the innernet? I don’t rightly know exactly what the feller’s talkin’ about when he says those of us who serve these here Ewnited States in the army are probly gonna end up scoopin’ brains out of the heyads of dead ‘raqis or play “hide the salami” with my little sister.

Now it’s not that I cain’t read what the feller’s wrote down. I went to schoolin’ long enough to to know my ABC’s and do my sums. It’s jest that I’m sorta, well, confused. Haven’t them folks been saying for well nigh goin’ on 4 years now that they love us military folk? They love us sooooooo much that they want all of us to come home from “raq?

According to the July 30, 2007 issue of The Nation magazine, damning photos of a U.S. Soldier using a spoon to literally scoop out the brains of a dead Iraqi and pretending to eat the gray matter were recently acquired.

Of course, everyone is appropriately appalled and make all claims of disgust and finger-wagging. Research shows, however, that such unacceptable behavior happens more often than the United States military wants you to know.

When it comes to training killing machines, the military really does create “an Army of one.”

The list of serial killers and mass murderers who have spent time in the military is astounding.

Well now, I haven’t known no brain scoopers in the army. Sounds sorta sick to me. “Course, there may be passels of brain scoopers in the military only they be, ya know, hiding’ it is a psychomological sorta way.

And if y’all wanna get techical about it, I guess you could say that they’s a bunch of mass murderers in t’army alright. Cept’in we make snipers out of ‘em. Damn fine shots those fellers and it shore is nice to be patrolin’ and knowin’ that those boys gotchyer back.

But like I said, I jes don’t unnerstand what the feller is so all fired upset about. I suppose that if the object of bein’ in a war was to kiss the enemy rather than kill ‘em, you wouldn’t want a bunch of young folks trained in the deadly art of firin’ a rifle. Me, I shore wouldn’t wanna be kissin’ no terrorist that’s fer sure. Fact is, I kinda feel proud that killin’ terrorists is actually a good thing and nothin’ to be shamed for.

‘Ceptin this here feller thinks I’m a jes waitin till I get home to start turnin’ cannibal or some such thang:

To deal with the problem, Kilner suggests justification “because, at least some killing in war is morally justifiable, military leaders have a duty to understand that justification, to train their soldiers to kill only when it is justified, and to explain to their soldiers why it is justified.” In other words, if you give a soldier a supposedly legitimate reason to kill another human being, such as self-defense, it may be easier for the soldier to cope with the outcome of his actions.

That seems a bit simplistic, especially when soldiers are firing randomly at civilians because they believe everyone in Iraq is a “terrorist.” Unfortunately, killing, whether justifable or not, is going to warp the killer’s mind in some fashion, and probably to an unrecoverable point.

America should start to see the effects of the Iraq war veterans’ killing sprees here in the United States very soon. Most serial killers tend to be in their mid 20s to mid 30s.

The newest crop of Charles Whitmans and Jeffrey Dahmers should be prowling our streets any day now—and for many years to come.

Mmmmm…cain’t quite remember ever jes lettin’ go and spraying rounds all over t’place and whoopin’ it up. Some of them “raqis are alright – most of ‘em, to be honest about it. It’s jes hard to explain to folks that them terrorists hide behind those poor ‘raqis and use ‘em like they was trees in the forest. Lots o’ times, we don’t even open up when we’s under attack ‘cause the Capn’ says theys too many women and kids aroun’ and such. But someways, you don’t read about those sorts of things in them eastern papers. Why, they’s times I be readin’ them stories ‘bout t’war in them newspapers and wonder if that reporter feller is in the same country as me. Shore is a strange place those fellers describe, this Iraq they see. Mebbe they oughter come out on patrol with me and the boys sometimes. Might change their way of lookin’ at things. Leastwise, I think t’would.

Then again, mebbe this feller’s right and I oughter get checked out by one of them psychologicals when I make it back home. I shore don wanna be tearing around the county killin’ folk and rapin’ no womern. I think folks kinda made that sorta thing illegal a while back – leastways ‘roundyear.

UPDATE

Michelle Malkin wonders if anyone will ask the Democratic candidates about the article at tonight’s YouTube debate?

I think it may be more compelling to ask them if, in light of this dastardly attack on the military and the men and women who serve, they still intend to speak before the Kos shindig?

And perhaps a question for all Democrats: These are people claiming to represent the “mainstream” of your party. Satisfied?

A beautiful summer day in the great ex-urbs of Chicago it is. About 75 degrees not a cloud in the sky. But August is just over the horizon – like the day’s new sun lightening the eastern sky. August is usually hell month here on the prairie what with heat and humidity unrelenting in its ferocity.

When I was a kid, we had no air conditioning which is why we all hated August. I can distinctly remember some nights lying in a pool of my own sweat, feeling the heat like a large hand clutching my chest, knowing that my other two brothers sleeping in the same room were wide awake also. If it got too bad, my mother would let us go down in the basement where it was always a good 20 degrees cooler.

For all the talk of global warming – and Al Gore is the only one stupid enough to take the temperature from one year or even a decade and try and make a point that the planet is warming up – I think it is actually cooler these last few years in August than it was in the 60’s and 70’s. Or perhaps when I get older, the heat doesn’t bother me as much.

The cold certainly does. And after August, comes September, football – and fall. My bones creak at the thought of another Chicago winter. My friend Louie the barber and I talk about it constantly. For him, it opening a little barbershop in St. Pete’s. I’m more of a Panhandle man myself. Maybe Zsu Zsu and I could find ourselves a little beach house on the gulf coast. Day trips to Biloxi. Overnights to New Orleans (if they ever rebuild it).

And speaking of Katrina, get a load of this diary that was featured at DailyKos:

“I have never in my 50 years of life been more frightened then I am now. I have seen the arrogance of this White House and the massive damage done to our country. But the Katrina-size storm clouds are gathering folks. If we do not wake up now and flood Congress to impeach the President and Vice President, one year from now, Daily Kos may be banned and Markos himself may be disappeared, in a federal prison somewhere.

Even as I write these words I feel like a wild-eyed nutcase. If it were not for the OH SO REAL danger this country faces in the next 15 months or so as the people in power see their own doom and are determined to prevent their expulsion from power by suspending next year’s elections and declaring martial law WHEN the next 9/11 comes or events that can be construed as a national emergency to “justify” such actions, I would be holding my tongue and crossing my fingers.

There are times when words of condemnation or hilarity just won’t do. The English language is an extraordinary invention – a riot of tonal images and visual noises. But in the case of this deluded infant, there is no language ever invented, no picture ever drawn, no music ever recorded that could begin to describe such utter nonsense.

It gets better. Much better:

If we cross our fingers hard enough and hold our breath (and close our eyes, and tap our ruby slippers together) maybe we’ll wake up to a beautiful new dawn January 20, 2009. Maybe even Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny will help elect a Democratic White House and stronger Democratic Congress.

What will it take to wake US up, let alone the average out-of-touch-with-reality American? What will it take? I thought about martial law the other day and I never thought I would actually hope illegal militias in the United States would be our final hope against a real dictatorship – that Americans will rise up with arms against a dictatorial government.

A Kossack pleading for help from the forest people? A progressive in good standing asking for help to save the United States from the Aryan Kluxers who slink through the jungles of the American northwest waiting for the race war and the fulfillment of The Turner Diaries? We are looking for our salvation from these guys? These inbred goober chewing yip yips are going to go up against the United States Army and win the day?

Don’t you find it just a little bit interesting that the diarist himself would never even contemplate taking up arms to defend the Constitution, to defend freedom?

More please:

But I fear even that hope is farfetched. Remember 9/11? Remember how most Americans were rah-rah patriotic (including me) and flying flags everywhere and supporting the President at 90% approval (including me)? Now I don’t know how and if we will have a disaster equal in casualties to 9/11 or worse, but even a series of London type bombings killing “only” a few dozen Americans may be all that is needed to institute martial law and cause most Americans, in fear, to rally around a President who warned them Al Quada was after us and that he will protect us with extraordinary means. He will say “these measures” are now needed to ensure no further attacks are done.

....This is deadly serious folks. This is not just another diary. We ignore this threat at our own peril. I would suggest even I in writing articles like this and the many writers at Daily Kos are personally at risk of being arrested in a future dictatorial United States. The government will use these writings as an excuse to put us away.

The diarist – whose moniker slw606 could either be referring to the ward and room number of the mental institution he’s in or his Home Depot employee number – without any irony whatsoever sadly concludes that his wish for the far right militias to take out the Bush Administration is “farfetched.”

Someone remind me why they call themselves the reality based community?

And if I have to sit and read one more dire warning about the Bushies pulling off “another 9/11” (presupposing they were responsible for the first one) in order to set up a dictatorship I’m going to turn in my Daily Kos Super Decoder Ring and tear up my copy of the Liberal Manifesto. When another attack happens – just as the left did with Katrina – before the bodies are cold they’re going to be screaming that it was Bush’s fault, that it’s just a plot to set up a fascist state.

And, of course, when the elections go off without a hitch and the peaceful transfer of power is achieved as it has been done every four years in the history of the republic, what then my friends? Will you smile a sheepish smile and say how wrong you were? Will you finally realize how deluded your fantasies have been these last 6 years?

Too easy.

The gentleman is right that “this is not just another diary.” It is full blown moonbattery in its finest, truest sense. But what do we make of this?

“I would suggest even I in writing articles like this and the many writers at Daily Kos are personally at risk of being arrested in a future dictatorial United States. The government will use these writings as an excuse to put us away.”

I must say, that’s heroic. Monumentally brave. What about me, though? Am I at risk? I only criticize the Bushies a little bit so maybe they’ll let me be. Should I stop calling Bush names?

I am not a violent man. But am I the only one who wants to grab this idiot by the shoulders and start slapping his face, hoping against hope that it will knock some sense into him?

Finally:

I say WAKE UP Daily Kos!! If the people at Daily Kos cannot take this seriously and try and do something about it, then the United States, as a free country IS doomed. Enjoy your freedom to read and write at such sites as Daily Kos, because that freedom will be taken away WHEN Bush declares martial law.

I will take it as seriously as it deserves. Which is not seriously at all.

(Hat Tip: John Hawkins)

This is certainly one of the more interesting science tidbits I’ve seen in the news lately. A panel of scientists has recommended that we expand our search for extraterrestrial life to include “weird” life forms based on other elements than carbon and water:

A panel of scientists convened by America’s leading scientific advisory group says the hunt for extraterrestrial life should be greatly expanded to include what they call “weird life”: organisms that lack DNA or other molecules found in life as we know it.

“The committee’s investigation makes clear that life is possible in forms different from those on Earth,” the scientists conclude in their report, “The Limits of Organic Life in Planetary Systems,” published by the National Research Council.

Other experts hailed the report as an important rethinking of the search for life. “It’s going to help us a lot to make sure we go exploring with our eyes wide open,” said Michael Meyer, lead scientist for NASA’s Mars exploration program.

Starfish, sequoias, salamanders and the rest of Earth’s residents may seem very diverse, but they are surprisingly similar on the molecular scale. All species that scientists have studied need liquid water to survive, for example. Further, they all rely on DNA to carry genetic information, and they all use that information to build proteins from the same set of building blocks, known as amino acids.

NASA has long looked to life on Earth to guide its search for life on other worlds. Planets and moons that have hints of liquid water have been ranked high on the list of potential sites for life-detection missions.

But there is good reason to suspect that other kinds of chemistry could support life as well, the authors of the new report argue. Weird life could differ from life as we know it in small or big ways.

Fascinating. When scientists say that “Weird life could differ from life as we know it,” are they talking about life like this?

(NSFW)

There’s only one question I have for everyone out there today.

WHAT THE HELL IS WRONG WITH YOU PEOPLE!

Don’t you know the planet is in danger of shriveling up like Al Gore’s testicles on a cold winter’s day? Don’t you realize that unless we do something NOW about global warming, Los Angeles will be under water before you know it and they’ll have to cancel all those “See the Homes of the Stars” tours? Can’t you see that unless we abandon all industrial production and go back to a time when men were men, women were women, and horses were just like cars except they didn’t have chrome bumpers and electric sun roofs, that the Earth Goddess will be angry at us and punish us by cancelling the Winter Olympics in 2050? (Goodness! What will the Canadians do if they can’t compete in Curling?)

YOU PEOPLE SUCK! No commitment. No concern for the planet. AND YOU’VE GOT THE MOST GOD-AWFUL TASTE IN MUSIC I’VE EVER SEEN!

Live Earth has been branded a foul-mouthed flop.

Organisers of the global music concert – punctuated by swearing from presenters and performers – had predicted massive viewing figures.

But BBC’s live afternoon television coverage attracted an average British audience of just 900,000.

In the evening, when coverage switched from BBC2 to BBC1, the figure rose to just 2.7million.

And the peak audience, which came when Madonna sang at Wembley, was a dismal 4.5million. Three times as many viewers saw the Princess Diana tribute on the same channel six days before.

Two years ago, Live 8 drew a peak television audience of 9.6million while Live Aid notched 10million in 1985.

The BBC blamed the poor figures on Saturday’s good weather and said its Wimbledon tennis coverage had drawn away afternoon viewers.

Critics said however that the public had simply snubbed what they saw as a hypocritical event.

ALL OF YOU SHOULD BE ROYALLY ASHAMED OF YOURSELVES!

More people went to see Tiger Woods play golf in DC than the Live Earth Concert – many, many more:

People in attendance at the PGA Tour event today in the D.C. area: 37,613, per a local sports channel.

People in attendance at Al Gore’s Live Earth event in D.C. today… Well, somewhat less than that. Guessing whether it was 100 times less, or merely 50 times less, that’s just part of the fun.

Here’s what look like empty seats at the marquee event in New York.

And drastically fewer people showed up than anticipated in Rio.

What does it say about you dilettantes that 140,000 people showed up at a NASCAR race in Daytona to watch carbon spewing automobiles race around an oval track while a less than impressive 52,00 showed up at Giants stadium to watch rocker Bon Jovi (local boy) and that paragon of restraint and virtue Kanye West?

Why, I’ll be you didn’t even sign the pledge. What pledge, you ask? Why, the Live Earth Pledge, naturally:

I PLEDGE:

1.To demand that my country join an international treaty within the next 2 years that cuts global warming pollution by 90% in developed countries and by more than half worldwide in time for the next generation to inherit a healthy earth;

You see what I mean about horses, right? Cutting 90% of our greenhouse gas emissions would take us back to the turn of the century. That’s the turn of the 20th century!. But hey! Who’s counting centuries with “earth in the balance?” And don’t forget to pledge this part extra hard:

2.To take personal action to help solve the climate crisis by reducing my own CO2 pollution as much as I can and offsetting the rest to become “carbon neutral;”

No burping. No farting. And forget about barbecuing the next 4th of July. Gas, electric, or briquette, it doesn’t matter. They all contribute to your massive carbon footprint on this planet.

And no burning wood either. Don’t you know how long the Earth Goddess has to work to grow a tree? What’s the matter with you? If you get cold during the winter, might I suggest burning a few unnecessary books? For a list of accepted and appropriate titles to burn, go here. Of course, there’s always “snuggling.” But keep your hands to yourself! No monkey business under your recycled cotton blanket. You know how Mother Earth feels about kids – the fewer the better. Unless they’re white. But all you brown and yellow people out there CUT IT OUT, WILLYA! You’re spoiling the planet for the rest of us by having oodles of kids. Take a cold shower once and a while, huh?

But I see where all those big music stars and even Al Gore failed to get through to you. It’s not their fault. They did their best. IT’S YOU PEOPLE WHO ARE FAULT! YOU JUST DON’T CARE ENOUGH TO BE A TRUE CLIMATE WARRIOR!

So be it. For penance, when the next one of these “Live (fill in the blank)” concerts takes place. I condemn you to sit in front of your computer or TV and watch the whole thing from beginning to end. Even if Madonna shows up. Even if the Beastie Boys are, well, Beastly. That will teach you the proper way to practice social activism; sitting on your butt listening to the bones creaking from ancient musical acts.

AND DON’T GET ANY IDEAS THIS IS OVER. IT’S NOT. NOTHING IS OVER UNTIL WE SAY IT IS. Was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor? AND IT’S NOT OVER NOW!

So make sure you sign the pledge. It may be an inconvenient truth, but there you have it.

AND I DON’T WANT TO HAVE TO COME DOWN ON YOU LIKE THIS AGAIN. GET GREEN!

I really wanted to spend this Fourth of July as I usually do here at The House; contemplating the past while trying to draw lessons from it that would resonate with Americans today. It’s one of the few days of the year that we explicitly celebrate our past and as a lover of history, I always find it invigorating to explore where we came from and try and connect it to where we are headed. We Americans tend to look to the future without giving much thought to events and people that preceded us. A price we pay, I suppose, for the raw dynamism of American society with its extraordinary pace and ability to turn on a dime, changing direction to suit the temper of the times in which we live.

I will allow myself the luxury of some of this today as I complete my series on Liveblogging the Second Continental Congress – July 2-4, 1776 (see here and here for the first two parts). I would highly recommend this kind of parlor game as a way to gain valuable insights – not just into yourself and your own attitudes toward history but also into how this country evolved into what it is today. For by placing yourself at the center of the action as a simple observer, you are forced to live a life not ordinarily contemplated today. If you’ve read Morrison, Page Smith, Zinn, Flexner, Trevelayan, Draper, and a few others and digest the letters and statements from ordinary folk about the revolution, you come away with a deep and abiding respect for those early Americans. Bigoted, prejudiced, ignorant in many ways and yet for all their faults, absolutely determined to to live in freedom.

The great military historian John Keegan believes that even if Washington’s little army had been destroyed outside of New York city in the summer of 1776 and members of Congress were arrested, tried, and executed, the war would have gone on until the British realized they no longer controlled the colonies and moved on. For in truth, the American people had willed the new nation into existence by the power of their imaginations and an abiding trust in what many of them called “Providence.” (For a great discussion of this theme, I recommend this podcast of my radio show where my brother, a life long English teacher and very smart fellow, holds forth at length on this purely American phenomena.)

But there is an intrusion into my reverie today – one so blatantly false and perfidious, that I feel a response is in order. The reaction by a large segment of the left to the commutation of Libby’s sentence has proved to be (as everyone predicted) an over the top extravaganza of hand wringing, bed wetting, spittle spewing and bile raising that is, at times, laughable while at other times has one concerned for the mental and emotional health of some of our liberal friends.

As an example of this truly frightening phenomena, here’s Taylor Marsh in what has to be the most hysterically overwrought post of the new millenia:

America wakes up in bondage today.

There’s no other way to see it. A president and vice president have taken hold of the helm of this country and are dictating by fiat the very freedom and air that people are allowed to breathe, while holding themselves and their own above the law. We are led by the most un-American of men. Let there be no doubt. But in the wake of inaction and a Congress only equipped to hurl words, the question remains what will be done about it?

[snip]

On this 4th of July, I. Scooter Libby may be free, but America is not. We the people are not. Most of the Senate certainly is not, tied down to some traditionalism that tacitly gives permission to the president’s lawlessness, because raising the Capitol dome is judged unseemly. House Democrats are at least standing up and shouting loudly, holding hearings and investigations, even if some can’t bring themselves to stand up and lose their jobs by doing their jobs, which is to preserve this republic at all costs, even your own. As for the Republicans in Congress, those Republicans, conservatives, as well as their right-wing pundits beyond who hail what Mr. Bush did in commuting Libby’s sentence as action of the good. They are now pariahs of The Patriots fighting to take this country back. People like you and me.

Wow.

I can’t fisk this or cover it in snark and ridicule. It is beyond my ability to explain, or even criticize.

For the record, we are still a free country – even the air we breathe is still free – and it was not “lawless” of the President to have commuted Libby’s sentence. It may have been stupid, or dumb, or even a wonderful thing. But it was entirely within the President’s purview to have done so. The Constitution, in one of its few clear and declarative moments, states that the President’s powers in this regard are absolute.

Liberals know this. They are fully aware of what the Constitution says. They even acknowledge it.

And then they go ahead like Marsh and ignore that salient fact and pretend that the Constitution doesn’t say what it says – that it either doesn’t say anything or that we should substitute their interpretation for what is one of the clearest sections in that 218 year old document.

To acknowledge the Constitution’s clarity in this matter would frankly, spoil the moment. Because as Keith Olbermann proved with his “Special Commentary” last night, this one event is the culmination of nearly seven years of effort by the left to prove to themselves and to the rest of us that, quite simply, they are a superior life form – that they can still mount the battlements and wave the bloody shirt, pleading with us peons to follow them while expecting us to worship their superior judgment and intelligence and gaze at them with a stuporous, doe eyed look of wonder. All because, by gum, they care! They really, really, really, really, care!

Were there any remaining lingering doubt otherwise, or any remaining lingering hope, it ended yesterday when Mr. Bush commuted the prison sentence of one of his own staffers.

Did so even before the appeals process was complete; did so without as much as a courtesy consultation with the Department of Justice; did so despite what James Madison—at the Constitutional Convention—said about impeaching any president who pardoned or sheltered those who had committed crimes “advised by” that president; did so without the slightest concern that even the most detached of citizens must look at the chain of events and wonder: To what degree was Mr. Libby told: break the law however you wish—the President will keep you out of prison?

In that moment, Mr. Bush, you broke that fundamental com-pact between yourself and the majority of this nation’s citizens—the ones who did not cast votes for you. In that moment, Mr. Bush, you ceased to be the President of the United States. In that moment, Mr. Bush, you became merely the President of a rabid and irresponsible corner of the Republican Party. And this is too important a time, Sir, to have a commander-in-chief who puts party over nation.

To paraphrase LBJ, when you’ve lost Olbermann, you’ve lost the middle of nowhere.

Sanctimony drips like tainted water from a toxic waste pipe in this entire, unhinged rant. I actually couldn’t watch the video and was forced to read a transcript, stifling my gag reflex to keep last night’s Jimmy John’s Italian Beef sandwich from making an encore appearance.

How truly heroic this former sports talking head sounds. The burden this man carries – saving us from total destruction at the hands of President Bush and his evil clique – must be getting awfully heavy. Is there no one in America who will help this magnificently valiant patriot carry the load? This doughty warrior for liberty whose herculean labors performed on behalf of the rest of us ignorant yip yips – we who are unable to grasp the monumental evil abroad in the land with Bush and his lawless gang running roughshod over the Constitution and the rule of law?

What are we to do? Tell us, ye who is so obviously our better:

It is nearly July 4th, Mr. Bush, the commemoration of the moment we Americans decided that rather than live under a King who made up the laws, or erased them, or ignored them—or commuted the sentences of those rightly convicted under them—we would force our independence, and regain our sacred freedoms.

We of this time—and our leaders in Congress, of both parties—must now live up to those standards which echo through our history: Pressure, negotiate, impeach—get you, Mr. Bush, and Mr. Cheney, two men who are now perilous to our Democracy, away from its helm.

For you, Mr. Bush, and for Mr. Cheney, there is a lesser task. You need merely achieve a very low threshold indeed. Display just that iota of patriotism which Richard Nixon showed, on August 9th, 1974.

Resign.

And give us someone—anyone—about whom all of us might yet be able to quote John Wayne, and say, “I didn’t vote for him, but he’s my president, and I hope he does a good job.”

Watching Mr. Olbermann can certainly be eductional. I had no idea we fought a revolution for 8 years so that no one would be able to commute the sentences of criminals. Of course, those crazy, unpredictable Founding Fathers then went ahead and wrote into the Constitution those very same powers with a clarity and simplicity that all but a few delusional nitwits like Olbermann could grasp so I guess we have to say that we fought the revolution for nothing.

And do you notice that the more unhinged the left has become lately, the more they like to toss around the words “patriot” and “patriotism?” Not as a feeling, of course. Such silly sentiments are reserved for the great unwashed masses who are placed on this earth to worship the superior beings that liberals consider themselves. The left likes to use those words as clubs -as Olbermann proves with his riotously stupid statement about Nixon’s “patriotism” in resigning.

I hate to break the news to Mr. Olbermann, but Nixon resigned because if he didn’t he would have surely been impeached in the House and convicted in the Senate. He did it to spare himself a personal humiliation. And don’t you think it’s a little late for anyone on the left to ascribe any sort of decency to anything Nixon ever did? Hypocrisy is the least of Olbermann’s sins in this screed but considering how the left has seen and reacted to Richard Nixon since he came to Congress in 1948 through even today, 13 years after his death, it is perhaps the most outrageous part of this entire commentary.

Except perhaps the last sentence:

And give us someone—anyone—about whom all of us might yet be able to quote John Wayne, and say, “I didn’t vote for him, but he’s my president, and I hope he does a good job.”

Someone? Anyone? Well, let’s think about that for a second. If the President resigns, the Vice President would become President. But wait! We can’t have that. Besides, Cheney should resign too. Whatever shall we do? Are we condemned to go presidentless until January 20, 2009?

In the event both the president and vice president are incapacitated through death or illness, the office would fall to a someone/anyone by the name of Nancy Pelosi, Speaker of the House of Representatives, second in the line of succession, and presumably someone we can all look up to a feel proud about being an American again.

Oh. Did I mention she’s a liberal Democrat?

Keith Olbermann took time out from making the world safe for Edward R. Murrow impersonators on his show Monday night to offer some interesting thoughts on the connection between bad news about the Bush Administration (and the proximity to elections) and the exposure of terror plots, the issuance of terror alerts, and government advice on how to prepare for a terrorist assault.

Showing how every time there was a terror plot uncovered or when the old Homeland Security Threat level was bumped up it seemed to coincide with what Olbermann saw as a bad news day for the Administration, the Anti-Murrow sought to prove that there is no such thing as a serious terror threat to the United States, that it is all a case of political smoke and mirrors by an evil and manipulative White House.

No, really. For instance, when the Phoenix FBI agent testified before Congress about her superiors ignoring her warnings about terrorists training in flight schools, Senator Graham remarked that her testimony had inspired other pre-9/11 “whistleblowers” to come forward.

“Just” 4 days later, Keith informs us ominously, then Attorney General Ashcroft announced the arrest of Jose Padilla for the dirty bomb plot – even though he had already been in custody for a month! (Cue Darth Vader theme.)

What Keith failed to mention is that if we had announced the arrest of Padilla before assuring ourselves that such information would not alert any of Padilla’s co-conspirators, he would have been all over the Administration for blowing an intelligence bonanza. And what is the significance of this happening “just” 4 days after the testimony of the Phoenix FBI agent? Why, none of course – unless you live in the topsy turvy, upside down world of Keith Olbermann and his drooling conspiracy minded netnuts. Why not make the announcement the day after the testimony? Or the next day? Why wait 4 days? Only a blithering idiot wouldn’t see the 4 day gap as totally disproving the idea that the Administration used the announcement to deflect attention from their pre-9/11 failures.

This idea of a political basis for announcing terror threats and raising the level of concern about an attack is a remix of an old recording that was last played all throughout the election of 2004. The netnuts went positively ballistic every time that Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge showed his face on TV.

The beauty of this critique is obvious; the left gets to have it both ways. If the Administration hadn’t said anything and an attack occurred, they would be all over the Bushies for not only failing to prevent the attack but for not warning the American people. And since the Administration did get out front in raising the threat level and warning of an attack, the left can claim that it was driven by partisan politics.

Simple. Elegant. And monumentally stupid.

Olbermann’s idea of “bad news” for the Administration is so obtuse as to be beyond belief. He cites Secretary Powell’s speech before the UN on February 5, 2003 where claims of WMD in Iraq were disproven “months later.” But just two days later, amidst the news of anti-war demonstrations around the world, Secretary Ridge raises the threat level to orange.

Excuse me but does anyone else see that particular example of the Administration playing politics with terror alerts to be out and out idiocy? What does Powell’s speech (not disproven for months) have to do with raising the threat level a few days later? And does anyone seriously believe that the Administration could have cared one whit about anti-war demonstrators in Amsterdam? Or the pitifully few 60’s holdovers who turned out in this country? So much so that they went to the trouble and huge expense of raising the threat level?

Keith Olbermann is a loon. And while he made mention of the logical fallacy argument – that just because event A and event B happen to occur at the same time, it doesn’t mean there is a connection between the two – he then descends into the outer darkness to make his point. He states the danger of logical fallacies and then goes ahead and engages in them. This kind of breathtaking stupidity is what Olbermann does best and it’s why the netnuts love him so. His thoughts mirror their paranoid worldview – that terrorism is vastly overblown as a threat to our security and that the Bushies have used the issue to convince Americans “to fear fear itself” according to Keith.

” …from the mind-bending idea that four guys dressed as Pizza Delivery men were going to out-gun all the soldiers at Fort Dix…to the not-too-thought-out plan to blow-up J-F-K Airport… here we go again…”

Yeah…and the idea that 19 guys with box cutters planning to hijack planes and fly them into the Pentagon and the World Trade Center is just plain kooky. (Note: For the record, the soldiers at Fort Dix were unarmed. Their weapons were locked up.)

It isn’t just the idea that there is always a political angle to terrorism threats in this country that makes Olbermann’s fantasies so destructive. Anyone so naive as to believe that there isn’t any political calculation in some of the things done by the FBI or DHS doesn’t know government very well. High profile investigations and raids always seem to get wrapped up around budget request time. The same goes, I’m sure, for some terrorism related investigations as well. This is the nature of the beast and trying to change it would be like trying to stop the rain.

But the thought that the Administration systematically used terrorism as a political club to blunt bad news is so outrageous as to reveal Olbermann and those who agree with him to be blissfully ignorant of reality. There is little doubt that Secretary Ridge wanted to be less aggressive in raising the threat level than the White House – not because he didn’t think the threat was bogus but because he thought that the constant yo-yoing of the color coded threat board lessened its impact. But can you chalk that up to politics? Or is there perhaps a more mundane reason such as the Administration wanting to be safe rather than sorry? CYA is a much more realistic – dare I say “reality based” – reason for the threat level rising than any Master Plan by the Bush Administration to use fear as a political weapon.

I’ve written this before half in jest but it bears repeating: Perhaps the best thing that could happen to this country’s preparedness for a terrorist attack is if we elected a Democrat as President. Not because he would do a better job than a Republican. It’s just that Republicans are far less likely to deliberately undermine our battle here at home to stay safe by positing wild, unprovable, paranoid conspiracy theories about the seriousness of the terror threat than the Democrats and their loony netnuts. I doubt very much that the left will disbelieve a Democratic Administration that announces the foiling of a terrorist plot. Nor will there be a whisper about using fear of terrorism as a political weapon.

At the very least, a Democratic Administration will keep the paranoid loons spouting their conspiracy theories relatively quiet for four years. It might be worth it just to enjoy that particular blessing.

UPDATE

Speaking of pooh-poohing the terrorist threat, Michelle has a “Gathering of Ostriches” who prove that Keith Olbermann isn’t the only one who thinks denial is just a river in Egypt.

UPDATE II

If I’d read Allah first, I wouldn’t have bothered:

You’ll note, I hope, that even Olby recognizes how dishonest he’s being. That’s why he feels obliged to mention not once but twice that coincidences do happen and, in his words, “we could probably construct a similar timeline of terror events and their relationship to the haircuts of popular politicians.” Why do it, then? Because, as the Truthers are wont to say, he’s “just asking questions.” Just “airing it,” Sullivan style. Make up your own mind.

He also doesn’t seem to grasp that just because the pipeline plot wasn’t feasible doesn’t mean no attack would have occurred. You’ve got a group of men with homicidal intent willing to travel internationally to bring off their plan. If they’re game for that, they’re probably game for walking into a crowd of people and opening up with automatic weapons and grenades. It won’t take out an airport, but you might very well top the body count from the London bombings two years ago.

Read the whole thing.