Mike Stark, victim of George Allen’s campaign workers: What You Don't Know

I read. A lot. About politics.

Over the summer I read about George Allen's troubles with common decency, and in particular, race. I learned that Allen opposed an official celebration for Martin Luther King's birthday, but he supported an official celebration of the Confederacy. He sought out, and posed for pictures with, white supremacists.

He kept a Confederate Flag and a noose in his office. And then, who can forget, he called a dark skinned University of Virginia student "Macaca."

Well, it didn't take any great leap of faith for me to put all this evidence together and suspect that George Allen was a very bad man -- and almost certainly a racist. So when I heard he was coming to Staunton, a town about 40 miles away from my home in Charlottesville, VA, I decided to make the trip. I was appalled that nobody in the dilapidated Fourth Estate had thought to themselves, "Sheesh, he called the kid "macaca," a racial slur. I wonder what other slurs Allen has used... Hmmm... One slur has particular relevance in this country..."

In late August this year, I learned from George Allen's campaign web site that he'd be in my neck of the woods. I decided to attend a couple of his events that day and ask the questions that, evidently, the media didn't think were relevant.

So I introduced myself to the Senator, listened to an excellent speech he gave to an all-white audience, and approached him as he was engaged in some retail politics. He had just finished having his picture taken with some supporters when I reached out my hand and said:

Me: "...given what's been in the news, I think some of us at the law school have some other questions on our mind. Have you ever used the word, 'nigger'?"

Allen: "Oh listen..."

Me: "Have you?"

Allen: "No"

Me: "You never have in your life?"

Allen: "No"

(audio)

The conversation continued with me asking about the confederate flag and the noose he kept in his office.

A staffer, David Snepp, inserted himself between the Senator and I, invaded my personal space and told me that I couldn't ask these questions because the event was for "real journalists" only.

Real journalists. Ponder that.

Now it's three months later. I've asked the Senator some more difficult questions and the media, when not lying of their own volition, are swallowing the campaign's story without the slightest degree of skepticism. They repeat every falsehood uttered by power and authority without question.

They've asserted without evidence that I coordinated with, first, the DSCC and then later, with the Webb campaign.

I've coordinated with nobody. I am a private citizen. I am a constituent of the Senator's. And I am a person concerned about the trajectory of our country. I've attended public Allen events on my own initiative.

A little more on that... At the Staunton Allen event, I noticed a young man taking still photos of the event. I had noticed him earlier with a video camera. I approached him and asked if he was working for Senator Allen. He said no -- that he was actually working for the Webb campaign. I told him to put away his still camera and get out his video camera -- I explained what I was about to do. He got the video camera out.

After I asked the Senator if he had ever used the n-word, he asked me to step aside so that he could conduct his media event. He promised to answer my questions when he was finished. Snepp fetched the hotel management and had them ask me to leave the premises. I tried to make the case that the Senator had indicated that he wanted to continue our conversation, but the manager was insistent, so I heeded his request.

His campaign schedule had been posted to his web site, so I knew he was going to do a meet and greet in downtown Staunton next. I drove to that location, hoping to follow up with the Senator there. While waiting, I called the Webb campaign headquarters and let them know what I had done previously. I told them that it was critically important that they give me the video guy's cell phone number so we could coordinate the next steps -- so he could shoot video of my follow-up questions.

The Webb camp refused. They said the candidate didn't want to engage in that kind of politics.

I later asked if I could get the video of my questions to the Senator. I wanted to put it up on YouTube. The Webb campaign never returned my calls.

Today, the Allen campaign is spinning whatever lies they can about me being connected to the Webb campaign. There is no evidence to support the allegation, but the media is more than happy to repeat it. Why aren't they so willing to repeat the allegation that the Senator spit on his first wife? Why aren't they reporting that the Senator refuses to address the nature of his arrests in Charlottesville in the 1970s?

What has happened to our media?

$100 If You Can List All The Republicans Under Investigation Or Convicted In One Breath

Rush's Remarks

Army Times: Boehner refuses to apologize for faulting generals

Rep. John Boehner's statements about the generals is causing a backlash in the military.

The Situation Room Video:

House Majority Leader John Boehner: Wolf, I understand that, but let's not blame what's happening in Iraq on Rumsfeld.

Wolf Blitzer: But he's in charge of the military.

John Boehner: But the fact is the generals on the ground are in charge and he works closely with them and the president.

This is being reported in ALL the Military Times outlets (Army Times, Navy Times, etc.). You know... something the troops see every day.

Bush Laments ‘Tone’ In Washington, Says His Opponents Want Terrorists To Win

On Tuesday, in an interview with Fox News’ Sean Hannity, President Bush said the worst thing about being President was the “tone” in Washington, saying that it “has gotten ugly.”

Bush said that he had stayed above the fray, noting “I really don’t think it’s fitting for the president to drag the presidency into that kind of a mudslinging.”

The day before, President Bush was on the campaign trail in Georgia. His message: his opponents want America to lose and the terrorist to win. Watch it.

Boehner: The Military’s Transformation Under Rumsfeld Has Been ‘Nothing Short Of Remarkable’

In the past few days, House Majority Leader John Boehner (R-OH) has vigorously defended Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, saying that he is the “best thing that’s happened to the Pentagon in 25 years” and is doing a “marvelous job.”

Yesterday on CNN, Boehner stated that under the Bush administration, the military has undergone a “remarkable” transformation and “there’s only person in America who could have brought about that transformation and that’s Donald Rumsfeld.”

In reality, Rumsfeld’s mismanagement has pushed the all-volunteer force perilously close to its breaking point. Some highlights of Rumsfeld’s “remarkable” leadership:

• The military’s equipment is outdated, below standards: Forty-two percent of Iraq and Afghanistan veterans said their equipment was below the military standard of being 90 percent operational. Thirty-five percent said their Humvees and trucks were not up-armored when they arrived in-country.


• The military faces severe manpower shortages: Currently, the Army has “close to zero combat-ready brigades in reserve” and the National Guard is “in an even more dire situation than the active Army.” Sixty-three percent of all Iraq and Afghanistan veterans believe the Army and Marine Corps are overextended.

White House Launches Campaign To Politicize Saddam Verdict Ahead of Midterm Elections

The verdict in the trial of former Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein was recently postponed until November 5, two days before the U.S. midterm elections. Media Matters has questioned whether “the date for the verdict’s release [was] set to provide maximum political benefit for the administration and congressional Republicans.”

Asked today whether the verdict would be a factor in the U.S. elections, White House Press Secretary Tony Snow said, “You are absolutely right, it will be a factor.” Snow said the verdict “may fit into a larger narrative about an Iraqi government that has been doing what the president has said all along.” He portrayed the decision as yet another turning point for Iraq.

“This is a benchmark episode, where the Iraqi people are taking control of their own destiny,” he said.

The day Hussein was captured, President Bush addressed the nation. He said the capture “marks the end his of the road…for all who bullied and killed in his name.” For ordinary Iraqis, it was “further assurance that the torture chambers and the secret police are gone forever.” Bush said, “A hopeful day has arrived. All Iraqis can now come together and reject violence and build a new Iraq.”

In the three years since, all of these claims have come undone. Since Hussein was captured:

• 2,358 U.S. soldiers have died, roughly 85 percent of the total U.S. fatalities during the Iraq war.


• Iraq has “become the “cause celebre” for jihadists, breeding a deep resentment of US involvement in the Muslim world and cultivating supporters for the global jihadist movement.” [Link]


• Torture in Iraq “may be worse now than it was under Saddam Hussein, with militias, terrorist groups and government forces disregarding rules on the humane treatment of prisoners,” the U.N.’s anti-torture chief said in September. [Link]


• Prospects for the “new Iraq” have fallen sharply. The 10-member bipartisan commission that is charged with assessing Bush’s Iraq strategy has reportedly “ruled out the prospect for victory.” [Link]

They Put Coffins In Their Ad For Purely Political Purposes. We Put Coffins In Ours Because We're Patriots

Republicans went nuts last summer when the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee used images of flag-draped coffins in a political ad that questioned Republican leadership.

The June Web ad, titled "America Needs a New Direction," featured a montage of troubling images, including Iraq war photos and coffins being loaded into a military transport plane. At the time, Republicans demanded the DCCC remove the ad and apologize.

"It makes my stomach turn to see national Democrats so blatantly exploit the sacrifices made by the men and women of our armed forces," Tom Reynolds, chairman of the National Republican Congressional Committee, told reporters. "It takes a galling level of smug self-righteousness for [DCCC Chairman] Rahm Emanuel to invoke our honored dead one day and put their coffins in an ad the next."

The ad, which was emailed to Democratic supporters, never made it on TV and was soon removed from the DCCC Website.

Six months later, the coffins are back--in a GOP ad.

Heading into the final weekend of the campaign, the NRCC has gone on the air in Georgia with a spot attacking Democratic Rep. John Barrow on homeland security issues. At one point during the ad, an image flashes to rows of television screens displaying rows of flag-draped coffins. An announcer intones, "Barrow is funded by an organization that used coffins of dead American soldiers in a fundraising ad."

Barrow, who faces a tough race against former Rep. Max Burns (whom he defeated two years ago), has called the ad "utter hypocrisy." Burns himself has demanded the NRCC remove the ad immediately.

"It is unacceptable for them to use American soldiers' coffins in my advertising," Burns told the Associated Press. But a NRCC spokesman says the party has "no plans to take it down," noting that the ad is "completely independent of Burns."

Bush: Commanders say Iraq troop level OK

President Bush says he has not received any request to send more American forces to Iraq and that commanders have told him the 144,000 troops already deployed are "what they can live with."

Bush said Democrats "don't have a plan for victory." He also said "it's hard for me to tell" if U.S. troops will still be in Iraq when he leaves office in January 2009.

LSB: Who does have a plan then?

Roasting Chestnuts

New Rule: Now that we've sent "stay the course" down the memory hole, where Big Brother erases things, we've also got to retire: "The world is safer with Saddam Hussein out of power." "Don't you want America to win?" and "Wouldn't you torture someone if they knew where to find an atomic time bomb?"

One: The world isn't safer with Saddam out of power. The only people who are safer are the dead. A number which has, admittedly, increased. Saddam didn't have weapons, that he wouldn't give to Al-Qaeda, whose guts he hated. He might have changed his mind, built weapons he didn't have, and given them to people he hated, but then, so could Dairy Queen.

Two: Don't I want America to win? Are we talking about a war between Sunnis and Shiites, or the Winter Olympics? I thought we wanted democracy to win. 103 Americans died in Iraq last month. Was that winning? Would 1000 be a blow out? Also, didn't we already win? I remember reading about it on an aircraft carrier.

Three: The atomic time bomb that justifies torture. The Constitution specifically says you can't torture people, and we can assume they meant: Even if you really, really want to. Because you wouldn't make a rule against something people didn't want to do. The Eighth Amendment protects terrorists. The same way the First Amendment protects Dixie Chicks. The Framers thought protecting people from the government was more important than anything - even than protecting them from a mythical bomb. You can disagree, but that's not what our Constitution says.

Beyond the fact that it's, like, "illegal," the next problem with the pro-torture argument is that no one - in human history -- has ever been seconds away from defusing an atomic time bomb. You're not thinking of life on earth. You're thinking of "Goldfinger."

You can't make a reasoned argument against a law based on the most outlandish possible hypothetical counter-example you just pulled out of your ass. This is called the Fallacy of Accident. A twist on the old dicto simpliciter ad dictum secundum quid. Like I have to tell you.

Bill Maher is the host of HBO's "Real Time with Bill Maher" which airs every Friday at 11PM.

Kerry Botches a Punchline, the GOP Pounces

Watching the Republican-fueled uproar over John Kerry's fumbled attempt at humor, it's clear the GOP will do anything to keep the pre-election debate off its failed policies in Iraq -- trash Michael J. Fox, go after David Letterman and Rosie O'Donnell, pounce on Kerry.

It's all about distracting voters from the real issues on the table.

This Kerry thing couldn't be more of a non-issue. Everyone -- especially a veteran like John Kerry -- supports the troops. That's not the debate; the debate is whether we are leaving our troops in the crossfire of a sectarian civil war with no clear mission and a job they are ill-equipped for (since when is our military trained to resolve thousand-year old religious hatreds?).

The White House had a full day to prepare for its attack on Kerry. Tony Snow was ready, talking points on the podium. Could he have been any more self-righteous, demanding an apology? As Kerry said, it's Bush who should apologize to the troops for sending them off to die with no clear strategy for winning.

What could be more absurd than the White House of George "I never met a sentence I didn't want to mangle" Bush -- the man who once said of terrorists, "They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we" -- jumping on John Kerry for what was obviously a mangled attempt at humor?

Lesson to Kerry: leave the punch lines to David Letterman.

That's how weird things have gotten: Letterman is making impassioned attacks against the GOP prosecution of the war, and Kerry is firing off -- and bungling -- one-liners.

And John McCain should be ashamed of himself. He knows Kerry wasn't slamming the troops, but couldn't help currying favor with the White House by piling on. Wasn't caving in on the torture bill enough of a suck-up?

Here's the well-oiled GOP message machine in action. On Drudge earlier today, under a picture of Kerry, was the headline: "I apologize To No One." Here's the full quote from Kerry: "I apologize to no one for my criticism of the President and his broken policy." [emphasis mine] Hmm, just a little different meaning than the impression left by your headline, eh Matt?

P.S. Thankfully, the blogosphere quickly and effectively gave this inane GOP straw-grasping the thrashing it deserves. Check out the takes of Steve Benen, billmon, John Cole, Attaturk, Ezra Klein, Charles P. Pierce, and HuffPosters Bob Cesca and Greg Saunders.

UPDATE: Ken Mehlman sent out an email today with the subject line "Disgraceful." In it, the RNC chair pushes the bogus story line that "failed presidential candidate John Kerry brazenly insulted the brave American men and women serving in our military." You want brazen? Tom DeLay, Dick Armey, and Matthew Dowd are among those Republicans who admit that Kerry flubbed a line and wasn't attacking our troops. But not Mehlman, who writes: "Our troops deserve to be honored, not insulted by the likes of John Kerry." John Kerry, who volunteered to serve in Vietnam, was repeatedly honored for his service, and who has gone on to consistently fight for veterans' issues in the Senate. But what does it matter when there is the chance to rouse the base instincts of the GOP base? "John Kerry's outrageous comments," continues Mehlman's missive, "are a vivid reminder of why these elections matter. In six days, politicians who are as bad or worse than John Kerry could take control of Congress... We need you to now keep the John Kerry Democrats out of power."

This from the guy whose organization paid for the race-baiting Harold Ford ads. Clearly, Ken Mehlman knows from "Disgraceful." Talk about chutzpah!

Arianna Huffington, HuffingtonPost.com

No Sex Please, We're Single

If you have one chance to convince an undecided Independent or a Republican to vote Democratic this year, I'd like to suggest the following:

The Bush administration would like to spend your taxpayer dollars on convincing unmarried men and women not to have sex before age 30.

Yes, Abstinence Only--if it's good for the 'tweens, it's great for the twenty-somethings.

The Department of Health and Human Services, which administers the 50 million dollar program, has issued new guidelines telling the states that they can get funding to teach abstinence to anybody up to age 29.

The party that covered up Mark Foley's stalking of teenagers, and the president who campaigned for a Pennsylvania Congressman who admitted an affair with a 29 year old woman, would like to ask all you singles out there to just say no to sex, at least until you're 30. (No telling whether there's an exemption for relationships with members of Congress).

I know, I know. Iraq. Katrina. Health care. Social Security. Minimum Wage. Habeas corpus. Torture. Privacy rights.

Any and all of them should be reason enough to kick these clowns out of Washington.

But let's face it, sex gets people's attention, and for a simple, breath-taking example of over-bearing, self-righteous, intrusive, government over-reach, you really can't do much better than funding abstinence only programs for unmarried adults. (At least, I hope you can't).

By the way, where do you hold the classes? The party room at Applebee's right before Happy Hour? Or maybe you recruit in the parking lot outside your local Speed Dating venue.

These are your tax dollars at work, people. Still undecided about who to vote for?

Shelley Lewis is author of Naked Republicans, A Full Frontal Exposure of Right-Wing Hypocrisy and Greed.

LSB: I thought the Conservative philosophy was about fiscal responsibility, less government intrusion in individuals’ lives, and ineffective social engineering programs were a "waste of the taxpayer dollars. Apparently this philosophy only extends to the bedroom door – then the extreme religious right (and the Repubs they’ve bought) can goose-step their way right into our bedrooms and dictate their moral absolutes. This program proposes to spend $50 MILLION – borrowed money, we’re actually in debt – to advocate that single twenty-somethings – legal adults – should refrain from out-of-wedlock sex in order to reduce the number of bastard children… to continue, if you will, the abstinence message they are getting in school… to “stay the course,” if you will, another ineffective program. Attractive, ego-centric, tight-bodied men and women in the horniest time of their lives – with little or no knowledge of contraception they might have learned in school (or, heaven forbid, at home) – should “Just Say No!” Have I got that right? Legal adults… legal activities… “just say no!” Why stop with twenty-somethings – most women are fertile through their 30’s (and often into their 40’s), so why not expand the program? And, really, we just need to focus on and control the sexual habits of women, as they are, afterall, the ones who have these bastard children. Perhaps we should just have unmarried, fertile women wear burkas until they marry; that may help to reduce both the number of bastard children on welfare and/or the number of abortions. $50 MILLION will buy a lot of burkas. Let’s get real, folks! How far will we allow the influence of the extreme religious right to go before we say, “Enough!”?