Could Lanny Davis be a bigger idiot

post from AMERICAblog: A great nation deserves the truth on 09 May 2008 03:01:00 PM. © AMERICAblog: A great nation deserves the truth

Seriously, Lanny Davis has to be on the top of the list of Clintonistas we never want to see on TV again.

We're almost getting our wish. He's been bitching about Tuesday night's coverage. TPM has a video montage of the pathetic performance. What a fricking crybaby. But the good news is that he won't appear on CNN anymore...well, not all of CNN...just CNN's election coverage. He'll still go on some CNN, like Larry King. (Vintage Clintonian parsing, btw).

Seriously, Davis is just an unbelievable tool. Go hang out with your pal, Lieberman, and his pal, McCain. No one will miss you.

Read The Full Article:
http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/Americablog/~3/287150547/could-lanny-davis-be-bigg
er-idiot.html

Digg this

McCains Lawyer Smacked Down By His Own
Organization

post from Firedoglake on 09 May 2008 03:00:50 PM. © Firedoglake

McCain's lawyer, Trevor Potter, poo-poohs the idea that FEC Chairman David Mason was fired because he was critical of McCain's public finance hypocrisy. But the Campaign Legal Center, the organization that Trevor Potter founded, strongly disagrees...[...]

Read The Full Article:
http://firedoglake.com/2008/05/09/mccains-lawyer-smacked-down-by-his-own-organiza
tion/

Digg this

Global Suicide Pact: Darfur Engine, Part 1

post from Crooks and Liars on 09 May 2008 03:00:43 PM. © Crooks and Liars

Natasha Chart at Open Left:Glenn Hurowitz recently wondered who’s going to help Tibet bring down China, like the Russians were brought down in Afghanistan and the British in India. International pressure and protest seems to carry no weight among the Chinese. Their government is still arresting monks for “unauthorized gatherings”, they’re still shooting and [...]

Read The Full Article:
http://www.crooksandliars.com/2008/05/09/global-suicide-pact-darfur-engine-part-1
/

Digg this

Right-wing junk religionists are at their beloved
game of trying to undermine the separation of church and state, which protects both church and state

post from DownWithTyranny! on 09 May 2008 03:00:00 PM. © DownWithTyranny!

"When religious leaders endorse candidates from the pulpit, they weaken both the sanctity of religion and the integrity of democracy. The IRS allows ? and the Interfaith Alliance encourages ? religious leaders to speak out on the important political issues of the day, but when clergy endorse specific candidates or parties in their official capacity, they abuse their pastoral authority."
--C. Welton Gaddy of the Interfaith Alliance

"The section of the tax code barring nonprofits from intervening in political campaigns has long frustrated clergy. Many ministers consider the provision an inappropriate government intrusion, blocking the duty of clergy to advise congregants."
--from a Wall Street Journal report on the Alliance Defense Fund's campaign to get ministers "to preach about election candidates this September, defying a tax law that bars churches from engaging in politics"

"I have yet to meet a pastor who feels this way. Responsible ministers understand that the First Amendment does as much or more to protect their congregations than it does to muffle their voice. More important, they understand that the mission of the church is to be the church, not an adjunct to a political movement."
--Pastor Dan, in his Street Prophets commentary today on the ADF's "double-dog daring churches to step over the line of Separation"

It took me a long time to understand that religious people aren't per se better or worse than other people. Just as there are folks whose faith inspires them to lead lives of inspiring morality and humanity, there are those who use religion as a tool, or even a weapon, to secure power or privilege or just make themselves feel better than other folks (and of course the unfortunate folks who take guidance from them, who just want to be told how to live their lives).

This shouldn't be all that surprising, of course. People are what people are. I'm guessing you find just about the same mix in most any walk of life. It was a heck of a shock for me to discover, as a youthful devotee of the fine arts, that the people on the inside of the arts profession, far from representing a higher order of being, incarnate the same mix of the good, the bad, and the in-between.

There's not much doubt in my mind that the folks at the forefront of America's epidemic of junk religion would have been bad people whatever career path they chose. It just strikes my delicate sensibilities as that much more reprehensible when they practice their evil in the name of "morality" or "decency"--or, bluntly, in the name of God. By the same token, the religious folk who are driven to work for the spiritual and practical well-being and betterment of their fellow homo sapiens would have been admirable human beings however their lives had been charted.

Today our good friend Pastor Dan of Street Prophets latched on to an important story about an outrageous abuse of this country's famous religious tolerance, a carefully worked-out plan by junk religionists to try to blast a hole in the separation of church and state (which as Pastor Dan likes to point out serves the best interests of both churches and the state):

Alliance Defense Fund: We Must Destroy First Amendment In Order To Save It
by pastordan
Fri May 09, 2008 at 10:04:17 AM PDT

The Wall Street Journal is reporting that the ADF is double-dog daring churches to step over the line of Separation:
A conservative legal-advocacy group is enlisting ministers to use their pulpits to preach about election candidates this September, defying a tax law that bars churches from engaging in politics.

Alliance Defense Fund, a Scottsdale, Ariz., nonprofit, is hoping at least one sermon will prompt the Internal Revenue Service to investigate, sparking a court battle that could get the tax provision declared unconstitutional. Alliance lawyers represent churches in disputes with the IRS over alleged partisan activity.

The action marks the latest attempt by a conservative organization to help clergy harness their congregations to sway elections. The protest is scheduled for Sunday, Sept. 28, a little more than a month before the general election, in a year when religious concerns and preachers have been a regular part of the political debate.

...

Alliance fund staff hopes 40 or 50 houses of worship will take part in the action, including clerics from liberal-leaning congregations. About 80 ministers have expressed interest, including one Catholic priest, says Erik Stanley, the Alliance's senior legal counsel.

Translation: we're hoping to partisanize conservative congregations, since who knows how many Justice Sundays did squat for us before. The law is quite settled here, and IRS complaints take a long time to settle, much less litigate. So the legal effect for 2006 is basically nil, meaning this is a political maneuver.

Oh yeah, and this is crap:

The section of the tax code barring nonprofits from intervening in political campaigns has long frustrated clergy. Many ministers consider the provision an inappropriate government intrusion, blocking the duty of clergy to advise congregants.

I have yet to meet a pastor who feels this way. Responsible ministers understand that the First Amendment does as much or more to protect their congregations than it does to muffle their voice. More important, they understand that the mission of the church is to be the church, not an adjunct to a political movement.

C. Welton Gaddy of the Interfaith Alliance had a statement on the ADF's move that seems on-the-money:
Houses of worship belong to divine authority ? they are not the property of either political party. The Alliance Defense Fund?s call for pastors to break the law represents the height of irresponsibility. They are putting churches across the country unnecessarily at risk to costly and time-consuming investigations that could result in harsh financial penalties. Putting churches in legal and financial jeopardy seems a bizarre way of defending religious freedom, which the ADF claims to defend.

But there is an even greater issue at stake in this campaign than violating the law. When religious leaders endorse candidates from the pulpit, they weaken both the sanctity of religion and the integrity of democracy. The IRS allows ? and the Interfaith Alliance encourages ? religious leaders to speak out on the important political issues of the day, but when clergy endorse specific candidates or parties in their official capacity, they abuse their pastoral authority.
Damn skippy.

#

Read The Full Article:
http://downwithtyranny.blogspot.com/2008/05/right-wing-junk-religionists-are-at.h
tml

Digg this

Right-wing junk religionists are at their beloved
game of trying to undermine separation of church and state, which protects both church and state

post from DownWithTyranny! on 09 May 2008 03:00:00 PM. © DownWithTyranny!

"When religious leaders endorse candidates from the pulpit, they weaken both the sanctity of religion and the integrity of democracy. The IRS allows ? and the Interfaith Alliance encourages ? religious leaders to speak out on the important political issues of the day, but when clergy endorse specific candidates or parties in their official capacity, they abuse their pastoral authority."
--C. Welton Gaddy of the Interfaith Alliance

"The section of the tax code barring nonprofits from intervening in political campaigns has long frustrated clergy. Many ministers consider the provision an inappropriate government intrusion, blocking the duty of clergy to advise congregants."
--from a Wall Street Journal report on the Alliance Defense Fund's campaign to get ministers "to preach about election candidates this September, defying a tax law that bars churches from engaging in politics"

"I have yet to meet a pastor who feels this way. Responsible ministers understand that the First Amendment does as much or more to protect their congregations than it does to muffle their voice. More important, they understand that the mission of the church is to be the church, not an adjunct to a political movement."
--Pastor Dan, in his Street Prophets commentary today on the ADF's "double-dog daring churches to step over the line of Separation"

It took me a long time to understand that religious people aren't per se better or worse than other people. Just as there are folks whose faith inspires them to lead lives of inspiring morality and humanity, there are those who use religion as a tool, or even a weapon, to secure power or privilege or just make themselves feel better than other folks (and of course the unfortunate folks who take guidance from them, who just want to be told how to live their lives).

This shouldn't be all that surprising, of course. People are what people are. I'm guessing you find just about the same mix in most any walk of life. It was a heck of a shock for me to discover, as a youthful devotee of the fine arts, that the people on the inside of the arts profession, far from representing a higher order of being, incarnate the same mix of the good, the bad, and the in-between.

There's not much doubt in my mind that the folks at the forefront of America's epidemic of junk religion would have been bad people whatever career path they chose. It just strikes my delicate sensibilities as that much more reprehensible when they practice their evil in the name of "morality" or "decency"--or, bluntly, in the name of God. By the same token, the religious folk who are driven to work for the spiritual and practical well-being and betterment of their fellow homo sapiens would have been admirable human beings however their lives had been charted.

Today our good friend Pastor Dan of Street Prophets latched on to an important story about an outrageous abuse of this country's famous religious tolerance, a carefully worked-out plan by junk religionists to try to blast a hole in the separation of church and state (which as Pastor Dan likes to point out serves the best interests of both churches and the state):

Alliance Defense Fund: We Must Destroy First Amendment In Order To Save It
by pastordan
Fri May 09, 2008 at 10:04:17 AM PDT

The Wall Street Journal is reporting that the ADF is double-dog daring churches to step over the line of Separation:
A conservative legal-advocacy group is enlisting ministers to use their pulpits to preach about election candidates this September, defying a tax law that bars churches from engaging in politics.

Alliance Defense Fund, a Scottsdale, Ariz., nonprofit, is hoping at least one sermon will prompt the Internal Revenue Service to investigate, sparking a court battle that could get the tax provision declared unconstitutional. Alliance lawyers represent churches in disputes with the IRS over alleged partisan activity.

The action marks the latest attempt by a conservative organization to help clergy harness their congregations to sway elections. The protest is scheduled for Sunday, Sept. 28, a little more than a month before the general election, in a year when religious concerns and preachers have been a regular part of the political debate.

...

Alliance fund staff hopes 40 or 50 houses of worship will take part in the action, including clerics from liberal-leaning congregations. About 80 ministers have expressed interest, including one Catholic priest, says Erik Stanley, the Alliance's senior legal counsel.

Translation: we're hoping to partisanize conservative congregations, since who knows how many Justice Sundays did squat for us before. The law is quite settled here, and IRS complaints take a long time to settle, much less litigate. So the legal effect for 2006 is basically nil, meaning this is a political maneuver.

Oh yeah, and this is crap:

The section of the tax code barring nonprofits from intervening in political campaigns has long frustrated clergy. Many ministers consider the provision an inappropriate government intrusion, blocking the duty of clergy to advise congregants.

I have yet to meet a pastor who feels this way. Responsible ministers understand that the First Amendment does as much or more to protect their congregations than it does to muffle their voice. More important, they understand that the mission of the church is to be the church, not an adjunct to a political movement.

C. Welton Gaddy of the Interfaith Alliance had a statement on the ADF's move that seems on-the-money:
Houses of worship belong to divine authority ? they are not the property of either political party. The Alliance Defense Fund?s call for pastors to break the law represents the height of irresponsibility. They are putting churches across the country unnecessarily at risk to costly and time-consuming investigations that could result in harsh financial penalties. Putting churches in legal and financial jeopardy seems a bizarre way of defending religious freedom, which the ADF claims to defend.

But there is an even greater issue at stake in this campaign than violating the law. When religious leaders endorse candidates from the pulpit, they weaken both the sanctity of religion and the integrity of democracy. The IRS allows ? and the Interfaith Alliance encourages ? religious leaders to speak out on the important political issues of the day, but when clergy endorse specific candidates or parties in their official capacity, they abuse their pastoral authority.
Damn skippy.

#

Read The Full Article:
http://downwithtyranny.blogspot.com/2008/05/right-wing-junk-religionists-are-at.h
tml

Digg this

Snake Oil Salesweasels

post from American Street on 09 May 2008 02:57:00 PM. © American Street

Another couple of items in today’s news* examined here courtesy of the Funny Farm News Burrow**:Obama’s Faulty Tax ArgumentAs the presidential campaign heats up, a key issue is whether to extend the 2001 and 2003 income tax cuts, which expire in 2011. John McCain wants to make the tax cuts permanent. Barack Obama and Hillary [...]

Read The Full Article:
http://www.reachm.com/amstreet/archives/2008/05/09/snake-oil-salesweasels/

Digg this

Forces Instruct Sadr City Residents to Leave

post from IraqSlogger.com on 09 May 2008 02:52:54 PM. © IraqSlogger.com

Residents of two Sadr City sectors have told IraqSlogger that they were instructed by Iraqi forces to leave their homes on Thursday to make way for intensified operations to clear militiamen from the besieged district.

Read The Full Article:
http://www.iraqslogger.com/index.php/post/5801

Digg this

New CBO Report Proves McCain Is ‘Full Of
It’ In His Opposition To Webb-Hagel GI Bill

Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) and the Pentagon have voiced their opposition to the bipartisan Webb-Hagel GI Bill by spouting fears that ?too many will use it,” and it will therefore ?harm? the military.

A new Congressional Budget Office (CBO) report analyzing the impact of the GI Bill shows that McCain is indeed ?full of it.? While the report explains that troop retention will decline because some troops will take advantage of their new education benefits, the loss in retention will be entirely made up for by increased military recruits:

Literature on the effects of educational benefits on retention suggest that every $10,000 increase in educational benefits yields a reduction in retention of slightly more than 1 percentage point. CBO estimates that S. 22 (as modified) would more than double the present value of educational benefits for servicemembers at the first reenlistment point ? from about $40,000 to over $90,000 ? implying a 16 percent decline in the reenlistment rate, from about 42 percent to about 36 percent. [?]
Educational benefits have been shown to raise the number of military recruits. Based on an analysis of the existing literature, CBO estimates that a 10 percent increase in educational benefits would result in an increase of about 1 percent in high-quality recruits. On that basis, CBO calculates that raising the educational benefits as proposed in S. 22 would result in a 16 percent increase in recruits.

Ignoring the conclusion of the CBO report, the Army Times prints this deceptive headline suggesting that the GI Bill will only harm the military: “CBO: Better GI Bill would cut retention 16%.”

As Sen. John Warner (R-VA) has said, the flip side of the impact on retention is that ?putting a big piece of cheese out there will induce more qualified people to join just to get this. It should be a tremendous incentive for recruitment.? If McCain and the Bush administration truly wanted to repair retention problems, they shouldn’t take benefits away from troops but rather — as Jon Soltz has said — “focus on the role of contractors, who continually snatch up troops, offering them up to 10 times their military pay to do a similar job in Iraq.”

Read The Full Article:
http://thinkprogress.org/2008/05/09/cbo-webb-hagel/

Digg this

CNN's Blitzer, on-screen text misled on cost of
housing bill

During the May 8 edition of CNN's The Situation Room, host Wolf Blitzer madethe misleading assertion that "the House of Representatives just passed a$300 billion plan to help struggling homeowners." In fact, as Media Matters for America documented, while the FHA Housing Stabilization and Homeownership Retention Act-- which passed the House as anamendment to the American Housing Rescue and ForeclosurePrevention Act -- would authorize the Federal Housing Administration to insure up to $300[...]

Read The Full Article:
http://feeds.mediamatters.org/~r/mediamatters/latest/~3/286994103/200805090003

Digg this

Wow, We Nominated The Black Guy

Wow, it is really happening: Barack Obama will be the Democratic nominee for President of the[...]

Read The Full Article:
http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/OpenLeft-FrontPage/~3/287021078/showDiary.do

Digg this