Dobson Cries Poor

I don't really trust anything James Dobson says, and his extended whine that the liberals have run roughshod over the country and nobody can stop it doesn't ring true either. Sure the hate-crimes bill will likely pass into law, but Dobson has something of a larger game here. On other culture-war issues, Dobson and his religious right cohorts have a plan.

If President Obama nominates Judge Diane P. Wood to the Supreme Court, conservatives plan to attack her as an “outspoken” supporter of “abortion, including partial-birth abortion.”

If he nominates Judge Sonia Sotomayor, they plan to accuse her of being “willing to expand constitutional rights beyond the text of the Constitution.”

And if he nominates Kathleen M. Sullivan, a law professor at Stanford, they plan to denounce her as a “prominent supporter of homosexual marriage.”

Preparing to oppose the confirmation of Mr. Obama’s eventual choice to succeed Justice David H. Souter, who is retiring, conservative groups are working together to stockpile ammunition. Ten memorandums summarizing their research, obtained by The New York Times, provide a window onto how they hope to frame the coming debate.

This is not a strategy to defeat the nominee - Republicans have basically given up on that. This is a strategy to demonize an eventual sitting Supreme Court Justice. Right now the religious right lacks a lightning rod, and of the ones they use, the President is too popular and the rest of the Democratic leadership to unknown. They need to raise the profile of an enemy, and claim that they are powerless to stop this enemy's rise to prominence. The culture wars feed off of a sense of powerlessness. It made no sense when Republicans sat in every seat of power in Washington. But the reversal puts things back in the natural state for those on the right with a siege mentality. Armed with a new enemy, only THEN will Dobson and his charges fight back.

Now, I do believe these issues have lost their salience. That abortion poll floating around is flawed, and even if it weren't, the emphasis has waned.

Essentially, Democrats shouldn't take this bait. The religious right will always claim that they are being forcibly pushed out of the country, regardless of the concessions made or common ground sought. I don't mind President Obama's Notre Dame speech as a rhetorical instrument and an olive branch to moderates. On policy, however, the theocons will always claim they are under siege, whether true or not. Might as well give them their enemy and make some positive change in the meantime.

A Vote Too Far

Orange County's Board of Supervisors may have crossed the line with this one.

The Orange County Board of Supervisors voted unanimously today to suspend a county contract with Planned Parenthood to provide health education for thousands of teens and preteens because the nonprofit organization offers abortions.

“I personally have a problem with government funding of an organization that provides abortion services,” said Supervisor John Moorlach, who placed the item on the agenda.

As it says in the opening graf, Planned Parenthood in Orange County does not provide abortion services. It provides health education for teenagers, including information on contraception and birth control. All this does is make kids in the area more susceptible to STDs. This is religious extremism that actually puts people at risk.

But alas, this is Orange County, some say. If they are so wedded to an extremist anti-choice ideology, then so be it. Except that's more true of the political class than the people who live there.

Despite testimony that the Planned Parenthood services under contract through the community health clincs is not funding abortions, and has been extensively audited, the Board of Supervisors voted to defund a contract that includes Planned Parenthood as one of 18 community clinics receiving funding under Propostion H [...]

Recent polling has shown that anti-choice activists in Orange County are now outnumbered over two to one by those who believe that abortion should be available without any restrictions, or with minor restrictions. (emphasis mine)

Two things jump out here. Planned Parenthood was receiving the funding via a voter-approved initiative. And then there's the part I bolded, that Orange County is strongly in favor of abortion rights. This is nothing new, by the way. The county has long been more socially liberal and economically conservative. Here's an article from June 2000 highlighting a survey showing the OC's tilt toward choice:

The county's libertarian bent also was evident on the subject of abortion. Sixty-five percent of those polled support abortion rights.

It seems to me that this vote could be a launching pad. The culture wars have played themselves out nationally, particularly in light of the economic crisis. South Dakota, one of the most conservative states in the country, couldn't pass an abortion ban in 2006 or 2008. The public supports abortion rights and even more strongly supports birth control and family planning (try 91%). This punitive measure by the OC Supes could be a rallying cry, starting a movement tailored to the libertarian thinking of the area, demanding that these lawmakers get their prying eyes out of their constituents' bedrooms. This is the kind of misstep that loses people elections. We'll see if anyone capitalizes.

Compare/Contrast

I guess the Obama people must feel like they got what they wanted out of the Rick Warren invocation, but from my vantage point it was a wooden and erratic address. Outside of the parts where he was quoting Scripture, it was hard to even understand his point half the time. When he started rambling about how God was "compassionate and merciful to everyone... and you are loving to everyone" it didn't even seem like it was written or thought out at all, despite the fact that he read the whole thing without making eye contact with the crowd. He looked hurried and rattled, and I have to think that the mass outcry against his appearance had to play a part in that. Either that or he's a star on a small stage who didn't translate to the step up in class.

For comparison's sake, check out the amazing work of the Rev. Joseph Lowery, who spoke of justice and charity and aid for the least among us. I'd say it was no contest.

And now, Lord, in the complex arena of human relations, help us to make choices on the side of love, not hate; on the side of inclusion, not exclusion; tolerance, not intolerance.

And as we leave this mountaintop, help us to hold on to the spirit of fellowship and the oneness of our family. Let us take that power back to our homes, our workplaces, our churches, our temples, our mosques, or wherever we seek your will.

Bless President Barack, First Lady Michelle. Look over our little, angelic Sasha and Malia.

We go now to walk together, children, pledging that we won't get weary in the difficult days ahead. We know you will not leave us alone, with your hands of power and your heart of love.

Help us then, now, Lord, to work for that day when nation shall not lift up sword against nation, when tanks will be beaten into tractors, when every man and every woman shall sit under his or her own vine and fig tree, and none shall be afraid; when justice will roll down like waters and righteousness as a mighty stream.

Lord, in the memory of all the saints who from their labors rest, and in the joy of a new beginning, we ask you to help us work for that day when black will not be asked to get back, when brown can stick around -- (laughter) -- when yellow will be mellow -- (laughter) -- when the red man can get ahead, man -- (laughter) -- and when white will embrace what is right.

Let all those who do justice and love mercy say amen.

The point that those who Digby refers to as the Religion Industrial Complex want to avoid is that there's no need to reinvent the liberal relationship to faith. It already exists in the application of many religious teachings, in the notions of peace and justice and equality and tolerance, and in the common effort seen in the civil rights and the global peace movements. The religious right has hijacked these principles for the purposes of authoritarian extremism, and what is sometimes depicted as the "religious left" would rather accommodate those extremist views. It's a false choice.

And it didn't hurt to here a little nod to non-believers up on that platform today. For a second I actually thought I lived in a country where church and state were separate. Not bad.

Davis Unbound

This is a pretty smart assessment by former Republican Rep. Tom Davis of the troubles of the modern GOP. Sure there are some fallacies ("We're victims of our own success!"), but in general it's pretty honest.

With the heavy lifting out of the way, we indulged in more trivial pursuits – and this led to trouble. We talked to ourselves and not to voters. We became more concerned with stem cell policy than economic policy, and with prayer in schools rather than balance in our public budgets and priorities. Not so long ago, it was easy to paint the Democrats as the party of extremists. Now, they say we’re extremists, and voters agree.

As a result, we’ve seen our support erode. Urban centers remain under Democratic control. Exurbs and rural areas remain under Republican dominance. But in the battleground that lies between – the suburbs -- we were winning them; now we’re not. Our candidates are safe in a swath that extends from North Texas across to North Alabama and up through Appalachia. Elsewhere, we are on the run. Almost every voter who can be convinced – who sometimes votes Democratic, sometimes Republican – now votes Democratic.

We’ve long-since given up on the African-American vote. We’re forfeiting the Hispanic vote with unwarranted and unsavory vitriol against immigrants. Youth vote? Gone. We ask for nothing from these idealistic voters, we offer little except chastisement of their lifestyle choices and denial of global warming, and we are woefully behind the Democrats in learning how to connect with them.

Soccer moms? They’re not comfortable with much of our social policy agenda, so many are gone as well. NASCAR dads? They’re our last redoubt, and the trends even there are not encouraging as unemployment rises and 401 (k)s are decimated. They want clean, competent government that meets basic challenges.

This is generally right, although Davis isn't willing to admit that the GOP lock on rural voters is starting to unloosen as well. What we saw in 2008 is a fall in support for Republicans from virtually all demographics except seniors. But if Davis can be forgiven for that oversight, I think the solutions he comes up with are a mixed bag.

First, we eliminate checklists and litmus tests and focus on broad principles, not heavy-handed prescriptions. Free trade. Strong defense – at home and abroad. Government as small as is practicable in these times. Economic, education and energy policies that promote growth, energy independence and a competitive agenda that will allow businesses to grow and compete, not be protected by artificial barriers [...]

Remind ourselves the first principle of conservatism is not tax cuts or free trade or even smaller government. It is prudence, and prudence should be our guide.

Prudence dictates we take seriously the concerns of those who elect us and tailor our policy proposals to counter the government-mandate-heavy ideas bound to emerge from the other side.

This is essentially a call for fiscal conservatism (right when such a strategy would doom us to depression, and is also deeply unpopular) with a nod toward "strong national defense." Now, I think the electorate has basically spoken and called those policies unnecessarily cruel toward the weakest among us. And while he's right that conservatives ought to "stop talking about how much we hate government if we expect people to elect us to run it," his prescription that they have to "reduce it to its ideal size is basically the same exact philosophy with different language. But what's interesting is that Davis essentially counsels the GOP to tell social cons to go pound sand. As Markos says, that's just not going to work.

That is the current GOP agenda minus one big, glaring omission: nothing about "Strong family values". In fact, he ignores the issue altogether, pretending that the modern GOP isn't beholden to its Sarah Palin wing. I have no doubt Palin cost McCain support among independents and Democrats, but she certainly energized McCain's campaign by bringing aboard its most motivated foot soldiers. Who does Tom Davis think will knock on doors for GOP candidates if you strip out its evangelical base? Wall Street Rockafeller Republicans? Stockbrokers? Bankers?

They made a corrupt bargain back in the 1970s to use the religious right as a grassroots army. They can jettison it now, but then they lose the only piece of the electorate that they're holding, and their entire volunteer base.

People have basically seen the outcome of conservative policies and they didn't like it. They may see the outcome of Obama's policies, call them "liberal," and decide they don't like them either. But the GOP's influence on this debate is largely irrelevant. They can use the Twitter and the Facebook and reinvent themselves all they want, but their path back to power is out of their hands. It depends on whether or not the Democrats waste this moment.

Deep Thinkers

Just to add to my assessment of the pervasive influence of know-nothing Dominionism on the right, here's Daniel Henninger, a columnist paid money by the Wall Street Journal, a working writer for a newspaper with an economic focus, blaming the financial crisis on greeters who don't say "Merry Christmas" at shopping malls:

This year we celebrate the desacralized "holidays" amid what is for many unprecedented economic ruin -- fortunes halved, jobs lost, homes foreclosed. People wonder, What happened? One man's theory: A nation whose people can't say "Merry Christmas" is a nation capable of ruining its own economy.

One had better explain that.

Yes, one had.

It has been my view that the steady secularizing and insistent effort at dereligioning America has been dangerous. That danger flashed red in the fall into subprime personal behavior by borrowers and bankers, who after all are just people. Northerners and atheists who vilify Southern evangelicals are throwing out nurturers of useful virtue with the bathwater of obnoxious political opinions.

The point for a healthy society of commerce and politics is not that religion saves, but that it keeps most of the players inside the chalk lines. We are erasing the chalk lines.

Feel free: Banish Merry Christmas. Get ready for Mad Max.

Got that, secular progressives? Deregulation, predatory lending and corporate greed had nothing to do with this. It's you and your atheist friends who are promoting anarchy and the destruction of morals. If there were only crosses on top of Wall Street skyscrapers, the investment bankers and hedge fund managers inside wouldn't have given in to the temptation of greed. Your 401 (k) might have been saved if you practiced Lent this year.

Thanks a lot, heathens. Good luck heating your home with those Bibles you like to burn.

Religious Right? I Don't See Any Religious Right.

Kathleen Parker wrote an op-ed today calling out the "oogedy-boogedy" theocratic wing of the GOP and "armband religion" as impeding conservative electoral prospects for a generation.

Here's the deal, 'pubbies: Howard Dean was right.

It isn't that culture doesn't matter. It does. But preaching to the choir produces no converts. And shifting demographics suggest that the Republican Party -- and conservatism with it -- eventually will die out unless religion is returned to the privacy of one's heart where it belongs [...]

But, like it or not, we are a diverse nation, no longer predominantly white and Christian. The change Barack Obama promised has already occurred, which is why he won.

Among Jewish voters, 78 percent went for Obama. Sixty-six percent of under-30 voters did likewise. Forty-five percent of voters ages 18-29 are Democrats compared to just 26 percent Republican; in 2000, party affiliation was split almost evenly.

The young will get older, of course. Most eventually will marry, and some will become their parents. But nonwhites won't get whiter. And the nonreligious won't get religion through external conversion. It doesn't work that way.

This has sent conservatives into a tizzy, as they demand, DEMAND to know what Parker is referring to. The author of "Liberal Fascism," who has never ascribed bad motives to a political party in his life, has a representative comment.

What aspects of the Christian Right amount to oogedy-boogedyism? I take oogedy-boogedy to be a perjorative reference to absurd superstition and irrational nonsense. So where has the GOP embraced to its detriment oogedy-boogedyism? With the possible exception of some variants of creationism (which is hardly a major issue at the national level in the GOP, as much as some on the left and a few on the right try to make it one), I'm at a loss as to what Kathleen is referring to. Opposition to abortion? Opposition to gay marriage? Euthanasia? Support for prayer in school?

Hey, can I offer a piece of evidence?

The California Supreme Court will take up various legal challenges to the constitutionality of Proposition 8, with oral arguments to begin around March and a decision expected by next May. I'm sure we'll see a host of arguments between now and March, but the amicus brief on behalf of the Lord is a new one. It's a PDF, but here's the opening statement:

Acting on behalf of the Almighty Eternal Creator, who is holding sole ownership to His creations, all planets, including the earth and everything above, below and on it, myself as His heiress, and the Kingdom of Heaven World Divine Mission (also known as Rebuild My Church Divine Mission), a Non-Profit Corporation in the State of California, submit this Amicus Curiae brief to the address the legal standard for granting "yes" on Proposition 8, passed with 52% of California voters votes, as the State of California Constitution Amendment: "Marriage between one man and one woman only!"

Later on, there's this section:

After a night full of dreams, before dawn on November 11, 2008, before I woke up in the morning, the Almighty Eternal Creator ordered me, saying "You explain to them the consequences that follow each and all of their actions. Once they understand, they will listen!"

These two matters (gay-lesbian and abortion) are just a couple of many major cases where people are exercising their free-will rights for wrong purposes. This has gone on for a hundred-thousand years and has contributed heavily to extreme weather, global warming, financial crisis, recession, global hatred, lying, violence, war and murder, serious sickness and diseases - often for the purpose of gaining rights for wrong purposes, power and money.

I mean, if you want to deny that a non-trivial part of your coalition is out in la-la land, go ahead. But ultimately, conservatives are responsible for giving this kind of nonsense talk a presentable forum and a place in their party. They made a devil's bargain and now they're trying to act like the Dominionists in their midst are perfectly normal.

I don't know how right Parker is (the economic royalists and the neocons can shoulder some of the blame), but let's not pretend that the religious right is rational and benign. And let's not pretend that their desire to mandate their views of morality on the whole society, to use hate as a wedge to divide and sow fear, to define what you do in the privacy of your home and with your body, hasn't caused revulsion among a fairly large segment of the population who can't stand being constantly told how to think and act.

John Cole has an additional bill of particulars.

The Crackup

I've been watching this looming conservative crackup with interest for about a year. The three legs of their stool - the fundie theocrats, the economic royalists, and the neocons - have been made more manic by a culture of demonizing liberals and branding them as abberant, and a loss was sure to break wide the fissures between those three competing sects. In the primaries there was no consensus whatsoever - each leg of the stool lined up with their own candidate - and you could just see that this wouldn't hold together. And while I didn't think it would get this nasty this soon, that's exactly what's happened. Listen to Rush Limbaugh trying to blame moderate Republicans (like there are any left) and "intellectualoids" (no shit, his expression) for their problems:

In that sense, it was said the only opportunity this party has to regain power is John McCain. Only John McCain can get moderates and independents and Democrats to join the Republican Party, "and we can't win," these intellectualoids said, "if that didn't happen." Well, the latest moderate Republican to abandon his party is William Weld, the former governor of Massachusetts who today endorsed the Most Merciful Lord Barack Obama. He joins moderate Republican Colin Powell. He joins former Bush press spokesman Scott McClellan. He joins a number of Republicans like Chuck Hagel, Senator from Nebraska ...

Now, I wish to ask all of you influential pseudointellectual conservative media types who have also abandoned McCain and want to go vote for Obama (and you know who you are without my having to mention your name) what happened to your precious theory? What the hell happened to your theory that only John McCain could enlarge this party, that we had to get moderates and independents? How the hell is it that moderate Republicans are fleeing their own party and we are not attracting other moderates and independents?

... When I saw the Weld thing today I smiled and I fired off a note to all my buddies and I said, "Wait, wait, wait, wait, wait! How can this be? How can this be? This is the kind of guy that our candidate was supposed to be attracting, and we were supposed to be getting all these moderates from the Democrat Party," and we will, by the way. We're going to get some rank and file, average American Democrats that are going to vote for McCain. But these hoity-toity bourgeoisie... Well, they're not the bourgeoisie, but... Well, they are in a sense. They're following their own self-interests, so I say fine. They have just admitted that Republican Party "big tent" philosophy didn't work. It was their philosophy; it was their idea. These are the people, once they steered the party to where it is, they are the ones that abandoned it.

Never has anti-intellectualism been so finely distilled. The theocons are training their fire on moderates as well. As if these so-called "latte conservatives" even exist. They created this monster and are part of its core. Now, suddenly as the ship goes down they don't want to be a part of it. And the right-wing populist wants to cast them off. More than anything, this is about loyalty:

Jim Nuzzo, a White House aide to the first President Bush, dismissed Mrs Palin's critics as "cocktail party conservatives" who "give aid and comfort to the enemy".

He told The Sunday Telegraph: "There's going to be a bloodbath. A lot of people are going to be excommunicated. David Brooks and David Frum and Peggy Noonan are dead people in the Republican Party. The litmus test will be: where did you stand on Palin?"

Mr Frum thinks that Mrs Palin's brand of cultural conservatism appeals only to a dwindling number of voters.

He said: "She emerges from this election as the probable frontrunner for the 2012 nomination. Her supporters vastly outnumber her critics. But it will be extremely difficult for her to win the presidency."

This was inevitable without Palin and McCain - conservatives never take responsibility for their own actions, and they would have scapegoated everyone but themselves for this potential realignment. But the obvious tension at the top of the ticket is exacerbating this, and well before the election to boot. McCain and Palin have split on Ted Stevens. They've split on this very damaging wardrobe story, with the RNC thrown in as well. McCain staffers are openly calling Palin a whack job. And this is just embarrassing.

I’m sympathetic to Eskew and Wallace, and not just because they’re decent people. They’ve held their tongue from leaking what a couple of McCain higher-ups have told me—namely, that Palin simply knew nothing about national and international issues. Which meant, as one such adviser said to me: “Letting Sarah be Sarah may not be such a good thing.” It’s a grim binary choice, but apparently it came down to whether to make Palin look like a scripted robot or an unscripted ignoramus. I was told that Palin chafed at being defined by her discomfiting performances in the Couric, Charlie Gibson, and Sean Hannity interviews. She wanted to get back out there and do more. Well, if you’re Eskew and Wallace, what do you say to that? Your responsibility isn’t the care and feeding of Sarah Palin’s ego; it’s the furtherance of John McCain’s quest for the presidency [...]

I’ve heard from one well-placed source that McCain has snubbed her on one long bus ride aboard the Straight Talk Express, to the embarrassment of those sitting nearby. It has surely been implied to the governor that she should be eternally grateful to have been plucked from obscurity. And yet the high water mark of John McCain’s campaign for the presidency unquestionably began on September 3, when Palin gave her nomination speech—and ended precisely twelve days later, when McCain went off-script—I have that on the authority of the person who participated in the writing of said script—and told an audience that he still believed the fundamentals of the economy were strong.

I love that the signature failing of the McCain campaign was an ad-lib.

Even the state parties are fighting with their standard-bearer, which almost never happens.

So obviously, that's harmful. But watching this almost with a scientific curiosity, I would say that McCain and Palin are almost irrelevant to the fundamental disconnect between the legs of the Republican stool in this modern era. The seething hatred of liberals, and the revised "Arkansas Project II" that we'll see hounding Barack Obama will keep them together, but that's not a path to a viable political majority. That path is closed off for the time being, and thinking the answer lies in insufficient loyalty or too much moderation is a path to disaster.

Now after the election I guess the legs of the stool are going to get together for a confab.

The decision to waste no time in plotting their moves in the post-Bush era reflects the widely-held view among many on the right, and elsewhere, that the GOP is heading toward major losses next week.

One of the topics of discussion will be how to fashion a "national grassroots political and policy coalition similar to the out Reagan years," said the attendee, a reference to the development of the so-called New Right apparatus following Jimmy Carter's 1976 victory and Reagan's election four years later.

"There's a sense that the Republican Party is broken, but the conservative movement is not," said this source, suggesting that it was the betrayal of some conservative principles by Bush and congressional leaders that led to the party's decline.

They really still don't get it. To be honest, there probably isn't a way out right now. They'll have to spend some time in the wilderness. And the lonely staffers will have to go get some real jobs. But one thing Republicans aren't likely to forget is how to be an opposition party. They will bond together by frustrating a Democratic agenda, and they'll be very skilled at it. It allows them to look askance at their problems.

Prop. 8: Breaking It Down

The other day I wondered if the No on 8 side was being too cautious in their advertising, instead of putting an actual face on the discrimination and harm that would be suffered if marriage rights were eliminated for a particular class of people. Well, this video isn't exactly that, but it certainly makes the point about discrimination. Via Amanda at Pandagon, this is my favorite video of the cycle. A group redubbed the voices on a video of young people ranting about all the supposed consequences about gay marriage, and changed it so they say "interracial marriage." It's kind of perfect:



See, this comes down to discrimination, pure and simple. The other side wants to talk about ancillary outcomes, but really they want to hurt LGBT people. I mean, we have to be willing to say that. The other side has no problem outlining what they consider to be the stakes, as crazy as they think they are:

“This vote on whether we stop the gay-marriage juggernaut in California is Armageddon,” said Charles W. Colson, the founder of Prison Fellowship Ministries and an eminent evangelical voice, speaking to pastors in a video promoting Proposition 8. “We lose this, we are going to lose in a lot of other ways, including freedom of religion.”

Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council, a conservative Christian lobby based in Washington, said in an interview, “It’s more important than the presidential election.”

“We’ve picked bad presidents before, and we’ve survived as a nation,” said Mr. Perkins, who has made two trips to California in the last six weeks. “But we will not survive if we lose the institution of marriage.”

I'm glad that No on 8 is raising a lot of money, and that high-profile Californians like Maria Shriver are on board. But at some point in this final week, someone has to break this down. This is about harming same-sex couples.

Prop Watch

Welcome to a probably not-so-regular feature, offering the latest news on the ballot propositions. The Calitics Editorial Board will be out with their endorsements on these initiatives sometime next week.

• Prop. 1A: A lot of good stuff on this race at Robert Cruickshank's California High Speed Rail blog. For instance, Arnold has come forward with his support:

There is far more economic opportunity in fighting global warming than economic risk....We shouldn't let the budget crisis hold back good things for the future. 20 years from now you can't look back and say "well they had a budget crisis so we didn't do it." Just because we had a problem with the budget does not mean that people should vote "no" on high speed rail. Our rail system in America is so old, we're driving the same speed as 100 years ago, the same system as 100 years ago. We should modernize, we should do what other countries do...We should start in this state, we should show leadership.

Absolutely, especially when you consider that initiatives which reduce emissions routinely save money and improve quality of life. A recent study showed that HSR would be a tremendous economic benefit to the Central Valley, with $3 billion in direct benefits and the creation of over 40,000 new construction jobs. You can add that to the reduction of billions of pounds of CO2 annually, which would be significant in that region at a time where interest groups are successfully suing the city of Fresno for its failure to curb pollution and protect the environment.

In other news, The LA Times has come out in favor, and check out this neat little graphic anticipating the train route.

• Prop. 2: You can see it by clicking on the ad on the side, but, you know, Piggy Wonder deserves some main-page love. Joe Trippi is apparently involved in the Prop. 2 campaign, which would help stop animal cruelty; I got an email from him promoting this video.

• Prop. 5: The LA Times has a series of profiles on all the propositions, and here's their edition on Prop. 5, which would finally increase treatment for nonviolent offenders like drug users instead of warehousing them at our overstuffed prisons. Opponents are smearing this by saying its true intent is to legalize drugs, but the failed Drug War is the great unmentionable sinkhole in state and national budgets, and a smart policy emphasizing rehabilitation is desperately needed, especially in California. The No on 5 people must have better spinmeisters, however, as most of the newspapers in the state have come out against the measure. Right, because the policymakers have done such a stellar job in sentencing law, we should just leave it to them.

• Prop. 8: An update on those million yard signs that were "in route" from China to the Yes on 8 campaign: they're still not here.

It seems that the signs, some of them outsourced overseas, didn't all arrive in time for the September event. And many still haven't reached supporters of the measure that would amend the state Constitution to ban gay marriage.

"It takes longer to get a million than we thought," said Sonja Eddings Brown, deputy communications director for the Protect Marriage coalition [...]

Brown tried to spin the production glitch as a positive thing for the campaign -- a sign, so to speak, of the overwhelming demand for lawn signs by voters who wanted to participate in "the most unprecedented and largest grass-roots effort ever attempted in California."

Oh that's just a FAIL.

Meanwhile, when the most reactionary editorial board in the state, the Orange County Register, comes out against your proposition, you know you're having a tough time selling it. As for the right-wing boycott of Google for opposing Prop. 8, the website orchestrating it advises its supporters to follow the fate of the proposition - on Google News.

I think I'm going to miss this initiative, it's been hilarious so far.

Fast4Equality - Fight Prop. 8 With a Brief Fast!

Last week I wrote about the religious right's takeover of the Yes on 8 campaign, and their efforts to rile up their base to eliminate marriage for same-sex couples. In particular, I highlighted this statement:

Hundreds of pastors have called on their congregations to fast and pray for passage of a ballot measure in November that would put an end to gay marriage in California.

The collective act of piety, starting Wednesday and culminating three days before the election in a revival for as many as 100,000 people at the San Diego Chargers' stadium, comes as church leaders across California put people, money and powerful words behind Proposition 8 [...]

the gathering, called the call, will conclude a 40-day fasting period for california that begins sept. 24. christians are being asked to fast in some way, either the entire 40 days or perhaps by using team relays to cover the entire 40 days.

This "fast relay" thing just sounded more like eliminating between-meal snacking. And just the notion of fasting to pass a ballot initiative is kee-razy to the extreme. Well, if they can do it, so can we.

Calitics has decided to set up a Counter-Fast For Equality. Participants can fast for 1 minute, 10 minutes, half an hour, whatever you can spare. At the Counter-Fast For Equality website, you can sign up for the amount of time you'll be fasting (hey Jews, don't pick Yom Kippur, you're fasting anyway!). And much like a charity race, you can get sponsored for your time and trouble for fasting at the rate of a dollar a minute. At the Fast4Equality ActBlue page, you can donate as little as $1 (or one minute's worth of fasting) to the No on 8 campaign.

Just to get you in the swing of things, we put together this video detailing the ins and outs of a short-term fast. Actually, our volunteer faster had a little trouble with it:



So get to it, America! Join us at The Counter-Fast For Equality and sign up today!

Going Over Like A Led Palin

I think John McCain suspended his campaign (sort of) to deflect attention away from the jaw-gaping performance by his running mate with Katie Couric. We already know that he ran in for a damage control interview with Couric last night in the middle of Letterman. That was the right move. I mean this is stunning:

COURIC: Why isn’t it better, Governor Palin, to spend $700 billion helping middle-class families struggling with health care, housing, gas and groceries? … Instead of helping these big financial institutions that played a role in creating this mess?

PALIN: Ultimately, what the bailout does is help those who are concerned about the health care reform that is needed to help shore up the economy– Oh, it’s got to be about job creation too. So health care reform and reducing taxes and reining in spending has got to accompany tax reductions.

And this:

COURIC: You've cited Alaska's proximity to Russia as part of your foreign policy experience. What did you mean by that?

PALIN: That Alaska has a very narrow maritime border between a foreign country, Russia, and on our other side, the land-- boundary that we have with-- Canada [...]

COURIC: Have you ever been involved with any negotiations, for example, with the Russians?

PALIN: We have trade missions back and forth. We-- we do-- it's very important when you consider even national security issues with Russia as Putin rears his head and comes into the air space of the United States of America, where-- where do they go? It's Alaska. It's just right over the border. It is-- from Alaska that we send those out to make sure that an eye is being kept on this very powerful nation, Russia, because they are right there. They are right next to-- to our state.

As Couric said yesterday, in the understatement of the year, “She’s not always responsive when she’s asked questions.” Yes, in the way a hen is not responsive.

(ZOMG, you just called Sarah Palin a hen!)

I'm with Greenwald, she's either deeply ignorant and incurious or she's so buttoned up by the McCain campaign that she can only speak gibberish. I'm inclined toward the latter, actually. McCain's team is desperate to keep her stage-managed to such a ridiculous degree that Campbell Brown is calling it sexist.



Nobody can sound credible in that environment when you're always looking over your shoulder.

Of course, the McCain campaign has good reason to restrict access to Palin. Because her views, if offered to the public, would be extremely damaging. She has extreme Christianist viewpoints including book-banning. Her pastor is a nutcase who believes in witchcraft and who made this comment about Jews right in front of her:

The second area whereby God wants us, wants to penetrate in our society is in the economic area. The Bible says that the wealth of the wicked is stored up for the righteous. It's high time that we have top Christian businessmen, businesswomen, bankers, you know, who are men and women of integrity running the economics of our nations. That's what we are waiting for. That's part and parcel of transformation. If you look at the -- you know -- if you look at the Israelites, that's how they work. And that's how they are, even today.

Yeah, I think you would want to hide the candidate of holy war. Plus there's the unseemly influence of Todd Palin, her unelected de facto chief of staff. And the vindictiveness of their obstruction in the Troopergate case, which now might include witness tampering.

“Until McCain campaign staffers flew to Alaska to stop this investigation, the Governor and her staff agreed to comply with what we all know is a bi-partisan investigation. After Aug. 29 the campaign started working to block this investigation, and witnesses began joining that effort by ignoring their subpoenas and risking jail time. Something obviously changed the minds of these witnesses after Aug. 29th,” said Rep., Les Gara (D-Anchorage), a State Representative and Former Alaska Assistant Attorney General.

Alaska’s witness tampering statutes prohibit any person from “inducing” a witness to fail to comply with a subpoena. Almost daily, McCain staffers have called press conferences and made efforts to stonewall the legislative investigation. Prior to Aug. 29 no witness had stated they’d refuse to comply with the investigation, and the Governor in fact promised she and her staff would comply.

Karl Rove was asked if Sarah Palin would make a good President. He said "I don't know." And the McCain campaign wants to keep it that way.

...see also this Rolling Stone article on the myths versus the facts in Sarah Palin's image.

Prop. 8: The Relay Fast

It's hard to get a handle on the efforts of the Yes on 8 people because they're so haphazard. They vow to produce a million yard signs but then get delayed because the signs are "in route" from China. They try to make their campaign seem to be about ordinary couples who want their traditional aw-shucks marriage, and then the virulence of their intolerance is revealed, over...

I am a Mormon High Priest. My bishop is a long-time family friend, and he has come to see me a couple of times recently, but each time he has come by assignment of his church supervisor. On the first visit, my bishop offered me a chance to resign my membership in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. When I declined, he told me a church disciplinary council would be held. On the second visit, just a couple of days ago, he brought me a letter informing me that I am charged with conduct unbecoming a member of the Mormon Church, and being "in apostasy."

...and over again...

Turns out the aptly-named "Church of the Divide" in faraway Placerville had sent a group of hate-mongering protesters to the church where (Sacramento mayoral candidate Kevin Johnson) and his family worships, complete with signs blaring "SODOMY" (and worse), to protest Kevin's decision to oppose Prop 8. They also flew in Rev. Jesse Lee Peterson from Los Angeles as their Rent-A-Hack.

What has become cleear is this: the Yes on 8 movement is a wholly-owned subsidiary of the fundamentalist right, an alliance of various religious sects who are coming together to try and impose their will on the people of California. They've certainly been successful financially, outraising the no side to this point. To be sure, there are liberal religious leaders coming out against this measure, like the California Faith for Equality coalition. But the level of participation by many groups, particularly the Church of Latter-Day Saints, is profoundly unsettling:

Members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints have contributed more than a third of the approximately $15.4 million raised since June 1 to support Proposition 8. The ballot initiative, if passed, would reverse the current right of same-sex couples to marry [...]

The top leadership of the Mormon Church, known as the First Presidency, issued a letter in June calling on Mormons to "do all you can" to support Proposition 8.

Mormon donors said they weren't coerced. "Nobody twisted my arm," said Richard Piquet, a Southern California accountant who gave $25,000 in support of Proposition 8. He said Mormon Church leaders called donating "a matter of personal conscience." Some Mormons who declined to donate said their local church leaders had made highly charged appeals, such as saying that their souls would be in jeopardy if they didn't give. Church spokesmen said any such incident wouldn't reflect Mormon Church policy [...]

The prominence of Mormon donors in the Proposition 8 fight has also led to alliances with evangelical Protestant groups and other Christian religions, some of which have deep theological differences with Mormons.

Jim Garlow, pastor of the evangelical Protestant Skyline Church near San Diego and a leading supporter of Proposition 8, said, "I would not, in all candor, have been meeting them or talking with them had it not been for" the marriage campaign. Rev. Garlow said he had developed a "friendship" with the Mormons he met, although he feels the theological differences remain "unbridgeable."

Certainly there is a broader movement among the religious spectrum beyond just the Mormons; the Family Research Council is heavily invested in the measure, and is spreading lies about the consequences of same-sex marriage to their members (Christians will be jailed!!!). But what is going to be the focus of their efforts to get out the vote and pass the proposition? Apparently, fasting and praying (I don't buy the 100,000 figure below, by the way, it sounds like more bluster):

Hundreds of pastors have called on their congregations to fast and pray for passage of a ballot measure in November that would put an end to gay marriage in California.

The collective act of piety, starting Wednesday and culminating three days before the election in a revival for as many as 100,000 people at the San Diego Chargers' stadium, comes as church leaders across California put people, money and powerful words behind Proposition 8.

Some pastors around the state and nation are encouraging their flocks to forgo solid food for up to 40 days in the biblical tradition.

Well, not quite. In a remarkable catch by skippy, this 40-day fasting period, scheduled to begin today, would be somewhat unusual.

the gathering, called the call, will conclude a 40-day fasting period for california that begins sept. 24. christians are being asked to fast in some way, either the entire 40 days or perhaps by using team relays to cover the entire 40 days. running parallel to the 40-day fast is a 100-day prayer effort, which was scheduled to start july 28.

Um... team relays?

Let me get this straight. If I last from lunch to dinner without a morsel, then tag off to my partner in prayer, I can go ahead and eat dinner then? Is that really a fast, or is it, I don't know... just not snacking?

Well, the religious right can't be the only ones to get in on this fun. That's why, starting today, I am calling on every liberal and progressive to take part in a counter-fast for equality. The goal is to get enough people involved that we only have to chip in about 15 minutes or so of fasting apiece. I'm blocking out September 29, 4:30-4:45. I'm not eating a thing. We're talking commitment!!!

More on this tomorrow.

The Faith Of Sarah Palin

The next President and the next Vice President of the United States could be Buddhists, Episcopalians, animists, Zoroastrians, agnostics, or worship a certain shade of green as long as they use sound judgment and the law to define their policy prescriptions. My concern is that Sarah Palin does not do so.

When Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin promised to lead the nation with a "servant's heart," evangelical Christians immediately recognized her as one of their own.

Whether before an audience of ministry students or on a national stage at the Republican National Convention on Wednesday, the 44-year-old Palin speaks fluently about her faith, striking chords with phrases that evoke Christian virtue. Palin has called on people to pray for the cooperation necessary to build a natural gas pipeline across Alaska, labeled the U.S. mission in Iraq a "task that is from God" and argued that students should be taught the creation account from Genesis in public schools.

In a race where both presidential candidates, Sens. Barack Obama and John McCain, have tried to court religious voting blocs, Palin's introduction to the Republican ticket adds another dimension.

Just as McCain's politics are largely shaped by his experience as a prisoner of war and Obama's by his embrace of his racial identity, Palin's approach has been shaped by her relationship with God. Palin sees her government work as paling in comparison to a greater mission.

"I can do my job there in developing our natural resources and doing things like getting the roads paved and making sure our troopers have their cop cars and their uniforms and their guns, and making sure our public schools are funded," she said in June to ministry students at her former church. "But really, all of that stuff doesn't do any good if the people of Alaska's heart isn't right with God."

I'm just never going to be OK with that. If your faith shapes your morality it's one thing. If you try to legislate your personal morality it's quite another. Palin has said that his goal as a public official is to follow God's will. She believes in a literal teaching of the Bible, and her current church seeks to convert gays away from homosexuality. They believe in spiritual warfare against the sinful. Her pastor has said that God is going to strike out His hand against America because of the fallen nature of Americans. This church is extremely radical and its teaching are not in step with a judicious handling of democratic institutions.

Many of Palin's beliefs mirror those of evangelical Christians. But Pentecostals occupy a distinct subset of evangelical Christianity. They believe they can be "baptized in the Holy Spirit" just as Jesus Christ's apostles were in the New Testament's Book of Acts. Gifts of the spirit include speaking in tongues, prophesy and faith healing.

The churches she has attended also embrace dispensation, a theological system that emphasizes man's dominion over the earth and the end times—theology that could potentially shape a believer's environmental and foreign policies.

We have endured eight years of this kind of end-times, Dominionist belief inside the White House. There's a difference between the faithful, the spiritual and what we are seeing out of the Wasilla Assembly of God. In the end, this comes back to McCain, who so needed the religious right to ramp up their phone banks and volunteer efforts that he sold his VP pick to the Christianists.

...and if you don't think this plays a role in public policy, take a look at this:

Health and Human Services Secretary Michael Leavitt has proposed a new rule that will limit the rights of women to receive medically accurate information and treatment. The alleged goal of the rule is to protect the rights of health care workers, volunteers, and trainees. The result would be limited access to birth control and abortion for women all over the country - regardless of state law.

From CNN:

The rule, which applies to institutions receiving government money, would require as many as 584,000 employers ranging from major hospitals to doctors' offices and nursing homes to certify in writing that they are complying with several federal laws that protect the conscience rights of health care workers. Violations could lead to a loss of government funding and legal action to recoup federal money already paid.

The comment period ends on September 25th. We have 19 days until this rule takes effect.

Read the entire thing.

Palin's Night v. Palin's Reality

Sarah Palin is going to have a great night. Everyone knows that, yes? She'll have a home-field advantage, won't have to answer any questions, and has spoken in front of crowds of this size in the past week. She has personal charisma and everyone in the audience will be rooting for her. The entire night will be defined on her terms, and the media is aching to deem her a success after a turbulent week. The media went out on a limb in focusing on personal issues instead of the very serious allegations lodged against her. She has an easy parry for that, and it'll turn them around.

But there will be a lot left unsaid tonight. For instance, how many times will Palin simply not tell the truth in her speech? Already, we've seen her lie multiple times in her introductory speech.

PALIN (8/29/08): I signed major ethics reforms and I appointed both Democrats and independents to serve in my administration. And I've championed reform to end the abuses of earmark spending by Congress. In fact, I told Congress, thanks but no thanks on that Bridge to Nowhere. If our state wanted a bridge, I said, we'd build it ourselves [...]

In fact, Palin never “told Congress” a bloomin’ thing about that much-derided bridge or earmark; Congress had removed itself from the matter thirteen months before she took office. But just to establish the fuller record, let’s ask two more obvious questions. When did Palin “champion reform to end the abuses of earmark spending by Congress?” And returning to her alleged defiance of Congress: When did Palin “tell Congress” that “if our state wanted a bridge, we'd build it ourselves?”

“If our state wanted a bridge, I said, we'd build it ourselves?” Question: When did Palin say or do something that dimly resembles that? [...]

And no, that isn’t the only howler in Palin’s new stump presentation. In this passage from Friday’s speech, she gives an absurdly bowdlerized account of her vastly heroic work on behalf of Alaska’s tax-payers:

PALIN: Along with fellow reformers in the great state of Alaska, as governor I stood up to the old politics as usual, to the special interests, to the lobbyists, the big oil companies, and the good old boy network. When oil and gas prices went up so dramatically, and the state revenues followed with that increase, I sent a large share of that revenue directly back to the people of Alaska.

What a champion of the people! But Palin vastly misstates this heroic tale too. Once again, she has basically lied.

What’s wrong with Palin’s account? She makes it sound like “state revenues” soared because “oil and gas prices went up so dramatically.” But this omits a fundamental part of this story; in fact, state revenues soared because Palin and the Alaska legislature raised taxes on the oil companies!

Whether it's the bridge/earmark nonsense, or casting herself as a reformer despite hiring a lobbyist with ties to Jack Abramoff and Ted Stevens while mayor of Wasilla, and taking money from the same interests that have led Stevens to be indicted, or even claiming that she's visited Ireland when she was actually on a refueling stopover for a half-hour, the official story is riddled with lies. And there are likely to be more tonight. And it's unclear whether or not they'll be reported.

Then there's the extremism, which may come out in the speech in oblique ways, but not nearly in ways that would offend or shock the vast majority of what will prove to be a large viewing public. There's the total rejection of women's reproductive rights (including in the cases of rape of incest) and the slashing of funding for the very teen mothers that she now has in her own family. But there's more. The Alaska Independence Party, of which her husband is a former longtime member, and which she courted as recently as 2002, is the Alaska conduit for the Constitution Party, which has as its goal "to restore American jurisprudence to Biblical common-law functions" (that's a direct quote). And Mrs. Palin has her very own pastor problem:

...just two weeks ago, when Palin’s church, the Wasilla Bible Church, gave its pulpit over to a figure viewed with deep hostility by many Jewish organizations: David Brickner, the founder of Jews for Jesus [...]

Brickner then explained that Jesus and his disciples were themselves Jewish.

“The Jewish community, in particular, has a difficult time understanding this reality,” he said.

Brickner’s mission has drawn wide criticism from the organized Jewish community, and the Anti-Defamation League accused them in a report of “targeting Jews for conversion with subterfuge and deception.”

Brickner also described terrorist attacks on Israelis as God's "judgment of unbelief" of Jews who haven't embraced Christianity.

"Judgment is very real and we see it played out on the pages of the newspapers and on the television. It's very real. When [Brickner's son] was in Jerusalem he was there to witness some of that judgment, some of that conflict, when a Palestinian from East Jerusalem took a bulldozer and went plowing through a score of cars, killing numbers of people. Judgment — you can't miss it."

Palin was in church that day, Kroon said, though he cautioned against attributing Brickner’s views to her.

Uh, God damn America?

This is the perspective you won't hear tonight, and there certainly won't be any Democrats in the story the way Republicans were all over the DNC. Unfortunately, this is the night when narratives will be cemented, and the media will make their judgment. I hope the Obama campaign has a way to get out the real record.

If This Were A Prizefight, It'd Be Called.

This is the endgame right here:

The McCain camp today disputed rumors that presumptive vice presidential nominee Sarah Palin was ever registered with the secessionist Alaska Independence Party by releasing years of voter registration history . . . but it looks like that doesn't apply to her husband.

This afternoon, the director of Division of Elections in Alaska, Gail Fenumiai, told TPMmuckraker that Todd Palin registered in October 1995 to the Alaska Independence Party, a radical group that advocates for Alaskan secession from the United States.

Besides a short period of a few months in 2000 when he changed his registration to undeclared, Todd Palin remained a registered member of AIP until July 2002 when he registered again as an undeclared voter.

She is married, figuratively speaking, to Tim McVeigh. The AIP is linked to militia movements and has as their goal secession from the United States.

At some point the McCain camp will get their butts up to Wasilla and discover this. They can call it a smear all they want, but understand: when Sarah Palin was the mayor of a small town, her husband was a member of a party that advocated secession.

Most of the focus so far has been on babygate:



But it's the radicalism that's going to get her. Here's why the theocrats are agog over the pick:

Speaking before the Pentecostal church, Palin painted the current war in Iraq as a messianic affair in which the United States could act out the will of the Lord.

"Pray for our military men and women who are striving to do what is right. Also, for this country, that our leaders, our national leaders, are sending [U.S. soldiers] out on a task that is from God," she exhorted the congregants. "That's what we have to make sure that we're praying for, that there is a plan and that that plan is God's plan."

Religion, however, was not strictly a thread in Palin's foreign policy. It was part of her energy proposals as well. Just prior to discussing Iraq, Alaska's governor asked the audience to pray for another matter -- a $30 billion national gas pipeline project that she wanted built in the state. "I think God's will has to be done in unifying people and companies to get that gas line built, so pray for that," she said.

And there's video.

They're already starting to hide her away.

Wow. Epic FAIL.

UPDATE: None dare call it treason... except New Jersey Congressman Frank Pallone!

In a message to Congress on July 4, 1861, President Abraham Lincoln said about attempts by the Southern States to secede that, "the States have their status in the Union, and they have no other legal status. If they break from this they can only do so against law and by revolution."

Allowing the potential Vice President of the United States, next in line to the presidency of our republic, to be someone that believes states have a legal right to secede from our union would be akin to allowing a member of the Parti Québécois to become Prime Minister of Canada or a Scottish National Party member to become Prime Minster of the United Kingdom.

While it may sound alarmist and overly dramatic, as someone who has sworn an oath to "support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies foreign and domestic," I find it extremely troubling that the country Ms. Palin would presume to lead as next in line to the Presidency, apparently wasn't good enough for her to be a part of. It is this, more than anything else, which speaks to her lack of qualification to be Vice President of the United States.

Rock, McCain, Hard Place

For the record, I don't think Palin's going anywhere. The McGovern lesson is that dumping a VP is essentially a death rattle. Plus, Palin is more well-liked among the rank and file than McCain is, so if anything, they'd dump HIM from the ticket. She was brought in to please the religious right and ramp up the phone banks and stuff the envelopes. The scandals swirling around her will not register with those folks in the least - in fact they'll see them as proof of liberal media bias and elitist liberal types harping on "experience." And they'll play the gender card explicitly to rile up the culture of the aggrieved, the permanent persecution complex among the right-wing base.

If McCain dropped her from the ticket the religious right would go apeshit and stay home en masse in November. He has no choice but to soldier on. Which leads to some of the most hilarious spin you're ever going to see as they try to rehabilitate her image.

As the chief executive of the nation's largest state, Ms. Palin oversees some of the country's largest energy reserves. She came into office at a critical time in Alaska politics, facing a system plagued by corruption. Her response was to immediately begin cleaning it up.

"The nation's largest state" in landmass, the fourth-smallest in population. Pfotenhauer is basically saying that Palin is good at managing the ice. Which, actually, considering her love of fossil fuel production and her denial of man-made climate change, she's quite BAD at.

What's key to focus on is her EXTREMISM. She's going to extreme lengths to obstruct the Troopergate investigation, trying to weasel out of the deposition and challenging the inquiry itself. Her views on the environment, on sex ed, on abortion, on creationism, are extreme and out of the mainstream. She has come out for book burning while mayor of Wasilla:

Stein says that as mayor, Palin continued to inject religious beliefs into her policy at times. "She asked the library how she could go about banning books," he says, because some voters thought they had inappropriate language in them. "The librarian was aghast." The librarian, Mary Ellen Baker, couldn't be reached for comment, but news reports from the time show that Palin had threatened to fire her for not giving "full support" to the mayor.

The question continues to be asked over whether she'll be replaced. But surely she can't be. That makes her a drag on the ticket right now. This could all blow over with what I would expect to be a good speech on Wednesday. But for now, the McCain campaign is totally off message and stuck, while Barack Obama continues to work his ground game and persuasion.

UPDATE: Vetted with teh Google - you really can't make this shit up.

The Palin Zig-Zag

Let nobody think that Sarah Palin was picked solely to excite Hillary Clinton-supporting women to vote for McCain. The base of the party wants none of that, and Palin herself has called Clinton a whiner. While Palin might sweep up a handful of low-information women, the real meaning of this pick was to fire up the grassroots base, those who can't stand those fancy-pants elites in the GOP with all their experience and governing. They want someone who believes this is a Christian nation:

Here's a "ca-ching" moment for Evangelicals. John McCain's new vice-presidential running mate signed a proclamation back in October of 2007 which emphasized the Christian heritage of America.

You can read the proclamation that she signed below:

WHEREAS, the celebration of Christian Heritage Week, October 21-27, 2007, reminds Alaskans of the role Christianity has played in our rich heritage. Many truly great men and women of America, giants in the structuring of American history, were Christians of caliber and integrity who did not hesitate to express their faith.

The theocon wing of the conservative base is energized. Even Ralph Reed is unafraid to come out of the woodwork and suggest that social conservatives are "getting back on the field." Of course, they're getting on the field a couple months too late. But they're getting on and they'll be put right to work.

This wasn't a pick to satisfy women. It was a pick to satisfy the base. I think Sen. Kerry has it right - this shows McCain as completely hostage to his far right Christianist wing. This is a proxy pick, and the DC establishment is pretty much misreading it.

The question is whether or not that base is big enough in 2008, or whether Americans have completely tuned out the kind of Christian Dominionism which this pick represents. The challenge for the Obama campaign is to make sure Palin's far-from-the-mainstream views are fully broadcast. Right now independents like her, though they may not see her as ready to take over the Presidency. I'd mention the abuse of power investigation - but I'd harp on the creationism and the Dominionism and the opposition to abortion in the case of rape or incest.

They Don't Like Her

I'm sure the right-wing will fall in line eventually, unless Sarah Palin is bounced off the ticket within a month, but for the moment they're not thrilled with the pick:

* Charles Krauthammer: "The Palin selection completely undercuts the argument about Obama's inexperience and readiness to lead.... To gratuitously undercut the remarkably successful 'Is he ready to lead' line of attack seems near suicidal."

* Noah Millman, presenting a defense for Palin: "I realize, of course, that she's totally unqualified to be President at this point in time. If McCain were to die in February 2009, I hope Palin would have the good sense to appoint someone who is more ready to be President to be her Vice President, on the understanding that she would then resign and be appointed Vice President by her successor."

* Ramesh Ponnuru called it "tokenism," adding, "Can anyone say with a straight face that Palin would have gotten picked if she were a man?"

* David Frum: "The longer I think about it, the less well this selection sits with me. And I increasingly doubt that it will prove good politics. The Palin choice looks cynical.... It's a wild gamble, undertaken by our oldest ever first-time candidate for president in hopes of changing the board of this election campaign. Maybe it will work. But maybe (and at least as likely) it will reinforce a theme that I'd be pounding home if I were the Obama campaign: that it's John McCain for all his white hair who represents the risky choice, while it is Barack Obama who offers cautious, steady, predictable governance.... If it were your decision, and you were putting your country first, would you put an untested small-town mayor a heartbeat away from the presidency?"

What makes this more incredible is that the Palin pick was intended to please the right wing of the party, particularly the theocons. It was probably one of the only ways to resurrect the fundie phone banks and the church-based ground machine. However, it's very late in the game to get those started, and the fact that the establishment right-wing is offended by the pick - in the same way they were offended by the Harriet Miers selection - almost negates the benefit.

And more dirt is coming out about her recent past.

The governor's appearance on KWHL's "The Bob and Mark Show" last week is plain and simple one of the most unprofessional, childish and inexcusable performances I've ever seen from a politician.

Anchorage DJ Bob Lester unleashed a vicious, mean-spirited, poisonous attack on Senate President Lyda Green last week while our governor was live on the air with him.

When we played the tape on my show the day after it happened, we received 130 calls. Even some Palinbots were disgusted.

The Daily News posted the recording on its Web site and it fired up bloggers.

The Fairbanks Daily News-Miner editorial writers demanded the governor apologize. The Juneau and Ketchikan papers also ran the editorial.

The Daily News opinion page addressed the governor's gaffe. They wrote "She came off looking immature herself, almost high-schoolish. It was conduct unbecoming a governor."

It was conduct unbecoming a human being, never mind a governor.

Here's the call. The radio host called Green a "cancer" (she's a cancer survivor) and a "bitch" and she laughed.

McCain's people are scrubbing the evidence wildly after the fact, but there is so much out there. The vetting process was abominable. What a crash and burn this is.

2012 Campaign Begins

The Man Called Petraeus puts out his first dogwhistle:

Gen. David Petraeus is used to controversy surrounding the war in Iraq, but his publicized thoughts on an Army chaplain's book for Soldiers put him squarely in the middle of the ongoing conflict over religious proselytizing in the U.S. military.

The book is "Under Orders: A Spiritual Handbook for Military Personnel," by Army Chaplain (Lt. Col.) William McCoy, and according to Petraeus' published endorsement of the work, "it should be in every rucksack for those times when soldiers need spiritual energy."

But the endorsement - which has spurred a demand by a watchdog group for Petraeus' dismissal and court martial on the grounds of establishing a religious requirement on troops - was a personal view never intended for publication, the book's author now says.

"In the process of securing … comments for recommending the book I believe there was a basic misunderstanding on my part that the comments were publishable," McCoy said in an Aug. 19 email to Military.com. "This was my mistake."

This endorsement has been on the book for close to a year. Petraeus must have been starting to worry that nobody would find out about it!

Can't you hear the theocon right, musing, "I knew that Gen. Petraeus was a good Christian man! If only he were our guy instead of this McCain fellow. I'll bet Petraeus wouldn't consider one a' them baby killers for his Vice President..."

McCain's doing his best to keep the fundies in the tent this time around, but in their heart, they want the guy who writes blurbs on the "Jesus in the foxhole" book.

Bill Kristol Makes Pinch Sulzberger Proud Again

Hey, imagine that, a movement conservative leads with his chin again and gets embarrassed by reality (although the extent to which he can ever be embarrassed, after all he's been wrong about, is questionable):

Bill Kristol, in the print edition of this morning’s New York Times:

"NBC’s Andrea Mitchell reported on “Meet the Press” that “the Obama people must feel that he didn’t do quite as well as they might have wanted to in that context. … What they’re putting out privately is that McCain may not have been in the cone of silence and may have had some ability to overhear what the questions were to Obama.”

That’s pretty astonishing, since there seems to be absolutely no basis for the charge. But the fact that Obama’s people made this suggestion means they know McCain outperformed him."

News story in today’s New York Times, print and online editions:

"Senator John McCain was not in a “cone of silence” on Saturday night while his rival, Senator Barack Obama, was being interviewed at the Saddleback Church in California.

Senator John McCain of Arizona at a forum on Saturday with the host, the Rev. Rick Warren of the Saddleback Church in California.

Members of the McCain campaign staff, who flew here Sunday from California, said Mr. McCain was in his motorcade on the way to the church as Mr. Obama was being interviewed by the Rev. Rick Warren, the author of the best-selling book 'The Purpose Driven Life.'"

Bill Kristol’s desperate last-minute attempt to salvage some shred of dignity by rewriting his column for the online edition of this morning’s New York TImes:

"NBC’s Andrea Mitchell reported on “Meet the Press” that “the Obama people must feel that he didn’t do quite as well as they might have wanted to in that context. … What they’re putting out privately is that McCain … may have had some ability to overhear what the questions were to Obama.”

There’s no evidence that McCain had any such advantage. But the fact that Obama’s people made this suggestion means they know McCain outperformed him."

Let's also focus on the SUBSTANCE of this claim, too. To say that McCain outperformed Obama at a gathering of evangelical conservative Christians would be as silly as saying Obama outperformed McCain at the NAACP. Obama was never going to "win" this, so grading them on without noting that is absurd. However, I think we have a rare instance of a liberal dogwhistle here:

“Now, let’s deal with abortion,” the Rev. Rick Warren said. “Forty million abortions since Roe v. Wade. You know, as a pastor, I have to deal with this all of the time. All of the pain and all of the conflicts. I know this is a very complex issue. Forty million abortions. At what point does a baby get human rights in your view?”

Obama responded, “Well, I think that whether you’re looking at it from a theological perspective or a scientific perspective, answering that question with specificity, you know, is above my pay grade. But let me just speak more generally about the issue of abortion because this is something obviously the country wrestles with. One thing that I’m absolutely convinced of is there is a moral and ethical content to this issue….” Obama went on to explain how (and why) we can reduce the number of abortions in this country, and why he’s pro-choice.

The right is flipping out over the "above my pay grade" comment, but they're not understanding that this Obama appeared to be expressing humility in the face of God. Conservative bloggers yelling "nothing is above the pay grade of the President!" are missing the point. If Obama does sway a significant portion of evangelicals in November, it'll be because of little moments like this, which display that he can speak their language to a degree. We'll see if this gets swamped by the tribal impulses to support the "party of life" or whatever, but I have a feeling that this was kind of brilliant and that Obama is not at all upset about the right ginning up a controversy over this.

Americablog has more on cone of silence-gate.