crossing the line

Okay, we get it. The Bush (mis)Administration doesn’t like the provision in the Bill of Rights guaranteeing a free press. It’s been apparent since they took office, not just after president Chimpy McFratParty flipped off the White House press corps after (finally) being mildly challenged at a news conference.

They broke with tradition and back-benched the dean of the White House press corps, Helen Thomas, because she dared to do her job and ask pointed questions. They’ve double- and triple-talked any reporter who asked for a straight answer from spokesmen who lie casually, consistently and with calculation.

The Bush (mis)Administration, for that matter the entire Republican, operates on the theory that, as long as they keep saying something is true, that it will be. Which is why they have gutted education with a program laughingly entitled No Child Left Behind and gutted air quality with a clean skies initiative. It’s why they tell us we’re doing just fine in Iraq and that a deal to turn over control to our ports to the United Arab Emirates is a good idea.

Disdain for the press is nothing new. Lyndon Johnson is the one who coined the nickname for former CNN tag team Evans and Novak: Errors and No Facts. Hell, George Washington was savaged by the press of his day.

This latest bit reported by Salon.com, however, is enough to piss off anyone who has ever called themselves a journalist:

“Government officials doing advance work for the president's trip to the Gulf Coast last week fooled at least one local resident into believing they were reporters from Fox News.
“Jerry Akins, whose construction site of a home Bush ended up visiting, tells the paper that two men approached him before Bush's trip, told him they worked for Fox News in Texas, and asked if they could look around as part of a "scouting mission" for a story on post-Katrina construction. Akins -- who had no idea the president was coming -- let the men look around and take pictures. Only after Bush had come and gone, Akins says, did the men tell him they were actually part of the president's team.
“Akins assumes they were Secret Service agents. A spokesman for the Secret Service said agents wouldn't normally pose as reporters and suggested that maybe the men were members of the military or the White House staff.
“Akins says he doesn't mind being duped; he got his picture taken with the president out of the deal. But the Poynter Institute's Aly Colon tells the Sun Herald that having government agents pose as reporters undermines the public's trust in journalism. "It creates, at the least, some confusion in the public's minds," Colon says. "The key to journalism is credibility. So what the public wants to be able to do is trust people and organizations who represent themselves as part of the journalistic community."
“We might say the same about people who represent themselves as part of the federal government.”

It’s a well-known secret that our government has hidden behind journalists for undercover work for ages. But to expand that façade to this extent is the stuff of despots. Journalists have been kidnapped and tortured during this (mis)administration’s laughably titled War on Terror – no doubt accused of being spies or government operatives. More journalists from around the world have been killed covering Iraq and Afghanistan than died covering World War II or Vietnam. And the (mis)administration made overtures about bombing Al Jazeera headquarters to stifle its coverage of Iraq – coverage that was beyond their control and done by reporters who spoke the language and were not imbedded and under U.S. military control.

I am a journalist. And I condemn these small-minded zealots. There is no end to the ways in which they have wiped their collective asses with the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. The first job of the next, Democratic administration will undoubtedly have to be having their stains removed from our founding documents.

More soon.

vote for the boobs

Katherine Harris is still in the race. And she claims she’s going to win. But the question is, win what?

The Chad Harpy of Florida has been caught up in a campaign finance scandal tied to the Randy “Duke” Cunningham imbroglio. She hid out last week while the press swarmed her campaign and rumors circulated about her dropping out of her race to unseat incumbent democrat Bill Nelson.

The bet is that Nelson will beat Harris by 20 points in November.

On Hannity and Whatever the other night, Harris announced that, not only was she staying in the race, that she was transferring $10 million of her own money into the campaign (which should give you some idea of the upside potential, career wise, being a Republican politician can be).

Anyone who’s seen pictures of this woman on the campaign trail has to cringe at the sex kitten way she’s promoting herself – even though her latest lift makes her face look like Glad Wrap that’s been stretch on four corners. When she looks in the camera, She looks like an X.

Still, it was The Daily Show with Jon Stewart that put her campaign into context.

Thursday night, Stewart showed the clip from Hannity and Whatever with her declaration that she was in the race and that she was going to win. He cringed. Then he pitched tdo Tallahassee Bureau Chief Jason Jones.

JS: “Let me ask you, what’s going on with Katherine Harris. It’s already been quite a campaign for Ms. Harris.”

JJ: “Indeed, Jon. With a paltry legislative record and receiving campaign contributions from a contractor embroiled in the Duke Cunningham scandal, Harris is clearly banking her campaign on two things: her spectacular breasts.”

JS: “Her, her breasts?”

JJ: “Yes, Jon. She tested the strategy last August on Hannity and Colmes with a bold decision to stand in profile, as if to say ‘Please, do not listen to what I am saying. Just check out my giant breasts.’”

JS: “If that’s true, Jason, it’s a pretty remarkable strategy.”

JJ: “Jon, you saw those pictures. This is Harris at one of her most recent campaign stops. I don’t know if you’re familiar with traditional rodeo garb, but tit-hugging spandex is generally considered sub-standard attire.”

JS: “That phrase, tit-hugging spandex . . . How can that possibly be considered a strategy for victory?”

JJ: “It’s not unprecedented. History buffs may recall that William Howard Taft’s narrow victory in 1908 was widely attributable to his formidable man-boobs. All I can say is, ‘Yowza.’”

JS: “So you believe that this strategy for Harris could actually work?”

JJ: “Well, what else has she got besides Moxie and Spunk? That’s what she’s named them.”

JS: “Thank you very much, Jason.”

All I can say is, we’ve seen what banking on a set of boobs has done for Barbara Bush.

More soon.

let the eagle soar: the cash register is now open

That paragon of moral rectitude, John Ashcroft, is now open for business.

The former Attorney General, who felt the taxpayers of this country were better served by covering the bare breast on the statue of Justice than by actually living up to the Bill of Rights, has assembled a staff or hard-core Republicans, rented fancy K Street digs and opened up his own Washington Lobbying firm.

Time to trade on those Homeland Security ties he made while at the Justice Department.

And why not?

The president is busy trying to feather his future nest by helping The Carlyle Group get in bed with Dubai Ports World. Cheney has done more good for Halliburton from the Vice President’s office than he did from the CEO’s digs and will likely cash in big time if his defibrillator doesn’t misfire. Karl Rove will hit the lecture circuit and consult with Republican candidates when he’s not attempting to channel Lee Atwater.

It will be interesting to watch how all these rats cash in.

More soon.

finally, bush has his own nickname

The president likes to give out nicknames. It’s part of his good-ol’-boy/frat boy charm.

Ken Lay, the CEO of Enron, of course, was “Kenny Boy” right up until the energy corporation imploded, taking investor’s retirement monies with it. Then he became “who?” Lobbyist Jack Abramoff, we have learned recently, is known as “Buff Guy,” – a surprisingly butch nickname in an administration known for its use of a former male escort as a press-room safety valve.

Karl Rove, of course, is “Turd Blossom,” – an imaginative nickname that is, frankly, the high point of Bush’s intellectual investment in politics.

Now, according to researchers at the Pew Research Center, the one word most frequently used to describe the President of the United States is “incompetent.” The top four vote-getters, interestingly enough, are “incompetent,” “good,” “idiot,” and “liar.” Considering the fact that Bush’s approval rating is hovering at 33 percent, according to one poll, the fact that one of the top four responses would be remotely possible is understandable. Deluded, but understandable.

A majority of those responding to the poll believe Bush is “out of touch.” Personally, I think it’s less a matter of George W. Bush being out of touch and about exactly who he is in touch with. If you are a corporate CEO, particularly one involved in the petroleum industry, you could not ask for a more in-touch president. If you are a member of the Carlyle Group, Bush is your man – no question about it.

But if you are a member of the middle class looking at the your share of the $9 trillion debut, which checks in at about $33,000 per person, there is little to recommend the Bush Administration.

If you are a senior citizen trying to thread your way through the mess the Bush Administration has made of the Medicare drug benefit, it would be difficult to call what the president has done for you as “good.”

If you have a student hoping to find a way to pay for college, it would be difficult to find anything favorable about the way Bush has slashed student loan benefits to pay for tax cuts for the aforementioned CEOs.

Still, the media flogs away in favor of George W. Bush.

Soledad O’Brien tied herself in a knot trying to query Senator Russ Feingold about his resolution of centure of Bush – in one question referring to censure as a slap on the rest and in another calling it something too serious to rush into.

And Chris Matthews, in a bellweather moment on just how much he doesn’t get it, questioned the polls that show the president’s approval ratings mired below 39 percent.

Matthews has a history of inflating Bush’s likeability ratings – as late as March 1 claiming that the “likeability” numbers were in the president’s favor.

According to Media Matters for America, the media watchdog webside created by David Brock, the host of MSNBC”s Hardball professed to being “amazed” when confronted by an NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll showing that just 39 percent of respondents expressed "positive" feelings toward President Bush, compared with 50 percent who expressed "negative" feelings.

Matthews quipped “I always thought Bush was more popular than his policies. I keep saying it, and I keep being wrong on this. Bush is not popular. I’m amazed when 50 percent of the people don’t like him – just don’t like this guy. Thirty-nine percent like him. Are you surprised? Does that fit with the world you walk in?”

For me, Chris? Absolutely.

In your world, where right wing organizations write you big checks for making speeches in favor of George W. Bush? Probably not so much.

You need to get out more, Chris. Try going to the Corner Club for a beer instead of the Country Club.

More soon.

what happened to the rule of law?

The Bush (mis)Administration has shown a total disdain for the law, preferring to believe that they, along with their president, are above such trivial things as The Constitution, which the Bush himself has reportedly referred to as “just a goddamned piece of paper.”

Given an expansion of presidential power by Congress to pursue his so-called “War on Terror,” Bush and his crony-filled ranks have grabbed for an unprecedented amount of presidential authority. War powers, they say, allow them to ignore FISA restrictions at will and data mine all telephone and cell phone as well as Internet traffic within the United States in an alleged “terrorist surveillance program.” They have crowed before every possible audience that this illegal program is good for the U.S. and legal under their “war powers.”

The (mis)Administration, which loves to toss the term treason at its detractors for daring to question “a war president,” treasonously exposed the identity of a CIA agent in retaliation to Joseph Wilson’s debunking of their claims that Saddam Hussein had tried to purchase uranium in Niger. And they have tried valiantly to stonewall an investigation into that leak.

The Bush (mis)Administration routinely refuses to allow its members to testify in front of Congress while under oath – claiming that merely asking them to swear to tell the truth is insulting. Considering how deeply they have lied on so many issues, that response is a sad joke. And now, it’s probably their future defense strategy once they’ve finally been thrown out of office.

So, is it any wonder that this “Gang That Couldn’t Keep the Truth Straight,” finds it impossible to play by the rule of law even when it comes to imprisoning a man responsible for flying airliners into the World Trade Center and the Pentagon – the tragedy they have turned into a campaign strategy and a smoke screen for their unprecedented power grab.

Federal prosecutors have so badly mishandled the trial of 9/11 conspirator Zacarias Moussaoui that a judge has barred key governmental witnesses from testifying. The judge threw out all evidence concerning aviation security, the very heart of the government’s case, effectively gutting it before it ever begins.

According to a Washington Post story: “Legal experts said it devastated the prosecution's main argument -- that if Moussaoui had not lied to the FBI about his knowledge of the Sept. 11, 2001, plot, the hijackings could have been prevented. The witnesses are airline security experts who would have testified about the measures the government would have taken had the truth been told.

“U.S. District Judge Leonie M. Brinkema issued her ruling at the close of an extraordinary hearing in Alexandria that centered on the conduct of Carla J. Martin, 51, a Transportation Security Administration lawyer who improperly shared testimony and communicated with seven witnesses. New evidence emerged that Martin was heavily involved in the case and had committed what Brinkema called other ‘egregious errors.’

“The most serious was telling a prosecutor that witnesses sought by defense attorneys had refused to meet with them. Relying on Martin's contact with the witnesses, prosecutor David J. Novak relayed the information to the defense. After hearing from those witnesses yesterday, Brinkema called Martin's information ‘a baldfaced lie.’

‘“I cannot allow that kind of conduct to go without there being serious sanctions,’ Brinkema said as she struck the expected testimony and all of the evidence about aviation. ‘It would likely turn the criminal justice system on its head.’

“The judge placed Martin's conduct, combined with other errors in the oft-delayed case, in historic terms. ‘I don't think in the annals of criminal law there has ever been a case with this many significant problems,’ she told a packed courtroom.

The Bush (mis)Administration and the Republican Party has consistently contended that Democrats could not be trusted on issues of national security or to pursue terrorists responsible for acts against the United States.

However, it should be pointed out it that it was Republican appointees who thwarted the FBI investigation into the bombing of the U.S.S. Cole and a Republican president who now champions a deal to turn over management of key U.S. ports to a company wholly owned by the government of Dubai, a key member of the United Arab Emirates – whose government banking houses were used by Al Qaeda to transfer funds to the men who flew airliners into the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, and that two of those hijackers were FROM the UAE.

And it should be pointed out that every involved in the first World Trade Center bombing plot by Al Qaeda were tracked down, arrested, prosecuted and imprisoned by a Democratic administration.

More soon.

by the numbers

Damn, this is getting old.

Criticize the Bush (mis)Administration and suddenly you’re a traitor.

Yesterday, finally, someone stood up and demanded the United States Senate take action against George W. Bush and his illegal wiretapping program. Today, Tony Perkins – not the guy who starred in Psycho but a religious psycho nonetheless, called Feingold’s call for censure “borderline treasonous behavior.” Perkins is president of the Family Research Council – one of the religious right’s shock troops. Perkins has been a mainstay at the various Justice Sunday rallies to oust “liberal judges.”

We’re at war, Perkins reminds us. You don’t criticize the commander-in-chief during times of war.

Never mind the fact that this is a war on, well, a concept. Terror? Terror is a state of being.

The way Republicans figure it, the United States needs to engage in perpetual war (read Project for a New American Century), which give them an endless supply of political cover to advance their social agenda – which basically means rounding up as much money as possible for corporations like Halliburton and Exxon and, by extention, wealthy investors who continually contribute to the Republican Party.

Anyone care to suggest that this is all about the pot calling the kettle black?

Thankfully, Sen. Feingold is willing to stand and fight. Too bad more of his fellow Democrats haven't found their spines and backed him.

Sen. Feingold pulled no punches in an interview with, of all places, Fox News,

"I’m amazed at Democrats, cowering with this president’s numbers so low. The administration just has to raise the specter of the war and the Democrats run and hide. … Too many Democrats are going to do the same thing they did in 2000 and 2004. In the face of this, they’ll say we’d better just focus on domestic issues. … [Democrats shouldn’t] cower to the argument, that whatever you do, if you question the administration, you’re helping the terrorists."

You're not alone on this one, Senator.

More soon.

daddy, they’re being mean to my friends

George W. Bush is concerned that vehement rejection of the deal to sell control of U.S. Ports to Dubai Ports World will send the wrong message to the Middle East.

That’s right. The man who brought the world a Shia-Sunni civil war in Iraq, who has done more to fuel jihadists around the world, is concerned a few Arab petro-billionaires will think ill of the United States.

I swear, if there’s a lick of sense in that position I cannot see it and neither can anyone else who spends more than a nanosecond examining it.

Except, perhaps, in this sense.

George W. Bush, who built his political career on creating an Us vs. Them atmosphere in the United States, sees the world in a much more strictly defined version.

There certainly is evidence of this particular world view. It certainly explains his policy of tax cuts and his administration’s reaction to Hurricane Katrina. And it explains his almost pathological avoidance of the Great Unwashed. His speeches are almost universally given to either military personnel or to tightly controlled groups of passionate supporters and his staff has done a magnificent job of bringing the White House press corps to heel so that his all-too-rare press conferences are heavily salted with softball questions from friendly, if not planted, journalists (and I use that term reluctantly).

So when George W. Bush postulates (and I would love to see him try to spell that word) that an effort by Congress to block the DPW port deal would upset the Middle East, you have to remember that, to him, the sum total of people in the Middle East are the ones who are now, or have in the immediate past, doing business with the Carlyle Group, the investment company that currently employs his father, Poppy, and will employ him as well once his mis-Administration leaves office.

With that narrow of a view, it’s no wonder he’s panicked over the port deal.

Next he’ll be up in arms over the shortage of quality polo ponies. No, wait. Barbara has forbid him from actually riding a horse – which is why there is no livestock on his phony-as-hell-brush ranch in Crawford. He’d surely fall off and land on his head. Which may explain his inability to GET IT in the first place.

Not that he’s alone in making loony leaps of logic.

Giving credit to an email that has been floating around now for some time, Republican logic has given us the following:

Saddam was a good guy when Reagan armed him, a bad guy when Bush's daddy made war on him, a good guy when Cheney did business with him and a bad guy when Bush needed a "we can't find Bin Laden" diversion.

Trade with Cuba is wrong because the country is communist, but trade with China and Vietnam is vital to a spirit of international harmony.

A woman can't be trusted with decisions about her own body, but multinational corporations can make decisions affecting all mankind without regulation.

Jesus loves you, shares your hatred of homosexuals and Hillary Clinton, and wants you to support the war.

The best way to improve military morale is to praise the troops in speeches while slashing veterans’ benefits and combat pay.

If condoms are kept out of schools, adolescents won't have sex.

Providing health care to all Iraqis is sound policy. Providing health care to all Americans is socialism.

HMO's and insurance companies have the best interests of the public at heart.

Global warming and tobacco’s link to cancer are junk science but creationism should be taught in schools.

A president lying about an extramarital affair is an impeachable offense. A president lying to enlist support for a war in which thousands die is solid defense policy.

Government should limit itself to the powers named in the Constitution, which include banning gay marriages and censoring the Internet.

The public has a right to know about Hillary's cattle trades, but George Bush's cocaine conviction is none of our business.

Being a drug addict is a moral failing and a crime, unless you're a conservative radio host. Then it’s an illness and you need our prayers for your recovery.

What Bill Clinton did in the 1960's is of vital national interest, but what Bush did in the '80's is irrelevant.

More soon.

hyp, hyp hypocrisy

Whatever happened to all that devotion Republicans used to howl about over the rule of law?

Ann Coulter, Kelly-Ann Whatever-Her-Name-Is-This-Month, Christopher “The Big Snitch” Hitchins and the rest of the Republican Prize Patrol spent endless hours telling Chris Matthews, Geraldo Rivera and the rest of the chattering class anchors that The Rule Of Law is sacred in this country, and that was the reason the had, Had, HAD to pursue Bill Clinton through impeachment and have hectored him regularly since leaving office.

Of course, the fact that the rule of law they were crowing about was lodged firmly in a gray area AND concerned a private sexual encounter made no difference, they said. They were devoted to the law and must pursue all those who break it.

So where do they stand now that their president, George W. Bush, admitted breaking the law to pursue a domestic spying operation that runs all of our telephone and Internet traffic through NSA computers in a vain search for terrorists?

To paraphrase Pennsylvania Senator Arlen Specter, the president may have been wrong, but his heart is pure. Specter, by the way, is a former prosecutor. I seriously doubt he ever let a defendant walk because, although they broke the law, their heart was pure.

It’s Bullshit. It was Bullshit when they impeached Bill Clinton over a blowjob, and it’s bullshit now that they are backing an unrepentant alcoholic with anger management problems who currently resides in this country’s most opulent public housing.

Of course, if there’s bullshit to be spread, you can expect the vice president to be in the middle of it all.

Dick “Bulls-eye” Cheney was in Wisconsin to contend that the domestic spying program is legal under the war powers congress gave the president, although there has been no such determination made by any legal authority outside the West Wing of the White House. But the Bush Administration’s modus aperandi always has been to keep parroting the party line as if it were true and eventually someone, somewhere might actually believe the lie.

Senator Russ Feingold started the ball rolling on Senate censure of the President of the United States for conducing his illegal domestic eavesdropping campaign.

Go Russ, Go.

Of course, those Republicans so dedicated to the rule of law already have scoffed at Feingold. Sadly, Democrats have not exactly beaten a path to get behind the junior senator from Wisconsin.

Meanwhile, Bush’s poll numbers continue to freefall, now at a new low of 36 percent according to a CNN/USA Today/Gallup poll out today.

More soon.

hit the nail on the head

No wonder Republicans truly fear Hollywood.

Sure, Tinsel Town has produced its share of devoted advocates for everything Republicans hate – worker’s rights, fair wages, environmental reform. But it also produces icons.

Mr. Smith Goes to Washington. And as I mentioned before, The American President.

Aaron Sorkin summed up Republican politics with the speech mentioned in the earlier post. Republicans aren’t interested in solving problems. They’re only interested in making you afraid and telling you who to blame.

Let’s break down an issue and see how true Sorkin’s words really are.

George W. Bush has admitted to a vast program of domestic spying the likes of which no one has seen before. How did he react when confronted by the fact of his own misdeeds?

He followed the Republican script. First, he questioned the patriotism of anyone who dared criticize his administration. Then, on cue, he turned to scare tactics – trotting out a fictitious attempt on a skyscraper in Los Angeles. Be afraid, be very afraid!

The coda on that refrain is to keep repeating the term “terrorist.” This wasn’t a case of domestic spying! This was a TERRORIST surveillance program! Be afraid of those Koran-quoting brown people! It’s their fault! They want to blow you up! I’m protecting you! You weren’t using your civil rights anyway, right? Only subversive types and homosexuals ever REALLY need civil rights – and we’re protecting you from gays, right?

Cut the bullshit, Mr. President.

Senator Feingold – you are absolutely correct in calling for censure. My only complaint is that it’s too little to ask for against a president more deserving of impeachment than any in the history of this republic.

More soon.

ooooohhhh no, dr. bill

Dr. Bill must be feeling flush after winning a straw presidential poll in his own backyard – a victory akin to winning the “best hamburger” cookoff competition at a family picnic.

Senator Bill Frist, the amazing doctor who can diagnose a persistent vegetative state off an edited videotape viewed from the Senate floor, responded to Senator Russ Feingold’s call to censure George W. Bush over his illegal wiretapping program by saying he was “hoping deep inside that the leadership in Iran…[was] not listening.”

The Patriotism Card.

Bill Frist is a scoundrel running for the presidency. What did we expect him to say? Just what he did. It’s what most Republicans and virtually any Republican in a position of “leadership (and I use that term loosely)” says anytime it’s pointed out that the emperor has no clothes. Question their patriotism.

Of course, it never occurred to Dr. Bill (and I call him that because he’s another politician we can’t afford) to defend the White House program that has data mined all of our email, telephone and cell phone traffic in a vain attempt to track down potential terrorists. That would be virtually impossible, since the program hasn’t accomplished squat on the terrorism front.

Then again, we would be foolish to expect anything more from Republican leadership. Question their immoral war in Iraq and they wrap themselves in the flag and spout off about supporting our troops. Point out the fact that they have never fully supported the troops with the armor they so desperately need and they wrap themselves in the flag and question your patriotism – how dare you criticize the president in a time of war! This is politics straight off a McDonald’s drive-up menu and Bill Frist’s response to Senator Feingold is the Happy Meal du jour.

Perhaps the most pithy commentary on current Republican strategy was offered by Aaron Sorkin at the end of his movie “The American President.”

You might remember the movie? Michael Douglas as the president and Annette Bening as his lobbyist/girlfriend? The movie spawned the television series The West Wing

Sorkin’s president, Andrew Shepherd, a democrat, has been under constant personal attack by his political challenger, Bob Rumsen, played by Richard Dreyfus and looking decidedly like Dick Cheney. Rumsen bewails the fact that Republicans couldn’t conduct their preferred campaign, a character debate, when Shepherd won the White House because his wife had just died from cancer.

But faced with reelection, Shepherd has begun dating Sydney Ellen Wade. Rumsen refers to her in one interview as “The Presidential Mistress.”

After trying to ignore Rumsen’s character assassination attempts throughout the movie, and losing Sydney along the way, President Shepherd finally responds in the final reel.

He says, in part:

“For the last couple of months, Senator Rumson has suggested that being president of this country was, to a certain extent, about character, and although I have not been willing to engage in his attacks on me, I've been here three years and three days, and I can tell you without hesitation: Being President of this country is entirely about character.

“For the record: Yes, I am a card-carrying member of the A.C.L.U. But the more important question is why aren't you, Bob? This is an organization whose sole purpose is to defend the Bill of Rights, so it naturally begs the question. Why would a senator, his party's most powerful spokesman and a candidate for president, choose to reject upholding the Constitution? If you can answer that question, then, folks, you're smarter than I am, because I didn't understand it until a couple of minutes ago.

“Everybody knows American isn't easy. America is advanced citizenship.You gotta want it bad, 'cause it's gonna put up a fight. It's gonna say, "You want free speech? Let's see you acknowledge a man whose words make your blood boil, who's standing center stage and advocating, at the top of his lungs, that which you would spend a lifetime opposing at the top of yours. You want to claim this land as the land of the free, then the symbol of your country can't just be a flag; the symbol also has to be one of its citizens exercising his right to burn that flag in protest. Show me that, defend that, celebrate that in your classrooms. Then you can stand up and sing about the land of the free.

“I've known Bob Rumson for years. I've been operating under the assumption that the reason Bob devotes so much time and energy to shouting at the rain was that he simply didn't get it. Well, I was wrong.

“Bob's problem isn't that he doesn't get it. Bob's problem is that he can't sell it. Nobody has ever won an election by talking about what I was just talking about.

“This is a country made up of people with hard jobs that they're terrified of losing. The roots of freedom are of little or no interest to them at the moment. We are a nation afraid to go out at night. We're a society that has assigned low priority to education and has looked the other way while our public schools have been decimated. We have serious problems to solve, and we need serious men to solve them. And whatever your particular problem is, friend, I promise you, Bob Rumson is not the least bit interested in solving it. He is interested in two things and two things only: Making you afraid of it and telling you who's to blame for it.

“That, ladies and gentlemen, is how you win elections…”

That, ladies and gentlemen, is how Republicans gained power. That's how they govern. That's how they plan to get reelected.

We cannot allow it. We cannot be afraid to stand up and point out the fact that these people are breaking the law, that they care robbing us blind to secure their own reelection and that they are rapidly turning huge portions of the world against us by making their own people fear anyone with a different skin color, a different religion, a different sexual orientation or a different opinion.

Enough. Stop. Now. Senator Frist, unless you have something substantive to say, get off the stage and clear the building. Go home to your cozy malpractice and help your family bilk Medicare for millions of taxpayer dollars.

More soon.