Tufts Democrats

Tom DeLay Resigning

2006-04-04T04:06:00.000-04:00

Tom DeLay is expected to announce today that he is resigning and will not seek reelection to the House of Representatives, despite winning the GOP primary for his district.

Who's next?

Immigration Reform Being Debated in Senate

2006-03-29T09:03:00.000-05:00

The Senate this week is taking up the issue of immigration reform, and is working on a bill that is far more comprehensive (and humane) than the one the House passed during the winter. There are lots of proposals and amendments floating back and forth, so it will be interesting to see what transpires. Whatever happens, it will be fun to watch the GOP fight amongst themselves.

GOP Splintering

2006-03-20T07:28:00.000-05:00

This story is on the front page of the Washington Post today, detailing the fractures within the Republican ranks and their inability to come up with a 2006 agenda. Between corruption, record spending (and deficits), and the war, how much longer can they really hold it together?

Patriot Act Renewed

2006-03-08T07:17:00.000-05:00

Congress voted yesterday to renew the Patriot Act. The bill now goes to the President to sign, which he almost certainly will. Though lawmakers were able to revise the law to protect some crucial civil liberties, on the whole it seems the Patriot Act still violates the rights of all Americans.

Another note: It seems to me that the conservative media simply cannot handle all the bad press of late for Republicans. Despite all the corruption (and other) scandals of late, the Washington Post and other mainstream media outlets still print articles such as this one in their top stories, making big news out of an otherwise minor story to try to provide "balance." Report the news as it is, and right now, that news involves GOP scandals.

Be careful on Facebook!

2006-03-03T19:42:00.000-05:00

This is an interesting article with some hard examples of Secret Service visiting people for posts on facebook. I think most people already knew this happens, but to see the hard facts is really disturbing. So be careful and fight for your right for free speech!!

Big Brother

2006-03-03T10:31:00.000-05:00

This is OUTRAGEOUS.

Military blocking troop access to critics

2006-03-01T18:36:00.000-05:00

The U.S. military has apparently blocked access for U.S. troops serving in Iraq to liberal blogs. This e-mail was sent by a soldier to Wonkette, one of the liberal blogs out there in cyperspace:

Just to let you know, the US Marines have blocked access to “Wonkette” along with numerous other sites such as personal email (i.e. Yahoo, AT&T, Hotmail, etc), blogs that don't agree with the government point of view, personal websites, and some news organizatons. This has taken effect as of the beginning of February. I have no problem with them blocking porn sites (after all it is a government network), but cutting off access to our email and possibly-not-toeing-the-government-line websites is a bit much.

Initially all web blocking was done locally at the hub sites in Iraq. If you wanted a site “unblocked” you just had to email the local administrator with a reason (like, “I'd like to read my email, please.”), and if it wasn't porn or offensive, they'd allow it. Now, all blocking is done by desk-weenies at the USMC Network Operations Center in Quantico, VA, who really don't care if we get our email (or gossip) out here, as they get to go to happy hour after working 9 to 5 and go home to a nice clean, warm home with a real bed! (Sorry, I'm a little peeved.)

This is simply outrageous. How can the government reconcile the idea of fighting from freedom of speech and expression in Iraq while disallowing it for the U.S. citizens doing the actual fighting and dying?

Every day that goes by makes me more and more upset with this administration.

Senate Approves Revised Patriot Act

2006-03-01T18:08:00.000-05:00

The Senate today approved a revised version of the Patriot Act, with several curbs to government infringement on civil liberties. A few Senators, however, namely Feingold (D-WI) and Byrd (D-WV) feel the revisions do not go far enough. The measure will now move to the House of Representatives.

UAE to Take Over 21 Ports, Not 6

2006-02-27T08:17:00.000-05:00

Well, it seems that the proposed takeover of port security by a UAE company goes deeper than we all thought. At first, I didn't really see what the big deal about this was, and thought the outrage to the deal might have been a little prejudiced. On further consideration, however, I realized: why risk it? What benefits come to our country by relinquishing control of our security to a foreign country, especially one with ties to Al-Qaeda? Wouldn't it be better for all parties to keep this in American hands?

Voting rights for college students?

2006-02-13T20:08:00.000-05:00

Although this news comes from far away New Hampshire, it is of vital importance to all of the college students who attend school in NH. There have been recent efforts by the Republicans to prevent all college students who live out-of-state from registering in NH.

HB1547 would not only eliminate college dormitories as legal domiciles, but also homeless shelters and emergency shelters for battered women. Both the Secretary of State and NHCLU oppose this effort, however. Read more at http://www.fosters.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060211/NEWS0202/102110067.

GOP House Report Blames Administration

2006-02-12T12:10:00.000-05:00

There have been quite a few newsworthy events going on in the past few days which I haven´t been able to blog, so sorry abuot that. However, this report, which is due to be released Wednesday, lays much of the blame for the pathetic response to Hurricane Katrina on the Bush Administration. Homeland Security Secretary Chertoff is criticized, and the report also notes that ´´earlier presidential involvement could have speeded the response.´´ All this from a Republican-led House - not a good sign for the President.

Anti-US sentiment creeping closer to home

2006-02-08T20:17:00.000-05:00

Don't know how much coverage this has received in the US, but relations between the US and Mexico are rapidly decreasing. The most recent incident happened this week when the Bush Administration told the Sheraton Hotel in Mexico City to evict a Cuban delegation staying there for a conference. They invoked an act saying that no US company can house Cubans, regardless of where in the world.

The Mexican government is obviously furious and is calling this an act of American imperialism. In fact, the Sheraton violated the Mexican Constitution which states that no one can be discriminated against based on nationality (not that the Mexican Constitution has not been violated without incident in the past).

The most alarming thing about this event is the fact that on the news they showed groups of Mexican citizens burning the American Flag. Think about this. Imagine 10 years ago seeing Mexican BURN the American Flag. This is just another example of the Bush Administration having completely distorted priorities and alienating every other country in the world. To have so many people with such fast growing anti-American sentiment in our second biggest trading partner and neighbor is NOT GOOD for American stability and security.

Hopefully with a Democratic Congress and in 2008 a Democratic President, the US can once again be respected in the world and be looked at as a common world leader, not a common world enemy.

This is just kind of amusing

2006-02-07T13:32:00.000-05:00

Alberto Gonzales, in his testimony before Congress:

President Washington, President Lincoln, President Wilson, President Roosevelt have all authorized electronic surveillance on a far broader scale.

Ah yes, many a phone was tapped during the Washington Administration.

If you're going to try and BS the public, at least make it sound less ridiculous.

Link to the footage.

Bush´s FY2007 Budget

2006-02-07T12:35:00.000-05:00

Well, Bush´s proposed 2007 budget is out...and Senators, both Republican and Democrat, are already criticizing it. Start teeing off.

2006 Overview

2006-02-06T07:55:00.000-05:00

The Washington Post today is publishing an interesting article that gives an overview of the 2006 Senate and House races, and the possibilities of Democratic gains.

Check it out here.

Patriot Act Set to be Extended Again

2006-02-01T13:55:00.000-05:00

Between Alito and the State of the Union, it´s been a busy few days. This news about the Patriot Act seems to have fallen through the cracks. Not quite sure how to read this latest extension...maybe lawmakers just haven´t had enough time to debate the issue with everything going on?

The State of the Union

2006-01-31T22:10:00.000-05:00

President Bush, as I'm sure you all know, gave his State of the Union address tonight. There were some parts of it that I found refreshing, and many more that I found to be outright lies/bullshit (pardon my French).

If you'll indulge me, I'd like to highlight what hit me as particularly interesting parts of the speech.

To begin...

In less than three years, that nation [Iraq] has gone from dictatorship, to liberation, to sovereignty, to a constitution, to national elections. At the same time, our coalition has been relentless in shutting off terrorist infiltration, clearing out insurgent strongholds, and turning over territory to Iraqi security forces...

As we make progress on the ground, and Iraqi forces increasingly take the lead, we should be able to further decrease our troop levels -- but those decisions will be made by our military commanders, not by politicians in Washington, D.C....

Yet there is a difference between responsible criticism that aims for success, and defeatism that refuses to acknowledge anything but failure. Hindsight alone is not wisdom. And second-guessing is not a strategy.

The earlier part of this statement is essentially mindless optimism. It completely glosses over the fact that our soldiers continue to die, that the Iraqi armed forces are considered to be totally incompetent and unable to legitimately fight, and terrorist forces continue to flourish.

Secondly, he talks about decisions being made by military commanders and not politicians, yet the track record does not bear this out. Neoconservative bureaucrats (with whom, in the spirit of openness, I share a bit of common ground with) were entirely in control of the planning for the Iraq War. Indeed, General Shinseki, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, was dismissed (or asked to resign, can't remember which) for insisting that it would take at least half a million troops to secure the country. Rumsfeld wanted 150,000.

The third part is simply a purely political, and fantastically reckless, shot at his critics. While not per se calling his critics unpatriotic, he went as far as is humanly possible in doing it. Saying that the war was mismanaged is not defeatism; saying that our troops have not enough body armor is not defeatism; saying that we should have secured arms depots in Iraq is not defeatism; saying that cutting our troops' and veterans' benefits is not defeatism. It is legitimate criticism of the president's policies, and if Bush wants to continue to call Democrats soft on national security, the only responsible thing to do is point out that his stupendous lack of success in the realm of foreign policy is an indication of profound misunderstanding of the world we live in.

Second part...

I have authorized a terrorist surveillance program to aggressively pursue the international communications of suspected al Qaeda operatives and affiliates to and from America. Previous presidents have used the same constitutional authority I have -- and federal courts have approved the use of that authority. Appropriate members of Congress have been kept informed. This terrorist surveillance program has helped prevent terrorist attacks. It remains essential to the security of America. If there are people inside our country who are talking with al Qaeda, we want to know about it -- because we will not sit back and wait to be hit again.

Unbelievable. Perhaps the only world to describe it. Firstly, an official in the FBI, who received transcripts of the National Security Agency's intercepts, said that all it revealed was "many calls to Pizza Hut." Hardly seems to me that much of it was in regards to al-Qaeda. Secondly, the statement that "previous presidents have... the same constitutional authority" is nothing but utter bullshit (once more, pardon my French). Every single president since the passing of the Domestic Surveillance Act in 1978 has used a secret federal court (FISA) for such wiretaps. Since the passage of the act, over 19,000 warrants have been issued by the FISA court, and only four been rejected. In addition, warrants can be approved retroactively if a time constraint presents itself. President Bush has circumvented the entire process, and has stated that while he still uses FISA, he will ignore it if necessary. All that does is make the process of obtaining a warrant irrelevant.

Alright I could go on further about the rest of the speech, but at a certain point I just need to cut myself off before I get too long winded. Maybe I'll post in the future.

In summary though, Bush sucks.

Call Call Call

2006-01-30T09:46:00.000-05:00

Today´s the day. Please take a few minutes to call your Senators (or other Democratic Senators) and urge them to support the filibuster. If you disagree with the move, or are talking to a Senator who also disagrees, please consider asking them to at least abstain from the cloture vote.

See below for the link for phone numbers.

Filibuster Info

2006-01-29T13:09:00.000-05:00

The Senate is scheduled to vote tomorrow on ending the debate on the Alito nomination (in fancy-pants Senate terms, 'cloture'). That means that we all HAVE to call our Senators RIGHT NOW, especially those from our home states, to tell to support the filibuster of Alito given his disgregard for the Constitution and to vote against cloture. Hell, call some random Senator and pretend you're from their state. This link gives a little info on phone numbers and which Senators are on the fence right now.

We all thought this was a long shot, but Dick Durbin (D-IL) claims they have 37 Senators on board...which means we only need 3 more...

Democracy in Latin America

2006-01-29T01:04:00.000-05:00

This semester, I will be posting a bit on American politics, but also try to provide some insight from south of the border as well, where I will be studying. I just saw this solid column on CNN about a type of Clintonian "third-way" that is emmerging in Latin America. While many center-left governments are being installed throughout Latin America, many of them are not your traditional anti-American socialistic regimes (obviously not including Chavez's Venezuela).

These new governments appreciate their relationship with the US and what it means for their economy but also know that things must be done within their countries to help close the gap between the rich and poor. I think if we can elect a Democrat to the White House, we can establish some very solid relationships with these countries.

One big race to keep an eye on this semester and summer is the Mexican Presidential race. The fact that it is competitive at all is a great change from the 70+ years of one-party rule imposed on our southern neighbors. Hopefully whichever party emmerges the victor will use its "third-way" Latin American predecessors as role models.

Stay tuned for more posts about this exciting time in Mexico and how it relates to American political and economic situation.

Your Senator!

2006-01-26T17:42:00.000-05:00

Well, this is interesting. And welcomed, I might add, at least by me. Call your Senators today to let them know you support the filibuster of Sam Alito. (202) 224-3121, and ask for your Senator.

White House Bracing for Impeachment?

2006-01-25T16:14:00.000-05:00

From politics1.com:

...it's worth taking notice when Insight magazine -- a sister publication of the pro-Bush Washington Times newspaper -- is writing about a possible impeachment of Bush. The purported charges would purportedly focus on the controversial secret electronic surveillance program that monitored domestic phone conversations and emails without any court authorization. The publication -- which has warm relations with the Administration -- quotes a few unnamed White House sources. One source said the "Bush administration is bracing for impeachment hearings in Congress" and a "prelude to the impeachment process could begin with hearings by the Senate Judiciary Committee in February." The article said Republicans -- including Committee Chair Arlen Specter (R-PA) -- are helping the Democrats by moving this probe forward. "Our arithmetic shows that a majority of the committee could vote against the President. If we work hard, there could be a tie," said a White House source. Specter, a critic of the secret program, told the magazine he is not seeking an impeachment vote -- but added it is a possible outcome of the hearings. "Impeachment is a remedy. After impeachment, you could have a criminal prosecution. But the principal remedy under our society is to pay a political price," said Specter. The magazine also notes conservative US Senator Sam Brownback (R-KS) -- a likely Presidential candidate -- is another Republican who has openly rejected the President's position and is viewed as a possible pro-impeachment vote...

The Bush Administration has adopted a very smart strategy, in my opinion. Instead of trying to cover their tracks on a clearly illegal and unconstitutional spy program, they have instead taken to the offensive, telling everyone who will listen that it is for the safety of the American people. The arrogance in such a strategy is palpable, but nevertheless has helped the president gain some ground on the issue.

Democrats, liberals, and indeed, conservatives and Republicans who value the ideals this country was founded on -- those of individual and personal liberty -- should be proclaiming to the world that this is something which cannot stand, and those responsible must be held accountable. It is certainly premature to call for impeachment, but I do believe that as the Senate hearings on the issue go forward, it might emerge as more of a viable option.

Great Protest at Georgetown University

2006-01-25T09:52:00.000-05:00

Yesterday, as Attorney General Alberto Gonzales gave a speech at Georgetown University in support of (probably illegal) warrantless domestic wiretapping, a group of more than a dozen students carried out a fantastic protest, using the words of one of our forefathers, Ben Franklin, to emphasize their point. As covered in the Chicago Tribune:

The appearance by the attorney general was punctuated by a silent protest from more than a dozen students who stood and turned their backs to Gonzales, who continued to speak without acknowledging them and did not take questions afterward. Five of the students wore black pillowcases over their heads--an apparent reference to the treatment of U.S. detainees overseas--and held a banner roughly paraphrasing Benjamin Franklin: "Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither.¨

Awesome.

Alito Committee Vote Today

2006-01-24T08:12:00.000-05:00

The Senate Judiciary Committee will meet this morning to vote on the nomination of Samuel Alito to the Supreme Court. The meeting will begin at 9:30am EST (6:30 PT, 3:30 Barcelona Time) and probably be carried live by C-SPAN, so check it out. Expect a party line vote, 10-8 in favor, unfortunately.

White House Knew About Katrina´s Impact

2006-01-24T07:33:00.000-05:00

Just like they received a memo warning that Osama bin Laden was ¨determined to strike within the United States,¨ the Bush Administration got ¨detailed warnings¨ about the effects of Hurricane Katrina on New Orleans and the Gulf Coast in the 48 hours before the storm hit last fall. This from today´s article in the Washington Post:

In the 48 hours before Hurricane Katrina hit, the White House received detailed warnings about the storm's likely impact, including eerily prescient predictions of breached levees, massive flooding, and major losses of life and property, documents show.

Did they mobilize aid to get to the area quickly? Did they have troops ready to go in to rescue survivors and control the situation? No. What did they do instead? NOTHING.

Patriot Act (Again)

2006-01-22T11:42:00.000-05:00

With everything else that's going on, the extension of the Patriot Act is set to expire this week. We could have the same fight that we had in December...

Hello from Barcelona!

2006-01-19T11:28:00.000-05:00

Hey all! I´m here in Barcelona, having a great semester so far! I hope everyone´s had a terrific break! I´ll still be blogging from here when I can, so don´t forget to check the blog regularly!

Things really seem to be heating up in Washington. The questioning of Alito, while lengthly, unfortunately didn´t seem to garner the reaction some people (myself included) were hoping for. The committee vote will probably be next week, which means there´s still time to contact your Senators. (Scroll down to the bottom of the page for the number).

Bush is spying on Americans without a warrant, which is blatantly illegal. The ACLU is suing the NSA to stop this ridiculousness.

Iran is posturing some more about their nuclear program. What do you think the US should do about it?

More Impeachment Talk

2006-01-15T22:50:00.000-05:00

While making sure to clarify that he is not in any way suggesting the President should be impeached, GOP Senator Arlen Specter did add fuel to the impeachment debate with his comments. Senator Specter has been very outspoked against the domestic spying authorized by this administration and would be a great ally from across the aisle if anything like censure or impeachment comes up.

Dean Raises Record Funds

2006-01-04T12:29:00.000-05:00

Howard Dean, in his first year as DNC Chairman, has raised over 51 million dollars for the party - a record for a non-election year! This sum is 20% higher than the amount raised in 2003, the last non-election year. It´s also important to remember that when Dean travels to states and raises money there, he lets state parties keep that money - a new policy. This is exactly what our party needs to take back Congress!

National Shame

2005-12-20T19:04:00.000-05:00

Those are the two best words I can come up with to describe Rep. Tom Delay. He is making a farce of American Democracy and nobody is laughing. Except for him in that goofy mugshot...

http://nytimes.com/aponline/national/AP-DeLay-Living-on-Donors.html

Intelligent Design Can't Be Taught In Classrooms

2005-12-20T15:03:00.000-05:00

A federal judge has just ruled that a Pennsylvania cannot mention Intelligent Design in the biology classes that it teaches. ID simply isn't science, and this is the correct move. If the hardcore right-wingers want ID to be taught in schools, they can do so - in religion courses.

Senate Fails to Renew Patriot Act

2005-12-16T13:53:00.000-05:00

In a stunning move today and a victory for the civil liberties of all Americans, the U.S. Senate today failed to reauthorize several provisions of the Patriot Act, which were deemed as being too intrusive on Americans liberty, freedom, and privacy.

A massive blow to President Bush and the Republican leadership, the Republicans failed to gain enough votes to overcome the bipartisan filibuster led by Senator Russ Feingold, Democrat of Wisconsin, and Senator Larry Craig, Republican of Idaho.

Feingold and Craig have argued that some of the provisions considered most detrimental to the rights of Americans laid out in the Bill of Rights, such as roving wiretaps, and secret warrants which require a library to turn over records of what books people have read, must have enormous safeguards put in place. The Bush Administration has refused to budge on the issue. Unless a last-minute compromise is put in place, the provisions will all expire on December 31.

The Bush Administration immediately (and naturally) attacked Democrats as being soft in the war on terrorism. But the real question is whether, on the heels of the news that Bush had authorized domestic spying (see Mickey's entry below), we can trust the government -- especially this government -- to use these powers with the discretion intended.

This is an ENORMOUS victory for Democrats, for civil liberties, and for everything America stands for. For the moment, at least, we should be deeply thankful that there are still some in Washington, both Republican and Democrat, who stand up for what they believe in and for our country in the face of the smears of our current administration.

Bush Authorized Domestic Spying in 2002

2005-12-16T02:01:00.000-05:00

Wow. A complete violation of every American's civil liberties - and the Constitution. This was blatantly illegal, and should worry everyone about the extreme power and secrecy of this Administration. It'll be interesting to see how this plays out in the current debate over the renewal of the Patriot Act. Wow.

Iraqis catch and free terror chief

2005-12-15T16:39:00.000-05:00

A report today states that Iraqi security forces caught the MOST wanted man in Iraq, leading terror chief Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, but didn't know who he was and released him. It's things like this that make me think we're going to be in there a whole lot longer than anticipated to secure and train the country.

In other Iraq news, Polls are now closed with expected reports of scattered violence. The results are expected at the end of the month. Stay tuned for more info.

Tales of the Freewayblogger

2005-12-15T13:47:00.000-05:00

Check this guy out: http://freewayblogger.blogspot.com

He posts anti-Bush, anti-war messages on freeway overpasses across the country - at first it seems a little weird, but I think it's actually a pretty effective way of reaching thousands and thousands of people. Check out the ones in Boston about the Iraq War especially.

I'd love to see the Democratic party start to do stuff like this beginning now in preparation for the 2006 elections. Wouldn't it be great to see ads go on TV in swing states with simple messages like Bush admitting the pre-war intelligence was wrong, Tom DeLay or Scooter Libby in court, or Duke Cunningham admitting he stole millions of dollars? At the end of each ad, a simple "Vote Democrat" message could go on the screen.

It's official: Romney Not Seeking Re-election

2005-12-14T19:33:00.000-05:00

To add to the previous post, Governor Mitt Romney spoke in a televised address from the Statehouse this evening publically announcing for the first time that he will not seek re-election.

"My decision comes down to this: In this four-year term, we can accomplish what I set out to do. In fact, we've already accomplished a great deal. Serving as your governor is one of the greatest honors of my life. A year from now, it will be time for me to pass that privilege to someone else. I will not be a candidate for re-election."

Frankly, I don't know what he means by that, he vetos the vast majority of the bills that come to him which then get sent back to the Statehouse and are quickly overturned. But he continues:

"Frankly there was very little to do for a second term that I could realistically accomplish. I said there is no reason to sit in the chair if the things you want to accomplish are done."

Oh, ok. So the over half a million MA residents with no health insurance mean nothing to him. The fact that it has been proven that countless numbers of MA-educated young adults are leaving the Commonwealth due to high costs of living and close to 200,000 lost jobs since 2000 among other reasons means nothing to him. The decrepit state of the public university system means nothing to him.

This is all not suprising considering Romney has toured the country bashing his own state, calling himself a "red speck in a blue state." If he can turn his back on the state he runs and the people who elected him so easily, what's to keep him from doing the same to our nation if he is elected President?

I'm not saying this is bad, in fact its great. Now its an open seat and one of the Democrats running can step up and really advance the Commonwealth into a new era, one where we lead the nation in effective progressive policies. Lt. Governor Kerry Healy will most likely get the Republican nod, but it seems she doesn't quite have the political skills Romney had. We can only hope--four more years with a Republican governor in Massachusetts would be absurd.

BREAKING: Romney Won't Seek Re-Election

2005-12-14T14:42:00.000-05:00

Boston.com is reporting that Mitt Romney won't seek re-election as governor of Massachusetts. Duh. He's gearing up to lose a bid for the presidency.

Is Karl Rove About to be Indicted?

2005-12-14T12:17:00.000-05:00

That's what the rumor mill in Washington is saying.

According to sources:

"There have been rumors flying around Washington in the last few days that Karl Rove, the president's top political adviser, might soon be indicted in the CIA leak investigation. "

Is this Fitzmas - Part II?

And yes, Rove is a weasel.

Brokeback Mountain Already Successful

2005-12-13T21:54:00.000-05:00

Brokeback Mountain, the new film that tells the story of two ranchers' (Jake Gyllenhaal and Heath Ledger) secret gay love affair, is already getting rave reviews from critics and tons of award nominations. It opened in only five theaters last weekend, and made almost $550,000 - an enormously successful debut for any movie. Check out this quote from an MSNBC article on the movie's success already:

Focus Features’ “Brokeback Mountain” debuted in five theaters and grossed an estimated $544,549. Helmed by Ang Lee, the drama about a love affair between two ranch hands in Wyoming averaged an impressive $108,910 per theater.

The important thing to look at is the "per theater" gross, which is quite high. Of course, the movie already has the right-wing nutjobs up in arms - god forbid homosexuals have feelings and be treated like real people too. This is how movements progress however, and a successful film about homosexuality can only help the fight for acceptance into mainstream society.

Merry Christmas?

2005-12-13T21:07:00.000-05:00

There is a smell wafting across America tonight and it is not the festive commingling of eggnog and chestnuts roasting on an open fire. The smell is desperation and it is emanating from the handful of Conservatives who are so eager to distract Americans from real issues that they have invented a "War on Christmas."

In the spirit of the season I have found two excellent examples of how silly and contrived the whole idea of a "War on Christmas" really is. First, from Michigan - sorry Sofia - we have State Senator Alan Cropsey, R-DeWitt who on the floor of the MI Senate said "terrorists are less likely to celebrate Christmas." Terrorists are also less likely to send their daughters to four year universities and more likely to kill innocent people, but apparently that is less disturbing then their unwillingness to put trees up in their living rooms - do terrorists even have living rooms? - and max out their credit cards at Wal-Mart. Those bastards.

Speaking of people with warped priorities, my second example comes from Bill O'Reilly, who really outdid himself on his show the other night. Desperate to show that there are people out there doing battle with his beloved holiday, he showed this letter on the split screen:

"As a non-Christian I find it the height of Christian racism that people wish me a Merry Christmas."

Rocky Soran
Tampa, FL

Then, and this is really rich, Bill admitted that the letter was fake and began rambling about how "we know who you people are...so watch it!" Is it possible that he split a gram with Rush Limbaugh before the show? We really are living in a post-modern hell when someone can fabricate a letter in support of a made-up conspiracy, admit the fallacy and then pass it off as "news." Bring back Joe McCarthy. This time he can admit that his list is phony and still demand a witch hunt; it's so much more honest that way, but I'm rambling.

This whole "War" is a desperate attempt to distract people from the incompetence and failures of the Bush Administration and the Republican-controlled Congress. It is part of the disturbing pattern of substituting smoke screens and fear mongering for results. There are real challenges and opportunities facing our country. We need to bring in the experts - and kick out the Neo-Cons - to sort out our Iraq policy. Education has been neglected for too long and needs real investment and innovation if we are going to compete for the jobs of the 21st century. This country must find a way to achieve energy independence. Healthcare is a national embarrassment and Medicare and Medicaid need drastic overhauls. And finally, we should stop trying to protect America with rhetoric, stop dragging our feet and fully implement the recommendations of the 9/11 Commission.

In the face of all this, it is mind-boggling that over the past 18 months Republicans have made their priorities banning Gay Marriage, scaring people about Terrorism, keeping Terry Schiavo hooked up to a feeding tube, privatizing social security and now, fighting an imaginary war over Christmas. As a party, they are making Don Quixote look like a guy with a really strong grip on reality.

But I'm optimistic as we enter 2006, optimistic because people are tired of Republicans who spend more time on creating distractions then on governing. Americans are hungry for leadership that understands the realities real people face, and that leadership is coming from the Democratic Party. So this time next year - as soon as I finish my "Seasons Greetings Loser" card to Bill O'Reilly - I'll be writing a thank you note to Santa for delivering lots of shiny, new Democrats to Congress.

So in the spirit of the season, and, in no particular order, Happy Christmas, Hanukkah, Diwali, Kwanzaa, Eid ul-Adha, Solstice or whatever else you may be celebrating at this time of year. And a Happy 2006 to everyone, it’s going to be great New Year.

Red Cross Chief Steps Down

2005-12-13T14:25:00.000-05:00

Marsha Evans, Chief of the American Red Cross, has resigned, effective at the end of this month. The Red Cross has been facing a great deal of criticism regarding its response to Hurricane Katrina, when it was unable to get to the hardest-hit areas for some time. Remember that the organization also faced criticism after 9/11 for (correct me if I'm wrong here) placing donations into a general "pool" of money rather than giving it straight to victims of the attacks. Despite its misgivings, the Red Cross received more than $1.5 billion after Katrina, and some local nonprofit aid agencies have been forced to carry out the same work with none of the money as a result. I wonder: is there a better way to distribute aid in a true emergency than relying solely on the Red Cross?

Why do we still have the death penalty?

2005-12-12T16:51:00.000-05:00

I have always been greatly opposed to the death penalty, I think it is cruel and unusual and I believe the scientific data that it doesn't deter criminals and that its actually more expensive (with appeals and all) to execute someone than keep them in jail for life.

This latest case with Crips founder Stanley Tookie Williams shows how ridiculous the death penalty really is. I'm not saying he should be set free, but keep him in jail. He's been writing children's books with anti-gang messages and has publically denounced gang violence. All the proceeds from his book sales go to anti-gang charities. Why stop this work from happening? Keep him in jail as a living testament to young people what happens if you join gangs. Execute him and he'll be forgotten soon, his work and his message will die.

Priorities of the Republican Congress

2005-12-10T18:11:00.000-05:00

The Republicans in the House of Representatives continue to reach new heights of absurdity with each new measure they pass.

Last month, the GOP slashed $50 billion from programs that benefit low-income Americans, such as food stamps, student loands, and Medicaid. They followed that up this past week by passing a $95 billion tax cut, most of which goes to the highest income Americans in the country. For example, according to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, twenty-four percent of the benefits go to those Americans making more than $1 million a year -- or 0.2% of the population. The wealthiest twenty percent of Americans will get 88.9% of the total benefits.

The typical Republican line in defense of this absurdity is that they are letting Americans "keep what they earn," and any opposition to it is an attempt to create class warfare. In reality, they are doing nothing more than destroying the ability of the poor to live a decent life, while fooling most Americans into thinking they are getting a break when in reality they get next to nothing.

And all this during a war.

Special Prosecutor Back in Action

2005-12-09T12:11:00.000-05:00

This week, Special Prosecutor Fitzgerald went before a new grand jury to continue investigating the Valerie Plame/CIA Leak Scandal. According to the Washington Post, a reporter for Time magazine, Viveca Novak, as well as Karl Rove's lawyer, Robert Luskin, were brought before the grand jury this week for testimony and deposition. Frankly, I didn't think this case could get any more complicated, but it appears that it has. The important thing, however, is that the case is not closed on this Bush Administration scandal.

Menendez to Replace Corzine (?)

2005-12-07T23:27:00.000-05:00

Apparently Democratic sources are saying that Jon Corzine, who was recently elected Governor of NJ, will tap Rep. Robert Menendez, chariman of the Democratic caucus, to fill his Senate seat in NJ. If this rumor is confirmed, Menendez will take over Corzine's seat, then run for re-election next fall.

Open Thread-The War in Iraq

2005-12-07T10:18:00.000-05:00

Alright everyone, let's try to get a solid discussion going here! In the spirit of Foreign Policy week, lets talk about our current situation in Iraq. There's obviously a strong argument for pulling out now, while at the same time, many people say that would lead to a much worse situation and would create a breeding ground for terror. What do you all think? Yes we Dems need to be unified, but some internal discourse is good for us all.

So start talking!

Orange County Election Results

2005-12-06T23:42:00.000-05:00

Election results should start coming in for the special election in California's 48th district around midnight. Remember, this is a heavily Republican district, so let's not get our hopes too high.

You can follow live election results as they come in here.

Hussein Trial Heats Up

2005-12-05T14:00:00.000-05:00

The trial of Saddam Hussein in Iraq got a little testy today, when Mr. Hussein disrupted the court several times with his outbursts and actions. At one point, the trial went to a 90 minute recess following a walkout by the defendants regarding the legitmacy of the trial. Saddam and his co-defendants claim that the court is not legitimate, as it was set up under a US-led occupation. Later in the day, Saddam chanted "Long live Iraq, long live the Arab state."

This is just the most recent in a series of struggles in creating a democracy in Iraq. Find out more and dicuss them at the roundtable dicussion about the war with Professor Eichenberg of the IR department, Wednesday at 11:45 in the Large Conference Room of the Campus Center.

New Jersey Senate Appointment

2005-12-02T14:31:00.000-05:00

Since Jon Corzine just won the New Jersey election for governor (yay!), he must give up his senate seat and appoint someone else. He announced that he is considering appointing NJ State Senator Nia Gill. If she is appointed she would be the second black woman to serve in the Senate after Carol Moseley-Braun. As Mickey stated in an earlier post, yesterday was the 50th anniversary of the day Rosa Parks refused to give up her seat on the bus to a white man. She with so many others during her time has helped our country progress and protect the civil rights of all its citizens. 50 years later, one black woman has been elected to the Senate and possibly one more could be appointed.

Rosa Parks 50th Anniversary

2005-12-01T13:00:00.000-05:00

Today marks the 50th anniversary of the day Rosa Parks refused to give up her seat to a white man on the bus, and helped bring civil rights issues to the forefront of the American consciousness. Thanks again, Ms. Parks.

Worse and Worse Each Day

2005-11-30T14:01:00.000-05:00

Have I mentioned lately how much I hate this guy?

The good news: I saw an ad on CNN this morning slamming Alito, by a group I've never heard of - I believe the website was independentcourt.com. Are Democrats coming together to oppose him? I am hopeful to see what the Center for American Progress comes up with in their anti-Alito campaign. Does anyone have other ideas about what we as a group (or what Tufts students in general) can do to make our opinions heard? If so, please post them in the comments section.

Supreme Court Takes On Abortion Issues

2005-11-29T17:41:00.000-05:00

Later this week, the Supreme Court will begin hearing two abortion-related cases. The most significant is regarding New Hampshire's parental notification law, which requires minors to obtain the consent of a parent or guardian before getting an abortion. A federal appeals court ruled the ban unconsitutional, but now it's up to the Supreme Court to decide. This will certainly be interesting to watch, and we'll get an idea of the Court's current tendencies, as well as the first abortion-related ruling of new Chief Justice Roberts. Remember that Sandra Day O'Connor is still on the bench.

Alito - Against Foreigners' Rights

2005-11-29T09:51:00.000-05:00

A memo written by Supreme Court nominee Sam Alito during the Reagan Administration argues that immigrants and foreigners outside their own country should not be afforded the same Constitutional rights as American citizens. This issue has been given new importance given the Bush Administration's detention of foreign nationals without due process rights, and it appears Alito would side with the Administration on this issue.

Cunningham Resigns

2005-11-28T17:17:00.000-05:00

Randy "Duke" Cunningham, Republican Congressman of California, who as discussed below pled guilty to numerous crimes, resigned today. That's one more seat it might be a little easier for the Democrats to pick up, and one more symptom of corruption that Democrats can capitalize on.

An Early Nevada Caucus?

2005-11-28T17:04:00.000-05:00

Democrats appear to be considering adding a caucus in Nevada early in the primary season to compete with the influence of Iowa and New Hampshire.

Republican Congressman pleads guilty to tax evasion

2005-11-28T13:50:00.000-05:00

In the continuing saga of Republican corruption in Washington, Republican Congressman "Duke" Cunningham from San Diego pleaded guilty to mail fraud, wire fraud, and tax evasion stemming from the sale of his house at an inflated price to defense contractor Mitchell Wade.

Cunningham sold his house for $1.675 million, much more than the house was worth, in order to buy a mansion in San Diego for $2.55 million. In addition, he lived rent free on Wade's yacht and said that he had accepted bribes which influenced the way he voted in Congress.

The Republican party ran on its Contract With America in 1994 vowing to clean up Washington. It now is becoming increasingly clear that the Republicans have become far more corrupt than the Democrats had ever been, even after sixty years of almost continual control of Congress.

It's time for Democrats to offer an alternative of strong leadership and progressive ideas, to show the American people that what we can do is far better than anything the Republicans have offered us in the last decade.

Happy Thanksgiving

2005-11-24T14:05:00.000-05:00

Happy Thanksgiving everyone!

Today is a day of thanks, and we have a lot to be thankful for. Despite the poor leadership of our country, it is a great country, and that gives us all the more reason to keep up the fight to make sure its led in a way that does this great country justice.

People arrested for small peaceful protests, Iraq getting worse each and every day, the appropriations bill for many non-profits stalled over small bickering, money being slashed from key programs vital to the health of our society, treason committed at the highest levels; obviously we can do better, and if we keep up this fight, we will do better.

This holiday season, remember how many people are being left behind in this country, as the richest are getting their tax breaks. If this administration fails to help people this holiday season, the least we can do is reach out ourselves and help someone this holiday season to make it the best it can be.

Alito Against Abortion - Again

2005-11-22T09:59:00.000-05:00

Forget the assonance in the title of this post - there are more important things to talk about. It seems that the Boston Globe has found, in another brief from the Reagan Administration, more arguments against the validity of Roe v. Wade. Surprise, surprise, current Supreme Court nominee Sam Alito played a major role in crafting this brief. The document argues that "there is no explicit textual warrant in the Constitution for the right to an abortion" and that Roe should not be considered a major precedent. We now have three explicit sources telling us Alito doesn't respect a woman's privacy - including his own mother. Is a filibuster in order (based on his apparent disregard for legal precedent)?

we love trains

2005-11-21T08:54:00.000-05:00

At the Mike Dukakis speech this past Friday, we all learned how important railway systems are and may even have become quite passionate about them as well. Here's a link to an article in the Boston Globe that will show what the city of Boston is planning to do about expanding the T to offset pollution that has been increased due to the Big Dig.

State Set to Endorse 3 Railway Projects

New Grand Jury, Iraq News

2005-11-20T12:52:00.000-05:00

Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald has convened a new grand jury in the CIA Leak/Plamegate case. We can only guess as to what the results of this might mean, but we do know that it means his investigation of the Bush Administration is not complete.

Meanwhile, House Republicans on Friday played politics with Democratic hawk Rep. Murtha's statements against the Iraq war. They brought forth a resolution to the full House late Friday night (before the Thanksgiving recess) asking each member to vote on whether they agreed that troops should immediately withdrawn. They hoped to get Dems on record as to whether or not they support the war, but the resolution was overwhelmingly defeated, 403-3. Even Murtha voted against it. Another petty tactic by the GOP. Bush, meanwhile, soundly rejected any thought of troop withdrawal, saying it "won't happen on my watch." (I have no idea why they call this guy stubborn.) Reports, meanwhile, indicate that a withdrawal plan has reached Defense Secretary Rumsfeld's desk.

This issue is being talked about more and more: do you think it's time to consider phasing out our troops? Post your thoughts in the comments.

Murtha Rips the Iraq War

2005-11-17T22:13:00.000-05:00

John Murtha, a Democratic member of the House of Representatives from Pennsylvania, today attacked the President's policy in Iraq and called for an immediate withdrawal of troops.

Murtha, the chairman of the House Appropriations Committee, is one of the most hawkish of the House Democrats. In this morning's speech, while calling for the withdrawal, he had tears running down his face.

During his speech, he said, "It is time for a change in direction. Our military is suffering, the future of our country is at risk. We cannot continue on the present course. It is evident that continued military action in Iraq is not in the best interests of the United States of America, the Iraqi people or the Persian Gulf region."

In order to understand Murtha's influence on defense and security issues in Washington, consider the following statement from the Associated Press' article on his speech:

Murtha is known as an ally of uniformed officers in the Pentagon and on the battlefield. The perception on Capitol Hill is that when the congressman makes a statement on military issues, he's talking for those in uniform.

In response to Dick Cheney, who received five draft deferments during the Vietnam War and recently attacked Democrats who have criticized the war effort, Murtha said, "I like guys who've never been there that criticize us who've been there. I like that. I like guys who got five deferments and never been there and send people to war, and then don't like to hear suggestions about what needs to be done... I resent the fact, on Veterans Day, he criticized Democrats for criticizing them."

Patriot Act message from ACLU

2005-11-16T16:07:00.000-05:00

This email just came out from the ACLU of Massachusetts:

THE FINAL VERSION WILL BE VOTED ON THIS WEEK — AND IT IS BAD
After it seemed last week that the House and Senate conferees would support the Senate version of the reauthorized PATRIOT Act that introduced some reforms into its worst provisions, there was a total reversal yesterday when Democratic conferees were all but shut out of negotiations. The revised PATRIOT Act is more in line with the Bush Administration wish list -- I don’t yet have the details. It is expected to be voted on tomorrow (Thursday) in the House and maybe Friday in the Senate. Even through our entire Massachusetts delegation will in all probability oppose it, we need to call our Representatives and Senators in their district offices today and tomorrow. Tell them how alarmed you are by the news from Washington, and how important it is to us that they say NO to the revised PATRIOT Act! Give them good reason to tell Congress that their constituents are demanding that the PATRIOT Act be brought in line with the Constitution!

It looks like we have to gear up for many new battles ahead,
Nancy Murray
Director of Education
ACLU of Massachusetts
(617) 482-3170 x 314

More Concerns About Alito

2005-11-16T15:59:00.000-05:00

When President Bush nominated Sam Alito to the Supreme Court a few weeks ago, there was an initial uproar from Democratic senators - the GOP, meanwhile, was ecstatic. Since then, however, some of the opposition seems to have died down a bit, and senators such as Joe Biden (D-DE) ruled out the possibility of a filibuster.

Once more, Harry Reid (D-NV), the Senate Minority Leader, is taking a strong stance to protect the rights of all Americans. Reid today stated that he has "significant concerns" about Alito, signaling that the fight over this nominee is far from over. Democrats have apparently not ruled out a filibuster (thank God), and will not be pushed around by Republicans on the future of the Supreme Court and the country.

Alito is an extremist. He's against abortion, and doesn't seem to respect the consitutitional right to privacy either. His views on civil rights and women's rights are primitive at best. The President disregarded the Constitution's rules of "advice and consent" and failed to talk with Democratic Senators regarding Alito's nomination. Bush's attempt to sneak an ideologue onto the Court won't work, and I, for one, am proud of the strength Democratic leaders such as Harry Reid have shown in the past weeks. Let's encourage them to keep up the fight.

If you want to contact Senator Reid, his office's phone number is (202) 224-3542.
Contact information for every Senator can be found here.

Alito Opposed Right to Abortion

2005-11-14T15:30:00.000-05:00

Not that we ever had any doubt about this, but some of Alito's documents from 1985 have come out, and they show that he's firmly against abortion. Now the question is: will his respect for legal precedent overrule his anti-choice views?

Bush Makes Veterans Day Political

2005-11-11T13:53:00.000-05:00

On a day to remember all our courageous veterans who have risked/lost their lives to protect our great country, President Bush invoked a self-proclaimed "campaign-style strategy" to directly confront attacks by his political opponents.

Furthermore, in his speech today, President Bush said that the US must stay in Iraq to keep it from becoming a failed state and becoming a breeding ground for terrorists. Seems to me, neither of those two things were problems before we invaded. Even more, the banner behind the President read: "Strategy for Victory." Seems like thats a step back in the process of war from "Mission Accomplished."

On this day of rememberence, veterans, soldiers and all Americans look to the President to present a clear plan for the war that has already taken over 2,000 American lives and to honor those who have served so bravely to defend this country. Democrats simply demand the truth and a plan that will keep us truly safe, and restore America as the respected leader in the world. So far the President has shown us neither.

A Great Night to Be a Democrat!

2005-11-08T23:01:00.000-05:00

Results are in, and it's looking like a big night for Democrats!

Tim Kaine won the Governor's race in Virginia, defeating sleazeball Jerry Kilgore by about a 51-46% margin.

Jon Corzine defeated Doug Forrester to become the next Governor of New Jersey, winning solidly with a 53-43% victory.

More analysis later, but these wins, especially in the red state of Virginia, further emphasize the disarray of the Republican Party.

Examples of Republican Dirty Tricks

2005-11-08T11:53:00.000-05:00

The Virginia governor's race has become a prime example of some of the dirty tactics being used by the GOP all over the country.

Example 1: The Republican candidate, Jerry Kilgore, spliced together certain of the Democratic candidate, Tim Kaine's, comments and started running it in liberal areas of the state to try and make Kaine look more conservative than he really is.

[Voice of Tim Kaine] I am running for Governor and I am not afraid to tell you where I stand.
I am conservative on issues of personal responsibility. As a former Christian missionary, faith is central to my life. I oppose gay marriage. I support restrictions on abortion: No public funding and parental consent. And I've worked to pass a state law banning partial birth abortion.

Paid for and authorized by Honest Leadership for Virginia PAC.

Registration number 05-034.

Example 2: The GOP has been sending out a periodical which claims to be the "Official 2005 Democratic and Progressive Voter Guide" to liberal areas of the state. In it, claims are made that an independent candidate for governor is more progressive than Tim Kaine, the idea obviously being to try and split the progressive vote.

Front Page Inside Page And who paid for it

Open Thread

2005-11-04T13:16:00.000-05:00

Thought it was time we had one of these. Post comments with topics you'd like to discuss, thought on national or local politics. This is your chance be heard by our international audience. Sound off on Bush, Healy, Romney, Libby, anything, now is your time!

The 06 Governors Race

2005-11-03T18:03:00.000-05:00

Regardless of who you're supporting in the Democratic primary, be it Tom Reilly or Deval Patrick, it's important to remember that there are still Republicans in the governor's office who are out of touch with the people of Massachusetts.

While speaking in AM 680 this past Tuesday, Kerry Healy, the Lt. Governor of Massachusetts and potential 2006 GOP Gubernatorial nominee, stated that the children of illegal immigrants shouldn't be given scholarships to public Massachusetts universities.

She fails to remember that the children of these immigrants have done nothing wrong. They have already gone through the Massachusetts public school system, and their parents are in the workforce. When Attorney General Reilly called up to dispute her, she claimed that "they're not Americans" and as such not deserving of scholarships, and said instead "they should just go to private schools."

Even in the state of Massachusetts we have Republicans in the executive branch who are out of touch. It's high time they got sent home.

Fine, I'll join you kids in this crazy 'blog-o-sphere'

2005-11-03T00:37:00.000-05:00

Tufts Democrats

The last President with approval ratings this low was 'Tricky' Dick Nixon. In July of 1973 - with the Watergate scandal exploding - he had a 39% approval rating, 4 points higher then Dubya's. I've always thought Bush was a liar. Now it appears that the American People (motto: "oops we elected a lying incompetent who doesn't care about us") have come to the same conclusion. 10 more points and Bush will match Nixon's 25% approval rating - the lowest in history - from two weeks before he resigned the Presidency. Much like the plunge of a roller coaster, it's going to be a fun ride down.

On an unrelated note...When I'm nominated to the Supreme Court, I'm not going to duck the tough questions like Roberts did and it appears Alito is about to do. No matter if the pressing questions of the day - in 2034 - are about privacy, the separation of church and state or rather Martians should be allowed to buy human children for foodstuffs, I'll answer with honesty and candor. For those of you keeping score at home, the answers are: protected by the constitution, a founding principle of this nation and only with FDA oversight.

And don't forget!
AL FRANKEN
Tuesday, November 15th 5:00PM Cohen Auditorium
Tickets go on sale this Tuesday 11/8 9:00AM
Cohen Box Office
Tickets are $5
1 ticket/ID max 2 IDs/student

Bush's Approval Rating Drops Again

2005-11-02T20:37:00.000-05:00

According to a new CBS News poll, President Bush's approval rating has dropped again, this time to 35% - its lowest value ever. His disapproval rating is huge, at 57%. If the truth begins to take hold in the American public about Alito, could it drop even further?

Democrats Force Closed Senate Session

2005-11-01T16:08:00.000-05:00

Harry Reid, the Senate Minority Leader, forced the U.S. Senate into a closed session today against the wishes of Bill Frist and the Republican leadership. The lack of an investigation into both the faulty pre-Iraq war intelligence and the Plamegate scandal by the Senate is Reid's reason for doing so. This, in theory, will force the Republicans to finally man up and confront their own demons.

Amen Harry.

Conservatives Just Love Alito

2005-11-01T15:19:00.000-05:00

Republicans are just falling all over themselves with Alito.

A few quotes:

James Dobson, the idiot who told the world Karl Rove had given him personal assurances about Miers' stance on certain issues (most likely abortion), is "extremely pleased."

Operation: Rescue, an anti-abortion wingnut group, is saying that the country is now on "the fast-track to derailing Roe v. Wade as the law of the land."

President Bush: "He [Alito] has a deep understanding of the proper role of judges in our society. He understands that judges are to interpret the laws, not to impose their preferences or priorities on the people."

Ah yes. Which is how he somehow managed to write that employers can refuse to hire or promote minorities if the employer is racist. Because in such a case, they are applying their own standards of what constitutes a worthy employee. I seem to remember from middle school history class that we had put in constitutional amendments prohibiting that sort of thing.

My personal favorite quote, however, is from Senator DeWine from Ohio.

He believes that Alito is "clearly within the mainstream," and, he says, "it's hard for me to envision that anyone would think about filibustering this nominee."

Clearly within the mainstream? Is he for real? How many Americans believe that a woman must notify her husband if she is going to have an abortion? (Personally, I wonder if a man has an affair with another woman if he has to notify his wife when his mistress is giong to have an abortion).

How many Americans think it's ok to strip search a ten year old girl when a search warrant had been issued for her father? Well Alito does.

And you know what that sounds like to me? Judicial activism (*gasp*). When you expand the terms of a narrowly defined search warrant to include ten year old girls, that's reading into the law what's not there. When you ignore constitutional amendments about discrimination on the basis of race, you're not just reading new elements into the law, you're completely ignoring them.

The Republican party has monopolized the use of the "judicial activist" term. It needs to be taken back and shown for what it is. The truth is, both conservatives and liberals are going to be activist in the courts. The key is whether or not they're active in protecting individual rights, or turning them back to the stone age.

On Allito

2005-10-31T13:41:00.000-05:00

From the Progress Report:

Samuel Alito's America
The right wing demanded the withdrawal of Harriet Miers so she could be replaced with a judge who met their rigid, ideological litmus test. This morning, the conservatives got what they wanted. President Bush will nominate Third Circuite Appeal Court Judge Samuel Alito as the replacement for swing-voter Sandra Day O'Connor. (In contrast, John Roberts replaced the very conservative William Rehnquist.) On NBC's Today Show, law professor Jonathan Turley said there "will be no one to the right of Sam Alito" on the Supreme Court. Alito's record supports Turley's view. His history of right-wing judicial activism will be a key issue during his hearings.

ALITO WOULD OVERTURN ROE V. WADE: In his dissenting opinion in Planned Parenthood v. Casey, Alito concurred with the majority in supporting the restrictive abortion-related measures passed by the Pennsylvania legislature in the late 1980s. Alito went further, however, saying the majority was wrong to strike down a requirement that women notify their spouses before having an abortion. The Supreme Court later rejected Alito’s view and also voted to reaffirm Roe v. Wade. [Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey, 1991]

Unbelieveable -- a woman must notify her spouse before an abortion. That's not just turning back the clock on abortion, it's turning back the clock on women as independent thinkers.

ALITO WOULD ALLOW RACE-BASED DISCRIMINATION: Alito dissented from a decision in favor of a Marriott Hotel manager who said she had been discriminated against on the basis of race. The majority explained that Alito would have protected racist employers by “immuniz[ing] an employer from the reach of Title VII if the employer’s belief that it had selected the ‘best’ candidate was the result of conscious racial bias.” [Bray v. Marriott Hotels, 1997]

So basically, if the person is racist then they are allowed to discriminate against the people they don't like. Don't need to explain how ridiculous that one is.

ALITO WOULD ALLOW DISABILITY-BASED DISCRIMINATION: In Nathanson v. Medical College of Pennsylvania, the majority said the standard for proving disability-based discrimination articulated in Alito’s dissent was so restrictive that “few if any…cases would survive summary judgment.” Summary judgment allows a case to be dismissed before it goes to trial. [Nathanson v.Medical College of Pennsylvania, 1991.

ALITO WOULD STRIKE DOWN THE FAMILY AND MEDICAL LEAVE ACT: The Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) "guarantees most workers up to 12 weeks of unpaid leave to care for a loved one." The 2003 Supreme Court ruling upholding FMLA [Nevada v. Hibbs, 2003] essentially reversed a 2000 decision by Alito which found that Congress exceeded its power in passing the law. [Chittister v. Department of Community and Economic Development, 2000]

ALITO SUPPORTS UNAUTHORIZED STRIP SEARCHES: In Doe v. Groody, Alito argued that police officers had not violated constitutional rights when they strip-searched a mother and her ten-year-old daughter while carrying out a search warrant that authorized only the search of a man and his home. [Doe v. Groody, 2004]

ALITO HOSTILE TOWARD IMMIGRANTS: In two cases involving the deportation of immigrants, the majority twice noted Alito’s disregard of settled law. In Dia v. Ashcroft, the majority opinion states that Alito’s dissent “guts the statutory standard” and “ignores our precedent.” In Ki Se Lee v. Ashcroft, the majority stated Alito’s opinion contradicted “well-recognized rules of statutory construction.” [Dia v. Ashcroft, 2003; Ki Se Lee v. Ashcroft, 2004]

All of these display an extraordinary disregard for the progress that has been made in the rights of all Americans over the past half century or so. Be it the disabled, the rights of women, the rights of persons against illegal search and seizure, or the rights of those newly arrived in our great country, Allito has consistently shown an animus towards them.

Shame on President Bush for caving to his extremist base and nominating a man of such outlandish views. While many are calling him the next Scalia, I would argue that he goes even farther. Scalia, at the very least, is consistent in his limited view of the constitution -- for example, he ruled against the Bush Administration's "unlawful combatants" argument, saying that the constitution had nothing which said that such a designation was legitimate. Yet Allito has consistently taken positions entirely contrary to constitutional protections, such as those banning illegal search and seizure and race-based discrimination. He's not merely being a "judicial activist," which Republicans say they deplore -- he's trying to pretend the constitution doesn't even exist.

SCOTUS Nominee: Another White Male

2005-10-31T10:27:00.000-05:00

President Bush has nominated Justice Samuel Alito to fill Sandra Day O'Connor's place on the Supreme Court, following Harriet Miers' withdrawal last week. Alito is a hardcore conservative. He's been nicknamed "Scalito" for his similarities to Justice Antonin Scalia. This could be a real fight.

For the news story on Alito's nomination, click here.

It's obvious that with this nomination Bush is playing solely to his base - the same base that forced Miers to withdraw.

Bush's Crumbling Presidency

2005-10-30T10:01:00.000-05:00

The Washington Post has been writing for days about the mounting problems the Administration is facing. This article is particularly good, and is the lead story in the Post today. It talks about the particularly complex set of challenges Bush is facing, and and he can go about dealing with them. It looks like it's going to be a long road.

Never Fear

2005-10-28T20:03:00.000-04:00

Karl Rove, according to his lawyer, is still under invetigation. His counterpart in the vice president's office, Lewis Libby, was of course indicted today, as you can read below.

"The special counsel has advised Mr. Rove that he has made no decision about whether or not to bring charges," attorney Robert Luskin said. "We are confident that when the special counsel finishes his work, he will conclude that Mr. Rove has done nothing wrong."

Prosecutors identified Rove in the Libby indictment only as "Official A," recounting a conversation he had with Libby about Plame and Wilson in the days just before the CIA operative's identity was revealed. The mention could make Rove a witness at any Libby trial.

Hopefully Rove can get dragged into this mess the White House has created for itself as well. He certainly deserves it.

But more importantly, the American people deserve a full accounting of what happened. Libby, who lied to the grand jury, is another symptom of the plague the Bush Administration has perpetuated in Washington -- politics above the best interests of the nation.

It is a plague which should be cured -- one Bush Administration member at a time.

Libby Indicted

2005-10-28T12:54:00.000-04:00

Lewis Libby has been indicted in the CIA Leak case. He's charged with one count of obstruction of justice, two counts of making false statements, and two counts of perjury.

Yay!

Plamegate Update

2005-10-28T11:16:00.000-04:00

CNN is now reporting that Lewis "Scooter" Libby, Vice President Cheney's Chief of Staff, will be indicted today. Special Prosecutor Fitzgerald is expected to hold a news conference at 2pm to announce the results of his 2 years of investigation. CNN also reports that Karl Rove will be spared indictment for now, but that he is not yet out of legal jeopardy. The investigation may continue. Until 2pm, everything is rumor. Kudos, however, to Fitzgerald for conducting a private and thorough investigation and not leaking to the press - the opposite of Ken Starr's investigation of President Clinton a few years ago, which "leaked like a sieve."

Indictments Friday?

2005-10-27T23:56:00.000-04:00

So it's entirely possible that Libby will be indicted tomorrow (or Friday, as this is technically late Friday night), for making false statements to the grand jury.

Karl Rove also appears to be a possibility, though his indictment is less certain than Libby. My personal opinion is that Rove should be indicted just for being detrimental to society in general, but apparently that's not against the law.

For a more in depth analysis (my brain capacity at this current moment is a tad limited), check out this.

Have fun guys and hopefully tomorrow will be Fitzmas.

Cheers to the continuing downfall of the Bush Administration.

Miers Withdraws Nomination

2005-10-27T10:30:00.000-04:00

Facing strong conservative opposition, Harriet Miers has withdrawn her nomination to the Supreme Court. Citing the "that the confirmation process presents a burden for the White House and its staff," she submitted a letter to the President this morning. We'll have to see what the fallout of this is in the next few days, but for now, it's certainly another blow to a hurting White House.

Indictments Coming?

2005-10-26T10:17:00.000-04:00

Could today be the day the special prosecutor hands down indictments to Bush Administration officials for Plamegate? That's the prevailing rumor, but we can only wait and see. Stay tuned...

UPDATE (11:30am): Sources are now saying that Fitzgerald will not announce any indictments today. Looks like another day of suspense.

New Poll Out, And It's Good News for Democrats

2005-10-26T02:24:00.000-04:00

There's a new poll out from CNN/USA Today/Gallup, and it's all beautiful stuff for Democrats.

Highlights include:

In a hypothetical election, Bush would lose to a Democratic candidate 55-39.

On who would better handle the following issues:

Democrats are better at health care by a score of 59-30.
Democrats are better at Social Security by a score of 56-33.
Democrats are better at gasoline prices by a score of 51-31.
Democrats are better at the economy by a score of 50-38.
Democrats are better at the Iraq situation by a score of 46-40 (a huge reversal from 2003, when it was 53-29 in favor the GOP).

This is really looking up. But at the same time, let's remember that everything can change in one year... just remember where we were last October. The work needs to be kept up.

The Executive Branch Gone Awry

2005-10-25T01:52:00.000-04:00

From the Boston Sunday Globe:

In John Yoo's world, President Bush didn't need to ask Congress for permission to invade Iraq. And if the special forces captured a terrorist suspect who might know of an upcoming attack on the New York subway, Bush could order him placed on a torture rack -- regardless of treaties the US has signed or whether Congress has passed laws banning torture.

...The Supreme Court faces several cases concerning how much control the president has over military detainees. And last week, Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice told the Senate Foreign Relations Committee that the president has the right to attack Syria, without congressional approval, if he deems that a necessary move in the war on terror.

I don't need to tell you how bad this sort of thing is. I don't believe that the removal of the Syrian government is necessarily a bad thing. Were the U.S. not involved so heavily in Iraq due to the incompetence of the Bush Administration, it may not be such a bad idea. But the idea that the president should be able to simply invade countries without consulting Congress offends everything this government stands for.

Continuing....

When it comes to foreign policy and the president's role as commander in chief, "Yoo concludes for all intents and purposes we have an elected king," says Michael J. Glennon, a professor of international law at Tufts University's Fletcher School, reflecting a commong view among left and centrist scholars.

Sorry, I had to do the Tufts plug. But keep reading.

Yoo wants to revise our understanding of the Constitution in two areas: presidential war powers and the interpretation of treaties...

The 18th century understanding of "declaring war," Yoo [says], was different from ours. When Britain declared war on France in 1756, for example... the two countries had been fighting in North America for two years already... [and so] if the framers meant "make war," but wrote "declare war," they would be "very clumsy draftsmen indeed."

This is a ridiculous attempt to assert executive power without knowing the consequences. Yes, indeed, at certain times it is legitimate for the president to assert American military might without congressional approval -- mainly in situations where the security of the nation cannot wait another moment. But Yoo's assertion that the president has the right to make war no matter what the situation, and completely without the consultation of the other branches of government -- which is essentially what he is saying -- neglects the premise of the founder's thought process. Checks and balances were the key. The creation of foreign policy was meant to be a joint enterprise between the legislative and executive branches, and Yoo tries to say that it is only the executive's job.

Yoo's other revisionist project -- the more arcane question of who gets to enforce international treaties -- bears directly on the issue of military detainees at Guantanamo Bay. Here, too, his critics say his constitutional readings are just a little too clever for their own good.

The Constitution makes treaties -- along with federal law -- "the Supreme Law of the Land." Yet Yoo, exploring how early US treaties were actually managed, says that the founders understanding was that in cases in which treaties affect domestic law, Congress has to pass legislation "executing" them...

"He has 200 years of Supreme Court precedent against him on that one," says Michael van Alstine, as the University of Maryland's law school.

Once again, Yoo has it wrong. It would be completely against America's role in the world to go against treaties we have signed. As a global leader, we have an obligation to do just that -- lead. To sign international agreements and then hide from them under the argument that they were never put into national law is absurd at best.

And lastly...

[Some] say a little judicial management at Guantanamo might not be a bad idea. "There is nothing that says the courts have to sit on the sideline and abide by the executive's judgement," says the Fletcher School's Glennon.

To the contrary, says Yoo, that's exactly what the Constitution says the courts must do: bench themselves. And the Supreme Court -- divided on this question -- will soon decide whether it agrees.

Yoo, by the way, has served in the Bush Administration and seems to be representative of what they are trying to do, which involves the enlargement of the power of the executive branch at the expense of the three other branches. This is anathema to what the founders believed, and should still be anathema to us today.

This is the fight we are fighting. The stakes are too high. We must prevail.

Rosa Parks Dies

2005-10-24T23:39:00.000-04:00

One of the most influential civil rights activists, Rosa Parks, died on Monday at the age of 92. Her courageous actions in December 1955 sparked a 381-day boycott of the bus systems in Alabama that eventually led to the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Full story here: http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/10/24/parks.obit/index.html

Great Weekend!

2005-10-23T20:38:00.000-04:00

About 15 Tufts Democrats just got back from Clark University, where we had a terrific weekend at a "mini-camp" campaign training. The training was conducted by the Emily's List Campaign Corps, a program that provides one of the top campaign trainings in the nation every summer. We studied all aspects of a campaign, from fundraising and field work to volunteer coordination and voter targeting. Truly an incredible experience...if you'd like to know more, just ask one of your fellow Jumbos who attended!

2005-10-21T13:18:00.000-04:00

Tom DeLay's mugshot. Unfortunately, the district in Texas no longer uses numbers to identify suspects. Obviously, DeLay's smiling on purpose to make this seem like a normal photo. It's too bad we all know he's a crook anyway.

Rove and Libby Discussed Plame

2005-10-20T15:43:00.000-04:00

Karl Rove testified today before a grand jury that he had discussed with Lewis Libby, Dick Cheney's Chief of Staff, about their contacts with reporters regarding Valerie Plame days before the story was broken about Plame being a CIA operative.

Rove maintains that his comments to reporters about Plame were never intended to serve as a confirmation of her as an undercover operative. Robert Novak, who first wrote that Plame was an agent, said that he had talked to Rove about it beforehand, and Rove said he had heard similar reports.

That sounds like a pretty decent confirmation to me.

In addition, Libby testified that several reporters had known about Plame's identity in the weeks before it came out, and that he had discussed it with Rove. However, it would seem that Libby probably made at least one of them aware of it for the first time. Judith Miller, the New York Times reporter who also had knowledge of the story, had in her notes about a conversation with Libby the mention of one "Valery Flame." Despite the misspellings, this is almost certainly a reference to Plame, and indicates that Libby was the one who first brought it to her attention.

Part of the keys to this case is being able to establish whether or not Rove and Libby's conversations were part of an actual effort to discredit Joseph Wilson, Plame's husband, or whether it was part of the usual political gossip and rumor milling. Regardless of whether or not it's proven, however, the scandal has already done a lot to damage the reputation of the administration.

DeLay Arrested

2005-10-20T15:31:00.000-04:00

So Tom DeLay got his mugshot photo taken and his fingerprints recorded today. He sure looks like the happiest man under arrest I've ever seen.

He was released when he posted his $10,000 bond.

2006 Senate Races

2005-10-19T20:44:00.000-04:00

Here's a very nice, in-depth look at the Senate races for 2006. Figured you guys might want to take a look... it certainly seems to bode well for Democrats.

Go Dems.

Arrest Warrant Issued for Tom DeLay

2005-10-19T15:51:00.000-04:00

An arrest warrant was issued today for Tom DeLay. It's a routine step for everyone before they have to make a court appearance.

But hey, it's still awesome.

Bush's Poll Numbers

2005-10-18T16:42:00.000-04:00

Bush's approval rating is hovering in the high thirties right now. But have you wondered how he fares from state to state?

Currently only six states have approval ratings for President Bush above fifty percent. He's dropping like a stone. Below are the poll results for states Bush won in 2004 and states Kerry won in the same election. The numbers are Approve-Disapprove.

BUSH STATES: Alabama (48-49), Alaska (52-44), Arkansas (38-58), Arizona (40-55), Colorado (42-57), Florida (41-58), Georgia (46-52), Idaho (55-44), Indiana (44-53), Iowa (38-61), Kansas (43-54), Kentucky (46-50), Louisiana (48-49), Mississippi (48-49), Missouri (39-59), Montana (49-49), Nebraska (52-45), Nevada (37-60) New Mexico (39-58), North Carolina (41-56), North Dakota (49-48), Ohio (37-61), Oklahoma (51-46), South Carolina (40-58), South Dakota (41-56), Tennessee (40-57), Texas (42-54), Utah (61-36), Virginia (41-56), West Virginia (43-55), Wyoming (54-44).

KERRY STATES: California (32-65), Connecticut (32-66), Delaware (33-65), Hawaii (39-54), Illinois (32-66), Maine (33-66), Maryland (33-64), Massachusetts (28-68), Michigan (33-65), Minnesota (39-58), New Hampshire (37-61), New Jersey (34-64), New York (30-66), Oregon (38-59), Pennsylvania (36-62), Rhode Island (29-70), Vermont (29-69), Washington (38-59), Wisconsin (36-61).

Some of the results which are particularly interesting include Texas, where Bush's approve-disapprove is at 42-54 and Ohio, where it is now 37-61 (if only that had been true a year ago).

In addition, the three states where Bush's approval rating is below thirty are all New England states -- Massachusetts, Rhode Island, and Vermont.

Naturally, Massachusetts ranks dead last (or first, if you want to think of it that way), at 28%.

Also, if you put this into electoral college numbers, and give Bush the states where the polling was even (out of courtesy), Kerry, or any other Democratic nominee, would have won 505-33.... That's called a landslide

The poll was conducted by SurveyUSA and was released today, October 18. If you want to check out the results, click here.

Harriet Miers and Other Supreme Court Stuff

2005-10-18T10:31:00.000-04:00

Harriet Miers is a supporter of increasing the power of the already strong executive branch, according to The Boston Globe. This brings into question her ability to understand constitutional issues of seperation of powers.

From the Globe:

Earlier this year, Supreme Court nominee Harriet E. Miers used several speeches to push for expanding President Bush's powers to protect the United States against terrorism, arguing that "a nation at war" needs a stronger executive branch, according to transcripts the White House has provided...

In her speeches to conservative groups, Miers called for extension of the Patriot Act, which expands law enforcement agencies' power to investigate suspected terrorists.

She defended Vice President Dick Cheney's closed-door energy task force as the best way for the administration to use confidential deliberations to set national policy. And she said her role as White House counsel was general to "protect against any attempted infringement on the appropriate role of the executive branch."

First of all, calling for the extension of the PATRIOT Act, whose provisions include the "sneek and peak" allowing the government to enter your home and search without any notification or a search warrant, shows a lack of understanding of the Bill of Rights. Beyond that, she has supported the use of "confidential deliberations to set national policy." The very essence of American democracy is undermined by that. Debate and dialogue is key for the success of our nation; the use of closed-door meetings to set policy flies in the face of this.

The more that we learn about Miers, the more it starts to smell. At first, the crumbling of the Republican party in the face of the nomination was a cause for joy. However, with her effusive praise of the President, her lack of a track record that would lead one to believe she has a strong judicial mind, the apparent private reassurances given to conservatives like James Dobson about her stance on Roe v. Wade, and now her belief in the extension of executive power and the use of secrecy in setting national policy, it has become increasingly clear that she is not someone whom the Democrats should support.

IN OTHER SUPREME COURT NEWS.....

From The Washington Post:

Issuing its first abortion-related decision under new Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr., the Supreme Court yesterday refused to block the court-ordered transport of a female prison inmate to an outside clinic for an abortion.

At this point it could not be ascertained whether or not Roberts voted for or against the ruling... but either way it's good to see and abortion isn't on the outs quite yet.

Oh. My. God.

2005-10-18T00:11:00.000-04:00

If this actually happens, I don't know what I'll do with myself.
This is the top story on the Washington Post website.

Elections - Three Weeks Away

2005-10-17T23:19:00.000-04:00

It's true, there are no national elections this year. Many liberal groups are still regrouping after last year's election, and turning their attention to Senate and House races in 2006. It's easy to forget about some important races that are being contested this year, however. Besides local races, which I'll detail soon, the two most important '05 elections are the Governors' races in New Jersey and Virginia.

In New Jersey, current Democratic Senator Jon Corzine is running against Republican Doug Forrester, a government contractor who also ran for Senate in 2002. New Jersey, traditionally a Democratic state, is currently polling with Corzine 7-10% in the lead. Remember, however, that Republicans in 2004 targeted New Jersey as a possible state to "steal" from the Dems. If Corzine is elected, he will be able to pick his replacement in the Senate, so there is no danger of his seat falling to the Republican side. For more information on Corzine, check out his website, here.

Virginia's Governor's race is undoubtedly the most hotly contested this year. With current Governor Mark Warner's term ending, Democratic Lieutenant Governor Tim Kaine is facing former Republican Attorney General Jerry Kilgore and Independent State Senator Russ Potts (who will likely not be much of a factor). Kaine and Kilgore are polling neck-and-neck, and the contest will certainly make for an exciting few weeks. In recent days, Kilgore has been accused of "swiftboating" Kaine, due to his inflammatory ads featuring Adolf Hitler. It appears this technique of unfair and over-the-top accusations, though helpful for Bush over Kerry, may be backfiring for Kilgore. Kaine has moved into the lead in the polls in the past few days. Here's the link to Tim Kaine's website. If you've got a few bucks lying around, he could probably use it.

Why are Governor's races important? Simply put, a whole hell of a lot of laws are made and modified on the state level. The more Democratic Governors there are, the better.

See you at the meeting Tuesday at 9, in Braker 001!

The Iraq Vote: Step Forward or Step Back?

2005-10-17T13:58:00.000-04:00

The Iraqi people stepped forward to vote on a new constitution on Saturday. No matter which way you cut it, this is a major event. It would have been difficult to imagine more than a few years ago that a nation in the Middle East, and in particular Iraq, would have been voting on a constitution.

But there is far more to it than that.

President Bush, in his radio address this weekend, said the following:

"After choosing their leaders in free elections in January, the Iraqi people have gone to the polls to vote on a democratic constitution. This constitution is the result of months of debate and compromise by representatives of Iraq's diverse ethnic and religious communities.
"These leaders came together to produce a document that protects fundamental freedoms and lays the foundation for a lasting democracy."

But he's missing the point -- or at the very least he's covering it up to try and gain political points.

The bolded passages indicate a fundamental falsehood. The Sunni regions of Iraq -- where the insurgency is at its strongest -- came out in full force against the new constitution. The "representatives of Iraq's diverse ethnic and religious communities" barely included the Sunnis at the beginning of the process. As a result, the constitution goes much farther towards putting the Kurds and Shi'ites in positions of power and cutting out the Sunnis -- not a fertile ground for a liberal democracy.

In addition, saying that this constitution "lays the foundations for a lasting democracy" is jumping the gun entirely. The Sunnis, voting strongly against the document, don't see themselves as being granted a place in this new democracy. That will likely fuel the insurgency, undercutting the attempts at good governance and the unity of the country.

President Bush needs to make an effort to bring Sunnis into the process. He has failed at that undertaking so far, taking half-measures and false steps in order to make it appear to the American people that progress is being made. If he doesn't stop, Iraq could become even messier than it already is.

The Republicans: Ignoring Treason for Political Gain

2005-10-17T12:12:00.000-04:00

This is from Joe Aravosis at AmericaBlog. It pretty much puts everything in perspective.

If a senior White House staffer had intentionally outed an American spy during World War II, he'd have been shot.
We're at war, George Bush keeps reminding us. We cannot continue with business as usual. A pre-9/11 mentality is deadly. Putting the lives of our troops at risk is treason.

Then why is the White House and the Republican party engaged in a concerted campaign to make treason acceptable during a time of war? That's exactly what they're doing. On numerous news shows today, Republican surrogates, their talking points ready, issued variations of the following concerning White House chief of staff Karl Rove's outing of a covert CIA agent as part of a political vendetta:

It's the criminalization of politics
Is this 'minor' leak really worth all this?
Political payback is common and should not be criminalized
Mis-speaking or mis-remembering is not a crime

Yes, the Republicans are now making light of an intentional effort to expose an undercover CIA agent, working on weapons of mass destruction in the Middle East, no less, while we are at war in the Middle East on that very issue.
The GOP has become the party of treason.

It would be one thing for a senior adviser to the president to put the nation's security at risk during a time of war. That could be explained as an aberration - a quite serious one, no doubt - but a fluke nonetheless. But when the president himself refuses to keep his own word about firing that aberration, and when the entire Republican party rallies around that fluke and tries to minimize what is usually a capital offense during wartime, something is seriously wrong with that party and its leadership.

America is ignoring the Geneva Conventions because our president feels that winning this war is so paramount. Our Congress has watered down our civil rights laws. We have jailed American citizens with no access to legal counsel. And our President even believes it is worth lying to the American people in order to wage this so-important battle. All this because we are a nation at war and nothing will be permitted to stand in the way of this life-and-death struggle.

But when a senior aide to the President of the United States endangers the life of an undercover CIA agent, her colleagues and contacts around the world - when he chooses to put at risk our entire effort to undercover weapons of mass destruction before they are used to kill millions in an American city - what response do we get from the Bush White House and the Republican Party? A defensive (offensive) shrug.

The Republican party's gift to the American people, and the Bush administration's legacy, will be the normalization of treason. They are trying to convince Americans that betraying our country during wartime for personal gain is no more serious than running a stop sign or going 60 in a 55 zone.

If a senior aide to the president had intentionally outed an American undercover agent during World War II, an agent whose work was central to our mission of defeating the Germans, that aide would very likely be put to death. While no one is yet arguing that Karl Rove be executed, it is the height of hypocrisy and hubris for the Republican party to attempt to minimize a crime that not only puts our troops at risk, but risks the lives of every American man, woman and child.

It is truly a sad day when the Republican party minimizes treason in a selfish attempt to defend a traitor. President Bush has yet to give a clear explanation as to why 2,000 Americans have given their lives in Iraq. But one thing is for sure. It wasn't to defend our right to treason.

Karl Rove and Lewis Libby have committed a treasonable offense by giving up the name of an American spy. When you think about it, wasn't this why Republicans like Ann Coulter love Joe McCarthy -- because he supposedly was going after people who were doing the same thing?

But with the Republicans, and in particular the Bush Administration, politics trumps everything. National security is irrelevant to them; all that matters is keeping power and maintaining public office.

Frist Subpoenaed

2005-10-13T15:09:00.000-04:00

Bill Frist, leader of the Republicans in the U.S. Senate, has been subpoenaed by the Securities and Exchange Commission to turn over documents which may pertain to insider trading.

Frist is expected to testify about the sale of his personal stocks in a hospital operation firm co-founded by his father. The stock price proceeded to take a dive just days after the sale. Frist, who seems to pride himself on his inability to be corrupted, may not in fact be as squeaky clean as he likes to think. Senators are expected to maintain stocks in which they may have an interest in blind trusts, but it seems that Frist may have not done so, further damaging his ability to dodge the possible charges of insider trading.

Now let's step back and take a look at this for a moment -- in just the last few weeks, Karl Rove, Bill Frist, and Tom DeLay are all under heavy fire, and all may face criminal charges. The president's approval rating is hovering at below 40 percent. The Republican party is on the verge of splitting itself in half.

The culture of corruption seems to run far deeper than we thought -- but it seems that the American people are finally starting to wake up and realize it. That means good things for Democrats, and for our country.

Bush Using a Different Kind of Litmus Test

2005-10-12T18:47:00.000-04:00

President Bush, under fire from both the left and the right for his nomination of Harriet Miers to the Supreme Court, announced today what played a huge role in his decision -- Miers religious beliefs.

"People are interested to know why I picked Harriet Miers," Bush told reporters at the White House. "Part of Harriet Miers' life is her religion."

So now the president has announced to the country that Miers' religious beliefs were one of the main reasons for her nomination. To nominate someone based on their religion goes against everything this country has been founded on, as it leads to the conclusion that only those of a certain religious persuasion would be allowed to occupy higher offices such as the Supreme Court.

Now the Senate will have to find out just what her religious beliefs are, something that normally would be completely out of bounds. But the president has brought such a situation upon himself, and upon Harriet Miers.

Boston losing its status as the Higher Education Capital of the Country?

2005-10-12T11:01:00.000-04:00

With all the talk about very pressing national issues, it is often easy to forget about the many local issues that are very important and hit very close to home. One of those is the issue of funding for higher education in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts.

Tufts was a collaborator on a report that stated that there are "warning clouds on the horizon" that areas such as Philadelphia and the Research Triangle in North Carolina are challenging Boston's status as education capital of the country as colleges in those areas are rising, and more and more educated young people are leaving the region due to high costs of living.

The bigger issue behind this is the problem with funding for higher education. The Commonwealth spends more money each year on prisons than it does on spending related to higher education and has dropped from 9th to 34th in the nation on higher education spending.

While it may appear that this doesn't effect a private school like Tufts, it does. Cities and towns like Medford and Somerville rely heavily on property taxes for their revenue. Since colleges are non-profits, they don't pay property taxes. Many cities (Boston, Somerville and Medford included) ask for payments-in-lieu of taxes to make up the difference. This puts area schools at a competitive disadvantage, since many other states, such as Connecticut, directly pay cities and towns up to 80% of the revenue lost by non-profits within their borders, allowing colleges and universities to use their money for educational purposes.

In this "new economy" with the growth of tech and other high-skilled jobs as well as the exportation of entry-level positions overseas, it seems like investing in higher education should be a priority for every state in the union, and new solutions for funding education at all levels need to be brainstormed.