Thieves in the Temple.

one step at a time.

Incredibly, House Speaker Pelosi might let Congress rubberstamp Mr. Bush's warrantless wiretapping program, via something called the "FISA Modernization" bill. What on earth is she thinking? What exactly is insufficiently "modern" about giving the President three days to get a warrant from a FISA judge, which the FISA law already lets you do? Why does the proposal bait-and-switch us by assuaging imaginary concerns about the "purpose" of warrantless surveillance efforts, when the method offends us? Can't Tha Bush Mobb hear a damn thing? The Electronic Freedom Foundation helps you call your Reps.

I have another contact tool, this one from Unionvoice, in which we instruct our Senators to make the SCHIP reauth bill veto-proof (the House tally was about four votes short of the two-thirds required). In my zeal to say so-effing-what to Mr. Bush's claim that the SCHIP reauth would lead too many people away from private health insurers, I missed even simpler retorts: these kids, who would now be getting health care because of the SCHIP reauth bill, are already entitled to it under the SCHIP program. And those kids don't have any health care now, private or otherwise. Dumb old Bush.

H.R. 969, the Federal Renewable Energy Standards Act, would require retail electricity suppliers to generate 20 percent of their energy from renewable energy sources (like solar and wind) by the year 2020. I'm not a big fan of trading "renewable energy credits" -- I think, since it's our government, we can just tell utilities to get to 20 percent or stuff it -- and I envision an energy grid where our own household renewable efforts comprise more than 20 percent of that grid. But the bill does represent progress -- which progress, needless to say, coal and oil companies are fighting tooth and nail as we speak. MoveOn provides the relevant petition.

gonna get through this world.

Looking for yet another reason to oppose recent bipartisan "free" trade efforts? They'd hamper our ability to keep unsafe foods away from ourselves, our children, and our pets. You see, restricting unsafe foods would "hurt" the foreign and domestic corporations who make or sell those foods, and stopping that wouldn't be "free" trade. The federal government, it seems, would rather have corporations free to make us sick or dead than have us free to avoid becoming sick or dead. But you can petition Congress to do better, using a link embedded within the link above. And, you know, by buying local/organic as much as you can.

H.R. 3406, the "Social Security Number Privacy and Identity Theft Prevention Act of 2007," would restrict businesses and government agencies from selling or displaying your Social Security number, like on checks and ID tags. Sec. 8(B)(3)(a)(ii) also says a business can't compel you to reveal your Social Security number as a condition of sale, which is terrific. The bill would generally compel your government to pre-empt as much identity theft as it can, and right-wing rageheads should note that the bill specifically exempts law-enforcement concerns. Consumers Union provides the contact tool.

Congress leaves for its vacation later on this week, which is generally an occasion to rejoice, but Mr. Bush has been pitching such a hissy fit about it that I feel compelled to defend them. Mr. Bush doesn't want Congress to leave until they "at least" give him a Defense Appropriations bill to sign. But Congress has the whole month of September to pass a Defense Appropriations bill. And Mr. Bush seems less concerned that Iraq's parliament plans to take August off although they are in the middle of a war zone and have more substantial work to do. Mr. Bush can whine about "troops in harm's way" (those would be the same troops he ordered there for no damn good reason) all he wants, but he sounds like a damn kid stomping his feet when he doesn't get his chocolate. Don't bet on the "liberal" media to tell you that, though.

penny rants for the day of July 29, 2007: liberal liberal liberal liberal liberal liberal liberal liberal liberal liberal liberal liberal liberal liberal liberal liberal liberal!

The inimitable Michael Savage thinks what we did to Don Imus was like what-Nazis-did-to-the-Jews. And I remember it well, how we deprived Don Imus of his livelihood, and then sewed a gold star into his shirt, and then tattooed him and put him behind chickenwire and worked him to death building our great liberal war machine, and, finally, gassed him and turned his body into soap. Well, OK, we did the first thing, but, really, we did him a favor, since his "livelihood" wasn't a real job, but a job being obnoxious for the amusement of American elites. But I sincerely hope that the idiots who seem to compare every imagined oppression to "what Nazis did to the Jews" these days will read the above, and be reminded of what real oppression is, and become ashamed. Nah, those guys have no shame -- that's why we need to shame their advertisers. Still, a man can hope.

A relatively sympathetic soul decides the Fairness Doctrine is a bad idea. I think he's just wrong. I agree that I'd rather have rallies against media ownership concentration, but the Fairness Doctrine would require reports on the public airwaves to get other opinions besides the government's, and that's a good thing. And I don't agree with many of the author's other claims, either. I think he overstates the number of "drive-by" listeners -- they're not a movement, or even a significant part of the audience share, just because they exist. And comparing Rush Limbaugh's number of listeners to NPR's is a bit specious, too, since Mr. Limbaugh is but one of many right-wing windbags. But the author stands on his shakiest ground when he simultaneously declares that "there's no shortage of debate and no deficit of conflicting opinions in the current media landscape" (!) and that "the massive concentration of communication power in an ever-shrinking bucket" is a problem. As I and many smarter people have long argued, concentration strangulates debate.

A few days after Hillary Clinton told us she's too good for the word "liberal," Rasmussen Reports tells us that most Americans, like Hillary, think the word "progressive" is better. They also dutifuly tell us that voters like the word "Reagan-like" better than the word "conservative," but "Reagan-like" doesn't roll off your tongue the same way, and anyway that's not the fault of the word "conservative," a word which Tha Bush Mobb and their enablers have debased at least as badly as they've done to the word "liberal." So not only will we have legions of liberals retreating from the word "liberal," we'll soon have the utter debasement of the word "progressive" as well -- Bill Richardson, who's might be "progressive" on drugs but not taxes, will probably tattoo the word on his forehead, just like John Kerry now fills his emails with the word "grassroots" when the man is, like, so not grassroots.

Local right-wing talker Michael Smerconish wonders why we don't hunt down bin Laden. Sparks of independence occasionally emanate from Mr. Smerconish, so he must give Mr. Bush holy hell in this article, right? Well, not exactly -- the word "Bush" doesn't appear once therein. And what of the Iraq war, which many on both sides of the ideological fence say detracts from any effort we might undertake to get bin Laden? Not a mention of that, either; perhaps these are separate issues for Mr. Smerconish. So what do we get? Some description of recent bin Laden-related events in Pakistan, and a series of laments that Presidential candidates don't get asked about bin Laden in debates. Both of which strike me as rather safe rhetorical tactics, actually. A fear of engaging tough issues (versus faux-tough issues) couldn't be Mr. Smerconish's Achilles heel, could it?

Somehow, a missive linking to this contact tool arrived in my email box yesterday. You may notice that this action alert tells you to do precisely the opposite of what I suggested we do on Wednesday in re corporate involvement in Medicare. You observe the usual right-wing canards -- "protect choice," "government overregulation," "millions of seniors...will find themselves paying more and getting less." But sitting on the header is the phrase that says it all: "protect your advantage." As in Medicare Advantage, surely, but isn't that's what it's all about for right-wingers -- protecting their "advantage"? Never mind whether Medicare Advantage is an advantage, or whether anyone deserves an "advantage" in health care over their fellow citizens.

starve the beast.

Now that he's done gone and said that the Daily Kos is just about morally equivalent to a Nazi website, Newshounds provides a list of Bill O'Reilly's TV advertisers, so you can ask them to withdraw financial support for The O'Reilly Factor -- and quick, before Mr. O'Reilly calls us all economic terrorists. Today's media superstars, as I've said, do not really have to account to "the folks," as Mr. O'Reilly calls them. But they still have to account to their advertisers, so -- in the absence of a la carte cable channel packaging -- that's where shame must be applied. And we don't have to make all of them abandon The O'Reilly Factor -- only enough to make massive public relations headaches for its star. These advertisers (who include Michael Moore) likely will say they advertise on the Factor to reach out to a certain audience. But if I took money from someone who watches the Factor, I would feel tainted.

I have two more alerts on the SCHIP reauthorization/expansion legislation, one from TrueMajority and the other from Consumers Union. The current SCHIP program expires at the end of September, which is actually a lot closer than I thought it was. Mr. Bush no doubt will paint his own intransigence as Congress's -- if they'd just do what I say, they could get things done, he undoubtedly says when there aren't any reporters around. Though the "liberal" media seems to see such matters the same way that Mr. Bush does -- they've devoted very little space to all that relentless Republican filibustering, while permitting Republicans to blame Democrats for being obstructionist. These are all lousy things to talk about while poor children go without a doctor's care, though.

tied up in chain.

At last, the Democrats show imagination: Senate Republicans filibustered the Democrats' attempt to permit Medicare to negotiate for better drug prices, but soon Congress will soon vote on a bill that would slash federal overpayments to private insurance companies. How is that possible? This bill would eliminate government subsidies to private companies for providing "Medicare Advantage" plans and part D drug benefits. That's right, your government gives handouts to corporations to provide "government" health care that you'd pay less for if you just got it straight from the government. You suppose these corporations are buying booze or penthouse apartments with their food stamps? The relevant phone number is 1.800.828.0498 -- or, you can use the tools in the toolbox in the upper left-hand corner.

Tha Bush Mobb never stops trying to screw things up! Their effort to install LFA sonar on Navy vessels got beaten back in 2003, when the political climate was Mobb-friendlier, but they're trying again, and what do you know, they're only taking comments on their proposal for two weeks! They're so clever, these fellows! Two weeks just isn't long enough for you to learn that LFA sonar deafens already endangered seafaring animals like whales and dolphins. Oh, wait, I just told you. Here's the contact tool. I'm sure defenders of LFA sonar will tell us we need it to catch terrorists. But why would terrorists try to get their hands on a submarine, usually guarded by folks with guns, when they can make incendiary items out of household cleaners and turn commercial airplanes into weapons while armed with only boxcutters? LFA sonar sounds (so to speak) like a defense contractor's boondoggle to me.

a little restraint, please -- or a large one.

Word on the street is that House Judiciary Chair John Conyers will start impeachment proceedings against Mr. Cheney if H.R. 333 gets three more co-sponsors (it currently has 13). With some 215 Democrats and maybe even Ron Paul to choose from, we ought to be able to get three more co-sponsors, right? And every day seems to bring a new reason to wield the hammer of impeachment -- like, Tha Bush Mobb has just awarded a contingency contract to Halliburton subsidiary Kellogg-Brown-Root to build detention centers for sudden influxes of immigrants wink-wink. Contact tools for your House Reps and Senators are, as usual, in the upper left-hand corner. Some folks calculate that a thorough investigation of Mr. Cheney will necessarily pull in Mr. Bush, but I wouldn't count on that.

Mr. Bush has threatened to veto a slew of Congressional appropriations bills, but that hasn't stopped a bipartisan majority in Congress from trying to expand the State Children's Health Insurance Program, or SCHIP. SCHIP helps provide health insurance to low-income children who don't have it, figuring, I guess, that even if we could put all the blame on adults for being poor, it's just a bit harder to tell a kid to get a second job flipping burgers. But Mr. Bush is, of course, more concerned with the philosophical problem of all these dang kids getting insurance from the government instead of corporations. Because, you know, kids are so resilient, but corporations need all the help they can get. Don't count on the "liberal" media to shine a light on Mr. Bush's peculiar obsessions; you'll need to make sure your Senators know how you feel, and MoveOn helps you do that.

we all fall/even Jack the Lad.

Just when you thought Mitt Romney couldn't find new ways to pander, he goes and does this.

Let me guess: "I didn't know what was on the sign."

readings for the day of July 21, 2007: the false flag.

Pat Buchanan is the latest to sound the Tonkin Gulf II alarm, and he even suggests it might have happened already -- General Bergner's claim that Iranians planned a January raid in Karbala, which killed 5 U.S. soldiers. Mr. Buchanan goes on to suggest that, since Iran would have no interest in toppling a U.S.-sponsored Shi'ite state in Iraq and certainly no interest in helping the Sunnis, the Karbala raid might actually have been a response to covert U.S. raids in Iran. In which case the two (soon to be three) U.S. aircraft carriers in the Gulf comprise something of a diversion. Of course, if more of us sound the Tonkin Gulf II alarm, Tha Bush Mobb might realize we're on to their horsedoodle.

America's last conservative, Paul Craig Roberts, went on Thom Hartmann's radio show on Thursday to discuss the possibility of another 9.11. Noting recent statements by Messrs. Chertoff and Santorum, Mr. Roberts suggests that either a) Messrs. Bush and Cheney are planning a "false flag" attack, or trumped-up terrorist attack, or b) they're going to let al-Qaeda carry out an attack without stopping them. All toward the end of widening their disastrous war (because, as bold thinkers know, the solution to chaos is always more chaos), and maybe hanging on to their little police state. I incline toward believing that Mr. Bush plans to dump his mess on the next guy (or gal). And that's a lot to ask of a man, to believe that Messrs. Bush and Cheney are capable of such evil. But they are. Pass it on.

Dr. Susan Block writes about the sexual hypocrisy of Senator David Vitter (R-LA), whose number wound up on Deborah Jeane Palfrey's infamous list of phone numbers and who then confessed to "a very serious sin" (though not the accusations of serious sins that dog him in his home state). Senator Vitter, and stop me if you've heard this before, beat the drum for President Clinton's impeachment, and has since made his name crusading for abstinence-only sex education and against gay marriage. But Dr. Block suggests there may be bigger game in the Palfrey list -- as in the biggest Dick of them all, Mr. Cheney. Long story short, he maintained a residence in Virginia whose phone number apparently appears on the Palfrey list several times. The only other question would be: was he the john or the pimp? Any way you look at it, he's a pimp. Maybe there's more to this "false flag" theory, eh?

power in naming.

I jumped for joy when I heard this: the RESPECT Act (not a clumsy acronym, for once) would clarify the meaning of the word "supervisor" so corporations can't just reclassify you as a "supervisor" willy-nilly, as the National Labor Relations Board ruled they could in that infamous Kentucky nurses case last year. Supervisors, you may recall, can't collectively bargain under the National Labor Relations Act, and if you've ever trained a newbie at your job, your overlords could strip you of your right to organize by calling you a supervisor, even if you can't hire, fire, evaluate, or reprimand workers. The RESPECT Act (H.R. 1644 and S. 969) would specifically mandate that "a majority of the individual's worktime" be spent actually supervising. It would, in essence, help conserve the actual, real-world meaning of the word "supervisor" and thwart activist judges seeking to legislate from the bench. You know, just like they say we do. American Rights at Work helps you communicate your will.

Rep. Sandor Levin (D-MI) has introduced H.R. 2834, which would close the tax loophole that permits investment fund managers to pay income taxes at a lower rate than you and I. An investment fund manager might make millions of dollars a year, but gets that income taxed at 15%, because the tax code currently regards that income as "capital gains." Folks who complain about the complexity of the tax code ought to realize that the main culprits are rich folks who persuade legislators to call income by all sorts of names just to avoid having it taxed as "income." And these same rich folks will soon commandeer the "liberal" media airwaves to declare that the economy just won't survive if investment fund managers can't be "free" to abandon their responsibility to the rest of us. Read more here, courtesy Citizens for Tax Justice, and then use the tools in the upper left-hand corner to contact your House member.

the money go-round/the money go-round/you wanna get off but it don't slow down.

As early as tomorrow, the Senate will vote on S.A. 2022, an amendment to the Defense Appropriations bill; S.A. 2022 would restore habeus corpus rights for detainees. Some people say, "so what? They're all terrorists." Right, because accusation is exactly the same as conviction. Some other people say, "so what? They're all foreigners." But that's not a given, either -- the President (sic) has claimed the authority to detain American citizens. Some other people say, "so what? These are hard times, and the President (sic) hasn't abused his authority." You only have his word for that, and might a President, no matter their name or party, lie about what they've done wrong? They were just claiming executive whatever yesterday over Pat Tillman's death, for Ford's sake. We do not trust the President at any time; the President must earn the trust of the citizenry, at all times. The ACLU helps you call your Senators, and TrueMajority helps you write them.

Seen that new Apple iPhone? I'd love to have one, but I'm never, ever going to get one. Know why? Because the iPhone only comes with AT&T as your service provider. You remember AT&T? They gave over your phone records to the NSA without a warrant. They oppose net neutrality, and whadayaknow the iPhone only lets you visit certain websites. Their CEO also gives boatloads of money to the National Front party, er, I mean the Republican Party. But I wouldn't buy the iPhone if it had an exclusive contract with Jesus's Own Superfast Service Provider Which Magically Overturns Bush Mobb Laws and Sets You Up With Attractive and Brilliant Women Who Inexplicably Overlook Your Faults, either. Exclusive contracts lock you into services for years at a time (two years, in the iPhone's case) and cripple innovation by forcing you to use slow, bare-bones services. Big telecoms will talk about how little leverage this gives them, but boo hoo. What about giving the consumer some leverage? Folks are hacking into the iPhone and using their own service providers as we speak. FreePress has the petition.

That thing I said about John Kerry yesterday might be the single meanest thing I've ever said about anyone. So, feeling bad about it, I've gone and fixed it. Not! Why should I apologize for being betrayed?

penny rants for the day of July 15, 2007: let freedom ring!

So now Tha Bush Mobb claims "executive branch confidentiality interests" in failing to provide documents to Congress in re Sgt. Tillman's death. Last I looked, the executive branch enforces the law. I can only think of bad reasons they'd want to keep secret how they do that. And what possible advantage do they imagine al-Qaeda would gain from the information they're withholding about one man's death? All Pat Tillman wanted to do was serve his country, and Tha Bush Mobb, not content merely with killing him, now drags his memory through the mud of politics. That Karl Rove sure is some "genius," ain't he?

In France, it begins: the Sarkozy government cuts the cap on high-end income taxes from 60 percent to 50 percent, and leftists describe the effort, accurately, as "a gift to the rich" -- just like it was when President Reagan slashed the top tax rate to 50 percent in 1981. It's only a matter of time before they privatize their world-class health-care system and their world-class public transportation system. Sean Hannity still has wet dreams about how the 1981 tax cut boosted government revenues. After all, if it's ironic, it must be true! And anyone who believes in the inherently superior truth value of irony must be smarter than everyone else! All of which is horsedoodle, of course.

Speaking of the world's worst interviewer, dig Sean Hannity's 2006 campaign contributions as reported by opensecret.org. $2,100 for Jeanine Pirro, who briefly ran for the Senate against Hillary Clinton in 2006? That's it? Beating Hillary was that important? Well, apparently not -- Ms. Pirro's withdrawal from the race did not entice Mr. Hannity to contribute even $200 to eventual Hillary opponent John Spencer. And it's not like Mr. Hannity's hurting for money -- he makes $5 million a year from his radio show. More importantly, Mr. Hannity apparently gave little or nothing to any beleaguered Republican House member in 2006, though he also said that preventing Nancy Pelosi from becoming Speaker was "a cause worth dying for." Oh, I forgot -- he really meant that it was a cause worth you dying for, not him. You know, kinda like Iraq.

Despite the scarlet R on his forehead, Republican Presidential hopeful Mike Huckabee gets a warm reception at the NEA. You know, even though it's a union, full of, you know, teachers, who've read a lot of books and stuff, know what I mean? We could make a Goofus and Gallant strip out of this news, where Mike Huckabee is Gallant and most of the other Republican Presidential candidates, too busy strutting before the Club for Growth and Regent University and the like, are Goofus. Mitt Romney, especially, must be wearing black upon discovering that he's not Gallant.

On a lighter note -- come on now, a "draft Kerry" movement? Why, so he can lead you to defeat again? I helped Mr. Kerry out in 2004, and I regret it now -- in retrospect, I learned everything I needed to know about John Kerry when the Swift Boat gang came around and he wouldn't stand up for himself. What do you suppose John Kerry does when burglars come to his house? Wait until the New York Times reports on it before getting his gun?

Cindy Sheehan speculates that Tha Bush Mobb might stage a "Gulf of Tonkin"-type incident in the Persian Gulf as a pretext for war with Iran, and Republican Presidential candidate Ron Paul agrees. I mean, of course he agrees -- he was saying it last year. And I'll duly echo it here, because I don't want it to happen, and the more people I tell, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera. Now I do wish Ron Paul wouldn't go on about domestic spending -- most domestic spending really gives you quite a bang for your buck, and even Social Security and Medicare spending can be managed more easily than a Libertarian can imagine. But I think a man who brings up the fall of Mossadeq in every Presidential debate can stay as long as he likes.

tears are not enough.

The ACLU helps you tell the White House to comply with those long-overdue subpoenas Congress has served in re the NSA's warrantless wiretapping program. Why does my email app's spell-checker insist that "warrantless" is not a real word? Could that be the reason the "liberal" media doesn't call Mr. Bush's little wiretapping plan what it is -- because spell-checks all over the country choke on the word? Nah. Messrs. Bush and Cheney don't care what you think, and Ms. Miers's behavior in recent days doesn't bode well, but we'll just tell them until they decide they can't stand the noise anymore. Tha Bush Mobb has until July 18 to comply with the subpoenas. And they know where they can stick their "executive privilege."

Did you make a Freedom of Information Act request after, say, 1987? Well, there's a chance the government hasn't gotten around to your request -- or, more likely, has just put it off. S. 849, the OPEN Government Act, would, among other things, create a tracking system for FOIA requests and permit requesters who win FOIA litigation to recover a reasonable amount of their legal fees. Hard to believe the FOIA just turned 41 and still doesn't have a tracking system -- wasn't having 69 Democrats in the Senate good for anything back then? Here's the email contact tool, courtesy EFF.

Last but certainly not least, the Senate may consider cutting off funding for Executive (sic) Order 13422, which would basically make the whole government regulatory process meaningless. Well, specifically, 13422 lets the President bypass the Senate in appointing Regulatory Policy Officers, protracts the White House review process for guidance documents, and changes the focus of new regulations to "market failures," instead of, you know, public health or environmental problems. My guess is that after six years of Tha Bush Mobb, ordinary folks like you and I would like the government to work again. Rather than, you know, not work. I could make a little list of ways in which the government has not worked over the past several years. Anyway, the House has already approved similar legislation to that described above; your Senators' contact information is in the tool box in the upper left-hand corner. 13422 takes effect on July 24, so tell them to act with a quickness.

planning for seven months ahead, let alone seven generations.

The Senate plans to take up amendments to the Defense Authorization bill this week. These amendments may include timetables for withdrawal, more rest for troops between tours, and revocation of the temporary AUMF Congress hurriedly granted Mr. Bush after 9.11. But the Senate may also relent to a smaller presence in Iraq, say in the tens of thousands, nominally to "fight terrorism" and "train Iraqi troops" but also to protect a permanent U.S. installation. And the Senate may also do nothing about the multitudinous non-military folks in Iraq -- like, you know, Blackwater, whose security guards make a thousand bucks a day and can't be told by the generals not to shoot people. 202.224.3121 is the number, and end the war, as in leave no troops or mercenaries in Iraq, is the message.

Meanwhile, the FCC's comment period on network neutrality remains open. I thought it had ended in mid-June; anyone want to bet that the FCC held it open because it didn't get enough comments from plain folk who care so much about the gilding of CEO plumbing that they want to pay more for a service that might deny them the content they want to see? If you haven't commented to the FCC yet, you still can, until Monday. Savetheinternet.com helps you do so. Helps you make your story all personal-like, too.

Are we running out of news hooks for the Union for Concerned Scientists' effort to get fast-food companies to use antibiotic-free meat? Why, no! Tyson Foods, the nation's largest producer of chicken, announced last month that it has begun to raise its chickens without antibiotics. Which is better for them, and better for you, since pumping everything full of antibiotics just makes bacteria stronger and everybody sicker in the long run. The petition remains at the link above. If Burger Joints can commit to better meat, I might eat some of their burgers once in a while. I said once in a while.

penny rants for the day of July 7, 2007.

Bob Novak isn't exactly the most disinterested observer of matters relating to Lewis Libby, but for one sentence he nails it: Mr. Bush's commutation of Mr. Libby's sentence "might be described as a Solomonic decision, but only if King Solomon actually split the baby and distributed halves to rival mothers." That's where Mr. Bush stands with so many decisions now -- unwilling to compromise on any of his core principles, his entire Presidency (sic) solidly rejected by the popular will, he can now only give half-measures that please no one. He made his bed. It's just a shame we all have to lie in it with him.

USA Today opines that Mr. Bush shouldn't have commuted Mr. Libby's sentence, and who is the author of their opposing view? None other than Tony Snow, Bush Mobb Chief PR hack. Who really, really wants you to know that Mr. Bush "respect(s) the jury's work" and that Mr. Bush fully understands that "(t)he concept of judgment by a jury of peers forms the backbone of our judicial system." Like that's a gift to us or something. Get the feeling USA Today couldn't find anyone outside Tha Bush Mobb to write this defense? Get the feeling there's a reason for that?

Anyone else as sick of hearing how "folksy" and "plainspoken" Fred Thompson is as I am? I've just watched the Great Red Hope talk for twenty minutes, and I'm not any more inspired by him than I am by Mr. Obama. Certainly he has a nice lilt to his voice, but really now, is he the only man in America capable of deploying the phrase "hitched up our belts"? Mike Huckabee already has all the qualities right-wingers are looking for in spades, plus he's an actual wit, plus he hates corporate crime. Oh, wait, that last thing: yeah, I guess the right wing does need another savior.

Finally, feel free to boo the Supreme Court, which struck down school-assignment laws aimed at diversifying public schools in Kentucky and Seattle while claiming to defend Brown v. Board of Education. Right, just like Gonzales v. Carhartt strengthened Roe, Casey and Stenberg at the very same time it eviscerated them. And here the error is possibly even more egregious: the plurality suggests that tabulating the racial makeup of students is itself racist. Because, as we all know, the real racists aren't, like, actual racists or anything, but the people who notice the racism and try to fix it. Is that Brit Hume I hear breaking open a bottle of champagne?

UPDATE. Replaced "majority" with "plurality" in above paragraph, since Justice Kennedy, in his concurring opinion, explicitly rejected the notion I describe above, a notion embraced by Justices Roberts, Alito, Scalia, and Thomas. My mistake.

double summer.

The Democrats' project to extend Mr. Bush's fast-track authority on "free" trade pacts now lies in ruins -- at this moment Mr. Bush has no such authority. Go buy yourself some locally-produced food as a reward for your good efforts. And then, if you like, Citizen Action can teach you how to hound your Congressfolk about "free" trade pacts. Conveniently, your Congressfolk are in their districts this week, mercifully far from their power to cause harm, but close to you and I. And Tha Bush Mobb released the final legal details of NAFTA-expansion deals with Peru, Panama, Colombia and South Korea, which they could try to ram through Congress. Congress might even feel a little like they owe the guy, since they didn't extend his fast-track authority. They don't, and neither do we.

The quarterly fundraising reports for the 2008 Presidential candidates are out, but I don't link to that kind of stuff. Better we should work at changing the system so that we don't condition ourselves to look at this like it's a damn horse race. So, Common Cause sponsors a petition telling the Presidential candidates to support the Fair Elections Now Act. Messrs. Obama and McCain have pledged to stay within the current system if they're the nominees, and good for them, but America needs more. And no no no no it is not a violation of the First Amendment to pass campaign-financing legislation. The First Amendment guarantees all of its citizens the right to petition to redress grievances. But all of us can't petition to redress grievances if some of us can "petition" more easily than others. Oh, and also because money isn't speech.