Because I care what you think.
Is There A Payment Plan Available?
We have to do something about skyrocketing energy costs:
Perhaps his $24 billion electric bill will teach Richard Redden not to leave the heat running. Thanks to a printing error, Redden and more than 1,300 Weatherford utility customers this week received billion-dollar electric bills marked as late notices.
Irving-bases DataProse, which prints customer bills for Weatherford Electric, said the company was embarrassed by the error.
“Obviously, this is not something we are pleased about,” said Curtis Nelson, DataProse vice president and general manager.
Although in all probability, 24 billion will be peanuts after Bush gets done with his energy initiatives.
D’nouncing D’Souza
You would think that rightwing pundits would take exception to terrorist sympathizer* Dinesh D’Souza’s claim that he is a perfectly mainstream conservative pundit. After all, the idea that terrorists are right to hate America isn’t just edging into Ward Churchill territory. It is exactly the Churchillian sin that got these same pundits worked up into such a frenzy not so long ago. If Churchill’s sins were so heinous then Hugh Hewitt, Glenn Reynolds and Michelle Malkin ought to take far more exception when the next Ward Churchill claims to be one of them.
On face value it seems that D’Souza’s claim to mainstream status is, for lack of a better word, perfectly right. He still holds an extremely well-paid post at the mainstream Hoover Institution. His bio lists plaudits from Investor’s Business Daily and an impressive array of prominent media appearances. He served in the Reagan Administration. It is extremely hard to imagine that D’Souza, who finds broad areas of agreement with anti-American terrorists’ about what is wrong with America, does sit squarely in the middle of modern conservatism. Using the Glenn Reynolds rules of punditry, the overall silence from D’Souza’s ideological compatriots indicates quite clearly that they find his ideas largely unobjectionable.
Setting aside other blame America firsters like Pat Robertson and Jerry Flawell, it might still be possible to d’smiss D’souza as a lone nut if his allies kept their agreement to themselves. That was apparently too much to ask Glenn Beck.
“The things that they were saying about us were true. Our morals are just out the window. We’re a society on the verge of moral collapse. And our promiscuity is off the charts.
“Now I don’t think that we should fly airplanes into buildings or behead people because of it, but that’s the prevailing feeling of Muslims in the Middle East. And you know what? They’re right.”
So much for one lone nut. Glenn Beck is essentially saying that he disagrees with al Qaeda on tactics rather than on principle. If bin Laden limited himself to, say, bombing abortion clinics and beating gays then maybe he’d get on board.
As should be clear by now the common causers represent a meaningful slice of the right, extending from the most extreme Christianists to multiple mainstream pundits with extensive media exposure. It seems impossible at this point to consider these reprehensible views in any way isolated or unique. If conservatives want to escape the impression that they willingly harbor within their ranks an element willing to make common cause with terrorists then it seems time to play their cards a little less close to the chest.
(*) Literally. D’Souza sympathizes with terrorists who hate America because, in his view he hates America for the same reasons.
***
This is an unrelated, probably unfair cheap shot, but conservatives who want to avoid the appearance of making common cause with terrorists should avoid giving them awards.
***Update***
Read Kevin Drum and Steve Benen for more context and a discussion of why this rhetorical tack would have some appeal.
***Update 2***
The good Glenn:
Thus, when one reads any speech given by President Ahmadinejad, it becomes apparent that his views on the dynamics of international affairs and the need to show “strength” — as well as his understanding of what “strength” means — are, at their core, indistinguishable from those who have been governing our country for the last six years. None of that means that there is (or is not) a moral equivalency between the U.S. and Iran. But it does mean that the efforts on the part of our political leaders to descend to the levels of Middle Eastern tyrants and to model our behavior after theirs are proceeding with full force.
h-indeed.
***Update 3***
Via commenter S., Scott Johnson of Powerline has done the right thing. It will be a happy day when I am obliged to eat my words on this.
***Update 4***
Count my friend Rick Moran in as well.
Spoof Magnet
Let me be clear, I think that intentionally misrepresenting somebody’s viewpoint as a form of ridicule is morally and rhetorically wrong. So please don’t take this as any sort of official encouragement. But, ye gods, are these guys begging for it.
From their “about” section, which appears to be down at the moment:
Tired of the LIBERAL BIAS every time you search on Google and a Wikipedia page appears? Now it’s time for the Conservatives to get our voice out on the internet!
Conservapedia began in November 2006, as the class project for a World History class of 58 advanced homeschooled and college-bound students meeting in New Jersey. Conservapedia has since grown enormously, including contributors nationwide.
Conservapedia already has over one-half the number of entries as the Oxford Dictionary of World History. Conservapedia is rapidly becoming one of the largest and most reliable online educational resources of its kind.
Try to resist.
***Update***
On their front page:
Did you know that faith is a uniquely Christian concept? Add to the explanation of what it means, and how it does not exist on other religions.
Yikes.
***Update 2***
PZ Meyers has more, plus some very naughty commenters.
Jumpy Joe
What made Joe Lieberman rethink his pledge to caucus with the Democratic party?
Probably this.
Democrats Seek to Repeal 2002 War Authorization
Senate Democratic leaders intend to unveil a plan next week to repeal the 2002 resolution authorizing the war in Iraq in favor of narrower authority that restricts the military’s role and begins withdrawals of combat troops.
[…] “I’ve had enough of ‘nonbinding,’ ” said Sen. John F. Kerry (D-Mass.), who is helping to draft the new Democratic proposal. The 2002 war resolution, he said, is an obvious target.“The authorization that we gave the president back in 2002 is completely, completely outdated, inappropriate to what we’re engaged in today,” he said.
[…] The new framework would set a goal for withdrawing combat brigades by March 31, 2008, the same timetable established by the bipartisan Iraq Study Group. Once the combat phase ends, troops would be restricted to assisting Iraqis with training, border security and counterterrorism.
It is still hard to see the threat here. Even granting this proposal’s symbolic nut-kick to sanctimonious war boosters like Lieberman the bill will never draw 60 votes to break a filibuster. Unless…
Senior Democratic aides said the proposed resolution would be sent directly to the Senate floor for action, without committee review, possibly as an amendment to a homeland security bill scheduled for debate next week.
Ah yes, that good old GOP medicine. Attach the poison to a bill that the other party would hurt itself to fight. It is not very hard to see why the GOP and the soon-to-be GOP would get tetchy.
Nasty? Partisan? Sure. In a perfect world I would love to see Congress handle important things with bipartisan fairness. Maybe (call it a dream that I have) we will get there some day. In the meantime we might as well come to terms with the true legacy of Newt Gingrich and Karl Rove. Their permanent Republican majority died on the vine but the next majority seems happy to adopt some of the old spiteful tactics. Now maybe the GOP will grasp why people like me advise against lowering the bar for official behavior. Means often outlive the ends. In the coming years when the right gets itself worked up in a lather about the awful nazi tactics of Reid, Pelosi, and Clinton/Obama/Edwards, it is probably unrealistic to expect even the smarter righties to recognize the unfamiliar smell of personal responsibility.
An Embarassing Spectacle
Yesterday, I got home from the office, turned on Tucker on MSNBC, and was surprised to see wall-to-wall coverage of the Anna Nicole Smith hearing.
Now I am not gonna say that hearing was the most embarassing or inappropriate thing to ever happen in the American judicial system, as I have heard of Dred Scott, to speak nothing of the fact that OJ Simpson is still a free man.
But it was awful. That judge is a disgrace, those lawyers should be taken out behind the courthouse and beaten (yes, I am advocating violence), and it was just a disgrace. The only sympathetic character in the whole bunch was Kato Kaelin Larry Birkhead, the bubble-headed blonde boyfriend of the bimbo.
Make this long national nightmare go away, please.
Man Free Island
Brought to you not by Maxim magazine, but Iran:
Iran plans a female-only island to boost tourism in a northwest province, the Tehran-e Emrouz newspaper on Wednesday quoted a local official as saying.
It will be on the Urumiyeh lake in Western Azerbaijan province, a municipality official identified only as Aghai said.
I am betting that Iranian officials and I have radically different ideas about why a man-free island is so good, and why it would boost tourism.
Under Iran’s strict Islamic law, mixing with men in public is forbidden. Strict sex segregation actually protects women rather than restricting their rights, officials argue.
“There will be no men on the Arezou (Wish) island. Public transport, restaurants and other facilities will be staffed only by women,” Aghai said.
Yep. We sure do.