Enjoy!

In the second half, we chat with Brad Friedman, independent journalist at bradblog.com.  Brad is doing some excellent work exposing the truth about recent right-wing attacks on ACORN, and he has a lot to say about James O'Keefe's recent legal troubles.

MANKIND'S second race for the moon has taken on a distinctly Cold War feel, with the Russian space agency accusing its old rival NASA of rejecting a proposal for joint lunar exploration.

The charge comes amid suspicion in Moscow that the US is seeking to deny Russia access to an isotope in abundance under the moon's surface that many believe could replace fossil fuels and even end the threat of global warming.

A new era of international co-operation in space supposedly dawned after the US, Russia and other powers declared their intention to send humans to the moon for the first time since 1972...[more]

I would like to submit that this story will be the backdrop for the next James Bond movie.

Chris

Cliff Schecter is a veteran campaign strategist and political commentator. Schecter writes a monthly column distributed by Knight Ridder and was a guest columnist for United Press International from 2002-2004. His work has been featured in a variety of publications including The Miami Herald, The American Prospect, The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, The Fordham Urban Law Journal, The Sacramento Bee and Salon.com. He blogs for The Gadflyer and writes a weekly satirical column each Friday called "Cliff's Corner," summarizing the week's most ridiculous events for AMERICAblog. Surprisingly, Tom DeLay gets mentioned a lot. During the 2004 election cycle, Schecter worked as the "liberal" pundit for The Sinclair Broadcast Group, where he debated conservative Armstrong Williams -- for significantly less cost to the White House. He has also appeared on CNN, CNBC, NPR FoxNews, The Canadian Broadcast Channel and Al Jazeera. Additionally, Schecter has provided analysis on American politics for international diplomats, journalists, students and politicians as part of The State Department Bureau of International Information Programs. Schecter holds an MA in International Affairs from the Columbia School of International and Public Affairs and is currently receiving his Ph.D. in American History as a Dean's Honors Fellow at American University. Schecter was a pollster for the successful reelection of President Bill Clinton in 1996 and fundraiser for former Governor of Virginia Mark Warner in 2001. He has also consulted for the DNC, DCCC and some other candidates he won't mention here because they lost.

Also here is some of his work on MSNBC:

And More: We're looking forward to Monday's show. Be sure to tune in. Btw, if there are any questions you'd like us to ask Cliff be sure to email us at nookularoption@yahoo.com Chris

So why is James Dobson against this?  Here's what he says about the bill:

"the true intent of the legislation is not to punish what is already illegal. It is to muzzle people of faith who dare to express their moral and biblical concerns about homosexuality."

How so?  By beating up homosexuals?  Is that how "people of faith" express their biblical concerns?  How about this wacko:

"Under a false banner of fighting hate, these liberals have demonstrated that they are the haters and their targets are Americans who believe in God and His teachings," said Rev. Louis P. Sheldon

Of course, these groups have the President's ear.  So a veto of this bill is a possibility.  These groups are claiming a bill like this could curtail freedom of speech rights.  But I disagree.  You can say whatever you want, but then if you go beat the shit out of someone then it's you who are violating someone's rights.

Chris

 The presidential campaign planes fly over all of us in red and blue America in search of âswing votersâ? in the dwindling set of âswing states.â? Fully 99 percent of presidential campaign funding in the last two cycles went to move voters in a mere 16 states, and two-thirds of the money was poured into five states. The majority of Americans have become long-distance spectators to the exciting action in the battleground states where issues are debated and campaign ads air. We watch as the candidates, the campaign staff and the media bear down on Florida, Ohio, New Mexico and a handful of others states blessed with closely divided electorates. Voter turn-out in the general election sometimes approaches 70 percent in the swing states but hovers in the mid-50s in demoralized spectator states, driving our national turn-out rates down to among the lowest on earth.

Public opinion polls have long shown that upwards of 65 percent of Americans favor a direct national popular vote for president in which all of our votes count equally. The puzzle has been how to reconcile a national popular election with the antique mechanics of the Electoral College, which Thomas Jefferson called âthe most dangerous blot on our Constitution.â? 

The National Popular Vote plan rests on the powers that states have to create interstate compacts and to appoint electors. Article II, Section I provides: âEach State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electorsââ? This power has been deployed by legislatures in different ways. When the nation began, the legislatures mostly named Electors directly and they operated as a deliberative body and voted their consciences. In 1800, for example, Maryland saw seven of its electors vote for Adams and four for Jefferson. When states began in the last century to award their electors in winner-take-all fashion based on a statewide popular vote, smaller states complained that this newfangled âunitâ? bloc voting diluted the power of small states (and they were right). They sued. In the aptly named Delaware v. New York  in 1966, the Supreme Court rejected this challenge and emphasized that the statesâ power to award electors may be exercised in any manner they see fit. The power is âplenary.â?

I like this plan for a couple of reasons.  First, it brings back the idea of "one person, one vote".   Currently, if you live in a predominately red or blue state your vote goes nowhere if you are on the losing side.   I think this helps lead to low voter turnout. 

Also, this forces candidate to campaign to the entire nation--not just a few "swing states" as the article points out.  A voter in Vermont (3 electoral votes) is just as important as a voter in California (55 electoral votes).  This is the American way.  I think we need to give this National Popular Vote plan more attention.

Chris

Mark your calendars, because on May 5, former child star Kirk Cameron and âbest-selling author Ray Comfortâ? are going to âprove God's existence, absolutely, scientifically, without mentioning the Bible or faith.â? Cameron has, like others on the Right, blamed school shootings on the teaching of evolution:

ABC â will host a debate in New York City on May 5, 2007. Moderated by Martin Bashir, the debate will be streamed LIVE on their website and will also be filmed for "Nightline."

Cameron ("Growing Pains" sitcom and Left Behind movies) will speak on what he believes is a major catalyst for atheism: Darwinian evolution. The popular actor stated, "Evolution is unscientific. In reality, it is a blind faith that's preached with religious zeal as the gospel truth. I'm embarrassed to admit that I was once a naÃve believer in the theory. The issue of intelligent design is extremely relevant at the moment. Atheism has become very popular in universities--where it's taught that we evolved from animals and that there are no moral absolutes. So we shouldn't be surprised when there are school shootings.â?â.

"Most people equate atheism with intellectualism," Comfort added, "but it's actually an intellectual embarrassment. I am amazed at how many people think that God's existence is a matter of faith. It's not, and I will prove it at the debate - once and for all. This is not a joke. I will present undeniable scientific proof that God exists.

If Cameron and Comfort think that evolution â the basis of much modern science â is unscientific, what kinds of âscientificâ? arguments are we likely to hear from them?  Maybe something like this, which just happens to be the second most viewed clip on GodTube:

AUSTIN â A package left at a clinic that performs abortions contained an explosive device that investigators said Thursday could have been deadly.

The incident came just days after a national abortion group alerted providers around the country to an increased risk of violence.

The device, found in a duffle bag Wednesday, "was configured in such a way to cause serious bodily injury or death," said David Carter, assistant chief of the Austin Police Department.

The bomb, which was found in the parking lot of the Austin Women's Health Center, comes on the heels of last week's U.S. Supreme Court ruling which banned a controversial type of abortion and was viewed as an anti-abortion victory.

Was Al-Qaeda behind this deadly attempt?  Maybe Hezbollah?  Hamas?  More likely, this was the work of some radical Christian group.   Is it ok in this day and age to accept 41 bombing attempts?

In the last 30 years, abortion clinics have been bombed 41 times according to law enforcement statistics compiled by the National Abortion Federation. Many of the crimes directed at abortion providers, including 93 attempted bombings and arson, were committed during times that abortion issues were prominent in the news, Saporta said.

Funny how we can be fighting a "global war on terror", and yet this kind of thing happens in our backyard, and there's nary a peep from the media.

Chris

THE PRESIDENT: Thank you all very much. Admiral Kelly, Captain Card, officers and sailors of the USS Abraham Lincoln, my fellow Americans: Major combat operations in Iraq have ended. In the battle of Iraq, the United States and our allies have prevailed.

So when Harry Reid claims we have lost, he's not framing the argument correctly.  What he should have said is that the current Bush strategy for post-Iraq rebuilding has failed.  He should have said the Bush strategy for post-Iraq security has failed.  He should have said the post-Iraq occupation is ill-conceived and needs to end.  The Iraqi government and Iraqis in general need to fight for their country and determine their own course.  

By claiming that we have lost in Iraq, Reid is playing into his opponents' hands, allowing them to say he (and all Dems by association) are soft on terror, blah blah blah.  It's time to reframe this debate, and tell the truth.  We won the war in Iraq, and now it's time to stop wasting our resources and work with our allies in breaking up terrorist groups in North Africa, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, and Syria 

World chlorofluorocarbon consumption, 1986: 1.08 million tons
World chlorofluorocarbon consumption, 2006: 0.04 million tons

Oh, and the hole in the ozone layer has stopped growing.  And according to reports it will return to normal levels by 2065-2070.  It's nice to see what we can do with atmospheric pollutants when we put our minds to it.  You know I'm talking about CO2.  I know, it's apples and oranges.  Still...

Further Reading:

The U.N. Environmental Program assesses the Montreal Protocol:
http://ozone.unep.org/Assessment_Panels/

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency adds its perspective:
http://www.epa.gov/ozone/science/

And the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change looks at global warming:
http://www.ipcc.ch/

More:

PPI's Energy & Environment Project looks at climate change policy, biofuels and plug-in cars, environmental technologies as an export opportunity, pollution in China and other questions:
http://www.ppionline.org/ppi_ka.cfm?knlgAreaID=116

UNEP lists 97 multilateral environmental agreements:
http://www.unep.org/dpdl/Law/
Law_instruments/law_instruments_global.asp

And EPA statistics on air quality, 1970-2005:
http://www.epa.gov/airtrends/econ-emissions.html

Thanks to the Progressive Policy Institute for this info.

Chris

1. Raise and index the minimum wage to half the average hourly wage.

2. Expand the Earned Income Tax Credit and Child Tax Credit.

3. Promote unionization by enacting the Employee Free Choice Act.

4. Guarantee child care assistance to low-income families and promote early education for all.

5. Create 2 million new âopportunityâ? housing vouchers, and promote equitable development in and around central cities.

6. Connect disadvantaged and disconnected youth with school and work.

7. Simplify and expand Pell Grants and make higher education accessible to residents of each state.

8. Help former prisoners find stable employment and reintegrate into their communities.

9. Ensure equity for low-wage workers in the Unemployment Insurance system.

10. Modernize means-tested benefits programs to develop a coordinated system that helps workers and families.

11. Reduce the high costs of being poor and increase access to financial services.

12. Expand and simplify the Saverâs Credit to encourage saving for education, homeownership, and retirement.

Chris

Article I

In his conduct while Vice President of the United States, Richard B. Cheney, in violation of his constitutional oath to faithfully execute the office of Vice President of the United States and, to the best of his ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States, and in violation of his constitutional duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed, has purposely manipulated the intelligence process to deceive the citizens and Congress of the United States by fabricating a threat of Iraqi weapons of mass destruction to justify the use of the United States Armed Forces against the nation of Iraq in a manner damaging to our national security interests, to wit:

(1) Despite all evidence to the contrary, the Vice President actively and systematically sought to deceive the citizens and Congress of the United States about an alleged threat of Iraqi weapons of mass destruction...

(2) Preceding the March 2003 invasion of Iraq 20 the Vice President was fully informed that no legitimate evidence existed of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. The Vice President pressured the intelligence community to change their findings to enable the deception of the citizens and Congress of the United States.

(3) The Vice Presidentâs actions corrupted or attempted to corrupt the 2002 National Intelligence Estimate, an intelligence document issued on October 1, 2002 and carefully considered by Congress prior to the October 10, 2002 vote to authorize the use of force. The Vice Presidentâs actions prevented the necessary reconciliation of facts for the National Intelligence Estimate which resulted in a high number of dissenting opinions from technical experts in two Federal agencies.

The Vice President subverted the national security interests of the United States by setting the stage for the loss of more than 3300 United States service members; the loss of 650,000 Iraqi citizens since the United States invasion; the loss of approximately $500 billion in war costs which has increased our Federal debt; the loss of military readiness within the United States Armed Services due to overextension, lack of training and lack of equipment; the loss of United States credibility in world affairs; and the decades of likely blowback created by the invasion of Iraq. In all of this, Vice President Richard B. Cheney has acted in a manner contrary to his trust as Vice President, and subversive of constitutional government, to the prejudice of the cause of law and justice and the manifest injury of the people of the United States.Wherefore, Vice President Richard B. Cheney, by such conduct, is guilty of an impeachable offense warranting removal from office.

Article II

In his conduct while Vice President of the United States, Richard B. Cheney, in violation of his constitutional oath to faithfully execute the office of Vice President of the United States and, to the best of his ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States, and in violation of his constitutional duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed, purposely manipulated the intelligence process to deceive the citizens and Congress of the United States about an alleged relationship between Iraq and al Qaeda in order to justify the use of the United States Armed Forces against the nation of Iraq in a manner damaging to our national security interests, to wit:

(1) Despite all evidence to the contrary, the Vice President actively and systematically sought to deceive the citizens and the Congress of the United States about an alleged relationship between Iraq and al Qaeda...

(2) Preceding the March 2003 invasion of Iraq the Vice President was fully informed that no credible evidence existed of a working relationship between Iraq and al Qaeda, a fact articulated in several official documents, including...

Article III

In his conduct while Vice President of the United States, Richard B. Cheney, in violation of his constitutional oath to faithfully execute the office of Vice President of the United States and, to the best of his ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States, and in violation of his constitutional duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed, has openly threatened aggression against the Republic of Iran absent any real threat to the United States, and done so with the United States proven capability to carry out such threats, thus undermining the national security of the United States, to wit:

(1) Despite no evidence that Iran has the intention or the capability of attacking the United States and despite the turmoil created by United States invasion of Iraq, the Vice President has openly threatened aggression against Iran as evidenced by the following:

(2) The Vice President, who repeatedly and falsely claimed to have had specific, detailed knowledge of Iraqâs alleged weapons of mass destruction capabilities, is no doubt fully aware of evidence that demonstrates Iran poses no real threat to the United States as evidenced by the following:

(3) The Vice President is fully aware of the actions taken by the United States towards Iran that are further destabilizing the world as evidenced by the following...

(4) In the last three years the Vice President has repeatedly threatened Iran. However, the Vice President is legally bound by the U.S Constitutionâs adherence to international law that prohibits threats of use of force...

Wherefore Richard B. Cheney, by such conduct, warrants impeachment and trial, and removal from office.

Chris

From The Politico

MANCHESTER, N.H. - - Rudy Giuliani said if a Democrat is elected president in 2008, America will be at risk for another terrorist attack on the scale of Sept. 11, 2001....[more]

Sorry Rudy, but you seem to forget it was a Republican in the White House when 9/11 happened, despite the warning signs.  Remember all the meetings Bush had regarding bin Laden from January '01 thru September '01?  Neither do I.

Chris

CORNYN: I think this is just crass politics. Senator Reid is playing to the worst elements of the antiwar left. That's part of unfortunately his political base. But I think, you know, we need to be more responsible. We need to try to not make this a partisan issue.

Or consider this comment at the end of a Townhall article:

"...while the Democratic Party -- now fully revealed as a radical, anti-war, far-left party"

Apparently, the majority of Americans are radical anti-war loons.  According to this Pew Poll, 53% of Americans want the troops home now.  Of course, it's easy to see what they're doing here.  By branding the opposition as radical in some way, you hope that any fence-sitters (so crucial in elections nowadays) will want to distance themselves.  In fact, in my opinion "anti-war" is also a misnomer.  If a war is just, and only as a last option, or in response to an attack I think war is unfortunately justified sometimes (surprise, the majority of Americans think this way as well).  But Iraq is none of these. 

But I also have a problem with those that claim the war "is lost".  On the contrary, President Bush declared the US and allies victorious in his infamous "Mission Accomplished" speech.  It's true, we have already won the war.  Saddam has been toppled.  Most Iraqis supported his ousting (even if we radicals thought it unnecessary).  What the ongoing violence is showing us however, is that Iraqis do not support the current occupation.  Time to get out.

Chris

The Supreme Court began chipping away at women's rights...[more]

Conservatives rejoice!  One of your own has finally conjured images of Ronald Reagan ("I can't recall").  Seems Gonzo has a poor memory as well...[more]

As pressure from Congress' Iraq funding bill mounts, the Bush Administration pulls out some old tricks.  Karl Rove says the terrorists will follow us home, and that (surprise!) it was Osama bin Laden's idea to start the Iraq war...[more]

The FDA/pet food poisoning story continues to grow.  Not only was melamine put into put food, but it may be in hogfeed now as well...[more]

As we try to put the horror of the VT shootings behind us, some want to blame liberals...[more]

And last but not least, Don and I have agreed to begin including some music on our blog every weekend.  We hope this will increase the enjoyment of our beloved "Nookular Base".  Starting this weekend, we will post some of our favorites right here.  We know Don is a big metal fan, but I will try to balance him out with some college/indie stuff.  Can't wait!

Chris

Cleveland congressman Dennis Kucinich sent his Democratic colleagues a two-sentence email this morning announcing imminent plans to introduce "Articles of Impeachment with respect to the conduct of Vice President Cheney."

"Please have your staff contact my office," the missive continued,"if you would like to receive a confidential copy of the document prior to its introduction in the House."

Kucinich press secretary Natalie Laber refused to comment on Kucinich's email or to provide any more information about his efforts to push for Cheney's impeachment. The Plain Dealer obtained the email from a different Democratic congressional office...[more]

Good for him.  He said that he kept receiving letters from his district calling for impeachment, so he's just following the will of the voters.  Sounds like something a Representative is supposed to do.  The consensus is to try to impeach Cheney first.  If Bush were to be impeached, we'd seriously be fucked with Cheney in command.  I don't imagine this first attempt would go anywhere.  However, I still think it's important to start the process and get the discussions flowing.  The more the idea is accepted as a possibility, the greater chance this will have down the road.  Go Dennis!

Chris

A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

Ok, so what exactly is a "well regulated militia"?  Is a militia now what we consider the National Guard?  Is it the entire pool of eligible citizens that could be called upon at a moment's notice ?  Or is the 2nd Amendment simply intended to grant individuals with the right to bear arms?  If it is the latter, what makes these individuals "well regulated"? 

I guess my basic question boils down to this.  Is the 2nd Amendment intended to ensure individuals the right to bear arms, or is it more of a question of state's rights to ensure that (well regulated) militias have the right to bear arms to protect the security of a free state?

Btw, one of the more asinine things I've heard about gun control laws came from Neal Boortz.  He argued that gun control laws would simply make it more difficult for law-abiding people to get guns, and not the criminals.  Boortz disregards the fact that Seung-hui Cho was law-abiding when he bought his guns.

Chris

 Former U.S. Attorney David Iglesias was fired after Sen. Pete Domenici, who had been unhappy with Iglesias for some time, made a personal appeal to the White House, the Journal has learned.
    Domenici had complained about Iglesias before, at one point going to Attorney General Alberto Gonzales before taking his request to the president as a last resort.
    The senior senator from New Mexico had listened to criticism of Iglesias going back to 2003 from sources ranging from law enforcement officials to Republican Party activists.
    Domenici, who submitted Iglesias' name for the job and guided him through the confirmation process in 2001, had tried at various times to get more white-collar crime help for the U.S. Attorney's OfficeÃ?? even if Iglesias didn't want it.
    At one point, the six-term Republican senator tried to get Iglesias moved to a Justice Department post in Washington, D.C., but Iglesias told Justice officials he wasn't interested.
    In the spring of 2006, Domenici told Gonzales he wanted Iglesias out.
    Gonzales refused. He told Domenici he would fire Iglesias only on orders from the president.
    At some point after the election last Nov. 6, Domenici called Bush's senior political adviser, Karl Rove, and told him he wanted Iglesias out and asked Rove to take his request directly to the president.
    Domenici and Bush subsequently had a telephone conversation about the issue....[read more]

This story is alot bigger than just some attorney firings.  The Bush administration was clearly setting up a legal staff that was designed to go after Democrats in states where elections were being held, as a part of their "Permanent Majority" delusion.  Thank God for the November elections, and for true watchdog journalism by blogs like TPM Muckraker.

 Chris

I heard about this documentary on the Randi Rhodes show yesterday.

The Halliburton Company said yesterday that its subsidiary that does business in Iran had completed all its commitments and was no longer working in the country.

In January 2005, the company, which was once led by Vice President Dick Cheney, said that it would not accept new work in Iran but that it would complete existing contracts there.

The Department of Justice subpoenaed documents from Halliburton in July 2004 for an investigation into the legality of contracts its Halliburton Products & Services Ltd. unit, which is registered in the Cayman Islands, held for work with the state-run National Iranian Oil Company.

American companies are forbidden under United States law from doing business in Iran, dating to sanctions imposed after the 1979 Islamic revolution when student fundamentalists held 52 American hostages for 444 days.

"Halliburton has said that its operations in Iran, handled through a Dubai office, were legal because they were isolated from American operations and management.

Halliburton's prior business in Iran was clearly permissible under applicable laws and regulations," the company reiterated in the statement yesterday.

Last month, Halliburton said its chief executive, David J. Lesar, would move to Dubai from Houston to open a new headquarters there to improve the company's competitive position for Middle East contracts.

Makes sense to me. Whenever you play both sides, you can really make a killing.

Chris

1. Confusing, unending war.  Citizens of Oceania never really knew if they were at war with Eurasia or Eastasia.  I personally can't remember if we are at war with Iraq, Afghanistan, the Taliban, Al-Qaeda, Islamo-fascism, terrorism, etc. 
2. Spying on citizens.   In Orwell's classic, you could almost hear Yacov Smirnov's voice while thinking "in Oceania, television watches you."   We are more civilized in America however.  We merely accept the fact that our phone calls or emails could be monitored at any time.
3. Torture.  Who can forget the Smith's ordeal in Room 101, with the head cage and the rat?  Our "Room 101" is Guantanamo Bay, where rights of the accused are ignored and torture has become not only acceptable, but expected.
4. "War is Peace"  Part of the motto of Big Brother.  Is this now part of Dubyaspeak?  Yes, George W Bush actually said "when we talk about war, we're really talking about peace".

The end of 1984 reveals that after Winston's stay in Room 101, he accepts his lot and learns to love Big Brother.  Will we choose the same fate?

Chris

Then two weeks ago Congress passed a supplemental spending bill with a withdrawal time table.  We thought "OK, here it is.  Some real progress on ending this occupation."  Sure the President threatened a veto.  But if Congress stuck to their guns, surely they could put enough pressure on him to eventually sign it. 

But alas, it's beginning to look like Congress is starting to acquiese.  Senator Levin from Michigan has said "We're not going to cut funding, period."  Also, it order to avoid a battle with Bush it appears that Congress will soon compromise with the President on the spending bill by removing any withdrawal timetables.  In this case when Congress and the President compromise, the American public and soldiers get screwed.

This also sets a disturbing precident.  Any future President can lie us into war, and be guaranteed that Congress will be too chicken-shit to do anything about it.  Especially if the 110th Congress has anything to say about it....

Chris