I Love This

God help me I do love it so:

The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) raided the home of Sen. Ted Stevens (R-Alaska) on Monday, advancing the corruption probe that has ensnared the once-untouchable GOP dean.

The Anchorage Daily News first reported the search of Stevens’s Girdwood, Alaska, residence on Monday afternoon, citing the assistant special agent in charge of the FBI’s local office.

That home has fueled the investigation into Stevens’ ties to oil-field services company Veco, whose two top executives recently resigned after pleading guilty to bribery and fraud. * * *

More on this here.

Bush Fatigue (with updates)

Here is a great post from Atrios:

Number of times the term "Clinton fatigue" appeared, according to a Nexis search, in major papers during July of 1999: 27.

Clinton Gallup poll approval rating in July of 1999: 64

Number of times the term "Bush fatigue" has appeared, so far, in July of 2007: 1, courtesy of Byron York's hair.

Bush Gallup poll approval rating in July of 2007: 31.

I've complained about this stuff for a long time (here is an example), but one would think that Bush's very low approval ratings would result in a lot more than a single reference to "Bush fatigue" in July 2007.

I know that I am pretty tired of all the bullshit. I used to enjoy attacking Bush, but every time I see him on TV these days, I wish that he and the rest of his incompetent administration would just go away. And although I'm sure I'm not alone in feeling this way, the Corporate Media is basically giving Bush a free pass when compared to what they did to Clinton during the PenisGate Scandal.

Jamison Foser has more on this:

[W]e have long noted that leading news outlets like The Washington Post and The New York Times have, by all available evidence, devoted significantly fewer resources to covering scandalous Bush administration actions than they devoted to covering President Clinton's relationship with a staffer.

When the Monica Lewinsky story broke, the Times and the Post -- like nearly every other news outlet in the country -- dedicated extraordinary resources to covering it. The day after the story broke, the Times and the Post ran a combined total of 19 articles about it, five of them on the front page. Twenty-eight reporters combined to write more than 20,000 words about a "scandal" that boiled down to whether the president told the truth about a consensual relationship that was ruled immaterial to a civil lawsuit that was thrown out of court for being entirely without merit. That's 28 reporters and 20,000 words -- at just two newspapers in just one day.

That relentless wall-to-wall coverage continued unabated for more than a year.

Fast-forward a few years. We have a president who has lied to the country in order to take it to war against a nation that didn't attack us, created a network of secret prisons, embraced torture, held people without trial or access to lawyers or even being charged with anything, used the government to spy on its own citizens, used "signing statements" to declare that he will not follow the very laws he is signing, and presided over an administration that is routinely described as "lawless" and that generally behaves as though the United States Congress has no more authority than the Ridgemont High School student council. Among other transgressions against the truth, the law, the Constitution, and human dignity.

And, it is important to note, those are not my conclusions. Those are conclusions that have each been reached by countless legal experts, scholars, and editorial boards, based on facts reported by countless journalists and placed in countless news reports by countless editors.

So, given what the occupants of the nation's most influential newsrooms clearly know -- what they have said and written before -- shouldn't the media be devoting greater coverage to the basic matter of whether or not we still live in a nation of laws?

Foser goes on to note that, on Thursday evening, CBS News devoted a mere 109 words to FBI Director Robert S. Mueller's testimony contradicting the sworn testimony of Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales, then spent 490 words on Oscar, the cat who knows when people are going to die.

OK, so the Oscar the Cat story is pretty cool, but come on.

UPDATE: What Digby says:

On the Stephanopoulos bobble head roundtable this morning, Cokie Roberts raised the baton and started the drumbeat: the Democrats risk moving waaaaay too far to the left and that is going to be a biiiiig problem for them "just like it was in Vietnam." Yes, she said it out loud. And David Gergen agreed whole heartedly.

Does anyone recall these gasbags saying that Bush was moving so far to the right with his monarchic, fundamentalist, shock and awe presidency that it was going to be a biiiig problem for them? I must have missed all those warnings. Now that he's at 28% and the conservatives are on the run after having proven that there really is a limit to how far the crazed radical wingnuts can go, they are still warning about the Democrats moving too far to the left. These people have not had an original thought in 40 years.

Amen. Who the hell is this so-called "left" anyway? Something like 55% of the country support legislation to withdraw from Iraq by next spring. Are all these people left-wingers?

The Democrats' big problem right now isn't that they might move too far to the left -- they should instead be worrying about what could happen to them in 2008 if they ignore the wishes of the American people with regard to Iraq.

UPDATE II: Here is a great cartoon connecting Oscar the Cat with the Bush Regime.

Photos From Last June's Crane Prairie Trip

Roxy took these:

The Bush Regime Subpoenas Michael Moore

On the stupidity meter, this is right up there with FauxNews/Bill O'Lielly's lawsuit against Al Franken:

Filmmaker Michael Moore revealed on Thursday's "The Tonight Show" with Jay Leno that the Bush Administration had served him with a subpoena regarding his recent trip to Cuba made as part of his new film, Sicko.

Moore told the audience that he was notified of the subpoena backstage.

"I haven't even told my own family yet," Moore remarked. "I was just informed when I was back there with Jay that the Bush administration has now issued a subpoena for me."

Moore declared that the subpoena was unwarranted, saying, "this was a work of journalism."

"I was there to help them and now I’m going to face this further harassment from the Bush people," Moore said, according to a transcript. “Aren’t they busy with something else?"

Moore is going to get a ton of publicity out of this. The idiocy of the Bush Administration never ceases to amaze me.

GonzoGate Update

Olbermann did a great summary last night of Alberto Gonzales' testimony yesterday in front of the Senate Judiciary Committee. Olbermann's report can be found here. TIME has more on Gonzo's testimony here.

It is pretty clear to me that Bush and Gonzales are in some kind of competition to see which one of them can tell the biggest lie. Gonzo, however, is doing his lying under oath, which tells me that he isn't all that worried about being charged with perjury.

Every Democrat Should Memorize These Numbers

You see it all the time -- some neofascist will be on television "debating" someone who opposes the Iraq War, and this neofascist will inevitably say that any American who wants the US to get out of Iraq is an idiot and should not be listened to. How should the war opponent respond? But running off these numbers from the latest Washington Post poll (summarized by Kevin Drum):

78% think George Bush is too unwilling to change policies in Iraq.

55% support legislation to withdraw from Iraq by next spring.

55% trust congressional Democrats on the war (only 32% trust Bush).

62% think Congress should have the final say about when to withdraw troops.

49% think Democrats have done too little to get Bush to change his Iraq policy (only 17% think they've done too much).

It's pretty easy -- most Republicans are outside the mainstream when it comes to Iraq, and that point must be driven home at every possible opportunity.

Great Piece On The Fall of Condi Rice

Not too long ago, Condoleezza Rice was being touted a possible GOP candidate for president, which I found to be pretty funny given how consistently shitty her job performance has been over the last six years.

Well, the times have definitely changed (from Joel Brinkley of the San Francisco Chronicle):

A few months ago, [Rice] decided to write an opinion piece about Lebanon. She enlisted John Chambers, chief executive officer of Cisco Systems as a co-author, and they wrote about public/private partnerships and how they might be of use in rebuilding Lebanon after last summer's war. No one would publish it.

Think about that. Every one of the major newspapers approached refused to publish an essay by the secretary of state. Price Floyd, who was the State Department's director of media affairs until recently, recalls that it was sent to the Wall Street Journal, the New York Times and perhaps other papers before the department finally tried a foreign publication, the Financial Times of London, which also turned it down.

As a last-ditch strategy, the State Department briefly considered translating the article into Arabic and trying a Lebanese paper. But finally they just gave up. "I kept hearing the same thing: 'There's no news in this.' " Floyd said. The piece, he said, was littered with glowing references to President Bush's wise leadership. "It read like a campaign document." * * *

As George Bush so famously said: "Fool me once, shame on — shame on you. Fool me — you can't get fooled again."

Mike Luckovich

By the way, Bush's approval rating is now at 25% in the latest ARG poll.

This Could Get Very Interesting

Larry Flynt was on Larry King last night talking about more possible revelations with regard to the DC prostitution scandal, and he said this:

FLYNT: We've got good leads. We've got over 300 initially. And they're down to about 30 now which is solid.

KING: When are you going to print?

FLYNT: Well, the last thing now is we don't know if we want to let it to drip, drip, drip or we want to go with everything at once.

KING: You mean you might release 30 names at once?

FLYNT: A good possibility.

KING: Will we be -- I don't want to get into names yet. Will we be shocked?

FLYNT: Yes.

KING: Were you shocked?

FLYNT: I was shocked, especially at one senator but...

KING: One senator especially?

FLYNT: Yes.

Of course, I have a feeling that a lot of Democrats will be implicated here -- after all, the GOP, despite its best efforts, hasn't yet cornered the market on this type of scandal -- but I can't wait to see how many more "family values" Republicans get pulled into this.

And speaking of GOP hypocrites, this Colbert segment is hysterical.

More Photos From Coast Trip

Here are four more photos taken from the beach house we stayed in last week on the Southern Oregon Coast (the last two photos feature the formation of rocks known as The Cat and Kittens):

There They Go Again

BBC correspondent Katty Kay said this on the Chris Matthews Show yesterday (via Think Progress):

Hawks have been calling the White House all week saying: “We hope you’re not going to wobble on Iraq.” And I understand they’ve been getting reassurance from the White House: “No, the policy is not changing.” Bill Kristol wrote a very condemning article saying that the White House must not change policy, must stick with the surge. The White House called back, said: “Why are you giving us such a hit; we’re staying with the surge.”

Good stuff. And if that isn't enough for you, here is what the Idiot Kristol wrote yesterday in the Washington Post: "I suppose I'll merely expose myself to harmless ridicule if I make the following assertion: George W. Bush's presidency will probably be a successful one."

The problem is that Kristol will not be exposed even to mere "harmless ridicule" for his idiocy, at least not by anyone in the mainstream media. This guy has long been one of the Iraq Debacle's loudest cheerleaders, so you'd think someone in the mainstream would at least call him on all his bullshit.

And by the way, I completely agree with Bob Schieffer. He said this yesterday on Face The Nation:

I am still not sure that I believe it: The Iraqi parliament is going on vacation during the month of August.

The White House offers the lame excuse that, after all, Baghdad is hot in August – sometimes 130 degrees.

May I ask a follow-up?

How much hotter do you suppose it is if you are a wearing a helmet, full body armor, carrying ammunition and walking foot patrols through Baghdad?

The last I heard, that is how American troops are spending their August in Iraq.

For me, this does it.

God help the Iraqi people because there is not much America can do to help a government that leaves Americans dying in the streets while the parliament escapes to cooler climes. * * *

Amen.

Photos From Latest Beach Trip

Photos From Recent Fishing Trips

I've gone fishing quite a few times during the last five weeks. The first couple of trips were fun, but pretty much fishless. The last three trips, however, were great. Over Father's Day weekend, Carl, Steve, Steve's extended family, and I hiked in to Marion Lake in the Jefferson Wilderness and probably caught 90 trout total in our group, releasing most of them (of course).

Last Saturday, Danimal, Larry (Danimal's dad), Mark, and I hiked in to some lakes located in the Three Sisters Wilderness (that's a picture of one of them at top). The first lake we tried had no fish in it -- at least none that were interested in biting -- so we decided to hike over to another lake. The other lake wasn't easy to find -- it is not on a trail so we had to do a bit of cross country -- but we finally did locate it and the fishing was good. We caught two brook trout and 13 cutthroat, and kept nine fish (pictured above) for the smoker. The fish were 11 to 14 inches in length, and were actually hitting spinners casted from the shore, which was great fun. The mosquitoes were pretty bad, though -- I wouldn't recommend going into the Oregon wilderness this time of year without lots of bug repellent.

And on Monday, my fishing guide buddy Phil took me, Steve, and Tom sturgeon fishing on the lower Columbia and we had a big day. We had six anglers on the boat, and each fisherman is allowed to keep one sturgeon per day between 45 inches and 60 inches in length. Well, the boat limited out by 9:20 -- the bigger fish pictured above was 57 inches in length -- but we continued fishing until about 12:20 pm doing catch and release, and ended up getting over thirty fish total.

The cool part was that about 24 of the fish we caught were between 45 and 60 inches long, meaning that we ended up bringing an additional three limits to the boat after we limited out. Usually it is the other way around -- you catch a few keeper-sized fish and the rest are sub-legals -- but not that day. That's me on the right holding my keeper sturgeon.

Thanks for a great trip, Phil.

Harold Is $5 Richer Thanks To George W. Bush

Here is an exchange which took place in the comments section of this blog about one month ago with regard to Scooter Libby:

I guess there's a filing to let him stay out during his appeal. If that fails, I will bet Harold $5 that Libby sees the inside of a cell.
Fredrick 06.05.07
-------------------------------------------

I hope you are right, Man, but I'll take that bet, and I'll gladly pay you the money if I lose. Scooter must see the inside of a jail cell -- on this particular case -- for you to win (if he gets picked up for drunk driving in the interim, that doesn't count).

But it is the easiest $5 I've ever made. Remember, this is the president (1) who launched an illegal war resulting in the needless deaths of hundreds of thousands of people, (2) who illegally eavesdropped on everybody, (3) who committed treason by outing a covert CIA operative, etc. etc. etc. If BushCo is willing to do all that, what's to stop it from pardoning Scooter before he see the inside of a jail cell?

Hell, a presidential pardon is a legal act! Sure, it might be politcally perilous for Bush, but his approval rating is already in the low 30s, and I don't think he can go much lower than that -- my guess is that 30% or so of the country would support Bush even if he was filmed sodomizing sheep on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial -- so what political risk would Bush really be taking if he pardoned Scooter?
Harold 06.06.07

Slic[k] suggested today that although Bush's approval rating probably won't drop much as a result of this de facto pardon, this is the kind of thing that will (1) energize the Democratic base and (2) hurt the GOP in the long run.

I think that is probably a fair assessment. Bush's presidency is such a disaster that he doesn't really care about how much damage he is causing the Republican Party, and I think he's probably accepted the fact that his presidency will be considered one of the worst in history. His goal now is simply to avoid being considered the worst.