The Allegations against Vick

I’m usually content to let Clement write about this but some of allegations in the indictment are horrid and disgusting, if true.  I simply cannot imagine the depravity needed for acts like this. 

But past the awful details of this story, a trial with lurid testimony about these allegations will certainly be a spectacle.  Perhaps Mike Vick will be the new O.J.? 

The main sources for this story continues to be the Atlanta Journal-Constitution, Profootballtalk.com, and (to a lesser extent) ESPN.com.  Here’s a link to the indictment and a link to a press release about the indictment. 

Excerpt from Profootballtalk.com –

The most graphic misconduct allegedly occurred not long before the first search of the property.  According to paragraph 83 of the indictment, Vick, Peace, and Phillips executed in April 2007 approximately eight dogs that did not perform well in “testing” sessions, by “hanging, drowning, and slamming at least one dog’s body to the ground.”

In other words, in the same month in which Vick declared that he never goes to his Surry County property, and the same month in which he sat face-to-face with the Commissioner, Vick had (according to the indictment) participated in the killing of as many as eight dogs deemed unfit for fighting.

From the press release –

According to the indictment, the defendants were involved in an ongoing animal fighting venture based out of a property located in Smithfield, Virginia, from early 2001 through on or about April 25, 2007. The property was purchased by Vick in June 2001. Since that time, the named defendants formed a dog fighting enterprise known as “Bad Newz Kennels” and used the property for housing and training pit bulls used in dog fights. From at least 2002, the defendants and others sponsored dog fights at the property, where participants and dogs traveled from South Carolina, North Carolina, Maryland, New York, Texas, Alabama, and other states to participate. Generally, only those accompanying the opposing kennels and “Bad Newz Kennels’” associates attended the fights. For a particular dog fight, the participants would establish a purse for the winning side, ranging from the hundreds to thousands of dollars. Participants and spectators would also place side-bets on the fight. The dog fight would last until the death or surrender of the losing dog. At the end of the fight, the losing dog was sometimes put to death by drowning, hanging, gunshot, electrocution, or another method. The indictment also alleges that the defendants participated in dog fights at locations other than the property in Smithfield. For these events, various members of “Bad Newz Kennels” would travel to other parts of Virginia and across state lines to participate in dog fights at other venues. The indictment alleges that the defendants and the “Bad Newz Kennels” dogs participated in dog fights in North Carolina, South Carolina, Maryland, New Jersey, and elsewhere in Virginia.

The indictment also includes allegations about the defendants “testing” the pit bulls in their inventory, to determine if particular dogs were good fighters. Sometimes, the dogs deemed not to be good fighters were be put to death. In the summer of 2002, at various times, Peace, Phillips, Taylor, and Vick performed “testing” sessions at the property in Smithfield. Following some of these sessions, the dogs that did not perform well were put to death by Peace, Phillips, or Taylor. Further, in April 2007, an additional “testing” session was performed by Peace, Phillips, and Vick. Following that session, the indictment alleges that approximately eight dogs were put to death by hanging, drowning, and/or slamming at least one dog’s body to the ground.

Novakula loves him some women bloggers

Amanda has some fun with him.  Hilarious. 

Really, really bad newz for Mike Vick and Falcons fans

Mike Vick has been indicted for his part in dogfighting operations ran out of Bad Newz Kennelz on Vick’s property in Surry County, VA. Based on the way Roger Goodell’s tenure as NFL Commissioner has started off so far, don’t expect to see Vick play a down in the NFL this year. I’ll have more on this later tonight.

Staffers are “Stunned” that Bush drops by meeting on Iraq

Am I the only one who finds it remotely humorous that staffers were “stunned” that Bush stopped by a meeting on Iraq in the White House? 

Potential Supreme Court Nominees

I missed this last week but it’s definitely worth a read and hopefully will start an important discussion.  Tom Goldstein over at SCOTUSblog previews who a Democratic President might nominate to fill potentially vacant seats in the next term.  He also has a follow-up here. 

I think a lot of people during the 2004 elections overlooked the importance of filling the Supreme Court.  Until Katrina, the ideological bent of this Preznit was hidden in plain sight and his two S.C. appointments were perfect examples of this. 

The confirmation hearings were maddening in the sense that the media, Bush, many politicians, and the nominees themselves pretended that their appointment was about anything but making the Court radically more conservative. 

Hopefully, the dialogue about the next nominee is more informed, honest, and helpful. 

Prison Break!!!

My theory on all the recent prison escapes is the influence television has on our prisoners.  It’s only a matter of time before Congress steps in. 

Shampoo, Nail Polish, Soda, and other dangerous items

The WaPo has an article today about how the TSA will continue to restrict the possession of various types of gels for carry-on passengers.  Can I just say that this policy is more than annoying? 

It’s also a complete over-reaction to the supposed dangers of terrorists mixing liquid explosives on a plane in order to blow it up.  The scenario in which it would happen is so implausible as to defy common sense. 

If you believe it could happen, you are either speaking in purely theoretical terms with no concern for practical realities or you do not know what you are talking about. 

If you believe these security measures are important, either you believe mixing liquid explosives on a plane is possible (in which case see above) or you are the kind of guy who likes to “look busy” when his boss is walking around but doesn’t really care if what you do is actually useful. 

Anti-choicers and Al Qaeda

Update – It looks like Amanda at Pandagon wrote with a slightly different angle about what the anti-choice movement is really about.  There are some pretty neat examples of what I’m talking about in her post too so check it out. 

In blog years, this is ancient.  But Elyzabethe at Yellow is the Color commented on this last week and it looks like Jill at Feministe picked it up too.  It’s about the Ohio state legislature introducing a bill to ban abortion. 

This may not be news anymore but I did want to attempt to answer Elyzbethe’s question which was: 

But still ….. don’t these people have anything better to do then introduce pointless radical legislation? Aren’t there, like, actual problems in Ohio? Would it be too much to ask that our elected officials paid attention to things that might actually be beneficial to state citizens, instead of measures designed solely to demonstrate their superior morality?

This brings up a point that I think is often underestimated or overlooked by people who support choice.  Anti-choicers see this issue as a crusade or, if you prefer, a jihad.  The most radical among them do not simply approach abortion as one of many political issues.  It is the issue. 

In their mind, the fact that abortion is legal and that women are having them is a symptom of a larger cultural and spiritual “evil.”  An abortion clinic in their neighborhood is a spiritual blight and a cancer.  It is an insult to the God that gave them that land, which in their mind is a Christian land.  It is deeply offensive to them. 

Much like Christian soldiers occupying Saudi Arabia or Iraq are offensive to groups like, say, Al Qaeda. 

The most radical anti-choicers see their movement to get rid of abortion as part of a larger movement to spiritually cleanse this nation.  They operate their movement like one would operate an insurgency.  Insurgencies follow certain patterns.  Here are a few I’ve noticed. 

1. Maintain at all costs the illusion of momentum and inevitablity. 

This is all important, actually.  Insurgencies are, by their nature, minority movements.  In the anti-choice world, even with the recent losses in the last election and specifically in South Dakota’s decision to overturn their own abortion ban, the anti-choice movement is growing.  They can now claim to have very nearly taken over the Supreme Court and to have scored a huge judicial victory when the partial birth abortion ban was upheld.

They have an amazing ability to raise money and support their own candidates for public office on nearly every level.  They can also offer simultaneous abortion bills in multiple states.  The more radical a bill is, and the more attention it garners, the better.  And if one gets defeated, they can just propose another one again and again.  If one legislator is voted out of office, they have dozens to take his place. 

The effect is to put pro-choicers on the defensive, to create the illusion that there is a mass groundswell of public support of banning abortion all over the country, making it difficult to direct resources to educate and oppose their radical agenda. 

This is similar to the tactic that has become a hallmark of Al Qaeda.  Multiple suicide bombings in different areas at the same time offer the illusion of sophistication, inevitability, and power.  It engenders confusion and makes it more difficult for governments to direct resources to fight back.  Even when the bombs fail, it still serves its purpose.  Even if a suicide bomber gets caught, there are dozens to take his place. 

2. Claim moral highground, superiority, and obscure the ultimate agenda. 

The partial birth abortion ban was a great example of this tactic.  Here was a little understood procedure which was used as a medically necessary option in certain situations that was described in the most heinous terms and then attacked.  It allowed the anti-choicers to paint abortion as a sadistic, violent, and immoral procedure, which had long-term psychological consequences for mothers. 

The debate about partial birth abortion, for them, was never about what was the most medically sound option for women.  It was about horrifying the public and shaming women, doctors, politicians, and voters. 

And of course, the real agenda for the most radical anti-choicers is not getting rid of abortion and saving babies.  It’s about getting rid of dirty, nasty, unholy sexual relationships, which includes most sexual relationships and most sexual positions.  It’s not about having fun!  Sexual fun is a sign of moral sickness and depravity.  Sex is about making babies.  And we all know that the best babies are only made in the missionary position between a man and his wife-servant. 

Of course, Al Qaeda also makes a point to describe in self-serving detail the various moral crimes of Christian soldiers against Muslims and their chattel.  Ahem.  I mean “women.”  They play and replay the photos from Abu Graib, scenes of destruction after American bombing, dead bodies along the road, houses in rubble, crying women, maimed children, and the “Westernization” of Arab culture. 

Al Qaeda advertises that they simply want to “liberate” the Arab people from their corrupted and compromised governments, from the Christian soldiers who occupy their lands, and from the sinful, secular Arabs who have brought it all upon them. 

But of course, this obscures the fact that Al Qaeda ultimately wishes to introduce sharia law. 

3. Probe, observe, and always test the defenses of the enemy.  Never rest. 

And finally the reason for legislation that will probably never pass.  It lets people know they’re still out there.  It keeps the opposition on its toes.  It exposes they way the opposition operates and reacts, which may reveal a weakness or even a fault line of support.  The partial birth abortion ban came out of this tactic.  Supreme Court decisions were analyzed and picked apart, focus groups were tested, and ideas were floated around until it became clear there was an opening there. 

When the U.S. soldiers first got to Iraq and after the Taliban left the major cities in Afghanistan without a fight, there was a period of relative quiet.  Many people, including our Preznit, thought that major combat operations were over. 

But like any competent insurgency, the enemy anticipated a long war, and occassionally coordinated an attack, to let people know they were still there but also to study the U.S. military.  It made them a better, more calculated insurgency and the results have largely been on display for the last couple years in both countries. 

What this all means for pro-choicers, like me, is that we have to recognize once for all what we’re up against.  We have to fight the anti-choicers the way we should be fighting Al Qaeda (sans the military, obviously).  With educational initiatives, by responding effectively to the absurd and horrific claims of the opposition, and by exposing the truth behind its radical agenda. 

So these are my initial answers to Elyzabethe’s question.  I’m interested in other people’s thoughts. 

And let me clarify something.  When I use the word “anti-choicer,” I am not talking about everyone who is pro-life.  I am only referring to the most radical part of the pro-life movement that is fueled by the need to decide for everyone else the best way to live their lives.  They are actively trying to taking choices away from everyone else because they know best and, in their mind, God said it was okay. 

And before all you radical anti-choicers get your Jack Bauer underoos in a bunch and accuse me of comparing you to terrorists, let me clarify:  I am absolutely comparing you to Al Qaeda.  If the neo-fascist anti-democratic one-God-fits-all theocratic shoe fits…

Getting Owned – Part III of Perlstein’s series

Rick Perlstein has part 3 up now of his “The Foreclosing of America” series. 

Here is where I wrote about the first two parts and provided links.  Rick’s writing brings into sharp focus the absolute irresponsibility of policy making under neo-conservative rule. 

Impeach!!!

Via Not Atrios –

Bill Moyers has John Nichols and Bill Fein on to talk impeachment.  It might seem weird to describe it as such but I thought the nearly forty minutes of this interview to be electrifying.  It should be required viewing by any high school social studies class as it gives a desperately needed perspective on the last 7 and a half years. 

For those who are not aware, Bill Fein was one of the guys who drafted the articles of impeachment… against Bill Clinton. 

Here’s a taste, but you really should just go watch the whole thing. 

BILL MOYERS: You just said in one sentence there “impeach Bush and Cheney.” You’re talking about taking that ax against the head of government, both of them.

JOHN NICHOLS: No. No, no, no.

BRUCE FEIN: It’s not an ax, Bill.

JOHN NICHOLS: We’re talking–

BRUCE FEIN: It’s not an ax– it’s not–Impeachment is not a criminal proceeding.

JOHN NICHOLS: You are being–

BRUCE FEIN: –we cannot entrust the reins of power, unchecked power, with these people. They’re untrustworthy. They’re asserting theories of governments that are monarchical. We don’t want them to exercise it. We don’t want Hillary Clinton or Rudy Giuliani or anyone in the future to exercise that.

JOHN NICHOLS: Bill Moyers, you are making a mistake. You are making a mistake that too many people make.

BILL MOYERS: Yes.

JOHN NICHOLS: You are seeing impeachment as a constitutional crisis. Impeachment is the cure for a constitutional crisis. Don’t mistake the medicine for the disease. When you have a constitutional crisis, the founders are very clear. They said there is a way to deal with this. We don’t have to have a war. We don’t have to raise an army and go to Washington. We have procedures in place where we can sanction a president appropriately, do what needs to be done up to the point of removing him from office and continue the republic. So we’re not talking here about taking an ax to government. Quite the opposite. We are talking about applying some necessary strong medicine that may cure not merely the crisis of the moment but, done right-

BRUCE FEIN: Moreover, it’s–

JOHN NICHOLS: –might actually cure–

BRUCE FEIN: It’s not an attack on Bush and Cheney in the sense of their personal– attacks. Listen, if you impeach them, they can live happily ever after into their-

JOHN NICHOLS: And go to San Clemente.

BRUCE FEIN: Yes, go to San Clemente or go back to the ranch or whatever. But it’s saying no, it’s the Constitution that’s more important than your aggrandizing of power. And not just for you because the precedent that would be set would bind every successor in the presidency as well, no matter Republican, Democrat, Independent, or otherwise.

Light Posting Today but…

Enjoy Rilo Kiley’s new video. 

It’s long because there’s about four or five minutes of interviews with porn stars at the beginning.  I’ll admit, I was fascinated by it and felt that the song was pretty good but completely different for Rilo Kiley. 

Jenny Lewis is still my siren. 

Historic Christian Warriors Save Senate from Diversity

But then are removed and diversity wins anyway.  Ah, well. 

Seriously, for the first time ever, the morning invocation in the Senate was being read by a Hindu Chaplain but not before three “Christian” activists started yelling, crying blasphemy. 

I don’t get it.  They came from North Carolina with the express purpose of disrupting the event.  Did they wake up one morning, hear it was scheduled, and imagine hellfire and brimstone if those damned Hindus got away with this? 

As an American who realizes that shit like this gets broadcast all around the world, I find this embarrassing. 

In my opinion, the self-identified Christians who actually believe they are fighting in a Holy War against other faiths by pulling crap like this aren’t really Christian.  They’re idiots and they’re dangerous. 

Christianity has a pretty wide tent, I think.  But I think these idiots have more in common with terrorists than with most of the well-intentioned people of faith I’ve met. 

“This is a Gary Trudeau cartoon live. We’re only missing the feather.”

Best quote from the hearings today in which Harriet Miers did not show up.  TPM has a great highlight video. 

Please, Congress, for the sake of the government, the principle of the separation of powers, your oversight responsibilities, and your own reflection in the mirror, hold Harriet Miers and the White House in contempt of Congress. 

The Rudy Video

Powerful.  See the Potemkin Candidate post below for more information. 

The Potemkin Candidate

First we had the photo op president (see here and here).  Now it looks like we’re getting the photo op candidate in Rudy Giuliani. 

Now it’s no secret that Giuliani’s entire campaign is premised on his 9/11 performance when he became known as “America’s mayor” by breathless media pundits everywhere. 

Apparently, the substance of that leadership is being disputed by the International Association of Firefighters.  You can find more information here and here. 

So how will the media cover what basically amounts to a refutation of the entire reason Giuliani is considered a candidate?  As a horse race, of course!  Digby has more.  But here’s the heart of her point: 

But for some reason, the media has come to habitually weigh the prospective competence and leadership qualities of candidates on the basis of how well they thwart smears. This stands in for real questions of leadership and competence, even in the case of Giuliani, whose entire rationale for running rests on his leadership and competence on 9/11 — and which is being attacked specifically in this ad. There is no need to substitute his campaign’s response for the real thing.

Katrinatowns

Sheelzebub over at Pandagon has an excellent and passionate response to this N.Y. Times article about the massive trailer parks still housing Katrina victims, which were designed for the convenience of no one but the lowest bid contractors. 

The absolutely unconscionable part of this story is that the problems associated with these trailer parks were not only foreseeable, they had happened already.  In Punta Gorda, Florida, people who were displaced by Hurricane Charley were still living in “FEMA City,” as it was called, one year later with no end in sight. 

It would have been a relatively simple task to provide some guidelines to the developers of these trailer parks to insure a certain standard of living was guaranteed by providing access to public transportation and a place to purchase groceries. 

Sudan

There’s a must-read article out today in the McClatchy newspapers.  It’s a well written compact assessment of a significant change in the dynamics of the Sudanese conflict.  Specifically, the fact that now some janjaweed gangs are supporting some rebels as part of a overall trend in which loyalties are changing, groups are being splintered into more and more factions, and aid workers are increasingly vulnerable. 

The account of the clashes around Songa village on June 9 and 10, given by African Union peacekeepers manning a small mountain outpost here in central Darfur, illustrates part of an increasingly upside-down security picture in Darfur. With some janjaweed now fighting alongside rebels they once tried to kill – and with the rebels riven by disputes and attacking peacekeepers and aid workers – this is hardly the same conflict of four years ago.

…

Now there’s a new set of problems: Few people know who’s attacking or why. Armed groups are breaking off and recombining according to the tactical advantage that day. Aid agencies and peacekeepers are at greater risk than ever.

I’ve followed this conflict off and on for a long time.  I’ve also got some friends who are in STAND, an extremely active student organization designed to raise awareness about the genocide in Sudan.  A couple years ago, in front of the White House, I attended a rally with Darfur survivors and had an opportunity to speak with a few.  What’s going on there is horrifying. 

Most people I know believe that the leadership of the United States can make a difference there and many have advocated for U.S. troops to intervene.  The U.N. is notoriously slow to act, especially when it comes to sending troops, and extremely risk adverse.  And there are significant challenges to any military action.  Without an extremely careful and well crafted plan with clearly obtainable objectives and defined benchmarks for success, it would be a classic mission creep scenario. 

The real key to success is in putting the full diplomatic and economic weight, with carrots and sticks, of the world and most especially the United States behind the effort to stabilize the region.  Any military forces could then be used mostly to provide security for refugee and humanitarian camps. 

Which is why this is so disheartening: 

Diplomats acknowledged that they stumbled after the peace accord, missing opportunities to win over other rebel groups. Experts said that U.S. engagement foundered when Zoellick left the State Department a few months later, briefly leaving the Bush administration without a point person for Darfur.

Clearly it is difficult to place the blame for a situation like this on any one thing.  There’s enough to go around.  But the one constant calming force, the one thing that should be a given, is the efficacy of American leadership.  Our credibility and commitment is a calming influence, or at least should be. 

Gut Feelings – Al Qaeda and the Meaning of Strength

By now everyone has heard of DHS Secretary Chertoff’s gut feeling that Al Qaeda was going to attack us this summer.  He was roundly and rightly ridiculed.  Apparently, our Preznit is the only one allowed to speak and fear from the gut. 

Now, in today’s Washington Post, there’s an article which says that Al Qaeda may be as strong if not stronger than it has been since 2001.  Notwithstanding the fact that, if true, this means that everything we’ve done, lost, sacrificed, bought, and tried since 9/11 has been wasted, I find the whole idea of measuring the level of Al Qaeda’s strength ridiculously difficult. 

First of all, it is in Al Qaeda’s interest to exaggerate its capability.  It relies on raising money and recruitment to survive and it can only do this if (a) it conducts effective operations and influences policy around the world and/or (b) everyone thinks it conducts effective operations and influences policy around the world. 

Second, it is in the Bush administration’s interest to exaggerate Al Qaeda’s capability.  A significant portion of the Republican/Bush political strategy is to convince people that the Al Qaeda barbarians are at the gate and this menacing specter can only be faced with Big Daddy Republicans in charge. 

So both Al Qaeda and the Bush administration are, in effect, promoting the same story.  Members of Al Qaeda are everywhere countering U.S. interests, attempting to foil and frustrate us at every turn.  They’re in Iraq, in Iran, in Syria, in Africa, in Europe, and even right here somewhere on your block, spying on your children, writing in their notebooks, patiently plodding, biding their time, and building a bomb. 

And they’re getting better and stronger and more lethal and sneakier.  And we just need to perservere, we just need to survive, and we just need to be trusted.  We’re in war, dammit! 

And every foiled “terrorist plot” is understood to reinforce that narrative. 

Except that most of these plots, when studied carefully and when the details are properly fleshed out beyond the scary “gut feelings” of what might have been, are amateur-ish and bungling.  Especially when compared to the awesome reputation of the super criminal infection that we hear about whenever Al Qaeda is described by our “serious” foreign policy makers. 

So what’s the truth?  How strong is Al Qaeda?  Are they planning something? 

All I can say is that, whatever the true strength, we’ve made Al Qaeda’s job a lot easier by our constant fear-mongering. 

Sex Ed – Bush style

NARAL pointed out that a government web-site designed to help parents teach their teens about sex says that “Abortions can have complications. There may be emotional consequences, as well: some women say that they feel sad and some use more alcohol or drugs than before.” 

It looks like the government has taken down the web-page but Think Progress has the visual. 

Atrios replies that Bush makes him sad and more likely to drink and use drugs.  “Can we outlaw him now?”

There really is something wrong…

with the world.  Via Elyzabethe at Yellow is the Color, it’s difficult to know what to do with this article about men, anal sex, and the ridiculous quotes and stories therein. 

Amanda Marcotte and Jessica Valenti muster more intelligent commentary than I am able to. 

I’ve seen a lot of mysogny and shameful “boys will be boys” behavior in my life.  And I don’t even doubt the men in that article are being accurately portrayed, at least as they were while being interviewed.  But the reporter who wrote that seems to have gone out of his way to gleefully recount what amount to sexually humiliating stories about women.  It’s weird how some men’s magazines feel that what men really want to hear is how bad-ass they are and women are just a bunch of bitches who deserve/want to be dominated by them.