Still Fighting

Activism

Jon Tester for Senate. Check out the skinny on Jon Tester in News #1 (below). Just because his opponent, incumbent Conrad Burns, is considered a weak Senator who barely won his Montana seat in 2000 is no reason to think Tester's campaign will be a walk in the park. Indeed, Republicans will be planning to spend an enormous amount of money to keep this seat for that very reason. Can you help Jon Tester bring the balance of power in the Senate back to the Democrats? Check out his website, and if you can, make a small donation to his fund.

News

Speaking of Losing Senate Seats...Jon Tester is running for the Senate seat in Montana, currently held by Conrad Burns. Burns barely won his Senate seat in 2000, and is considered one of the most vulnerable seats in the country. Above that, the Swing State Project has many reasons why Tester will win. Burns is having trouble raising money. Burns is "a key figure in multiple corruption investigations." In contrast to Burns, Tester is considered more than just a good candidate. He's a leader. Looking at the bills he's introduced into Montana' State legislature (Tester is a two-term State Senator), it's easy to see why Monatans are excited about Tester.

Do They Know Something We Don't? Last summer, Rumsfeld approved something called an "Interim Global Strike Alert Order." Sound ominous? Just wait...there's more. This global strike also includes a possible "nuclear option," which runs counter to every American notion of nuclear weapons - that they are defensive measures only. Strategic Command, or Starcom, is the agency responsible for overseeing a global strike. But Starcom has something called CONPLAN 8022, designed to deal with an imminent threat from North Korea or Iran. In CONPLAN 8022, the option to use nuclear weapons is reserved for when "intelligence suggests an "imminent" launch of an enemy nuclear strike on the United States or if there is a need to destroy hard-to-reach targets." A need to destroy hard-to-reach targets? Now, there's CONPLAN 8022-02, which, for the first time in history, would apply a plan for a preemptive and offensive strike against Iran and North Korea. Yes, you read that correctly. No longer a last resort, Rumsfeld has made a plan to go out and attack Iran and North Korea. Why? Or better yet, who? What personnel would do this? Where would they come from? As you've read, military recruitment isn't exactly what it once was. CONPLAN suggests a quick, clean attack to safeguard America's security. The DoD has always said that they won't discuss war plans. Now that CONPLAN is in the open, why aren't we talking about it?

The Next Big Battle? Speculation runs wild over the possible resignation of Chief Justice William Rehnquist from the Supreme Court. Rehnquist, you may recall, recently revealed that he has thyroid cancer, and has been absent from many of the Court's recent rulings. Mum's the word from Rehnquist himself, but that doesn't stop law experts around the country from proclaiming that now is the time for him to step down. From the Republican side, it makes sense, because the GOP could (will?) lose precious Senate seats in 2006. Politics aside, we want Rehnquist to step down when he is ready to step down. Since Rehnquist will have no input into who the next nominee will be, he might be better served to wait. Even Rehnquist would have a hard time agreeing that someone like Priscilla Owen is fit to have a lifetime appointment.

Editorials

Clinton in 2008? Steve M. brings us a story that was kind of buried this week. In a USA Today/CNN/Gallup Poll, for the first time ever, a majority of polled Americans would vote for Hillary Clinton in 2008. Would we? Obviously, we'll support whomever the final Democratic nominee is, but it might be difficult, if someone like Wes Clark decides to run again. As Steve points out, a lot of people (including us) have said that "Hillary can't win." Steve doesn't believe that anymore, even though he has serious doubts about Hillary being able to bring liberalism "back" to America, and countering the Right-Wing machine. Steve's bottom line is simple. "Is any other Democrat even close to figuring out a way to challenge the lock Republicans have on voters who tear up when they see an American flag?" Read the Nation article he links to, and then answer us that question.

Return of the McCainiacs. Speaking of 2008, what about John McCain? Aside from his ridiculous stance with Bush on Social Security, McCain doesn't act like your typical Republican. He has made his displeasure with the administration and Senate leaders plain. He's one of the few people in government we would trust to do what's right for the country. With his role in preventing the filibuster, he's most likely angered the Dobson/Falwell/Robertson crowd, and that could hurt his chances on the Republican primary. But McCain himself acknowledges that he was putting the interests of the country above his own desires for '08. We hear that a lot from politicians, but there's no other way to explain McCain's actions with the filibuster. Had he simply toed the party line, and not tried to hammer out an agreement, we'd be in a very different situation right now. But McCain saw the removal of the filibuster as not only detrimental to democracy, he knew that Republicans wouldn't be in power forever, and what would happen when the shoe's on the other foot? A McCain nomination in 2008 would be bittersweet to Democrats - McCain is no Bush, and doesn't play to special interest groups; he'll do what is in the country's best interests. But he's not a Democrat.

The NYT Swings and Misses On Santorum. From one side of the Republican spectrum to the other, we shift our attention to Senator Rick Santorum. PNIOnline has a great writeup about a recent New York Times Magazine article on Santorum. The article, written by Michael Sokolove, is a love-fest for Rick Santorum, who can do no wrong, apparently. PNI points out several instances where Sokolove "misses" the opportunity to show the real Santorum. Santorum looks to need all the help he can get, as the last Quinnipiac poll shows him 14 points behind State Treasurer Bob Casey, Jr. Still, we agree with PNI - magazine articles don't often include "in-depth" reporting, but this is ridiculous. For example, the article portrays Santorum as a man who fights for the lower classes. Then why did he vote against the minimum wage increase? We can't wait to get Santorum out of office, and you can bet we'll be taking the fight to Pennsylvania to ensure Casey's win.

Activism

Tom DeLay's back in the news - see news item #3 for details. We're getting pretty sick of writing about Tom DeLay's questionable ethics behavior. So, you be the judge of who's in DeLay's pocket. The Public Campaign Action Fund has created a chart of member of Congress, and how much they are "in" with DeLay": How often they voted with him, how much DeLay's PAC has given their campaign, how much they've donated to DeLay, etc. Check out the list here. Find out where your representatives rank, and then contact them, if need be, to find out why they associate themselves with unethical people like DeLay. We need to make it completely unacceptable for anyone associated with DeLay to continue to serve in Congress.

News

"I'm Learning New Things Every Day." The government has had a long-standing, zero-tolerance policy against discrimination of homosexuals in the workplace. Well, on Tuesday, special counsel Scott J. Bloch, who has a history of shady government business practices to begin with, testified before the Senate Homeland Security and Government Affairs subcommittee on oversight of government management. In his testimony, he told the committee that there was absolutely no legal recourse for said discrimination. To wit, if an employee is fired, reassigned or harassed because of that employee's sexual orientation, there is absolutely nothing that the government can do about it. He claims that due to court rulings, sexual orientation is not considered a "protected class," like race, creed, age, political affiliation and disability. Despite the White House mandate, should a government employee wish to press charges, there is nothing that the Office of Special Counsel can do for that employee. Perhaps this is simply an oversight, or more likely it's lip service by the administration, saying something they'd like to believe is true, pandering to the religious right, with no justification at all.

If It Walks Like a Duck... In recently declassified documents from 2002, the FBI wrote that detainees in Guantanamo Bay had accused their American jailers of flushing the Qur'an down a toilet. And it appears that this incident has happened on numerous occasions. If true, you've got to know that no one will be held accountable for it. Come on, if the top brass at the Pentagon can escape reprisals from a little thing like Abu Ghraib, does anyone really expect there to be military fallout over this? We wonder if McClellan will even mention his bashing of Newsweek. Perhaps it is just our cynicism showing, but we hope none of these turn out to be true. In the world's eyes, America's stock is very low - can we really afford to let it fall any lower?

New Ethics Cloud Over Leading Republican DeLay. Hey, remember Tom DeLay? You know, the #2 Republican in the House of Representatives? Tom's been pretty quiet since the whole Schiavo thing blew up in his face, most likely hoping that the heat against him would die down. Unfortunately for DeLay, a Texas judge ruled today that a committee formed by the powerful Republican had violated state law by failing to disclose $600,000 in mostly corporate donations. The suit was brought filed by five Democratic candidates defeated in 2002 by Republicans. The Repulicans in question received money from "Texans for a Republican Majority," a political action committee founded by DeLay to help Republicans capture the Texas Legislature. The judge awarded the Democrats $196,660 in damages, but the case wasn't really about the money. It was about DeLay using any underhanded tactict he could find to win. First this, and then the re-districting in 2004. Although DeLay was not a defendant in the suit, he can't get far enough away from the taint of being associated with it. We haven't forgotten about DeLay's questionable ethics, and we hope you haven't, either.

Editorials

Dean On Abortion. We're starting to see a new stance on abortion from Democrats, and we couldn't be happier. Well, it's not exactly "new," so much as "actually being explained correctly." Howard Dean was on Meet the Press last weekend, and explained that Democrats aren't "pro-abortion." Nobody is "pro-abortion." Democrats believe that a woman should have the right to choose, period. As Jack O'Toole writes, the argument shouldn't be that 'giving birth and having an abortion are morally equivalent.' The argument should be, as Dean says, 'The painful and difficuly choice of having an abortion should be the choice of the woman involved.' Between this mindset, and Hilary's recent comments about wanting to do more for prevention (while still keeping abortion legal), Democrats just might get through to the right, or at least to the center, which would be nice.

A Troubled Hunt. There's a question that we've been wondering about- why IS bin Laden still alive? If we're so effective at capturing his #2 man, his #3 man (twice!), and so on, why have we not caught him? 3 3/4 years since 9/11, and we're no closer to finding him than we were when we started. Are Pakistanis helping as well as they could be? Is the Afghan government hiding intelligence? Does bin Laden have an Invisibility Cloak? Whatever the reason is, we honestly can't remember the last time Bush said the name "Osama bin Laden," much less heard information about the hunt for him. Certainly, the MSM holds some small fault as well, for not asking these questions. Don't you care? Or are you "over" it?

Caesar and Stem Cells. The White House will veto it, and there weren't enough votes to overturn the eventual veto, but the ever since the House passed the stem cell research bill, pro-lifers and right-wingers have re-found their voice. Jerry and Joe Long discuss the pro-pre-life fascination with saving "life," at the cost of life. The worst part? No one seems to care. If more people honestly cared about stem cell research, more people would have come out to vote in for the Democratic candidate in 2004. Certainly, more than the 122 million that did vote. And we know Americans know how to vote - after all, more than 500 million of them voted over the course of this year's American Idol season. Maybe if we allowed people to dial an 800 number for their candidate in the next election...

Activism

Democracy for America has set up trainings in Texas, Vermont, Virginia, New York and Pennsylvania (unfortunately, California occurred last week). These trainings are designed to teach grassroots activists about how to spread the Democratic message. If you live in any of these areas (particularly Virginia (Kaine for Governor), Texas (Lampson over DeLay) and Pennsylvania (Casey over Santorum)), and you care about getting progressives elected, you must attend this training. If you've signed up for Virginia, let us know!

News

Split-the-Baby. Well, it's D-Day, or rather it would be, if we hadn't reached a compromise last night. A bipartisan panel of 7 Republicans and 7 Democrats fostered a deal that no one seems to be happy with. Republicans aren't happy because only three of their seven will get up-or-down votes (including Priscilla Owen). Democrats aren't happy because they were seen as having the upper hand, and then caved, and now three of the seven will get votes. Bush, however, is tickled pink, because he avoids a vote that he could have lost (for the nuclear option), and he gets three of his judges confirmed, with the possibility for more. Even the religious right isn't happy. But it's about more than that. As the New York Times writes, this is a limited victory for Bush, but now he faces more tests. Stem cells, CAFTA, Bolton, deficit spending and Social Security are all issues where Bush sits on the unpopular side of the fence. Not that that's stopped him before, but still. The only good news to come of this is that Republicans won't get an automatic entry onto the Supreme Court. Frist should be ashamed for attemtping to hijack our checks and balances process, and hopefully Americans will keep this in mind when they vote for their Senators in 2006.

The Race to Richmond. Virginia's Governor race is all but officially between two candidates - Lt. Gov. Tim Kaine (D) and Attorney General Jerry Kilgore (R). Kilgore's camp released an ad last week, accusing Kaine of raising property taxes when he was Mayor of Richmond. Kaine immediately responded with an ad, calling Kilgore's "misleading," and showing that, as Mayor, Kaine cut taxes. We've talked about how much Republicans want the Governor's seat in Virgina, and we're starting to see the smear campaign tactic. Look for more as we get closer to the vote, because if Republicans allow Kaine to run on his and Governor Mark Warner's record, he'll surely win.

Slow News Day? The Parents Television Council, who have made it their mission to decide what you can watch, is all up in arms over a new Paris Hilton commercial for Carl's Jr. The commercial features Hilton "frolicking with a water hose." It has already begun airing, so (presumably) it has passed the FCC screening process. But that's not good enough for the PTC, who has initiated a protest, urging the FCC to pull the ad. This is apprently such big news that sex fiend Bill O'Reilly couldn't stop himself from commenting on it as well. Really, it's one thing for a media watchdog group to advise people on what to watch and not watch. But protesting the FCC? If everybody protested the FCC over offensive material on television, According to Jim wouldn't have made it past the first season!

Editorials

America Wants Security. Krugman's latest may come seem to be a scattershot attempt to cover several topics, but his main point comes across solidly: Why is our government so out of touch? From Robert Ehrlich vetoing the "Wal-Mart bill" for health care, to Tom DeLay bragging about bankruptcy reform, to Schwarzenegger trying to privatize state pension plans, we're seeing numerous attempts to make (or unmake) laws that go against the average citizen. What Krugman calls the "social safety net" is not being met, and people are getting frustrated over it. Hey, there's a message Democrats can stand on - "Bringing you the Social Safety Net since 1928!"

Drowning Out the Real Issues. Terry Neal has a fantastic editorial up about the bizarro universe the White House lives in. Condemning Newsweek for their reporting on the Qur'an (Qur'angate?) brings to light the hypocrisy that burns within the White House's sanctum - blame the messenger, ignore the message. Instead of looking for the cause and expressing pathos for those killed in the Afghanistan riots, Bush and Scott McClellan are quick to blame Newsweek. Instead of responding to allegations from Rathergate, Bush allowed the press to do the work for him. Instead of admitting that the intelligence from "Curveball" wasn't accurate, and thus admitting the War in Iraq was based on a bad source, Rumsfeld has kept mum. We all know that this administration rarely (if ever) admits mistakes, but this is bordering on absurd. If you believe that there's a liberal bias in the media, how do you explain the Washington Post's 415 cover stories on Monicagate? How do you explain this so-called liberal media missing the chance to put Bush in his place by not asking for accountability on Curveball? No one is saying that Newsweek is entirely without fault here. What we're saying is that Isikoff's article brought to light the hypocrisy of this administration, and re-raised the question of why we aren't holding the White House more accountible for it's actions.

Hocking a Lugar. Just who is Richard Lugar? His website identifies him as a five-term Republican Senator from Indiana. He is the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, a Rhodes scholar, a former mayor if Indianapolis, and has four children. Lugar comes across as a pretty intelligent man, political party notwithstanding. So it's amazing that Lugar came out of the John Bolton confirmation looking like a lame duck. Michael Steinberger writes that Lugar was portrayed as the "hapless straight arrow" nocked to do what the White House aims him to do, which is nonsense. Lugar's been around long enough and has enough clout that he doesn't need to be the White House's lapdog. Yet that's exactly what he was. The fact that Bolton is not qualified for the position of U.N. Ambassador was completely overshadowed by his questions of conduct, and there Lugar lost it. Lugar can be considered the "anti-Bolton," as Steniberger writes. But thanks to his cowardice, Bolton now goes before the Senate in a full vote.

Activism

The 11th Hour is upon us. MoveOn is collecting signatures to deliver to Congress; signatures that have signed an electronic petition to show solidarity with Democrats, and oppose the "nuclear option." You know what's at stake. Go here to sign MoveOn's petition now. Time is running out!

News

Sure, But Can She Cook? With the vote for the nuclear option getting closer, it's important to know why exactly Democrats don't want these judges approved. Who are they? Why are they bad for the judicial branch? Meet Priscilla Owen, justice on the Texas Supreme Court. Owen has constantly dissented from court opinion in the past, leading her to be labelled as judge who cares less for the citizens of Texas and more the state's corporations. Owen's dissents lead her to create law, not interpret it. Is this the kind of person that we want in a lifetime judicial appointment in an appeals court? We think not.

Four Out Of Thirty Three. The Federal Office of Management and Budget has determined that only four of the thirty-three homeland security programs it examined can be considered "effective." So, what's going wrong? The airport screening budget was raised by over 700%, yet screeners still fail to detect weapons at the same rate as before the increase. Truck screening machines can't distinguish between uranium and common household items. Airport bomb-detection machines have spewed out scores of false alarms. The reason for all of these, and more, according to OMB, was the rush to spend money. We know that the government is notorious for spending money ineffectively. So ineffectively, in fact, that the head of DHS's contracting division can't explain how they spent their $700 million budget, as more than one-third of it was listed under "other." And although this is an extremely important issue, the article raises a secondary, but perhaps more important point. With contractors taking over so much of the government's responsibilities, the margin for error becomes much bigger. Government agencies tend to look, more often than not, to see if a contractor's proposal is written in English, and then go with the contractor with the cheapest budget. There are two problems with this: First, cheaper isn't always better. Second, many times contractors will submit a lower budget, get awarded a contract, and then spend money regardless of the budget, knowing that they government will have to, as they always do, fork over the money owed. There is a growing call for more oversight into contractor work, as there should be - it's your tax dollars being spent.

Going Crazy. There was a huge to-do down in Atlanta yesterday; it was the first day of the American Psyhiatric Association's 2005 Annual Conference, and boy was it a doozy. APA representatives held a voice vote, and approved a statement urging legal recognition of same-sex marriage. This is a huge deal, and, if approved by APA's directors (and there's no reason to think that it won't), it would make the APA the first major medical group to endorse such a thing. Homosexuality, remember, used to be classified as a mental disorder. There's a fascinating interview with Jeffrey Satinover that you can read here, which discusses how homosexuality has "evolved" in terms of disorder-status to civil-rights cause.

Editorials

Bill Moyers Fights Back. Did you read Saturday's Still Fighting Post? What? You didn't? OK, go here and read it...we'll wait. Good. Now, as we wrote about Saturday, the Chairman of the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, Kenneth Tomlinson, recently made insinuations that public radio (like NPR) and public television (like PBS) have a very sharp liberal bias. Unfortunately, he could only point to Bill Moyers's show, NOW With Bill Moyers, as an example of liberalism. Tomlinson thinks that there needs to be more conservative opinions represented in these media. Moyers has always been outspoken, and in recent comments he lets it fly. Disputing Tomlinson's claim of a liberal bias, he rattled off the number of conservative guests he's had on the show. He produced a letter from Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX) praising the show. He also chastised Tomlinson for paying a former White House aide $10,000 to track who was on the show, looking for this liberal bias. Said Moyers, "Gee, Ken, for $2.50 a week you can pick up a copy of TV Guide on the newsstand. A subscription is even cheaper, and I would have sent you a coupon that can save you up to 62 percent! Or for that matter, Ken, all you had to do was watch the show!" It's obvious that conservatives see public radio and television as another medium to exploit, when, in fact, most programming is pretty down the center. Perhaps they'd be slighly more sympathetic to conservative views if conservative views these days, in general, weren't so ridiculous. After all, that's why we have Fox News, isn't it?

Cowboys and Eggheads. Remember the 2004 election? Of course you do - it's probably one of the reasons why you're reading this. Remember the exit polls, which showed that "79 percent of voters who said terrorism or national security determined their vote chose the chickenhawk over the war hero." Fair enough. But since then, as Eric Altermann writes, are things any better? Osama is still loose, North Korea is about to do a nuclear test, nuclear and water plants remain just as vulnerable to terrorist activity as they did four years ago, and, oh, yes, world public approval of America is so low, it's actually inspiring terrorists from other countries. All of the problems listed are the result of either rejection of a Democratic policy or implementation of the exact opposite of a Democratic policy. The problem is that Kerry never really looked like a strong leader on foreign policy. Bush, wrong as he was/is, gave the impression that he would do whatever it took to ensure America's safety. He was believable (unless you knew he was lying), and most people aren't sure that Democrats have that ability. Image can be everything, and any candidate thinking of running for president on the Democratic ticket in 2008 would be well served to keep this in mind.

War Didn't and Doesn't Bring Democracy. Well, of course it doesn't. What kind of foolish idiot could possibly think that it does? Oh...right. The administration thinks that the recent stirrings of democracy in the middle east are a direct result of what we've done in Iraq. News flash! The only direct result of what we've done in Iraq is the loss of thousands of American lives and hundreds of thousands of Iraqis. Wes Clark writes about these stirrings of democracy, and what their real catalysts were. Democracy can certainly thrive in this region, but it's nonsense for the White House to take claim for it all. Then again, as Clark writes, the more you repeat something, the more it sticks in people's minds.

Activism

The Corporation. You like movies, don't you? Well, we have a doozy of one for you. "The Corporation" is a fantastic documentary that recently arrived on DVD. It documents the rise of corporations as legal entities in America, from the early days, when they had to serve the public good. Now, they have all the rights of people, but unlike people, can't be jailed, and are rarely even dissolved. The movie argues that if many corporations were actually people, they'd fit all of the criteria for being certified psychopaths. So why are exploitative and harmful corporations given a pass, and why are their leaders often revered? We urge you to watch this documentary any way you can - rent it, Netflix it, or see a screening at a house party. It truly is insightful, well-crafted, and compelling.

News

When It Hits the Fan...Maybe it's the Downing Street Memo. Maybe it's Bush's falling approval rating. Maybe it's a mass attack of conscience. Whatever it is, there are now a whole lot of people saying that they didn't think the evidence for War was strong enough. Some had said it before, but not publicly. Others had suspicions. But when this many high-level people think you're doing something wrong (i.e. starting a war), then you're probably doing something wrong. Of course, it's not like Bush listens, so even if these people had went public, and had their suspicions sprayed across the front page of the Washington Post, but would simply not pay attention.

DHS Arrests 60 Illegals in Sensitive Jobs. Homeland Security has arrested 60 illegal immigrants who worked in "12 critical infrastructure sites" in the U.S. Although none of the immigrants have any terrorist ties, they apparently were still a security threat, according to DHS. DHS crows about how these immigrants could be "potential" targets of terrorist activites. News flash: We do have something in this country called "presumed innocent until proven guilty." If DHS wants to actually do something, why don't they investigate how all of these workers came from the same company, which used the same hiring service? Or look at how they all obtained false identification that was good enough to get them hired? Are we asking for too much here?

Tense moments for Laura Bush at Jerusalem holy sites. For some inexplicable reasons, most Americans are pretty fond of Laura Bush. Well, as usual, our friends overseas are a bit more insightful and demanding of their world leaders. Mrs. Bush took a trip to Jerusalem, presumably for some glad-handing and publicity shots, but no one was really buying what she was selling. Jews used the opportunity to protest the imprisonment of Jonathan Pollard, a man in prison for spying for Israel. Muslims, well, you can only imagine how Muslims felt about Mrs. Bush's trip.

Editorials

Getting Democrats From No to Yes. E.J. Dionne, Jr. writes about the "Politics of No." Essentially, it's far easier for Democrats and Republicans to agree on what they can't agree on, instead of trying to find things to agree upon. Dionne's biggest point is Social Security, which, as most Americans agree, shouldn't be changed to reflect Bush's plan. However, we do disagree with Dionne's statement that, regarding Social Security, "For the first time in a long while, core liberal principles are actually winning in a public debate." If our memory serves correctly, public opinion was with Democrats when Republicans decided to introduce legislation to "save" Terri Schiavo. Public opinion is with Democrats in not removing the filibuster. Hell, public opinion has been with the Democrats regarding the war in Iraq. Now, Democrats need to focus on sharpening that public opinion into favor for the Democratic party. How do we do that?

The Chinese Connection. Let's talk a little more about China. Earlier in the week, we wrote about the U.S. demanding that China change it's currency policy. But what does that mean, really? Essentially, China is making a lot of money from trade. China then turns around and uses that money to buy American "dollar assets." This means that China is lending lots of money, at low interest rates, to America. This money has kept our interest rates low, even with the massive borrowing we've had to do to cover the budget deficit. These low interest rates mean soaring house prices, booms in the construction industry, and, most importantly, allows homeowners to refinance their mortgages and turn that into cash. So, why is the government complaining? The U.S. is complaining because the low value of the yuan means that the trade surplus stays unbalanced. But it's a huge catch-22, because if China does change it's currency policy, the exact opposite of what's listed above will occur, ending with falling home prices that lead to a wave of bankruptcies. Of course, that's short term. The long-term effects mean a healthier economy. And the above could happen without a change in the yuan, if China stops buying dollars. There's no easy answers yet, but the first step to finding an answer is to understand the problem. That's why we have Krugman.

The people responsible for this are the ones who are undermining the troops. What is Steve at No More Mr. Nice Blog talking about? Well, he's talking about the "Koran-gate" story. As you know by now, once in a while, instead of insightful, civilized political commentary, sometimes we like to present insightful, uncivilized rants that cut to the heart of the matter. And here's a great one. Basically, if you somehow think that it's Newsweek's fault that there were riots in Afghanistan, well, as Steve puts it, you're an idiot.