Daily Kos has recently been abuzz with speculation that the coming Presidential election will play out similarly to that of 1932 -- a dramatic realignment election that puts Dems on top for a generation. DHinMI advanced this argument in a very good three-partseries last month. Today, New Deal democrat provides more evidence of this phenomenon by pointing out that economic conditions were similar in some ways then to how they are now.
In the first installment of this series, I introduced the concept that our impeachment system is fatally flawed. In the second installment, I provided evidence of this contention by discussing all eighteen historical cases of federal impeachment. Now, it's time to draw some conclusions.
In Part I of this series, I explained the purpose behind these diaries: to explore the failed mechanism of federal impeachment and suggest ways to fix its flaws. Yesterday, though, we examined only the instances where impeachment worked: nine cases handled according to protocol, with appropriate outcomes and streamlined processes. Today, we'll look at the flip side of the coin: nine cases where impeachment was inappropriately politicized or should never have occurred at all owing to procedural errors or a lack of other removal methods.
I'm one of the few bloggers out there who doesn't believe we should be pushing for impeachment of President Bush -- even though I think he's clearly committed impeachable crimes. My reasoning is not based on Bush's guilt or innocence, but on the fact that impeachment as a mechanism is broken and needs significant repair before it can be viewed as a legitimate means of removal from office of any public official, much less a U.S. President.
Keeping up my steady drumbeat of meta...if you're not interested in reading the diary, please take the poll anyway, as I'd like to get a sense of where the community is on this issue. And you might want to read the last paragraph.
Yesterday, a commenter for whom I have great respect, but with whom I disagree mightily on the duty of TU's at Daily Kos, wrote this comment:
When someone is clearly attempting to use this site for purposes other than those which its owner has said are acceptable, I am absolutely going to mock and/or attack that. When someone makes a completely off-the-wall claim, of course I'm going to mock and/or attack that. When someone tries to rewrite history, you're goddamn good and right I'm going to mock and/or attack that.
Mockery is a very effective weapon, particularly in an online setting where other common tactics don't work as well. Shaming is another good one. ...
Here's a quote from that blogmeister of blogmeisters, Markos Moulitsas:
The community stuff is a seperate beast. It's not my community. But it's also not EVERYONE'S community, either. I have set unofficial guidelines -- it's a site for Democratic partisans. Everyone else is welcome, with the understanding that it's a home for Democrats. So Republicans, Greens, etc, are welcome. But it's not their home.
You don't go to Synagogue to argue Christianity. You don't go to Yoga class and demand to do aerobics. I know I don't make this point explicit, but I prefer a little bit of gray area. As long as it's not written in stone, we won't have well-meaning Greens being kicked off the site by fundamentalist Kosmopolitans.
I can live with that. I really can. It's fine to me that this site is full of Democratic partisans. I'm even one myself, though I'm always shaky about just how partisan I want to be.
According the Daily Kos FAQ as interpreted by Trapper John and BarbinMD, the following individuals should be banned from Daily Kos for actively opposing the Democratic Party and its elected officials:
"The Democrats are the party of slavery and were the party that started every war in the 20th Century except the other Bush debacle. The Federal Reserve, permanent federal (and unconstitutional) income taxes, Japanese Concentration Camps and, not one, but two atom bombs dropped on the innocent citizens of Japan were brought to us via the Democrats. Don’t tell me the Democrats are our "Saviors" because I am not buying it. ..."
Harry Reid on Bush's commutation of the Libby sentence:
The President's decision to commute Mr. Libby's sentence is disgraceful. Libby's conviction was the one faint glimmer of accountability for White House efforts to manipulate intelligence and silence critics of the Iraq War. Now, even that small bit of justice has been undone. Judge Walton correctly determined that Libby deserved to be imprisoned for lying about a matter of national security. The Constitution gives President Bush the power to commute sentences, but history will judge him harshly for using that power to benefit his own Vice President's Chief of Staff who was convicted of such a serious violation of law. (emphasis mine)
Jim Webb's victory tonight is a victory for Virginia's netroots. Virginia's progressive blogosphere was not thrilled with the default candidate emerging earlier this year. So, spearheaded by Lowell and many others, they drafted a Reagan Republican with a stellar resume to run as a Democrat and propelled him to victory in the primary.
My, how far we in the activist Netroots have fallen. With Brad Miller's refusal to run in the North Carolina Senate race, it's time to admit that we have a full-fledged blogosphere recruitment disaster on our hands for the 2008 Senate races -- and to ask why it happened, and how we can avoid such an event in the future.
It's a simple question, and one that I'm sure many of us on the Left have asked more than once: what motivates so many Americans to oppose so violently those ethnically different from us? The phenomenon of jingoism is common; most political observers are familiar with its most recent incarnation, in the anti-immigrant ravings of individuals such as Presidential candidates Tom Tancredo and Duncan Hunter and Minutemen founder Jim Gilchrist. But the idea has a long and nefarious history in America; other infamous instances include the xenophobic ramblings of popular radio priest Father Charles Coughlin in the 1930's, the anti-Catholic Know-Nothing Party in the 1850's, and of course Southern discrimination against and enslavement of individuals of African descent.
[Update] As many folks pointed out in comments, just about everything I posted about this story is wrong. The protesters were not supporting immigration but labor rights, and it's possible they were striking on private property, which changes the dynamic slightly. I deeply apologize for the inaccuracy of my reporting. However, I DO stand by the comparison of this event with Selma -- although, as I stated in the original story, the spray from the water truck was not nearly as strong as that from the Selma fire hoses. -- Nonpartisan
From the excellent Tucson, AZ blog Rum, Romanism, and Rebellion comes this horrific footage of pro-immigration protesters in Southern Arizona being repeatedly hosed down by a water truck operated by Pulte Homes:
The following comments, taken from several distinct diaries, were directed at posters who, while not necessarily trolls, posted unquestionably trollish diaries or comments:
Screw you and your "we believe in" shit. Patronizing dolt.
Relax -- save your fire for the idiot diarist
I am done with you. you are a total lunatic. ... fuck you for continuing your demand that everyone disavow it [another poster's comment].
you fucking idiot ... Stop inflicting your bizzare insanity on the rest of us.
If you went to college you really should ask them for your money back.
I'll pare it down for you then. You're a cretin. I believe that word sums it up nicely. ... If you act like a cretin, you get called a cretin. Get used to it.
I don't know -- I kind of like nincompoop, or heel, or knave, but nincompoop is best. It does have poop in it after all.
We Wilsonian Progressives remember well the two dates in American history when two Presidents killed the the Progressive ideal of government as a beneficent and egalitarian force. On January 20, 1981, newly-inaugurated President Ronald Reagan uttered his famous salvo against government: "Government is not the solution to our problem. Government is the problem." And on January 23, 1996, President Bill Clinton sealed the bipartisan pact against government when he declared in his State of the Union address that "the era of big government is over."
Yeah, you heard that right. They eat babies. Moreover, they eat Christian babies. And Muslim babies too. The jury is still out on whether they eat Jewish babies, but I wouldn't be surprised.
In addition, it should be noted that Jews are directly responsible for the destruction of our environment. Every carbon dioxide atom that is contributing to global warming today was exhaled by a Jew. The rest of our exhalations are absorbed by plants or something.
As I wade with trepidation into this thorny and contentious issue, two quotes seem particularly relevant. The first quote comes from John McWhorter's jaw-droppingly good piece on August Wilson (who, as far as I can tell, had no opinion whatsoever on the I/P conflict):
History is important--but not so much that, as Faulkner had it, the past isn't even past.
[Cross-posted at 
It's a simple question, and one that I'm sure many of us on the Left have asked more than once: what motivates so many Americans to oppose so violently those ethnically different from us? The phenomenon of jingoism is common; most political observers are familiar with its most recent incarnation, in the anti-immigrant ravings of individuals such as Presidential candidates Tom Tancredo and Duncan Hunter and Minutemen founder Jim Gilchrist. But the idea has a long and nefarious history in America; other infamous instances include the xenophobic ramblings of popular radio priest Father Charles Coughlin in the 1930's, the anti-Catholic Know-Nothing Party in the 1850's, and of course Southern discrimination against and enslavement of individuals of African descent.
[Cross-posted at 
As I wade with trepidation into this thorny and contentious issue, two quotes seem particularly relevant. The first quote comes from John McWhorter's jaw-droppingly good 
[Posted at 
