Blue Spot

"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." Benjamin Franklin

It's hard to believe Fossella is actually trying to run as an "independent" congressman when he is tied to the hip of this administration. Apparently, one of the very few times Vito voted against Bush came very recently, earlier this year. Here he is again siding with Bush and trashing the constitution as Bush so often does. If Dems don't stop them, these authoritarian Right-wing conservatives will try to re-write history and totally disregard the traditions that made this country a true beacon. I keep hearing this argument that people are dying to get into this country, like Bill O'Reilly mentioned on the Tonight Show last night, but of course they are. Everybody still wants to get into this country but not always for the same reasons they once had. These days it's just because of pure desperation where once it was for hope. Because of politicians like Vito, Bush & Cheney and other assholes like Peter King, the nation is slowing losing its soul. We are becoming the very problem that these people from all over the world are fleeing. Do we want to be seen around the world as a sadistic, authoritarian, elitist, selfish, paranoid, cultural wasteland? There are ways to protect us without falling into this trap.
Opponents clash over terror legislation

AMERICAblog: GOP leaders still let Foley remain as chair of House sex offender caucus


UPDATE! From the Washington Post-10/01/2006. Confirmation that House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) was notified early this year of inappropriate e-mails from the former representative.

Fossella told BrooklynPapers.com: “I think our government needs to give our intelligence agencies every tool possible consistent with the law to obtain information to prevent another terrorist attack.” Well as we all know, Bush tried his hardest to make torture "consistent with the law" and congress pretty much obliged. When our guys start getting captured and tortured and pointing to Bush's policies to justify it, Republicans will then realize that they are yet again on the wrong side of history.

BrooklynPapers.com- Vito, Steve on the issues

There's some really interesting characters on Vito's "Friends" list on his MySpace page.

I wonder if Vito's socially conservative followers would approve of "Gentle when stroked, fierce when provoked" (actual profile name), who has the following graphic boldly displayed on her page:


Somehow, I doubt they would approve.

Please note:

In order to make friends on MySpace, one member must request another’s “friendship.” The recipient of the request has the opportunity to review the other’s page and determine whether or not to reject the overture.

BrooklynPapers.com has the scoop!

If you'd like to meet some of Vito's kinky friends, click here.

The New York Observer Politicker: Fossella Interview

The Politcker will be interviewing Fossella next week. They're taking suggestions on what they should ask him. Click on the link above to leave your comment.

On Anderson Cooper 360, John Roberts talks with former presidential advisor, David Gergen about Bob Woodward's book "State Of Denial."


Note that positive references to Woodward's previous book, "Plan of Attack" appeared on the Bush/Cheney website in 2004.

Disgraced lobbyist Jack Abramoff had hundreds more contacts with top White House officials than those Bush administration officials had previously acknowledged, according to a congressional report to be released today.

The report by the House Government Reform Committee said the panel found about 485 contacts between Abramoff and his associations and the White House, including 10 with Karl Rove.

The committee based its findings on 14,000 pages of e-mails and billing records spanning three years ending in 2003.
The White House challenged the credibility of the report, saying it was based on material originally generated by Abramoff. Abramoff and associates have pleaded guilty to conspiracy, fraud and related crimes in an influence-peddling scandal that reachedinto Congress. -Reuters

Kerry & Clinton speak out against S.3930, the detainee bill.

Double-click image to view video. Requires Windows Media Player

Well here it is folks! Last night, Steve Harrison delivered his most impassioned speech to date and made the case why he should be getting more support from his own party and why he should be the man representing the people of New York's 13th congressional district. Harrison also, confirmed that he is scheduled to debate Rep. Vito Fossella in 4 upcoming debates.

Harrison was absolutely on fire last night. With a fiery finish that left my hair standing, he laid out a clear strategy and a convincing case for getting out of Iraq, focusing on energy issues, improving our economy and fixing our education and healthcare systems. He fired off a blistering attack on Fossella. Vito will now have to account for his record during the last 9 years and his steadfast support for this administration. One thing I was surprised to learn last night was that Fossella only just recently in 2006, voted against the administration for the first time. Also, I wasn't aware that Vito voted for the infamous Alaskan "highway to nowhere" which would have cost taxpayers millions. He's trying hard to fool the folks of S.I. and Brooklyn but we're going to keep reminding folks that this man is no more "independent" than Dick Cheney is.

NY State Sen. Diane Savino at a fundraiser for Democratic candidate for NY's 13th congressional district, Steve Harrison. She also said, "...(Fossella) is going to answer for the votes he's taken in Washington and the positions that he has espoused.

More later on Steve's great speech.

Please go to the Polticker to read the interview and make sure to leave a comment!

The New York Observer Politicker: Stephen Harrison Interview

From NY13:
Fossella finally agrees to debate Harrison
STATEN ISLAND/BROOKLYN, NY –Vito Fossella (NY-13 Staten Island and Brooklyn) has finally accepted Steve Harrison’s proposal to debate four times. The candidates will debate twice in Staten Island and twice in Brooklyn. The agreement comes two months after Stephen Harrison originally proposed debates. In the past, Vito Fossella has rarely debated opponents. An incumbent agreeing to multiple debates late in the campaign generally signals a competitive race. “I look forward to debating my opponent,” remarked Harrison. “The people of Staten Island and Brooklyn deserve to hear directly from their candidates, and now they’ll have the opportunity. Congressman Fossella has been all too quiet about Iraq, our national security, veterans’ benefits, Social Security, healthcare, transportation, and many other issues. It’s time he answers to his constituents. ”The first debate will take place on October 9, during the Pleasant Plains/Princes Bay/Richmond Valley (PPPBRV) “Meet the Candidates Forum” at the United Methodist Church in Staten Island. On October 10, the two candidates square off in the first Brooklyn debate, hosted by the Dyker Heights Civic Association. The Richmond County American Legion will host the candidates on October 20, and the Bay Ridge Community Council (BRCC) will host the final debate on October 24.Harrison sent a letter proposing four debates in July, and provided Congressman Fossella with eight possible dates. Fossella’s first they claimed they had not received the letter, which had been both faxed and mailed. The Fossella campaign upon learning that Harrison was going to ask for the debates in person after 3 weeks without response, conveniently faxed to Harrison a statement while the Democratic candidate was already at Fossella campaign headquarters. It acknowledged receipt but stated Fossella would be in Washington for all proposed dates, despite Congress not being scheduled to be in session and Fossella being in New York for a press conference on one of the dates. Last week the Congressman’s campaign came back with four dates, which the Harrison campaign accepted.

Get this -

Vernon Ehlers took over as Chair of the Commission on Congressional Mailing Standards (aka the Franking Commission) on Thursday, September 21, a day before the decision was released. Ney left the committee. BUT, according to the Franking Commission itself, the 3 Republicans on the Committee - including Ney - voted on this case back on September 7!

Of course, the decision was 6-0 (with 3 Dems on the commission) but it's interesting.

From our friends at NY13:

Yesterday we learned of Rep. Vito Fossella's verdict returned by the House Commission on Congressional Mailing Standards in regards to the complaint filed by Stephen Harrison. Fossella essentially was fined $60,000, but ultimately cleared of 10 of 11 charges. So who exactly in on this House Commission on Congressional Mailing Standards? Well up until Monday, September 18th, Rep. Bob Ney was chairman of the House Commission on Congressional Mailing Standards.

via his House site:
First sworn into the US Congress in 1995, Congressman Bob Ney has represented Ohio's 18th Congressional district, which today encompasses 16 counties in Ohio. Ney is the Chairman of the Financial Services Subcommittee on Housing, a member of the Committee on House Administration and a member of the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure. In addition, the Congressman serves as the Chairman of the Commission on Congressional Mailing Standards, the Chairman of the Joint Committee on the Library, the Vice Chairman of the Joint Committee on Printing, and a Deputy Majority Whip. Rep. Bob Ney took Fossella on trips to Vail with lobbyists for the past several winters.Rep. Bob Ney contributed to Fossella's campaign. Rep. Bob Ney chaired the committee that cleared Fossella of his campaign mailing violations. I wonder what tomorrow's connection will be?

Spy Agencies Say Iraq War Hurting U.S. Terror Fight - washingtonpost.com

NY Times-Spy Agencies Say Iraq War Worsens Terrorism Threat
Can anybody say: "I Told You." From the Bush-Kerry debate on September 30th, 2004:

I believe America is safest and strongest when we are leading the world and we are leading strong alliances. I'll never give a veto to any country over our security. But I also know how to lead those alliances. This president has left them in shatters across the globe, and we're now 90 percent of the casualties in Iraq and 90 percent of the costs. I think that's wrong, and I think we can do better.

I have a better plan for homeland security. I have a better plan to be able to fight the war on terror by strengthening our military, strengthening our intelligence, by going after the financing more authoritatively, by doing what we need to do to rebuild the alliances, by reaching out to the Muslim world, which the president has almost not done, and beginning to isolate the radical Islamic Muslims, not have them isolate the United States of America...

...I believe in being strong and resolute and determined. And I will hunt down and kill the terrorists, wherever they are. But we also have to be smart, Jim. And smart means not diverting your attention from the real war on terror in Afghanistan against Osama bin Laden and taking if off to Iraq where the 9/11 Commission confirms there was no connection to 9/11 itself and Saddam Hussein, and where the reason for going to war was weapons of mass destruction, not the removal of Saddam Hussein.

This president has made, I regret to say, a colossal error of judgment. And judgment is what we look for in the president of the United States of America.

I'm proud that important military figures who are supporting me in this race: former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff John Shalikashvili; just yesterday, General Eisenhower's son, General John Eisenhower, endorsed me; General Admiral William Crown; General Tony McBeak, who ran the Air Force war so effectively for his father -- all believe I would make a stronger commander in chief. And they believe it because they know I would not take my eye off of the goal: Osama bin Laden.

Unfortunately, he escaped in the mountains of Tora Bora. We had him surrounded. But we didn't use American forces, the best trained in the world, to go kill him. The president relied on Afghan warlords and he outsourced that job too. That's wrong.

-John Kerry

Their can no longer be any doubt that Fox News is nothing but a propaganda machine for the GOP.

Well it looks like Fox pulled the You Tube videos. Thanks to Think Progress you can still see the interview. They also have some interesting fact checks here.

Gore & Branson: Investing to Solve Global Warming

From YT's sgbnyc:

Sir Richard Branson and formere VP Al Gore interviewed on the story of Branson's commitment to invest $3 billion in alternative fuel development. Branson and Gore specifically deal with the leadership necessary to solve the climate crisis and how there is money to be made in doing so. People will be doing different things, but it will not hurt the overall economy to make this change!

New York Daily News - Home - Vito's licked for 60G in mail flap:

"U.S. Rep. Vito Fossella must pay back at least $60,000 for using duplicate photos of New York firefighters in both campaign and taxpayer-funded congressional mailings, a House commission has decided."

Here's the response I got when I asked NY1 why they don't have any mention of Tuesday's Harrison speech on their website:

Hello,

Unfortunately, though we covered the event yesterday for our Staten Island News Now report, it didn’t make its way to our website. I will be having discussions with our web staff on how we can get our local reports from that segment onto our website.


Thanks for the feedback.

Steve Paulus
General Manager, NY1

Think Progress » Fox News Sunday, Interview With President Bill Clinton, 9/22/06 (Rough Transcript)

Of course FOX is going to edit this interview to make Clinton look bad, as you see in this clip. They end with Clinton saying "...I tried and I failed..."

The New York Observer Politicker: The Harrison Interview You've Been Waiting For

wcbstv.com
Schumer: "further proof the federal government is not doing enough to help cities guard against terrorism."

Click on image to see the whole speech! (Must have Windows Media Player)

Excerpt from Harrison's Energy Policy Speech at the Staten Island Museum (9/19):

...Instead of seeing the war on terror as some cosmic struggle, we need to look to the concrete reasons why our fate has become tangled up in such a volatile part of the world. There are many reasons why the United States is involved in the Middle East, but there is no doubt that oil has dragged us into many conflicts that we otherwise would have had no part of.
As even our President has said, we are addicted to oil. In our foreign policy, we have let our hunger for oil compromise our ideals. Where the United States should be a beacon of democracy and freedom, we have supported dictatorship and corruption. Where we should bear the standard of everything that makes our civilization great, we have cynically manipulated nations. All this because of our dependence on oil. This must end.
Our relationship with our oil suppliers is unhealthy for both us and them. Nations that could have spent the last half-century growing robust economies instead live by selling off their dwindling oil reserves. Governments plagued by despotism and corruption feed their people anti-American hatred to distract them from their own countries' failings. I will not say that this must end, for the people of the Mid-east must make their own future...
All we have done since 9-11 has bought us time. Nothing more, but also nothing less, and we must be thankful for those who have paid the terrible price these last five years. Our troops, our firefighters, our police, their families, so many other Americans have suffered and sacrificed to give us those years. It is our obligation to honor their sacrifice by using the time they bought so dearly. We can not in good conscience ask another five years of sacrifice, and another five, and another five, without knowing when it will end, without committing to end our addiction from oil and truly ending the war on terror.
The environmental costs of energy are every bit as high as the national security costs, if perhaps somewhat less immediate. Climate change is real. There is no longer any serious scientific doubt. Our energy use is changing the planet in ways vast and frightening. Although there will always be debate about the details, that is the nature of science, the basic story of climate change is no longer in question. Some well-funded public relations campaigns still try to sow doubt and confusion, but that is little more than a desperate rear-guard action by those who lack the courage to face a difficult reality...Across all industries with a stake in energy, boards of directors have realized that protecting their shareholder's interest demands that they face the reality of climate change. Hard-nosed corporations, many of them hardly known for their warmth towards environmental causes, now factor climate change into their investment planning. Climate change is longer just a concern of scientists environmentalistsalist. It is a business reality...For those of us here in New York, rising sea levels are the most obvious and dramatic threat. We are a harbor city, and large tracts of New York, especially the southern parts of Staten Island, are only a few feet above sea level.
Indeed, there are already worrying signs of rising seas. When I was chair of Community Board 10, our top priority was repairing the collapsing seawall along Shore Parkway. After the engineers did their investigation, I was told that the reason the seawall was falling into the water was that spring tides were topping the wall, something that never happened when it was first built...If we accept the loss of our coasts and our neighbor's homes, we can not guarantee our safety. What happened in New Orleans one year ago is a harsh reminder that, even in our might, we are not immune to natural disaster.
Energy is, quite simply, the lifeblood of our economy. There's no other way of saying it. Virtually every profession, every industry, and every technological advance of the last 200 years relies in some way on our power to burn fossil fuels. For far too long, we've been stuck in a sterile debate between environmental protection and economic growth. Sometimes, at the local level, environment and economy do collide; there is a legitimate conflict between the logger supporting his family and the environmentalist seeking to preserve forests. But, at a national level, I reject this conflict. Time and time again, we have seen that environmental laws end up costing far less than naysayers predicted. Study after study shows that states and countries with strong environmental laws pay no economic penalty, and often even have advantages over those with weak protections.
As we leave the fossil fuel era, the advantages of energy leadership will multiply many times. The age of fossil fuels began in the 18th century; make no mistake, it will end in the 21st. In all likelihood, oil and natural gas production will peak during our lifetimes; even coal may peak during our children's. Demand for all forms of fossil fuel will inexorably rise as growing countries like China and India become wealthy enough to afford cars for their middle class. The question is not if we adapt to scarce fossil fuels, but how we adopt.
History has cautionary tales for those who refuse to face the future. Look back to the American auto industry in the 1970's. As the world changed around them, they refused to accept the new reality, and insisted on making the same styles of big, inefficient cars...
Today, we are at a similar crossroads, but with vastly higher stakes. Nations that master tomorrow's energy technology will prosper; those that fail to adapt risk becoming economically obsolete. Corporations and investors who embrace and navigate the change will be richly rewarded... Over the next decade, we must develop economically competitive alternatives to fossil fuels for power generation, transportation, industrial processes, and chemical production. This will be a great effort, but a richly rewarded one. We will be able to finally end the unhealthy relationship with the Middle East that ties us to a region in turmoil. We will keep our technological edge and once again produce advanced products for the entire world.
The Federal government must take the lead in this, but ultimately, the private sector will do the heavy lifting. The era of command-and-control regulation is over. Regulations and fines may have been appropriate for dealing with the last generation's environmental issues but only flexible, market-driven policies that encourage innovation and investment can meet the next generation's. The federal government's appropriate role is to set long-term energy goals, fund research into basic technologies, and create conditions that encourage and focus private research and investment. The federal government should not engage in picking technologies--we have a very poor track record at that. Instead, we need to create policies that reward investors who help us move towards our energy goals...
For transportation, these goals are to dramatically improve the way we power our automobiles, heavy vehicles, and aircraft. I am not talking about the marginal improvements that current CAFE legislation requires, but order of magnitude improvements made possible by dramatic new technologies. Whatever the right solution is, we must develop new types of cars without sacrificing safety in any way... We should support research into urban planning to see if we can help municipalities design more livable communities that are pedestrian friendly--who knows, as a side benefit, we may even find ways to replace strip malls with the senior and child friendly main streets of years gone by.
In the power generation sector, we will set aggressive goals for renewable or carbon free generation. In this area, states have pulled far ahead of the federal government, and have very successfully used renewable portfolio standards--rules that require utilities to source a percentage of their electricity from clean sources, and allow complete flexibility in how they do that, so long as the statewide targets are met. From Massachusetts to Texas, these RPS policies have been wildly successful, time and time again delivering clean electricity at prices far lower than the doubters ever said. Expanding these standards nationwide should lower prices even further, by encouraging regions ripe for renewables to fully develop their resources and giving utilities that can't economically develop them other options. I believe that with the right goals and research, in 10 years we will see carbon-free electricity that is economically competitive with coal and natural gas.
There are many exciting technologies on the horizon that will let us do this. Wind power is already the fastest growing source of electricity in the world, and I believe that both on-shore and over-the-horizon offshore wind turbines will be a major source of power in the future. Hydrogen has great promise as a transportation fuel. Solar, geothermal, and biomass have all proven themselves in niche markets, and with further development, may well take a much larger role in the future...Clean, quiet fuel cells may let us place generators where the power is needed, saving transmission costs. Breakthroughs in more exotic technologies could transform the entire energy and environmental landscape...
We also need to look critically at how we manage our national power grid. Experts agree that our electrical system is dangerously underfunded. Sometimes, like during the Blackout of 2003, this has disastrous results. But everyday, our grid wastes substantial amounts of energy, and its outdated equipment complicates bringing new energy sources online. The federal government should work with state regulators to solve the difficult problem of encouraging private investment to modernize our transmission and distribution systems. Modernizing the grid will not only reduce waste, it will help us develop industrial products that will be in demand around the world. As we do this, we need to be sure that we make any mprovements necessary to support new generation technologies, and give entrepreneurial independent power producers a level playing field to compete with established utilities...
It might seem strange, but what really hurts isn't high oil prices. It's unpredictable oil prices. We know how to adjust to high prices--we've done it in the past. It's the surprises, the suddenly expensive oil that nobody planned for, that really hurts our wallets and our economy...
This all leads me to my strategy for helping all of us deal with the inevitable. The government can not make prices lower. Except for short-term, unwise measures, that is beyond our power. What the government can do is stabilize prices. I believe that we should look into setting up a system, modeled after the Federal Reserve, to smooth out short-term fluctuations in oil prices.
Let me be very clear. I am proposing neither a tax nor a subsidy. What I am proposing is that we look into ways to set aside money when energy is relatively cheap to use in the times when it is overpriced. Doing this will require finesse and skill, and it may turn out that, after study, the experts find it beyond us. Still, this policy, or one like it, could have powerful benefits for individuals and investors. Individuals will know what they can expect to spend on gas for their cars or heating for their homes, and will be better able to make smart decisions that save them money. Producers will know the markets their customers face, and will have strong incentives to introduce appropriate new products. In many cases, uncertainty about energy prices blocks industry from improving efficiency and deploying new technologies. Reducing this uncertainty will go a long way to stimulate the investments we'll need to prosper in the post fossil-fuel era.
One danger looms larger than all I have mentioned so far today: denial and compliancy. There are those who pretend that there is no problem, who would rather spend effort on public relations than science, who are afraid of change. There are those who believe that sticking our heads in the sand is better than bravely facing the future. I submit to you that that is the real danger. We are the most scientifically advanced, economically powerful nation in all of history. We can lead the world into the next century. All we need is the will and the courage to do so.

One side note: during the Q & A, Mr. Harrison brought up a very good point and that is that Vito Fossella has been one of the most inaccessible congressman for this district in quite some time. I think this is very true and his continuous ducking of a debate is further evidence of this. He's doing the people of this district a great disservice. If he's really proud of his record why won't he defend it. After the Q & A, a Fossella plant that was in the audience made the point that no congressional incumbents anywhere in the NY area ever debate their opponents. Does this make it right? The district has a right to know what his record is and where he stands on the issues. Then let them decide for themselves. I can't believe New Yorkers keep voting for a guy who will not stand up for what he believes in and backs away from a fight. If you go on the internet, you'll find it very hard to come up with pics, videos or stories related to him, partly because he hasn't done much to warrant any media attenion. You can't even get Vito these days to say he's a Republican even though he's voted for Bush 90% of the time. According to the American Conservative Union, Fossella has had a higher conservative rating than even Peter King. Come on folks! This is not a red state we're talking about here. There's no room left for any Republicans anywhere in the city. Let's kick him out!

Princeton University shows how they quickly reversed the outcome of a mock vote -- leaving no evidence that they did so. This particular Diebold machine will be used for 10% of the U.S. electorate this November.


Incredibly, Fox News was one of the first to give this some attention. Maybe conservatives are becoming just as worried that some liberal geeks may get together to sabotage an election.

Sen. Menendez on Port Security in NY & NJ

National Security Advisor, Stephen Hadley on ABC's This Week w/George Stephanopoulos, making the case for torture.

There must be a reason why the administration is fighting for this so bad as Stephanopoulos says in the opening of this clip. The anwser may be as easy as Jonathan Turley of GW University explained on Friday's Countdown w/Keith Olberman. Bush may be just trying to cover his ass since he knows that the International Red Cross will be or has already interviewed the 14 detainees who were recently transferred to Gitmo. They are expected to reveal that they were indeed tortured, despite the administration's denials. Since this is a major international crime, Bush is seeking legislation that will retro-actively cover his ass.

New York 2006 Elections Democratic Party Eliot Spitzer GOTV, Get Out The Vote Hillary Clinton
Dear Eliot, Dear Hillary,
Congratulations on your respective (and quite respectable) victories in the Democratic primary on September 12th. You earned a resounding mandate for the November elections from the party rank and file, and now, you can both look forward to the general election with great confidence.
The same primary confirmed, at least for you, Madame Senator, that you'll be running against a rather pitiable lot. John Spencer, now the official republican designee, inspires "a serious case of the icks" even among republicans - quite remarkable. As to your opponent, Eliot, the less said, the better.
Both of you, in short, and fifty-one days out, seem assured of victory. You have bulging war chests, with millions of dollars that, quite frankly, you could pile up at The Battery and burn, and still get elected with Schumer-esque margins.
I'd like to suggest a better use for those millions than a bonfire. This better use, incidentally, also ties in with your own goals, because both of you, for reasons of your own, need resounding victories all across the state. You need a mandate.
What better way to create that mandate than to finance a huge, statewide get out the vote operation that not only benefits you, but Democrats further down your ticket? Concretely, we have six competitive House races – including the one that always gets overlooked, in the Thirteenth District – and a number of competitive State Senate races. You, Eliot, can't change everything from Day One if Joe Bruno remains as Senate Majority Leader. And you, Madame Senator, whatever your future plans are, would be in a far better position to execute them if you could point to six shiny new Democratic Members of the House that you helped get elected. Campaign with these candidates, print palm cards, help them raise money – you know the game.
Best of all, this is a win-win proposition. If, say, both of you spent $5 million on GOTV, that would directly benefit your own campaign. What it would also do, in a way that television ads won't, is exploit that most precious of political commodities, coattails. Both of you have them, and our party needs to make good use of them.
So what do you say? Do we have a deal?
-->
Bouldin's blog add new comment del.icio.us links

Double-Click on image to view video controller.

Al Franken was at a screening last night of his new movie "Al Franken: God Spoke." The movie played at the IFC Center in The Village. He spoke to the audience along with the filmakers (Nick Doob and Chris Hegedus) and took questions after the movie, urging them to get involved and help take back Congress in November. To the many liberals who I read on the national blogs, bashing Air America Radio, the visceral reaction you get when you see all the right-wing attacks on screen, might help you understand why we must support the network. You're not going to hear everything you want to hear every minute of the day, but that doesn't mean we should not support AAR. After all, you already know we are not like the other side. We do have diverse opinions and we don't have to be spoon-fed talking points or told what to believe like the Fox News audience. So you're going to hear something you don't like at any given moment...does that mean you write off the whole network? There's plenty of content on the network that is solid and worth your attention. Get yourself an audio ripper program like Audiograbber and you can schedule recordings of the best shows. Let's get behind AAR so we don't have to see O'Reilly and Rush gloat.

The movie chronicles Franken from his USO tour in Iraq, to the studios of liberal radio network Air America and on the campaign trail. The filmmakers Nick Doob and Chris Hegedus are granted entre to one of the most effective political satirists of our time. Franken fearlessly confronts pundits and politicians, blurring the boundaries between political satire and impassioned citizenry.
Featuring a host of beltway big mouths including Ann Coulter, Michael Moore, Al Gore, John Kerry, Robert Kennedy Jr., Sean Hannity, William Safire, Karen Hughes and Henry Kissinger, the film is an hilarious look behind the front lines of the media wars during the most contentious election in recent history. But ultimately, the film is a personal drama of transformation, as Al Franken leaves his comedy days behind and moves from his seat in the sidelines to become a contender inside the political ring.

Half a lifetime ago, I worked in this now-empty space. And for 40 days after the attacks, I worked here again, trying to make sense of what happened, and was yet to happen, as a reporter.
All the time, I knew that the very air I breathed contained the remains of thousands of people, including four of my friends, two in the planes and -- as I discovered from those "missing posters" seared still into my soul -- two more in the Towers.
And I knew too, that this was the pyre for hundreds of New York policemen and firemen, of whom my family can claim half a dozen or more, as our ancestors.
I belabor this to emphasize that, for me this was, and is, and always shall be, personal.
And anyone who claims that I and others like me are "soft,"or have "forgotten" the lessons of what happened here is at best a grasping, opportunistic, dilettante and at worst, an idiot whether he is a commentator, or a Vice President, or a President.
However, of all the things those of us who were here five years ago could have forecast -- of all the nightmares that unfolded before our eyes, and the others that unfolded only in our minds -- none of us could have predicted this.
Five years later this space is still empty.
Five years later there is no memorial to the dead.
Five years later there is no building rising to show with proud defiance that we would not have our America wrung from us, by cowards and criminals.
Five years later this country's wound is still open.
Five years later this country's mass grave is still unmarked.
Five years later this is still just a background for a photo-op.
It is beyond shameful.
At the dedication of the Gettysburg Memorial -- barely four months after the last soldier staggered from another Pennsylvania field -- Mr. Lincoln said, "we cannot dedicate, we cannot consecrate, we cannot hallow this ground. The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract."
Lincoln used those words to immortalize their sacrifice.
Today our leaders could use those same words to rationalize their reprehensible inaction. "We cannot dedicate, we can not consecrate, we can not hallow this ground." So we won't.
Instead they bicker and buck pass. They thwart private efforts, and jostle to claim credit for initiatives that go nowhere. They spend the money on irrelevant wars, and elaborate self-congratulations, and buying off columnists to write how good a job they're doing instead of doing any job at all.
Five years later, Mr. Bush, we are still fighting the terrorists on these streets. And look carefully, sir, on these 16 empty acres. The terrorists are clearly, still winning.
And, in a crime against every victim here and every patriotic sentiment you mouthed but did not enact, you have done nothing about it.
And there is something worse still than this vast gaping hole in this city, and in the fabric of our nation. There is its symbolism of the promise unfulfilled, the urgent oath, reduced to lazy execution.
The only positive on 9/11 and the days and weeks that so slowly and painfully followed it was the unanimous humanity, here, and throughout the country. The government, the President in particular, was given every possible measure of support.
Those who did not belong to his party -- tabled that.
Those who doubted the mechanics of his election -- ignored that.
Those who wondered of his qualifications -- forgot that.
History teaches us that nearly unanimous support of a government cannot be taken away from that government by its critics. It can only be squandered by those who use it not to heal a nation's wounds, but to take political advantage.
Terrorists did not come and steal our newly-regained sense of being American first, and political, fiftieth. Nor did the Democrats. Nor did the media. Nor did the people.
The President -- and those around him -- did that.
They promised bi-partisanship, and then showed that to them, "bi-partisanship" meant that their party would rule and the rest would have to follow, or be branded, with ever-escalating hysteria, as morally or intellectually confused, as appeasers, as those who, in the Vice President's words yesterday, "validate the strategy of the terrorists."
They promised protection, and then showed that to them "protection" meant going to war against a despot whose hand they had once shaken, a despot who we now learn from our own Senate Intelligence Committee, hated al-Qaida as much as we did.
The polite phrase for how so many of us were duped into supporting a war, on the false premise that it had 'something to do' with 9/11 is "lying by implication."
The impolite phrase is "impeachable offense."
Not once in now five years has this President ever offered to assume responsibility for the failures that led to this empty space, and to this, the current, curdled, version of our beloved country.
Still, there is a last snapping flame from a final candle of respect and fairness: even his most virulent critics have never suggested he alone bears the full brunt of the blame for 9/11.
Half the time, in fact, this President has been so gently treated, that he has seemed not even to be the man most responsible for anything in his own administration.
Yet what is happening this very night?
A mini-series, created, influenced -- possibly financed by -- the most radical and cold of domestic political Machiavellis, continues to be televised into our homes.
The documented truths of the last fifteen years are replaced by bald-faced lies; the talking points of the current regime parroted; the whole sorry story blurred, by spin, to make the party out of office seem vacillating and impotent, and the party in office, seem like the only option.
How dare you, Mr. President, after taking cynical advantage of the unanimity and love, and transmuting it into fraudulent war and needless death, after monstrously transforming it into fear and suspicion and turning that fear into the campaign slogan of three elections? How dare you -- or those around you -- ever "spin" 9/11?
Just as the terrorists have succeeded -- are still succeeding -- as long as there is no memorial and no construction here at Ground Zero.
So, too, have they succeeded, and are still succeeding as long as this government uses 9/11 as a wedge to pit Americans against Americans.
This is an odd point to cite a television program, especially one from March of 1960. But as Disney's continuing sell-out of the truth (and this country) suggests, even television programs can be powerful things.
And long ago, a series called "The Twilight Zone" broadcast a riveting episode entitled "The Monsters Are Due On Maple Street."
In brief: a meteor sparks rumors of an invasion by extra-terrestrials disguised as humans. The electricity goes out. A neighbor pleads for calm. Suddenly his car -- and only his car -- starts. Someone suggests he must be the alien. Then another man's lights go on. As charges and suspicion and panic overtake the street, guns are inevitably produced. An "alien" is shot -- but he turns out to be just another neighbor, returning from going for help. The camera pulls back to a near-by hill, where two extra-terrestrials are seen manipulating a small device that can jam electricity. The veteran tells his novice that there's no need to actually attack, that you just turn off a few of the human machines and then, "they pick the most dangerous enemy they can find, and it's themselves."
And then, in perhaps his finest piece of writing, Rod Serling sums it up with words of remarkable prescience, given where we find ourselves tonight: "The tools of conquest do not necessarily come with bombs and explosions and fallout. There are weapons that are simply thoughts, attitudes, prejudices, to be found only in the minds of men.
"For the record, prejudices can kill and suspicion can destroy, and a thoughtless, frightened search for a scapegoat has a fallout all its own -- for the children, and the children yet unborn."
When those who dissent are told time and time again -- as we will be, if not tonight by the President, then tomorrow by his portable public chorus -- that he is preserving our freedom, but that if we use any of it, we are somehow un-American...When we are scolded, that if we merely question, we have "forgotten the lessons of 9/11"... look into this empty space behind me and the bi-partisanship upon which this administration also did not build, and tell me:
Who has left this hole in the ground?
We have not forgotten, Mr. President.
You have.
May this country forgive you.
Sept. 11, 2006 3:19 p.m. ET
A special comment on 9/11

Colin Powell also blasts president’s proposal for interrogations

WASHINGTON - A rebellious Senate committee defied President Bush on Thursday and approved terror-detainee legislation he has vowed to block, deepening Republican conflict over terrorism and national security in the middle of election season.

Republican Sen. John Warner of Virginia, normally a Bush supporter, pushed the measure through his Armed Services Committee by a 15-9 vote, with Warner and three other GOP lawmakers joining Democrats. The vote set the stage for a showdown on the Senate floor as early as next week.

Earlier in the day, Bush had journeyed to the Capitol to try nailing down support for his own version of the legislation.

Powell's letter on interrorgations' strategy

Remember this: "We do not torture!"

Bush discusses (or doesn't) rendition policy with Matt Lauer.

A post on Think Progress and then later on MyDD, is claiming that Air America Radio will announce on Friday a major restructuring, which is expected to include a bankruptcy filing. Think Progress claims it got it's information from three independent sources. A response from AAR is also posted on their site as follows:

If Air America had filed for bankruptcy every time someone rumored it to be doing so, we would have ceased to exist long ago; it may be frustrating to some that this hasn’t happened. No decision has been taken to make any filing of any kind, we are not sure of the source of these rumors and frankly can not respond to every rumor in the marketplace.

The NY Daily News reported today that AAR is unveiling a new lineup on Monday, with Jerry Springer getting the boot from local flagship WWRL (1600 AM) and Rachel Maddow reappearing in the early evening (6-8 p.m.). The network has also signed a new morning show, "The Young Turks," who are Cenk Uygur, Ben Mankiewicz and Jill Pike. Springer's 9 a.m.-noon slot will be filled by Sam Seder. AAR will still syndicate Springer's show. Al Franken's show remains unchanged. Randi Rhodes' show will be shortened one hour (3-6 p.m.) as she requested. "Politically Direct" with David Bender will be on 8-9 p.m., "Ecotalk" with Betsy Rosenberg, 9-10 p.m., and guest host Peter Werbe, 10 p.m.-midnight according to the paper.

Although AAR says they acquired "The Young Turks" as a move to be more entertaining, I remember my first impression of the show was that I was not impressed. I confess that I only heard the show once and it was an interview with Professor Noam Chomsky. I'm not even sure if it was Cenk or Ben interviewing Chomsky but it was obvious that the interviewer was ill prepared to match wits with the brilliant Chomsky. You be the judge:





I'll be going through their archives to see if they've had more successful interviews. I'll keep an open mind. Their lists of guests is rather impressive. The list includes John Kerry, Dick Durbin, John Conyers, Joe Wilson, Harry Reid, Mario Cuomo, Wesley Clark, Paul Krugman, John Hackett, John Dean and many other prominent Dems, as well as a few celebs like Matt Dillon, Richard Dreyfuss and Jack Klugman.

I've read many posts or diaries on sites like Daily Kos that are followed by many negative comments by the community about AAR. I'm sorry but I don't understand this. I agree that the show does need some changes, and getting rid of Springer is a good start, but to simply write the network off because you don't like what you hear every minute of the day is just wrong. The network needs our support. Nothing would make Bill O'Reilly or Rush happier than to see the network fail. If you don't like something in particular, write to them. Give them feedback. If AAR fails, the right-wing will surely use this as an example. We can't let them do this.

Sen. Levin on The NewsHour w/Jim Lehrer

Sen. Kit Bond and Sen. Carl Levin discuss two new Senate Intelligence Committee reports and on pre-war intel.