Tripping through the blogosphere....

I've been up to no good lately, at least according to some folks. I'll post more on a particular feud over one comment a little later, when i can get my thoughts in order.

Around the Conservative media and blogosphere, there seems to be an uproar over a "lack of Unity" behind our President. This is of course a smear campaign against anyone who has trouble with unlimited warrant less spying, unlimited arrest and detention of any person without no evidence or criminal charges, and let's not forget the little trifling matter of outing covert agents, and then suppressing an investigation into the damage caused by such a a leak.

Be warned, that if you make any public statement questioning the validity of these acts, you will be labelled "un-American." If you're an elected Democrat, you will be called an "islamofascist" even if you're a christian minister and/or a U.S. Military reservist or retiree.

It's refreshing to know that not all conservatives are steamrolling towards the extreme right. A few cases in point:

CrooksandLiars has a post on a new book coming out, written by Sen. John Danforth, formerly a contender to be Bush's Vice-Presidential Candidate, an exclusive from Raw Story:

The former Missouri senator shortlisted to be then-Governor Bush's running mate in the 2000 presidential election -- said to have been second choice only to Vice President Cheney -- will come out vehemently against administration and Congressional Republican policy in a book to be published next week., according to an advance copy obtained by RAW STORY.

John Danforth, who retired in 1995 after four terms in the Senate, briefly served as Bush's ambassador to the United Nations but resigned after Condoleezza Rice was tapped to be Secretary of State. According to CNN, he was second on the list of Bush's potential vice presidential choices in 2000.

In Faith and Politics, to be released Tuesday, Danforth blasts the alignment of the Republican Party with the Christian right, lays out his most aggressive pro-gay stance to date and attacks the handling of the Terri Schiavo case.

See, this is what's called "thinking" for yourself, and respecting the rights of every American Citizen to do as they wish (isn't that point of Capitalism and Democracy?). It's also about principles such as small, limited government and self-determination:

Danforth calls the Terri Schiavo case -- where Congress intervened to attempt to keep a severely brain-damaged woman from being taken off life support -- "Big Brotherism."

"That the federal government could intervene in the Schiavo case was a threat to all the families that had seen their loved ones suffer through terminal illness," he writes.

It was a threat to people who were terrified that their own lives might someday be artificially extended in nightmarish circumstances. It was a threat to some of our most heartfelt values. It was Big Brotherism in the extreme, an exercise of the raw and awesome power of the federal government.
"They intervened not in the name of principle, but at the expense of principle," Danforth avers. "They abandoned principle by deciding a medical question without any firsthand knowledge of what they were doing."

So, let's add The Reverend John Danforth, an ordained Episcopal Priest, to the ranks of Colin Powell, John Dean, and other conservative who have the moral fortitude to stand up and say that they will not go blindly down this dark path.

You can pre-order Danforth's Faith and Politics

While there, why not pick up Conservatives Without Conscience by John W. Dean, White house Counsel to Richard Nixon, and self-described Barry Goldwater conservative. You might also like any of the books by or about Colin Powell.

For a more immediate fix, Crooksandliars has video of Joe Scarborough placing Principles above Partisanship or Sen. Lindsey Graham explaining the importance of the Geneva Conventions. Scarborough is a former Republican congressman from Florida, and Sen. Graham is a Colonel in the U.S. Air Force Reserve Command.

A response to conservatives supporting Kinky Friedman.

This was originally intended as a comment on this blog. Unfortunately, I'm using the new-fangled Blogger Beta, and it doesn't play well with non-Beta bloggers. So the comment is below.

I previously posted about this video and one other here.

I will revisit this issue again soon, but I first must sleep and take care of general other things.

COMMENT:

What really troubles me about Kinky's comment is that Joe Lieberman isn't "Pro-Israel." He's anti-Arab, and anti-Arab democracy, and as a consequence, ant-Israel. TO say what Kinky did, that Lamont and the folks who voted for him are "Anti-American and Anti-Israel," is not only wrong, but it's ignorantly knee-jerk stupid. His campaign manager should have slapped him.

You and a select minority of the nation may be giddy that we have our army over there dying under false pretenses, and Kinky may believe that American dominance in the Middle East is paramount to American national policy. It is this mindset, perpetuated by Bush and the GOP, that subjugates Israel, ultimately foisting her up for defeat.

The GOP, expressed through the "Freedom Plan" Bush and Cheney enacted after 9/11, sees Israel simply as an immune military arm enslaved to do bidding of the U.S.

Let's be clear about something: "the bidding of the U.S." refers not to the will of the people, expressed through Democratic means. Rather, it refers to the hegemonic interests of behemoth corporations whose headquarters reside int he U.S. Or at least whose campaign contributions find their way to the GOP.

Take a minute and educate yourself. You don't have to be Liberal to understand that this Administration is very far off base. Just ask John Dean. I'll be happy to recommend some reference books.

Dear Senate Majority Leader scareydoodle

Sen. Frist,

I apologize for taking so long to post this memo. I've been busy doing what I can to prevent covert officials from doing their jobs and discovering a truth that disagrees with us. Your welcome in advance.

I'm writing in response to your recent petition request regarding the Flag Burning Amendment.Please allow me to send you my sincere condolences for your failur to push through your agenda.

You say you pushed this amendment because you don't think the flag should be desecrated, and not because you hate the first amendment. Therefore, it is most important that you address, or re-address explicitly, the flag desecration statutes already on the books. Specifically: U.S. Code, title 4, Chapter One. We'd hate to have a bloated Government rife with duplications, wouldn't we? Think how many Departments of Homeland Security would have to be created just to sort through the different laws pertaining to the flag!

You should also stand tall, and tell the President he did indeed descrate the flag, and YOU WON'T STAND FOR FLAG DESECRATION:

• We impeached Clinton for a stain on a dress.


• We must send the proper message to America:


• The FLAG, symbol of our great nation, is greater than a mere dress.


• IF President Bush has stained the flag, we must tell him what "is" is!!!

Also, in an unrelated matter, I know that you are a supporter of open markets and not a fascist, so I know I don't need to worry about your support for Net Neutrality. You do support Net Neutrality, don't you?

Oh and before I go, please stop the Lie-and-Die rhetoric. I know it's a great piece of TP to say that the War in Iraq is not strenghtening the terorrists. As a USAA member, I am deeply offended by your ignorance regarding war, and must ask you to refrain from lying.

That would go a long ways toward allowing our soldiers to stop dying.