Archive for June 12, 2009

Connecticut Mayor Utterly Destroys Steve Doocy

Congratulations to Wonkette for uncovering the sordid story behind the early career of “Fox & Friends” commentator Steve Doocy. On further investigation, it turns out that Steve Doocy’s career is a veritable repository of fail, including this excerpt, where Connecticut mayor & gubernatorial candidate Dan Malloy reams Doocy for practicing the same “gotcha journalism” tactics he pretends to decry:

In the last bit, you can almost see Doocy’s career flash before his eyes. Too bad Fox rewards incompetence, rather than punishing it.

Meghan McCain Throws Huckabee Under the Bus; Palin Should Follow

Not that I blame her, but this type of honesty is rare from any political figure, let alone a Republican:

Little McCain, of course, is right. Huckabee is a proud theocrat, someone who makes no apologies for putting fundamentalist notions of religious morality ahead of constitutional values. That brand of Republican may have had a chance at the nomination in 2008, but the Republican far-right has never had a shot at an electoral college victory. The GOP will need to end its relationship with the religious right, and be “open to the realities of our changing world,” to use her words. If that’s really the way she feels, though, Huckabee is too easy of a target. No-one seriously talks about Mike Huckabee as the future of the Republican Party. [UPDATE: false. Thanks James F.]

Sarah Palin, on the other hand, is not just a serious contender – she knows it. And she’s just as backwards as Huckabee. If Meghan McCain is serious about re-inventing the GOP into a post-culture war conservative force, it might be time for her to break her scrupulous silence on her dad’s running mate.

Iran’s Election: Not 100% Free, But Not 100% Sham Either

Today, Friday, Iranians went to the polls to elect their president. While early returns are not expected to be available until late Friday night (EDT), many Western observers are predicting a tough re-election bid for Ahmadinejad, some going so far as to say reform candidate Mir Hossein Mousavi can win a first ballot majority, negating the need for a run-off election.

In any event, (at the time of this writing) polls remained open an additional three hours, closing at 12:30 p.m. (EDT) in the face of massive voter turnout. They might stay open later, still. Of course, Iranian elections are not entirely free elections. Not just anyone can collect the prescribed number of signatures and pay a fee to get on the ballot. It is the mullahs who decide who is going to be a presidential candidate. Therefore, any “reform” minded candidate is going to represent the degree of reform the mullahs are willing to accept without threat to their supreme control over Iranian society and politics. Too, who knows what sort of shadiness takes place in vote counting, etc., to ensure the election comes out according to the mullahs’ liking.

Nonetheless, there is power in numbers. And massive turnout says something about how critical it is to Iranians to be heard, no matter where their tastes lie on the political/cultural spectrum. With turnout this large, if the results do not reflect what the voters know happened, expect a backlash. Similarly, massive turnout brings media coverage. Photos of chador-draped women in blocks-long lines are impressive testaments to democracy. Sure, the Ayatollah can spin it as a symbol of his and his cohorts benign and beneficient rule, but I take it more as a sign that the mullahs ought to be circumspect with how they operationalize their control of Iran’s citizenry. The world is watching.

We wrote on Iran back in December, when the mullahs ordered the raid of Shirin Ebadi’s Center for the Defense of Human Rights. Iran’s theocracy ensures cruelty, repression, and injustice are state-sanctioned realities in Iranian society. But for every step back, there are two steps forward. I believe we will see one such step forward this weekend with the election of Mousavi (or at least a runoff between Mousavi and Ahmadinejad). The mullahs might be draconian and totalitarian, but they aren’t stupid. The geopolitical landscape has changed. Now that the U.S. has (thankfully and far too late) shut up its saber-rattling mouth (with the exception of the residual belching of a sidelined ex-vice president), Iran doesn’t want to be in the embarrassing position as the last guest to leave the party.

And in allowing for Ahmadinejad’s ouster for Mousavi in a “democratic election,” the mullahs get to be the heroes they are in their own minds and, collaterally, give Iranians the break they so very much deserve.

Looking Ahead to Obama’s Second Pick: Pamela Karlan for the Supreme Court!

We here are big fans of Judge Sotomayor – even if she is a serial violator of Rove’s Law (“Never attempt to say anything insightful, comical, or otherwise geared to provoke independent thought, if it can be quoted out of context in a manner likely to ‘offend’ right-wing sensibilities”). As near as we can tell, she’s likely to defend the right to choose, and potentially even advance the strong incorporation of gay rights into the Equal Protection Clause.

Mr. Chief Justice?

However, I admit of this nagging doubt: she is not the daring, or even provocative pick that we on the left would hope for, and deserve, from the Obama administration. Let’s face it – the current Senate would probably confirm Morbo the Annihilator, if Obama asked them to. We should be using this opportunity to put a true liberal lion(ess) on the bench, someone with the rhetorical talent of Antonin Scalia, the progressive sensibilities of William Brennan, and the insight of Sandra Day O’Connor. Admittedly, Judge Sotomayor may be just that, but we’ll have to wait until July 13th to find out. That means we have to endure another month of Republicans oversimplifying the role federal judiciary and coasting on sham charges of “racism,” destroying any possibility of substantive dialogue. Too bad: although it’s easy to see why he wouldn’t want to (think “How to Lose Your Political Capital in 200 days”), nominating a forceful academic, with a record of advancing controversial but unassailable progressive positions, could force a discussion of the nature of constitutional democracy from which (*gasp!*) the public might actually learn.

Depending on the substance of her confirmation hearings, we might not get this type of productive discourse at all this time around. But because Obama will likely have to fill two more Supreme Court vacancies to fill in his first term (Stevens is 89, and Ginsburg, sadly, in poor health), we’ll probably get another chance. Here’s how to take it:

Professor Pamela Karlan for the Supreme Court.

Professor Karlan is roundly regarded as a “liberal Scalia,” the kind of jurist who not only “pushes the envelope” on social issues, but does so brilliantly, and from a firm intellectual foundation. By way of example, the arguments for gay marriage found in her writings are sensible, accessible, and syllogism-like in their simplicity and completeness, making her a daring but defensible nominee: while her writings would immediately come into issue, any debate would be on the President’s terms. This type of nominee is generally less trouble than you’d expect. Justice Scalia, for example, came to the Senate with an ample paper trail, but won confirmation in a stunning 98-0 vote. Admittedly, that was a different time, but the Roberts confirmation hearing should be ample proof that Senators have a hard time opposing competent nominees, regardless of their politics.

A constitutional leader, if we can only get her on the Court.

Her intellect alone more than qualifies her to sit on the nation’s highest court. But demographically, too, Karlan would be an expert pick: she’s a woman, and openly gay. Both are assets. The Court needs more women.  And cases like Lawrence v. Texas – which emphatically refused to treat homosexuality as a serious personality trait – prove that, even when they get the law right, the current Supreme Court doesn’t understand the importance of gay rights. From her writings and her personal stake in the matter, I’d venture to guess that Professor Karlan could provide this absent perspective.

Make no mistake, Karlan would be a risky pick, no matter what Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL) promises today. But her intellectual stature, and the productive discussion that her nomination would generate, make it a risk worth taking. I understand why Obama needs an easy confirmation now. It is, after all, still his first 200 days, and his White House certainly has enough on its plate at the moment. But given the uniqueness of this moment in history, and President Obama’s apparent political genius, it would be a shame to not see this White House use a difficult Supreme Court confirmation battle to restore the tattered image of the progressive Court. Expanding constitutional freedoms to worthy groups is a virtue, not a vice, and it’s high time we remind the American people of this simple, vital truth.