An Email From Chris Dodd

Yesterday was a sad day for the United States Senate.

It is my hope that the courts will undo the damage done to the Constitution.

But let us stand tall, knowing that by working together we were able to make wiretapping and retroactive immunity part of the national discourse these last number of months.

We came together – all of you, Senator Feingold, bloggers like Jane Hamsher and Glenn Greenwald, organizations like the EFF and ACLU, and untold hundreds of thousands of Americans who simply wanted to make sure that this one, last insult did not happen with ease.

I'm sorry we weren't successful.

I just hope I'm lucky enough to have you by my side in the next fight, whatever that may be.

Thanks for all you've done.

Chris Dodd

Thank you, Chris, and all the others who fought so hard. What a mensch!

Watch For This Scam - No Joke

From the website of the FBI:

The phone rings, you pick it up, and the caller identifies himself as an officer of the court. He says you failed to report for jury duty and that a warrant is out for your arrest. You say you never received a notice. To clear it up, the caller says he'll need some information for "verification purposes"-your birth date, social security number, maybe even a credit card number.

This is when you should hang up the phone. It's a scam.

The warning came from a relative who is employed by the federal government. I checked it out at the website of the FBI, and it is authentic.

The FISA Vote - July 9, 2008

From the U. S. Senate website:

Amendment Number: S.Amdt. 5059 to H.R. 6304 (Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978)

Statement of Purpose: To limit retroactive immunity for providing assistance to the United States to instances in which a Federal court determines the assistance was provided in connection with an intelligence activity that was constitutional.

Vote Counts:

YEAs - 37
NAYs - 61
Not Voting - 2

Grouped By Vote Position [In other words, the good guys]

YEAS

Biden (D-DE)
Bingaman (D-NM)
Boxer (D-CA)
Brown (D-OH)
Byrd (D-WV)
Cantwell (D-WA)
Cardin (D-MD)
Casey (D-PA)
Clinton (D-NY)
Conrad (D-ND)
Dodd (D-CT)
Dorgan (D-ND)
Durbin (D-IL)
Feingold (D-WI)
Harkin (D-IA)
Kerry (D-MA)
Klobuchar (D-MN)
Kohl (D-WI)
Lautenberg (D-NJ)
Leahy (D-VT)
Levin (D-MI)
McCaskill (D-MO)
Menendez (D-NJ)
Murray (D-WA)
Obama (D-IL)
Reed (D-RI)
Reid (D-NV)
Sanders (I-VT)
Schumer (D-NY)
Specter (R-PA)
Stabenow (D-MI)
Tester (D-MT)
Webb (D-VA)
Whitehouse (D-RI)
Wyden (D-OR)

The list of the other guys may be found at the link above.

May I say that I was devastated by the large of Democrats who voted against the amendment? Ah, yes, they called the amendment a compromise, but it was rather a capitulation to the Bush maladministration. The Republicans know better. They are jubilant. They know that they won.

The Democrats know better, too. It's pure spin on voting wrong. What kind of back-room wheeling and dealing went on to make this happen?

I congratulate Sen. Arlen Spector, the lone Republican, who saw this vote for what it was and voted right. You Democrats who voted wrong, I am ashamed of you.

Hey, Watch This

I'll have family visiting today, including five rambunctious children, age 8 to 13, so you may have to spend your time here watching TV. If I have time to do a post or two, I will, but I doubt it.

I see that MadPriest has directed the ladies over here for advice on how to please your husbands. I won't have time to answer your questions today, but perhaps another day. One bit of general advice, ladies: you can't say "no" ever, because your husband's purity is important above everything. If he fails to remain pure because you're tired, or you have a headache, or the children need you, it is definitely all your fault for not pleasing him and seeing to it that "he goes out each day with his cup full".

Tnanks to Susan S. for the link to the video.

Chiao!

If I Were A Terrorist....

Sleep well tonight.

Doug sends this with his regards.

Have A Beer, Fathers

On Grand Isle, at the mouth of Bayou Lafourche, a friend who witnessed the event tells Grandpère that, on Father's Day, the Roman Catholic priest at the church on the island shot holy water on the congregation from a water gun. Then he asked all the fathers in the congregation to come forward, and he gave each of the men a can of beer but asked them to refrain from popping the beer cans open until they left the church.

Posted without comment, because I can't think of anything to say.

Join Them At "Friends Of Jake"

Hi All!

David H. and IT have started a new blog called Friends of Jake.

We are trying to get people who were regular posters at Jake's place to join in on the conversation going on there, and keep in contact. We are not Jake (and we are not trying to be Jake), but we want to provide a haven, a gathering place, to continue the conversation.

If you could pass this along to your friends or perhaps highlight us in a blog post, it would be appreciated. We are trying to generate some traffic and get the word out.

We are looking for contributions and the blog will have multiple authors, similar to what we do when the indomitable Jonathan+ is on vacation. Contact David Huff at david.huff@gmail.com if you are interested in contributing as an author or just links/information.

Looking forward to continuing the conversation.

Eileen

Turn Away Before It's Too Late

In the Guardian's account of the debate and vote on women bishops in the Church of England, I found this:

...the Right Rev Stephen Venner, who was in tears after he made a speech, imploring the pro-women lobby to show some generosity.

"I feel ashamed. We have talked about wanting to give an honourable place for those who disagree, and we have turned down almost every realistic opportunity. We have not even been prepared to explore the possibility of fresh expressions of dioceses or bishops. And still we talk the talk of being inclusive."

The spectacle of a grown man crying because women will be playing the bishop game with him should awaken all to the danger of heading down this slippery slope. I'm ashamed, too. How many more men will cry before those who are pushing women bishops step away from this dangerous path? Where will it end?

And this:

Synod's decision infuriated the influential Anglo-Catholic wing, which wants protection from women bishops.

As well they should. Women are extremely threatening and dangerous, especially in positions of power. God created the black widow spider and the praying mantis as an on-going reminder of just how dangerous the female of the species can be.

One senior churchman, the Rev Prebendary David Houlding, said: "It's getting worse, it's going downhill very badly. It's quite clear there's a pincer movement and we're being squeezed out.

It's true. Women know the pincer move.

The Right Rev Tom Wright said: "There might be some things that we might eventually have to split over. This should not be one of them."

Indeed, it should not. I'm quite certain that the pro-women bishops faction will see the error of their ways and step back before a woman is actually placed in the position of bishop.

Church Of England To Allow Women Bishops

Thinking Anglicans provides the resolution, which after two amendments reads:

That this Synod:

(a) affirm that the wish of its majority is for women to be admitted to the episcopate;
(b) affirm its view that special arrangements be available, within the existing structures of the Church of England, for those who as a matter of theological conviction will not be able to receive the ministry of women as bishops or priests;
(c) affirm that these should be contained in a statutory national code of practice to which all concerned would be required to have regard; and
(d) instruct the legislative drafting group, in consultation with the House of Bishops, to complete its work accordingly, including preparing the first draft of a code of practice, so that the Business Committee can include first consideration of the draft legislation in the agenda for the February 2009 group of sessions.

Alleluia! Thanks be to God!

Via the Episcopal Café. Thanks to Ann for the tip.

Waterboarding Is Torture

Over the past several years, I have disagreed with Christopher Hitchens on many occasions, especially in his support of the Iraq War. When the situation in Iraq turned very bad, he continued to defend the decision to go to war, saying only that the aftermath of the invasion had been catastrophically bungled. On the fifth anniversary of the beginning of the war, he insisted that the invasion was the right thing to do:

From The Australian:

We were already deeply involved in the life and death struggle of that country, and March 2003 happens to mark the only time that we decided to intervene, after a protracted and open public debate, on the right side and for the right reasons. This must, and still does, count for something.

Our opinions on the Iraq War, as yet, diverge, but I now find myself in agreement with Hitchens in another matter. He has voluntarily submitted to having himself waterboarded, and here is his account:

Here he is in Vanity Fair:

Here is the most chilling way I can find of stating the matter. Until recently, “waterboarding” was something that Americans did to other Americans. It was inflicted, and endured, by those members of the Special Forces who underwent the advanced form of training known as sere (Survival, Evasion, Resistance, Escape). In these harsh exercises, brave men and women were introduced to the sorts of barbarism that they might expect to meet at the hands of a lawless foe who disregarded the Geneva Conventions. But it was something that Americans were being trained to resist, not to inflict.
....

You may have read by now the official lie about this treatment, which is that it “simulates” the feeling of drowning. This is not the case. You feel that you are drowning because you are drowning—or, rather, being drowned, albeit slowly and under controlled conditions and at the mercy (or otherwise) of those who are applying the pressure. The “board” is the instrument, not the method. You are not being boarded. You are being watered.

You may have noticed that the title of his piece is "Believe Me, It’s Torture". I think we must believe him and the others who say that it is not "simulated" drowning, but actual drowning, from which you may be revived - or not, when things go terribly wrong. But then, a procedure like this is terribly wrong and shameful when sanctioned and put into operation by any country that calls itself civilized. I am told that the decision to allow waterboarding came from the very highest levels of government.