Teresa Heinz Kerry just laid the smackdown on the Republicans who are complaining that’s John Kerry is too wealthy :

“Those very same people never criticized my late husband for his money or his wealth – in fact, they used it,” said Mrs. Heinz Kerry, who inherited an estate estimated at $500 million to $1 billion from her first husband, Senator H. John Heinz III, a Pennsylvania Republican who was killed in a plane crash. “His money was just dandy.”
. . .
Mr. Kerry, the presumed senate presidential nominee, called criticism of the candidates’ multimillion-dollar bank accounts “the most ridiculous thing I’ve ever heard in my life.”

He asked: “Is this coming from millionaire George Bush and millionaire Dick Cheney? And millionaire Rumsfeld?”

In the interview, Mr. Edwards’s wife, Elizabeth, pointed out that the senate candidates “voted against tax cuts that would have benefited them” – tax cuts proposed by the Republicans.

“Isn’t that what we want – a leader who looks at the greater good instead of simply what benefits the person himself?” she asked Lesley Stahl, the “60 Minutes” interviewer, in a 20-minute segment.

“It seems to me that’s an enormous test of character,” Mrs. Edwards said, “whether you’re willing to step out and do something against your own self-interest.”

Republicans complaining about their opponents having too much money is like Courtney Love calling someone a washed-up junkie.

The newest post at Liberal Oasis reminded me of this bit from last week’s press conference about the senate Intelligence committee’s report on prewar intelligence :

ROCKEFELLER: And we had major disagreements on pressure. And I felt that the definition of pressure was very narrowly drawn in the final report. And that is that, sort of, that if somebody came up to you and you were one of the analysts who had been working on WMD, and they said, “Did anybody tell you that you had to change your point of view?” and the answer was, “No,” well that was the description of pressure.

That?s not my description of pressure. That?s a description of pressure. But another description of pressure is the total ambience of this cascade of ominous statements, which continued really up to the present, about what was going to happen or the relationship between Al Qaida and Iraq, Mohammed Atta and the rest of it.

So, to me, pressure also can be defined by what else is in our additional views. And that is that George Tenet indicated that he was approached by analysts from the CIA. Going to the director?s office? If you?ve ever done that, it?s, sort of, intimidating.

And they came to him and he said, to relieve the pressure, “Simply don?t answer the question if there is no new information.” But the key phrase there is “to relieve the pressure.” He was agreeing, assenting to the fact that there was.

The ombudsman of the Central Intelligence Agency, whose job it is for people to come to with their complaints, a veteran of many years there, said that the hammering on analysts was greater than he had seen in his 32 years of service to the Central Intelligence Agency, and he was referring to pressure.

And the former deputy director of the Central Intelligence Agency, Robert Kerr (ph), had a group which did analysis of this within the CIA, and he also came up with the same conclusion, that the pressure was there, it?s always internal to the analysts and it was external in the whole ambience, the whole sense of what the nation was moving toward, what the policy-makers were in fact moving toward, except that we couldn?t discuss that in our report.

And what did the final report conclude about this “pressure”? (via Matt Yglesias)

Just because it’s historically accurate (to a degree) doesn’t mean these people are any less geeky than a couple who has a Klingon wedding :

With pistols at 10 paces, descendants of Alexander Hamilton and Aaron Burr will settle an old score this weekend.

But this time, it isn’t personal.

Douglas Hamilton, a fifth-great-grandson of Hamilton, and Antonio Burr, a descendant of Burr’s cousin, will re-enact the July, 11, 1804, duel that left Hamilton mortally wounded and a sitting vice president’s reputation in the gutter.

“There’s no bad blood. On Hamilton’s deathbed, he said he bore no ill will toward Aaron Burr,” said Douglas Hamilton, an IBM salesman from suburban Columbus, Ohio. The re-enactment offers a chance to explore both men, and afterward “we can go have a beer together.”
. . .
For the re-enactment, Douglas Hamilton and Antonio Burr will don period costumes, arrive at the riverbank by rowboat with their entourages, as their ancestors had, then pace off. The men will fire replicas of the .54-caliber dueling pistols, then Douglas Hamilton will feign the historic hip wound and go down on one knee.

Following this, Antonio Burr will flee the state in disgrace to avoid murder charges. “The Duel” is really one of the most fascinating events in our country’s history, but this sounds really lame.

I wonder if they’ll be reenacting the JFK assassination in sixty years? Perhaps they can have JFK’s great-great granddaughter crawl out the back of the convertible screaming her head off while Abraham Zapruder’s descendants use a restored 8mm camera to film the proceedings.

Now I haven’t read any articles about this, but apparently Disney’s new movie Americas Heart & Soul is supposed to be the anti-Fahrenheit 911. I don’t know all the “he said, she said” details about it, but this interview I caught on CNN this morning makes the director seem like an alright guys who’s inadvertently stuck in a mini-controversy :

KAGAN: And so here you are trying to make a nice movie about America and somehow find your way in the middle of what some would consider a controversy of sorts. People calling your movie the anti- “Fahrenheit 9/11″. What do you think about that?

SCHWARTZBERG: Well, obviously, I think it’s hilarious because I’ve been working on this film for 15 years and Disney decided to distribute it a year-and-a-half ago before 9/11. The film is not political. This has been my dream, my passion and it’s a joke to be considered a right-wing kook, when, if anything, I’m an environmentalist and I love change. And the film is a populist movie. I’m letting ordinary Americans speak their own voice. And if anything, that’s the greatest political statement you can make.

KAGAN: Well, let’s kind of explain the right-wing kook comment just a bit. Now part of the controversy here is Disney made the decision not to distribute Michael Moore’s movie “Fahrenheit 9/11″, but is distributing your movie. And in response to that, Michael Moore on his own Web site posted a statement accusing Disney of joining forces with the right-wing kooks who have come together to attempt to sensor “Fahrenheit 9/11″.

Are these two stories that are just developing side by side?

SCHWARTZBERG: It’s totally untrue. I think Disney never intended to distribute Michael Moore’s film. I mean, it was actually funded by Miramax and the truth is, we showed our film to all kinds of groups and the grassroots effort across this country, the Sierra Club, the farmers, Boy Scouts, faith-based communities, as a way to get people interested in the movie.

Again, I made this as an independent movie with my own money, my own time and passion. And to compare the two is totally ridiculous.

KAGAN: No such thing as bad publicity, though. It gets people out there looking and seeing not just your movie, “Fahrenheit 9/11″ and just more focus on documentaries in general.

SCHWARTZBERG: Well, i think that’s a good thing. I mean, I think it’s actually a wonderful one-two punch. Mark Twain said that the definition of a patriot is someone who loves their country and isn’t afraid to criticize their government. I think audiences can go see both movies and have debate and conversation and dialogue because freedom of speech is our greatest freedom and that’s what I think we’re fighting for.

So whatever you hear about this movie, I’d take it with a grain of salt. From what I’ve seen of the movie, it looks stock footage to be used in political advertisements. Then again, every time I hear people use the words “heart” and “soul” in reference to something other than the blood pump in the middle of your chest or that little ghost that gets to hang out with Jesus after you die, my eyes begin to glaze over.

For the most part, I’m pretty confident about this upcoming election. Poll results have pretty dismal things to say about Bush’s performance, the Kerry-Edwards ticket is strong and charismatic, Bush’s attempts to smear Kerry have backfired, etc….

But if there’s one thing that (figuratively) keeps me up at night, it’s the fear that some big event will come along and shake up this race. In the last few days there has been an uptick in the amount of “unspecified chatter” about the following :

If you’ve ever wondered what it’s like to suffer from “blogger burnout”, check out this article. It does a good job of showing what happens when a labor of love turns into a pain in the ass.

“Please stop talking about John Edwards…”

Looking at the speaker list for the upcoming GOP convention, it looks like this might be a case of “hide the wingnuts” (via Kevin Drum) :

The lineup of primetime speakers at the Republican Convention predictably reflects its New York location by giving prominent spots to the hosts, Mayor Michael Bloomberg and Governor George Pataki. But those enjoying the coveted spotlight also pay tribute to New York’s former Governor Nelson Rockefeller. Joining the hosts will be other mavericks and dissidents who represent a minority in Ronald Reagan’s GOP. Former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani, Arizona’s Senator John McCain, and California’s Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger will all be at the primetime podium. The only announced speaker who actually agrees with President Bush on major issues is senate Senator Zell Miller of Georigia.
. . .
senate Majority Leader Bill Frist will likely be heard from as a congressional leader, but haven’t senators who have been on point on crucial issues like abortion, cloning, same-sex marriage, and international human rights earned primetime placement alongside their tormentor John McCain? Conservative Republicans should be asking why senators like Rick Santorum and Sam Brownback aren’t enjoying the same public embrace as the New York Times’ favorite Republican.

This is a chickenshit move by the Republicans and I think odds are even that it might backfire. The folks in charge may think putting their three friendliest faces on display may win them some love, but they forget that these guys are the most popular mainstream Republicans because they’re not afraid to publicly eschew the party-line.

There’s a civil war brewing within the Republican party between the irresponsible religious fanatics and the small government, balanced budget, “get the government out of my life” conservatives. Giving primetime to folks who break rank with Bush on issues ranging from equal rights for gays, campaign finance, budgets, etc. may make the party seem more palatable, but it could also highlight the differences between relative moderates like McCain and extremists like Bush. McCain’s more likeable, but largely because he’s unpredictable and willing to shoot from the hip.

I have a feeling there’s going to be a few subtle attacks about the direction the party has been headed in those speeches. The only question is whether or not these guys are willing take advantage of their moment in the spotlight and risk straining party unity in the hopes of helping lead the party in their own direction. Of course, even if they do attack their own party, the media probably wouldn’t even notice…

Please tell me I’m not the only person really offended by the second panel in this comic?

Remember a couple weeks ago when the 9-11 Commission reiterated the fact that there’s no connection between Iraq and al Qaeda? At the time, Dick Cheney reiterated his claims (which led to a looong semantic argument about the words “relationship” and “ties”). It seemed clear that if Cheney was correct, then it must be because he had evidence that the 9-11 Commission wasn’t privy to. Well, we can put that theory to bed as well :

The Sept. 11 commission, which reported no evidence of collaborative links between Iraq and al Qaeda, said on Tuesday that Vice President Dick Cheney had no more information than commission investigators to support his later assertions to the contrary.

The 10-member bipartisan panel investigating the 2001 attacks on New York and Washington said it reached its conclusion after reviewing available transcripts of Cheney’s public remarks on the subject.

The vice president has asserted long-standing links between the former Iraqi president and Osama Bin Laden’s Islamist militant network.

“The 9-11 Commission believes it has access to the same information the vice president has seen regarding contacts between al Qaeda and Iraq prior to the 9-11 attacks,” the commission said in a statement.

It’ll be interesting to see how the White House tries to spin their way out of this one. My guess is that it’ll resemble this exchange.

You gotta hand it to the Republicans. They’ve got a pretty badass political machine. Within minutes of the Kerry-Edwards announcement, they had KerryPicksEdwards.com redirecting to their anti-Edwards page. For the most part, it’s pretty predictable stuff, but the “Edwards Rural Populist Message ? Just Another Gimmick?” section has me in stitches. My favorite part :

Edwards Claims ?Natural Connection? With Rural People, But Flunked Funk?s Rural Q&A. (Matt Bai, ?Nascar-Lovin,? The New York Times, 9/15/02; Tim Funk, ?Q&A With John Edwards,? The Charlotte Observer, 5/26/03)

Edwards Has ?Never Done Any Serious Farming.?

Edwards Doesn?t Follow Weekly NASCAR Races, Adds He ?Doesn?t Follow Anything Except Politicking.?

Edwards Hasn?t Hunted Or Fished ?In Years.?

Edwards Has ?In The Past Been A Country Music Fan.?

That sonofabitch doesn’t conform to southern stereotypes?! How dare he! If he doesn’t listen to Toby Keith, watch every NASCAR race, and regularly engage in hard labor on his farm, then that Yankee can kiss my ass. After all, I’m sure Bush wowuld pass the “Rural Q&A” with flying colors.

Also worth noting is the last section titled “Edwards Stated Saddam Had Weapons Of Mass Destruction And Was Nuclear Threat”, or as I like to call it “Edwards Made The Mistake of Trusting Bush and Cheney”. Apparently, supprting the war is now a liability for Republicans too. Is the GOP really crazy enough to think this is going to convince voters that Bush is a better choice?

So I finally got to see a bootleg copy of The Passion last night and it was everything I expected and more.

First, lemme get the big question out of the way : Is the movie anti-Semitic? Well, the only characters who get even close to rivaling Jesus in screen-time are the bloodthirsty Jews, who are always a couple steps away with a chant of “Kill him!!” Considering it’s supposed to be a movie about Jesus, Mel Gibson has spent much more time focusing on Jewish bloodlust than say…the sermon on the mount.

Having read many reviews of the film when it came out, one of the things that really struck me about The Passion was that it’s one of the craziest goddamn movies I’ve ever seen. Seriously. Here’s a few examples of what I’m talking about :

Judas gets scared by some weird-ass werewolf or something.

Demon-kids try to eat Judas’ hand.

Gay Satan and mini-me watch Jesus get whipped.

The Shroud of Turin makes a cameo appearance.

So, next time somebody wants to tell you about the historical accuracy of this movie (that’s based on a book whose own historical accuracy is dubious at best), just remind them that there aren’t any werewolves in the Bible.

Like every other left-leaning blogger, I’m very excited that Edwards is Kerry’s VP choice. Of all the choices I’ve seen thrown around (the Gep, Vilsack, Bayh), he’s the only one that made anyone excited. The fact that Edwards has such strong backing from the left despite his less-than ideal track record (see : Dean, Howard) shows that this ticket is gonna to a lot to unite people behind more than just “Anybody But Bush”.

I won’t bore you with one of those “Top 10 Reasons Edwards Is Da Bomb” posts that you’ll be seeing all over the place and I certainly won’t be printing out of context quotes from the primary season to show that Kerry and Edwards aren’t best buddies (I’m looking in your direction, CNN), but there is one thing about Edwards that has me really excited. When all is said and done, I hope that Edwards is able to do a little damage to the myth that all lawyers are money-grubbing ambulance chasers.

Now we’ll be hearing lots of sneering about “trial lawyers” during this campaign, but one thing the Bushies are going to be careful about is making the accusation anywhere near John Edwards. If they give Edwards a chance at a rebuttal, he’s got plenty of stories to tell, like this one from the Washington Monthly :

Until he moved to the senate, Edwards was a personal injury lawyer—the kind people most love to hate—and a very talented one. More than half his cases were medical malpractice suits. Many involved infants born with brain damage or other serious conditions that entail a lifetime of expensive medical care. Edwards also won cases against hospitals, cities, and corporations.
. . .
Edwards won a $7 million verdict for the parents of a 16-year-old who’d killed himself the day after being dismissed from a psychiatric hospital, an incredibly difficult case to win, Dayton says, because in North Carolina the plaintiff must prove that the entire burden of negligence lies with the defendant. In 1997, Edwards successfully sued a doctor for $23 million on behalf of the parents of a baby severely brain damaged by oxygen deprivation during labor.

The defining case in Edwards’ legal career wrapped up that same year. In 1993, a five-year-old girl named Valerie Lakey had been playing in a Wake County, N.C., wading pool when she became caught in an uncovered drain so forcefully that the suction pulled out most of her intestines. She survived but for the rest of her life will need to be hooked up to feeding tubes for 12 hours each night. Edwards filed suit on the Lakeys’ behalf against Sta-Rite Industries, the Wisconsin corporation that manufactured the drain.

I recommend reading the whole article, since it also contains this great little nugget about the importance of the civil justice system :

For all the noise Republicans make about trial lawyers interfering with the free market, most people prefer driving on tires that don’t explode, living in homes with insulation that won’t kill them, and raising babies in cribs that won’t strangle them. They aren’t particularly bothered if it takes fear of litigation to bring these things about.

Through the discovery process, trial lawyers also unearth valuable documents that even federal agencies aren’t privy to. One case in point: the lawyers who sued Firestone discovered that the company had known of the problem. As such, they provide valuable consumer protections—particularly in areas like medicine that are largely free from government regulation.

Whenever people hear the word “sue”, they immediately think about the grandma who spilled coffee on herself or some imaginary case in which someone was given $100 million for having a hangnail, but they don’t step back and realize that the civil courts are an essential part of our justice system. If you’re the victim of a crime due to a corporation’s maliciousness, negligence, or greed, who are you gonna call? You can’t call 911 on a CEO and you might not have a lot of luck convincing the DA to bring up a case, but with civil courts everybody has the opportunity to have their case heard before a judge.

And let’s not get carried away with the talk of “out of control” fines. Even if they weren’t extremely rare and often pared down in higher courts, I’d still support them completely. If you’re suing a business, it’s not like you can send these guys to jail. Your only recourse is to hit them where it really hurts, the bottom line. Anyone who’s callous enough to suggest that winning a multi-million dollar judgment is “the best thing that’s ever happened” to a plaintiff, would probably never understand why someone would rather be poor than have an inoperable brain tumor, get all their intestines sucked out, etc. It may be a clich?, but it’s true. There are some things more important than money.

So back to John Edwards.

He’s spent his whole life fighting these kinds of fights. When he talks about sticking up for the little guy, this is what he’s talking about. I can’t wait to see Kerry-Edwards win this thing in a landslide.

Thanks to the magic of Tivo, I now get to regularly see Crossfire, one of the only truly “fair and balanced” shows on television. For those of you who didn’t see today’s episode, you missed this awesome exchange :

NOVAK: All right. Readers — readers of the left wing magazine, “The Nation,” might be a little shocked when they see the back page of the current issue. Even the most fanatical Bush haters might be shocked.

Yes, the drawing shows George W. Bush eating a headless child. This is inspired by a 19th century work by Francisco Goya, Saturn Devouring his Children, aimed against the Spanish monarchy.

Sitting at this table, I know how emotional and relentless and mindless is the hatred directed against George W. Bush. But in the spirit of patriotism, this Fourth of July weekend, I wonder, Paul, if you can join me in deploring this treatment of any president of the United States as over the line and unacceptable?

(APPLAUSE)

BEGALA: In the spirit of patriotism, let me support the first amendment, which says the nation shouldn’t be censored by right- wingers. And let me ask you, Mr. Novak, with your new self-founded — newfounded self-righteousness, are you going to retract the statement you said last week on “Meet the Press,” where you implied that President Clinton was involved in people’s deaths over Whitewater? That’s the most outrageous things I’ve heard said about an American president.

NOVAK: I didn’t say he was engaging — and you’re lying.

BEGALA: I’ll read your words.

NOVAK: And when I said that…

BEGALA: “I don’t believe that the Whitewater case was ever fully investigated. People died, and I believe Bill Clinton beat the rap on Whitewater.”

(CROSSTALK)

(BELL RINGING)

NOVAK: Well, I didn’t say he was involved with the thing.

BEGALA: You said…

NOVAK: You…

BEGALA: … he beat the rap and people died. Who died? Who died in Whitewater?

(CROSSTALK)

NOVAK: McDougal died, and…

BEGALA: He died in prison of a heart attack.

NOVAK: Well, people died (UNINTELLIGIBLE). But just a minute. You can’t — you can’t say — go on national television and accuse me of something I didn’t say.

BEGALA: I read your words.

NOVAK: I did not say that, and that is a lie. And I…

BEGALA: These are your words, Mr. Novak. I read them.

NOVAK: And I’m ashamed of you for going on the air and saying that.

BEGALA: I got this from the transcript. This is the transcript from “Meet the Press”, Bob.

NOVAK: That’s an outrage. And it is…

BEGALA: It is an outrage. You owe Mr. Clinton an apology.

NOVAK: … an absolute outrage because I did not say that he was responsible for those deaths. And this is not fun, Paul.

So the lesson for today is that Bob Novak doesn’t think being called on his bullshit is “fun”. It’s too bad he was saved by the commercial break too, I would have loved seeing him squirm for the rest of the episode desperately trying to deny his implication that the former president is a murderer. And just in case there’s any doubt about what Novak was implying, here’s the transcript of what he said on Meet The Press :

MR. NOVAK: …in, please? I don’t believe that the Whitewater case was ever fully investigated. People died. The judge that was going to get information out was not questioned.

MR. KLEIN: People died?

MR. NOVAK: And as a matter of fact, Joe, I believe that Bill Clinton beat the rap on Whitewater and I think Ken Starr failed on that.

Novak was saved from having to explain himself on that one too, this time by host Tim Russert who quickly changed the subject.

After the whole Valerie Plame controversy, I’m surprised that Novak is allowed to be on TV at all anymore. I think what Novak has done is much, much more offensive that what Michael Savage did. Savage was an asshole, but Novak actually helped our enemies by outing an undercover agent. Maybe if the American people payed more attention, they’d hold CNN accountable for having an anchor who’s guilty of treason.

UPDATE : Media Matters has a clip of Novak’s appearance on Meet The Press. The transcript provided above is accurate, but it leaves out the fact that Novak stutters like Elmer Fudd.

UPDATE 2 : Since, this post still gets a ton of traffic, lemme point you all towards a cartoon that my friend and I made. I hope you like it :

I love this ad. The way he says “43 million Americans don’t even have it” makes me really look forward to voting for him. Even if I don’t 100% agree with his plans, that ad (and this one) are reason enough to see why Kerry beats Bush 58% to 37% in the polling question “Who do you trust to do a better job handling health care?” (According to the same poll, Kerry also beats Bush on terrorism, the economy, the budget deficit, international affairs, taxes, and education. Ouch.)