Divorceé Senator Kay Bailey Hutchinson apparently believes in biblical double standards. According to a local constituent, the Bible really means what it says in condemning gays, but not in condemning divorceés who remarry.

And, as blogger Michael Petrelis jogged my memory, who can forget about the rampant adultery of presidential brother Neil Bush? Surely, not his "defend the family" presidential brother?

Ah, it's nice to be Neil Bush.

When you're Neil Bush, you'll be sitting in a hotel room in Thailand or Hong Kong, minding your own business, when suddenly there's a knock at the door. You answer it and a comely woman strolls in and has sex with you.

Just how much fun was revealed in a deposition taken last March, during Bush's very nasty divorce battle. Asked by his wife's attorney whether he'd had any extramarital affairs, Bush told the story of his Asian hotel room escapades.

We know what the Religious Right says the Bible says about homosexuality, but what about adultery? Answer below the fold.

David Rieff gets it exactly right about why we don't belong in Darfur.

The main point of his argument, that it's questionable as to whether or not what has been happening in Sudan is actually "genocide" or not, is one I've argued for more than a year. (I've always contended that, ignoring attempts to put nice and neat boundaries on things, what we have is more intertribal warfare-cum-civil war than out-and-out genocide.

Here's his take on the situation:

Yes, in the United States, it is universally believed -- so much so that the claim is even enshrined in a unanimous congressional declaration -- that a slow-motion genocide has been taking place in Darfur. But many reputable groups abroad, including the French section of Doctors Without Borders, whose physicians have been on the ground in Darfur for a very long time, reject those claims. (Emphasis added.)

More below the fold.

I got up early this morning to be a protestor at the Exxon-Mobil shareholders' meeting in Dallas. We had about 40-50 people show up to protest, contacted through Expose Exxon  and other activist groups. (I get e-alerts from so many different environmental groups I'm not sure which one first reminded me of the shareholders meetiing, but I think it was the Union of Concerned Scientists.)

I didn't think to bring my camera, just my placard, so no pics. Since you can't capture the essence of Exxon's deceit with just one sign, I had messages on both sides.

More below the fold.

Picture this hypothetical phone call, if you will, about the latest phon-y baloney from the White House.

Me: "I can't talk to you right now."

John Doe: "Why?"

Me: "You know why; Bush has ALL of our phone records, of ALL of us. Not just THEM, but US. And, without any search warrants."

John Doe: "What do you mean, not just them?"

Me: "You know, the people with Arabic-sounding names, or wearing turbans or whatever. He has EVERYBODY's phone records. Yours. Mine. The blue-haired ladies who adore him."

More of the conversation below the fold.

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi pledged "just investigations, no impeachment," and doesn't even list the the NSA warrantless wiretapping as a specific targets of investigation, in talking to NBC Sunday. Nor, despite talking about investigating the use of intelligence in the lead-up to the invasion of Iraq, does she mention investigating leaks, i.e., the name of Valerie Plame.

Today on "Meet the Press," Pelosi pledged "just investigations, not impeachment" if they gain a majority after the November elections.

It's fine to note that the EU did condemn the CIA's 1,000-plus renditions.

But, in doing so, and even though he bolded the relevant sentence in the story, Armando drove right past what is itself a major news item -- the EU's hypocrisy on this issue.

Armando quotes:

Legislators selected to look into allegations of questionable CIA activities in Europe said flight data showed a pattern of hidden operations by American agents, and they accused some European governments of knowing about it but remaining silent.

(Armando's emphasis)

But, Armando just goes right by this. He ignores the fact that this is pretty close to the pot calling the kettle black.

More below the fold.

Even U.S. Ambassador to Iraq Zalmay Khalilzad is losing faith in the chances of success there.

Reports the Guardian:

Khalilzad told the Los Angeles Times Iraq had been pulled back from the brink of civil war after the February 22 bombing of a Shia shrine in Samarra. However, another similar incident would leave Iraq "really vulnerable" to that happening, he said. "We have opened the Pandora's box and the question is, what is the way forward?" He added that the best approach was to build bridges between religious and ethnic communities.

Ah, Zalmay? That should have been happening, oh, at least two years ago.

Meanwhile, his comments caught official Washington so fast that Donald Rumsfeld couldn't even spin them.

Rumsfeld said sectarian violence had been exaggerated by the media. When asked how that squared with Khalilzad's view, he replied: "Well, he's there. He's an expert. And he said what he said. I happen to have not read it, but I am not going to try to disagree with it."

That's not all Khalilzad had to say. More below the fold.

For people who aren't sufficiently skeptical yet about Montana Gov. Brian Schweitzer and his "technology will always succeed" claims (combined with a stiff double shot of Montana economic boosterism) that the Fischer-Tropsch coal-gasification process, combined with Montana's abundant coal, will solve all of America's transportation energy problems, read here for another view.

Short story: To reduce America's imported oil usage (not total, just imported) by 1/12th, or 8.33 percent, by using Montana coal in the Fischer-Tropsch process, would require two and a half times as much water as the entire annual flow of the Tongue River.

If it's wrong for Dick Cheney-sponsored coalbed methane to suck dry the watershed of the neighboring Powder River, then it can't be right for Schweitzer to want to do even worse to the Tongue River, can it?

Environmental problem details below the fold.

And I would have to agree.

The Green Party says HR 4694, touted for public financing of Congressional campaigns, is biased against third parties. Originally posted at Democracy in Action.

Now, the bill does a number of good things, including barring paid, professional petition-signature gatherers. (Not sure how this or other bill provisions will pass the "money is speech" SCOTUS sniffer, but that's another story.

But, there are legitimate third-party concerns. Look below the fold.

Zakaria claims "Europe is in deep trouble."

These days we all talk about the rise of Asia and the challenge to America, but it may well turn out that the most consequential trend of the next decade will be the economic decline of Europe.

It's often noted that the European Union has a combined gross domestic product that is approximately the same as that of the United States. But the E.U. has 170 million more people. Its per capita GDP is 25 percent lower than that of the United States, and, most important, that gap has been widening for 15 years. If present trends continue, the chief economist at the OECD argues, in 20 years the average U.S. citizen will be twice as rich as the average Frenchman or German.

Sounds horrible, right? But, Zakaria conveniently omits a serious bit of information. Look below the fold.

I specifically refer to this by "emmasnacker," talking all sorts of conspiracy theory stupidity about HAARP, the High Altitude Atmospheric Research Program. Although apparently having quaffed deeply from the short-wave nectar of conspiracy high priest Art Bell, "emmasnacker" accepts (reluctantly?) the comment of one respondent poster to his/her diary that there's nothing sinister about HAARP.

Unfortunately, s/he then goes on into further nutbarrery in a post of her own to the selfsame diary, talking about the nonexistent "chemtrails."

Well, there's only one suitable response.

Leonard Pitts column of today rightly salutes Coretta Scott King for preserving and developing her late husband's legacy.

But, he also spares no bones in pointing out her feet of clay in simultaneously tarnishing his legacy. How? By serving Mammon as well as civil rights, Pitts says.

It's the money-grubbing of the King family, including and beginning with Coretta herself, including personal experience details.

Pitts' comments on the flip.

So, now it's semi-officially not OK, in BushCo's eyes, to satirize religious beliefs.

BushCo. says that European newspapers need to practice self-censorship.

"These cartoons are indeed offensive to the belief of Muslims," State Department spokesman Kurtis Cooper said in answer to a question. "We all fully recognize and respect freedom of the press and expression but it must be coupled with press responsibility. Inciting religious or ethnic hatreds in this manner is not acceptable."

Since BushCo has already indicated it expects political self censorship from American newspapers, this should be no surprise.

I originally posted this as a comment to rasbobbo's diary on the upcoming 250th anniversary of Mozart's birth, but decided to expand it here.

I own nearly 500 classical CDs and can count my Mozart CDs on the fingers of my two hands. He doesn't make the Top 10 of my classical composer playlist. And who is that Top 10? ...

Wisconsin's David Obey and Massachusetts' Barney Frank, both Democrats, said Jan. 25 they will introduce legislation to establish public financing of Congressional campaigns, similar to our current publicly financed presidential election system.

"The problem with politics is more fundamental than meals or trips with lobbyists," Obey said in a statement.

Please, please, please, both now and when Obey and Frank introduce the appropriate legislation, call your Congressperson and urge him or her to support public campaign financing. And talk this up in any way you can.

No, it won't be a cure-all; our current presidential system shows that.

But, for those old enough to remember, would you want to go back to Nixon's 1972 Presidential campaign -- just the finance issues, leaving out Watergate?

As for me, if Obey and Frank actually succeed, I would elect them president, king and czar.

Two weeks ago, in the wake of Jack Abramoff's plea agreement, House and Senate Democrats announced they would have a package of lobbying reforms to present to the public soon.

But, when it comes to actually having that package ready to go, the GOP is first to the pole.

If you can't be better organized than that on a crucial campaign issue, how can you expect to reverse the tide?

Note: This is not a comment on the content of the Repubican package; it's not perfect, certainly, but it's not horrible either.

UPDATE: Thanks for the comments, especially the supportive ones by "swimming." "Bimini" has commented on "negative" posts by me before, especially when I mention voting Green.

First, as noted, I didn't say the GOP plan was perfect on the surface. I didn't even mention enforceability loopholes.

BUT, BUT, BUT, this boils down to what was a HUGE buzz topic here a year ago -- Lakoff's "framing" issue.

And, no way around it: Democratic leadership, with inexcusable tardiness, FLUNKED the framing on an issue with huge electoral importance. Can they rebound? Perhaps. But now it's an uphill slog.

(From my newspaper column for this week)

The spirit of Christmas, like the celebration of any other holiday, is always an inside job.

That's why I find this recent political spin from Bill O'Reilly and the "we distort, you deride" folks at Fox News, and their fellow travelers, to be laughable until I look past that to the hypocritical. (The Fox network had a "holiday" party, not a "Christmas" party; apparently that didn't stop O'Reilly from going.)

But let's take just a bit of a further look at some of the claims by O'Reilly and his fellow travelers, above all their attack-dog comments about stores that say "Happy Holidays" and not "Merry Christmas."

Over at TPM, Sen. Jay Rockefeller goes Viagra-challenged on whether Bush was actually doing anything wrong, by saying "I am neither a technician or an attorney."

And at Political Animal, Kevin Drum gets the same disorder when he says:

Q: Is the NSA program a violation of the Fourth Amendment?

A: That's unclear. The Supreme Court has previously ruled that warrants are required in cases involving purely domestic surveillance, but has punted on the question of whether the same rules apply to domestic surveillance for the purpose of gathering foreign intelligence. A couple of cases during the 60s and 70s suggest that warrantless wiretaps are constitutional if their "primary purpose" is collection of foreign intelligence, but there have been no definitive rulings on this.

But, let's actually look at the Fourth Amendment, Sen. Rockefeller, and Kevin.