MAX BLUMENTHAL

Hear Me
I will be on Democracy Now! tomorrow morning discussing the Abramoff/Christian right connection. And if there's anybody out there in Music City, I'll be on Radio Free Nashville at 7:30 CT to talk about the ongoing immigrant rights mobilizations.

Walkout!

On Monday, thousands of Latino high school students walked out of their classrooms en masse and took to the streets of cities from Detroit to Dallas to Los Angeles to protest the draconian, anti-immigrant "Sensenbrenner bill" (aka. HR 4437). Walkouts in Los Angeles spread east into the Inland Empire and south to Santa Ana, where police provoked a brief scuffle by wading into the protest with full riot gear and batons drawn. 25,000 students from the Los Angeles Unified School District are estimated to have participated in the otherwise peaceful demonstrations.

As was the case during Sunday's mass mobilization, the walkouts' most dramatic moment arrived at the city's main artery: the 101 freeway. There, according to an eyewitness I spoke to last night, 200 jubilant, flag-waving students paraded down the center lane while a cavalcade of LAPD motorcycle cops followed closely behind, ensuring that the backed-up traffic didn't plow them over (sorry, no pictures for now). While the walkouts were planned well in advance, the idea of taking to the freeway seemed to have been devised organically and disseminated through word-of-mouth, text messages and Myspace.

Many people I talked with around the city yesterday questioned whether Edward James Olmos' newly released documentary about mass Chicano student protests against discriminatory educational policies in 1968 East L.A. high schools, "Walkout," influenced yesterday's events. In an interview yesterday with Hoy, an L.A.-based Spanish language paper, Olmos refuted this idea by claiming the conditions that precipitated the protests against HR 4437 were drastically different than those that animated Chicano life in 1968. However, a student demonstrator from Manual Arts told Hoy, "Before I saw the movie, I didn't think we could do something like that. I didn't understand how you could affect change. But after I saw it, I felt in my heart that I could do something."

The tactics employed by student demonstrators also bore striking resonances of those conceived by the Situationist International, which stressed the liberation of ordinary life (school) by creating improvised, participatory situations (parading down the middle of the freeway during rush hour). Though I doubt Guy Debord's manifestos were in the front of any of the demonstrators' minds yesterday, the walkouts neatly established an open-ended, dramatic "situation" that captivated the media and sustained the momentum of the weekend demos.

As Monday drew to a close, the tone of many leaders of L.A.'s Latino community shifted from mobilization to discretion. A popular Spanish-language morning radio host instrumental in promoting the weekend mobilizations, El Piolin por la Manana, appeared during commercial breaks on Univision to thank viewers for their participation in the demos. The message was subtle but clear: the mobilizations were a smashing success, but any further activity would be gratuitious and counter-productive. Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa joined in by expressing gratitude to the demonstrators while admonishing students to return to school on Tuesday.

Though the mobilizations are over, their effect will be felt for generations. Under mounting pressure, the Senate Judiciary Committe overwhelmingly approved a bill providing a path to citizenship for 11 million undocumented immigrants -- a humiliating blow to Majority Leader Bill Frist and the reactionary forces pulling his strings. A new movement has been galvanized which will not only transform the face of American politics, it will challenge the country to, as one dreamer once put it, rise up and live out the true meaning of its creed.

Sensenbrenner Awakens a Sleeping Giant






I have just returned from the largest, most energized demonstration I have ever witnessed in my life. Over 500,000 people filled the streets of downtown Los Angeles to march against HR 4437, a bill authored by Republican Rep. James Sensenbrenner (heir to the Kotex fortune) which would turn 11 million undocumented immigrants into felons, punish anyone guilty of providing them assistance, and construct an iron wall between the US and Mexico.

The rally reached a crescendo as thousands of demonstrators lined the walls and bridges above the 101 freeway waving flags and cheering while an endless parade of cars and trucks blasted their horns in support. It was the sound of a sleeping giant awakening.

In passing HR 4437 and whatever draconian and utterly counter-productive bill emerges from the Senate, the congressional Republicans have become their party's worst enemy. They have cast their white, Southern base in conflict with the Latino constituency the RNC and the Bush White House realize they must win over if they are ever to achieve a so-called "Republican majority."

A leading researcher of the neo-Confederate movement, Ed Sebesta, submitted an illuminating analysis of the GOP's immigration quandary to me by email yesterday. Here are some excerpts:

In regards to Hispanics and the GOP I think the big development is that Hispanics are immigrating in large numbers now into the Southeast, or I should say the former Confederate states, excepting Texas and Southern Florida. It isn't something largely confined to the Southwest and major urban centers outside the South. This is where the base of the Republican party is. There has developed a reaction against this immigration in these areas. The Neo-Confederate movement and a lot of other movements have taken up this issue...

These reactionary elements and others see immigration as an issue to take control of conservatism in the South, if not the nation...

Suddenly the Republican party is going to have to try to get votes from two groups that will be increasingly at odds with each other. Also, what happens to Hispanics in Alabama will get back to Hispanics in California.

Hispanic immigrants didn't grow up as minorities and don't have the habits of deference or accomodations to prejudice. They may be poor or disadvantaged materially, but they don't have internalized anti-Hispanic values.

They will have no inclination to accommodate themselves to a subordinated role, and no prior history of accomodation to subordination. They will challenge anti-Hispanic tactics and efforts in the Southeast, not give in to them. They will not have religious leaders saying that some anti-Hispanic measure is okay.

Deprived of any substantive issues ahead of this year's mid-term congressional elections, the Republicans have reached into their deck and drawn the race-card. Introducing a stream of anti-immigrant legislation specifically directed against brown-skinned workers is the GOP's post-Bush, post-9/11 strategy.

And as they advance their short-term political goals, the congressional GOP institutionalizes a culture of hypocrisy which punishes immigrants publicly while paying them privately. To quote a sign that hung today on an overpass above the 101 freeway, "We built your houses, we growed [sic] your food, and now you call us criminals?"

The Fall and Fall of Ralph Reed
The conservative polling firm Strategic Vision has just released an amazing poll on attitudes of likely voters in Georgia. Their sample group was clearly right-wing: 56% approve of Bush, the same percentage approve of his handling of the war, and 77% are confident there will be a terrorist attack inside the US in the next six months. (Maybe some folks are planning to bomb an abortion clinic and the word got around).

Given the rightward slant of Strategic Vision's respondents, it is fair to declare that Ralph Reed's campaign for Lieutenant Governor is, to paraphrase Dick Cheney, in its last throes. His unfavorablity rating is 44% compared to a favorability rating of 36%. He may not even make it out of the primary, although he still leads his opponent, Casey Cagle, by the poll's margin of error. If Cagle does win the primary, he had better send a fat box of Godivas over to Defcon.

Jonathan Hutson has much more at Talk2Action.

Abortion, the video game. I hear women in the Islamic Republic of South Dakota will be required by law to notify their parents and/or husbands before playing it.

Yes, War for Oil!
This is pretty sad. In his latest defense of the occupation of Iraq, Gary Bauer, who's never met a war he didn't like (except one he or his children might have to fight in), is reduced to claiming that a US withdrawal would cause gas prices to rise. Bauer was one of the original signers of PNAC, and now he seems to be conceding the invasion of Iraq was a war for oil after all. If all those "Michael Moore conspiracies" (a term used by the Washington Post's new intelllectually abstinent right-wing blogger Ben Domenech in his first post) were ever paranoid delusions, Bauer's boys have turned them into self-fulfilling prophecies.

From: "Gary L. Bauer" Add to Address BookAdd to Address Book Add Mobile Alert
To: xamxam1@yahoo.com
Subject: End of Day -- 3/20/06
Date: 20 Mar 2006 16:39:51 -0500

To: Friends and Supporters

From: Gary L. Bauer, Chairman
Campaign for Working Families

Date: Monday, March 20, 2006



Three Years

This past weekend marked the three-year anniversary of the beginning of
the
Iraq war. The Bush Administration marked the occasion by making a
strong
defense of our involvement and the need to stay the course. The
president,
speaking on the South Lawn of the White House, said, “A victory in Iraq
will make this county more secure and will help lay the foundation of
peace
for generations to come.” Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld wrote a guest
editorial in the Washington Post saying this: “Turning our backs on
postwar Iraq today would be the modern equivalent of handing postwar
Germany back to the Nazis.”

In contrast, virtually every Democrat over the weekend was defeatist,
critical and claimed the situation in Iraq is worse each year than the
year
before. The Democratic National Committee said we were following a
“failed
strategy.” Congressman John Murtha (D-PA) rejected reports of progress
and
compared Iraq to Vietnam.

I could fill the entire report with more examples of rhetorical
defeatism.
Not one Democrat politician that I monitored over the weekend had a
word or
suggestion to say about how to win the war -- everyone assumed we’re
going
to fail. And I suspect most of them hoped that our failure would help
guarantee their political success in the next election.

Does this chorus of nay-sayers have any idea what the consequences
would be
of a U.S. pullout before we have finished the job? The odds are high
that,
without coalition forces, Iraq would fall under the control of “al
Qaeda in
Iraq” led by Zarqawi. Syria and Iran would see once again that the
American people lack the resolve to see the war through to a successful
conclusion. Countries in the Middle East cooperating with us would be
at
great risk. Israel would face a greater security threat; and if you
don’t
like paying $2.50 a gallon for gas, get prepared for $5.00 a gallon. A
Middle East with the U.S. in retreat and our enemies on the attack
would be
a Middle East where energy supplies would be much more precarious.

Bush Is Finally Asked About Armageddon
But the question was phrased too specifically, thus allowing Bush a way out. The questioner should have simply asked, "Do you believe in Armageddon or End Times Theology? Yes or No?"

QUESTION: Thank you for coming to Cleveland, Mr. President, and to the City Club.

My question is that author and former Nixon administration official Kevin Phillips in his latest book, "American Theocracy," discusses what has been called radical Christianity and its growing involvement into government and politics. He makes the point that members of your administration have reached out to prophetic Christians who see the war in Iraq and the rise of terrorism as signs of the Apocalypse.

QUESTION: Do you believe this, that the war in Iraq and the rise of terrorism are signs of the Apocalypse?

And if not, why not?

BUSH: Hmmm.

(LAUGHTER)

The answer is I haven't really thought of it that way.

(LAUGHTER)

Here's how I think of it.

First, I've heard of that, by the way.

I guess I'm more of a practical fellow. I vowed, after September the 11th, that I would do everything I could to protect the American people. And my attitude, of course, was affected by the attacks.

I knew we were at war. I knew that the enemy obviously had to be sophisticated and lethal to fly hijacked airplanes into facilities that would be killing thousands of people, innocent people, doing nothing, just sitting there, going to work.

I also knew this about this war on terror: that the farther we got away from September the 11th, the more likely it is people would seek comfort and not think about this global war on terror as a global war of terror.

And that's good, by the way. It's hard to take a risk if you're a small-business owner, for example, if you're worried that the next attack is going to come tomorrow. I understand that.

But I also understand my most important job, the most important job of any president today, and I predict, down the road, is to protect America.

And so I told the American people that we would find the terrorists and bring them to justice and that we needed to defeat them overseas so we didn't have to face them here at home.

I also understood that the war on terror requires some clear doctrine. And one of the doctrines that I laid out was, if you harbor a terrorist, you're equally as guilty as the terrorist.

And the first time that doctrine was really challenged was in Afghanistan. I guess the Taliban didn't believe us -- or me. And so we acted. Twenty-five million people are now free, and Afghanistan is no longer a safe haven for the terrorists.

And the other doctrine that's really important, and it's a change of attitude -- it's going require a change in attitude for a while -- is that when you see a threat, you've got to deal with it before it hurts you.

Foreign policy used to be dictated by the fact we had two ocean protecting us. If we saw a threat, we could deal with it if you needed to you think, or not, but we'd be safe.

My most important job is to protect you, is to protect the American people. Therefore, when we see threats, given the lesson of September the 11th, we've got to deal with them.

That does not mean militarily, necessarily. Obviously, the first option for a president has to be the full use of diplomacy.

That's what you're watching in Iran right now. I see a threat in Iran.

I'm, kind of, getting off subject here, but not because I don't want to answer your question. But I guess that's what happens in Washington, we get a little long-winded.

(LAUGHTER)

But now that I'm on Iran, the threat from Iran, of course...

(LAUGHTER)

(APPLAUSE)

The threat from Iran is, of course, their stated objective to destroy our strong ally Israel.

That's a threat. A serious threat. It's a threat to world peace. It's a threat in essence to a strong alliance.

I made it clear, and I'll make it clear again, that we will use military might to protect our ally Israel.

(APPLAUSE)

And at any rate, our objective is to solve this issue diplomatically.

And so our message must be a united message; a message from not only the United States, but also Great Britain and France and Germany, as well as Russia, hopefully, and China -- in order to say loud and clear to the Iranians, "This is unacceptable behavior; your desire to having a nuclear weapon is unacceptable."

So to answer your question, I take a practical view of doing the job you want me to do, which is how do we defeat an enemy that still wants to hurt us and how do we deal with threats before they fully materialize? What do we do to protect us from harm? That's my job.

And that job came home on September the 11th for me, loud and clear. And I think about my job of protecting you every day. Every single day of the presidency I am concerned about the safety of the American people.

So is this where the Dobson-bots came from?

In the 1960s Jack Block and his wife and fellow professor Jeanne Block (now deceased) began tracking more than 100 nursery school kids as part of a general study of personality. The kids' personalities were rated at the time by teachers and assistants who had known them for months. There's no reason to think political bias skewed the ratings — the investigators were not looking at political orientation back then. Even if they had been, it's unlikely that 3- and 4-year-olds would have had much idea about their political leanings.

A few decades later, Block followed up with more surveys, looking again at personality, and this time at politics, too. The whiny kids tended to grow up conservative, and turned into rigid young adults who hewed closely to traditional gender roles and were uncomfortable with ambiguity.

Obviously, accepting a study like this as a blanket explanation for individual development of conservative ideology is simplistic, but it supports a wealth of research dating back to the landmark Authoritarian Personality, which also concluded that individuals with rigid political worldviews generally demonstrated less self-sufficiency as children. Assessing conservative psychology on a group level is a more complicated task. The Block study only accounted for the poltical development of people in Berkeley, a relatively liberal place. But what about white Protestants in the South? Couldn't homogeneity and cultural pressure explain their conservatism at least as well as any childhood factor?

I'll be on LA's Ian Masters' Background Briefing today (Sunday at 11 AM) discussing the Christian right and my latest article on the white nationalist-Republican nexus, which will appear in the Nation early this week. It should be a good show -- I will follow Kevin Phillips, who just dropped his latest book, American Theocracy: The Peril and Politics of Radical Religion, Oil and Borrowed Money in the 21st century. If you're not in L.A., you can listen to the streaming version.

The following Dobson-bot is good but not great. The best bot messages I flagged are buried so deep in my email I can't even find them anymore. And besides, me and my fellow Soros (read: Jew) funded operatives are too busy trying to destroy America to even care.

This message is not flagged. [ Flag Message - Mark as Unread ]
Subject: Your lies about St. Jim Dobson
To: "Max Blumenthal"
From: "Albert Tremaine" Add to Address BookAdd to Address Book Add Mobile Alert
Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2006 21:51:28 -0500 (EST)

Albert Tremaine
1514 Jay Street
Carpinteria, CA 93013-1523


March 17, 2006

Max Blumenthal



Max Blumenthal:

Lies, lies, lies. Is that all you know.

If you had 1/1 millionth of the integrity that he has you would be
blessed.

His focus is on helping families. Why are you so determined to destroy
America?

Sincerely,


Albert Tremaine

Spanky vs. Hitler
In the grand tradition of Alan Keyes, Mike Ditka and the Ryans, the ILGOP is fielding some amazing candidates this year:

Local Republicans are facing what many consider an embarrassing choice between two perennial candidates in the race for the Republican nomination for Congress in the 3rd Congressional district, which includes a portion of Forest Park south of the Eisenhower expressway.

The two candidates are Art Jones, a Chicago insurance broker with past ties white supremacist organizations and Ray Wardingley, who used to perform as Spanky the Clown.

A Right-WIng Francophile in Indiana
At least one right-winger wants more French influence in America. Republican congressional candidate Tony Zirkle of Indiana is proposing bring the guillotine stateside (and reinstituting more traditional American institutions like the lynch mob):

"If I am elected to Congress, I will introduce a declaration of war against human traffickers, porn-pimps and child rapists," Zirkle said in a campaign release. "We must put fear back into the criminals who are preying on our children."

The first stage of the battle, as proposed by Zirkle, calls for suspension of the constitutional protections of property rights for "porn-pimps."

"Every adultery (sic) book store will be immediately seized and the property will be forfeited to the taxpayers without any process of law other than a hearing within 10 days of seizure to give the porn-pimps the opportunity (to) challenge the sufficiency of prostitution evidence."

Stage 2, Zirkle said, would involve "actual arrests" for those who did not learn from Stage 1. Stage 3, if necessary, calls for "super speedy public trials with severe punishment that is swiftly carried out after a rapid appeal."

Which leads to Stage 4. "If this stage is necessary, then I am willing to debate the idea of returning the guillotine and lynch mob for those who prey on children under the age of 12; however, no capital punishment will be extended without at least four witnesses."

The Dobson-bots
Yolanda is one of my favorite Dobson-bots so far:

Subject: Christian Family
To: "Max Blumenthal"
From: "Yolanda Glatfelter" Add to Address BookAdd to Address Book Add Mobile Alert
Date: Sat, 11 Mar 2006 18:38:25 -0500 (EST)

Yolanda Glatfelter
5858 Morgan Pl. #53
Stockton, CA 95219-4628


March 11, 2006

Max Blumenthal



Max Blumenthal:

Sometimes Iam thinking if these Aclu or these liberal Democrats still
beleive in God.Pres. Bush won the re-election bec. of the conservatives
I
wished they should opened up their eyes & their mind that there are
signs
that these world is about to end.We are experiencing some of the signs
,like the Tsunami,Katrina,Earthquake,Hurricane & Tornado big flood I
beleive that there'll be the 2nd. coming of God.We all should be
prepare &
repent for all our sins.I always beleive that the Family is the soul
founda- tion of our society & the marriage is only between man & woman
&
that is even indicated in the bible

Sincerely,


Yolanda Glatfelter

It's Hard Out Here For A Pimp
Now that moral-mongering former White House domestic policy advisor Claude Allen has been charged with felony retail fraud, his old friends and allies are silent. It wasn't long ago that they were heaping their praise on him and defending him from liberals' "elitist and anti-democratic manifesto for America."

Here's Dobson smooching with Allen on his show in August:

DOBSON: I just said how much I love and appreciate you, and it comes directly from my heart.

ALLEN: It is such a privilege to be on your program. You too have been just dear to me and my family, and so we're very grateful for that. And thank you for your leadership on so many issues that are important to the family and our nation.

C. Boyden Gray was one of Allen's staunchest defenders during his failed bid for confirmation to a federal court. Where's his liberal conspiracy now?

Extremist views? Educating his children and promoting sexual responsibility? One might think these are the marks of an excellent judicial selection — yet these are the bases for strident liberal opposition to Claude Allen's nomination. Why would NOW, the Alliance, or any of their ideological ilk take such a stand? The answer is an instructive window into their elitist and anti-democratic manifesto for America.

And Human Events was sorely disappointed when Allen resigned "to spend more time with his family:"

We’ll probably never know the real reason [why Allen resigned], but that’s what makes speculation so fun. In any case, Allen will be missed. He won widespread praise when he was given the job. And while some of he initiatives that came up under his watch (Social Security being the biggest) didn’t go his way, at least he was rooted in conservative thought.

Who Really Paid For Focus' Ads?
James Dobson claims Focus on the Family accepted no money from Jack Abramoff's clients to produce ads against their competitors. Of course they didn't -- the money went to radio stations to provide airtime for the ads. Dobson and his henchmen will never concede that now. But in the past, despite Dobson's incredulous denials, Focus on the Family has admitted it produced ads paid for by Abramoff's clients (link is no longer live, so I Nexised this):

Copyright 2005 The Denver Post
All Rights Reserved
The Denver Post

June 23, 2005 Thursday
FINAL EDITION

SECTION: A SECTION; Pg. A-01

LENGTH: 719 words

HEADLINE: Tribe, Focus point fingers at lobbyist

BYLINE: Mike Soraghan Denver Post Staff Writer

BODY:


Washington - Christian conservative activist Ralph Reed billed a casino-operating Indian tribe for a 1999 anti-lottery radio advertising campaign by Focus on the Family founder James Dobson, documents show.

The documents were released Wednesday at a hearing of the Senate Indian Affairs Committee on alleged wrongdoing by tribal-casino lobbyist Jack Abramoff.

Focus on the Family officials said it was common at the time for Dobson to record radio ads for anti-gambling campaigns. Focus paid to produce the spots, then handed them to anti-gambling groups who paid to air them.

But if Focus had known that the airtime for the 1999 campaign was paid for by a casino tribe, it wouldn't have provided the spot, said Ron Reno, who headed up Focus' anti-gambling efforts at the time.

"It has been our standard procedure to not cooperate with gambling interests who are simply trying to protect their turf," said Reno, now a special assistant to Dobson.

Documents and testimony at Wednesday's hearing indicated that Abramoff and associate Michael Scanlon cheated tribes out of millions of dollars, using a scheme they called "gimme five" to funnel money to themselves and charities they controlled.

Abramoff and Scanlon allegedly convinced tribal leaders that they were spending vast sums on extensive lobbying efforts on behalf of the tribes and their gambling interests, when in fact their work was far more modest, documents suggested. Much of the tribal money reportedly went into Abramoff's own bank account.

The committee's chairman, Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., urged the Department of Justice to investigate Abramoff's tribal billings, saying Abramoff may have committed mail and wire fraud.

"Today's hearing is about more than contempt, even more than greed," McCain said. "It is simply and sadly a tale of betrayal."

Many of the documents also detail Abramoff's extensive work with Reed, former executive director of the Christian Coalition and now a candidate for lieutenant governor in Georgia.

In the late 1990s, Reed formed a political consulting group that helped organize anti-gambling campaigns in the South. Documents show that Abramoff sent money from his client, the Choctaw Tribe of Mississippi, to help with the campaigns.

Starting in 1995, the Choctaws paid Abramoff $7 million, in part to help quash competition for the casinos at their Pearl River Resort. Though the money went to protect their gambling interests, tribal officials said at Wednesday's hearing that the money came from a noncasino account.

At one point in 2002, Abramoff and Scanlon questioned what Reed was doing to earn his sizable fees. "He's a bad version of us!" Abramoff quipped to Scanlon in an e-mail. "No more money for him!"

In 1999, Reed was helping to defeat a state lottery proposal in neighboring Alabama. On April 21, 1999, documents show, he sent an e-mail to Abramoff stating he'd be forwarding an invoice that night for $250,000 to $300,000. The money, he wrote, would cover phone banks, a week-long TV advertising campaign "and a saturation statewide radio buy with a new ad by Jim Dobson that he will record tomorrow. ...

"We are opening the bomb bays and holding nothing back," Reed wrote. "If victory is possible, we will achieve it."

Abramoff responded that he was checking with his contact at the Choctaw Tribe and was "pushing her to get the check out the door."

When Reed responded that he was starting up the campaign, Abramoff replied, "Yeaaaa Baaabbyy!!!"

Other documents released at the hearing show Abramoff billed the Choctaws for two lunches with former Colorado political operative Italia Federici in 2001.

Federici is a former campaign aide to Interior Secretary Gale Norton who runs an environmental group. Federici formerly worked on Norton's failed campaign for one of Colorado's U.S. Senate seats.

After Norton took over at Interior, she became a connection between Abramoff and Interior officials who oversee Indian casinos. Federici declined comment Wednesday.

An Abramoff spokesman defended the lobbyist, who was not at Wednesday's hearing.

"Any fair reading of Mr. Abramoff's career would show that his clients benefitted immensely from the hard work he and his team did on their behalf," spokesman Andrew Blum said in a statement.

Staff writer Mike Soraghan can be reached at 202-662-8730 or msoraghan@denverpost.com.

LOAD-DATE: June 23, 2005

Dobson still can't explain why Ralph Reed boasts to Abramoff about using him for their scheme. (Also, why did Gail Norton resign yesterday? Abramoff, anyone?)

How the Right Handles Factual Criticism #16

This is from one of a few thousand emails I've been receiving since yesterday from James Dobson's remote controlled army of Christ-bots:

Subject: I'll donate money.
To: "Max Blumenthal"
From: Send an Instant Message "Robert Ragle" Add to Address BookAdd to Address Book Add Mobile Alert
Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2006 11:55:32 -0500 (EST)
Robert Ragle
1553 Deerwoods
Milford, OH 45150-2665

March 10, 2006

Max Blumenthal

Max Blumenthal:

What a bunch of pathetic low lifes you are! Your allegations are
hilarious at best and outright slander that should be dealt with.
Please,
come to Ohio and introduce yourself to me and I'll deal with you
myself.
You "people" and I use that term loosely, should be sued, arrested, and
shipped out of the country. I'll be glad to donate money for that!
Seriously, get a life and get for real. I'd love to hear from you.

Sincerely,


Robert Ragle
5135180747

To be fair, not all of Dobson's bots want to rebuild Dachau for the secular humanists. This email is more typical of the missives I've received:

Subject: James Dobson not a liar
To: "Max Blumenthal"
From: "Scott Johnson" Add to Address BookAdd to Address Book Add Mobile Alert
Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2006 12:19:04 -0500 (EST)

Scott Johnson
148 Rupert Rd
Raleigh, NC 27603-3628


March 10, 2006

Max Blumenthal



Max Blumenthal:

I could appreciate what you are saying, as a pastor I am appalled at
what
"religious" people do. However, I do not believe your accusations and
would ask that unless you have compelling, complete evidence that you
take
back your accusation. He has worked his whole life for family, granted
family as it relates to traditional family. I do not support gay
marriage
but I do not attack gay people. You may not support christainity but do
not attack the christian. I appall abortion but I love the woman in
Jesus
and pray for her healing. Please attack no more.

Sincerely,


Scott Johnson

According to Mike Tidmus, the mainstream press is finally waking up to the Abramoff-Dobson-Reed-Sheldon casino connection.

The Beginner's Guide to the Dobson-Abramoff Casino Connection
If James Dobson had spent a little more of his time learning biblical strictures against usury and gambling, and a little less time with his hand in Ralph Reed's pocket, he wouldn't be in so much trouble. Here are the emails that spell out Dobson's involvement in Jack Abramoff's schemes, courtesy of Marvin Olasky's World Magazine:

# March 20, 2001 – Jack Abramoff (JA) and Ralph Reed (RR) are manipulating evangelicals for the benefit of their casino clients, and Mr. Reed wants his pay: JA writes to an associate that RR “is out of money. He has asked us to get another $250K asap.” Here come the checks: “Pay to the order of Century Strategies [RR’s company] Two Hundred Thousand Dollars…. Pay to the order of Century Strategies One Hundred Ninety-Eight Thousand Dollars.”
# April 6, 2001 – RR brags to JA how he is pulling strings on a gambling bill in Texas “One of our operatives attends the same church” as a key legislator, so the operative convinced his pastor to visit the legislator “and urge him to vote against the casino bill. This happened just hours before the [committee] met to consider the casino bill!” Here come the checks: April 17, “Pay to the order of Century Strategies One Hundred Thousand Dollars.” April 30, “Pay to the order of Century Strategies Three Hundred Ninety-Eight Thousand Dollars.” May 2, “Pay to the order of Century Strategies One Hundred Thousand Dollars.” May 8, “Pay to the order of Century Strategies Seven Hundred Fifty Thousand Dollars.”
# At some point JA decides he’s not getting his money’s worth for all those checks. On Oct. 8, 2001, he writes to associate Michael Scanlon (MS), “Call Ralph and get him moving.” Two days later RR writes to JA that he’s working hard, and “can we please get the invoice paid?” On Nov. 8, RR tells JA, “We are in overdrive and all pistons are firing.” On Nov. 12 he writes, “We have over 50 pastors mobilized, with a total membership in those churches of over 40,000”
# JA is still not satisfied that he’s getting what he paid for. On Dec. 4 JA writes to MS, “Ralph is toast from now on, or we’ll only give him a scrap. Pathetic.” RR has to show that he’s worth millions of dollars, so he apparently makes the case to JA that he can manipulate James Dobson, and one result is this excited “Ralph and Dobson” email from JA to MS on Feb. 6, 2002: “He got to Dobson who is going to mail Louisiana and get on the radio!” RR follows that claim with a request on Feb. 11 for more money: “can we now get an ‘attaboy’ budget…?
# RR wants more, and on Feb. 14 JA blows off some steam in a note to MS: “I know you (we!) hate him [Reed], but it does give us good cover and patter… give him some chump change.” RR, again having to prove that he’s worth all that money, receives a direct question from JA on Feb. 19: “Can we get Dobson on the air?” RR responds that same day in one email, “yes. We’re negotiating that now,” and in another, “called Dobson this a.m.” On Feb. 20 JA writes to MS that maybe they haven’t wasted money on RR: “He may finally have scored for us! Dobson goes up on the radio on this next week.

Here is some additional reporting on the Dobson-Abramoff connection from the Washington Post's award-winning reporter, Susan Schmidt:

Meanwhile, Abramoff opened a second front to bring outside pressure on Interior against the Jenas.

He looked to Reed, the former Christian Coalition leader who operated several consulting companies. Reed has acknowledged receiving as much as $4 million from Abramoff and his associate, Scanlon, to organize grass-roots anti-gambling campaigns in Louisiana and Texas. The money came from casino-rich Indian tribes, including the Coushattas, but Reed said that although he knew of Abramoff's connection to the tribes, he did not know until media accounts surfaced last summer that his fees came from gambling proceeds.

Reed then turned to Dobson to marshal his vast network of evangelicals, Abramoff's e-mails show.

Abramoff wrote to Scanlon in a Feb. 20, 2002, e-mail that Dobson would make radio ads against gambling. Reed "may finally have scored for us! Dobson goes up on the radio on this next week!" He suggested giving Reed $60,000 for the ads to run in Louisiana and Texas. "We'll then play it in the WH [White House] and Interior," he told Scanlon.

The prospect that Dobson would become involved had an immediate impact at Interior. His regular radio show had a huge audience, and his Colorado-based Focus on the Family actively campaigned against gambling as a social evil.

One of Dobson's top aides, Tom Minnery, wrote to Norton saying Louisiana "already has an alarming number of gaming establishments" -- a letter he copied to White House Chief of Staff Andrew H. Card Jr. The Interior Department's White House liaison, Doug Domenech, sounded the alarm.

"Doug came to me and said, 'Dobson's going to shut down our phone system. He's going to go on the air and tell everyone who listens to Focus on the Family to call Interior to oppose the Jena compact,' " said a former senior Interior official, who spoke on the condition that he not be identified.

Federici, of CREA, stoked the nervousness at Interior. "From what I have been told," she wrote Norton spokesman Eric Ruff in a Feb. 21 memo, Reed "has been bending the ear of Karl Rove and possibly even the President about land-in-trust and gaming issues. I am also hearing that Ralph has involved James Dobson and Phyllis Schlafly with this. Supposedly Dobson is planning to run ads and they mention Gale by name."

Federici said she had also heard that conservatives in the House "have been asked to sign a letter to Gale and the President slamming DOI [Department of Interior]."

Federici declined to comment on why she had any involvement with the tribes or the gambling issue. Along with her memo to Ruff, she enclosed without explanation copies of e-mails on the issue that Reed had sent to Abramoff.

There is no evidence that Dobson's group knew of Abramoff's connection to Reed. But Dobson's involvement was discussed at a senior Interior staff meeting and "had its intended effect, which was to get everyone worried," the former senior official said. "Norton didn't want a spectacle involving the department, especially involving gambling."

Abramoff Splits the Christian Right
"He [Reed] got to Dobson who is going to mail Louisiana and get on the radio!"
--email from Jack Abramoff to Michael Scanlon, 2/6/02

As the Jack Abramoff scandal unfolds, it is becoming increasingly clear how extensively he collaborated with the Christian right to advance his casino schemes. Ralph Reed was paid no less than $4 million by Abramoff and his Indian casino clients to serve as a liasion to the Christian right. Reed managed to lasso Focus on the Family President James Dobson into a series of campaigns to stamp out competition to Abramoff's clients. Though Senate subpeonaed emails seem to confirm that Dobson was manipulated by Reed and Abramoff, he and his employees have repeatedly claimed that his activism against rivals to Abramoff's clients was a complete coincidence.

While I wrote about this for the Nation and Media Matters, there has been very little mainstream press interest on Dobson's role in Abramoff's schemes. So far, some of the best -- and most adversarial -- reporting on the Abramoff/Reed/Dobson saga is coming from the Christian media, namely from Marvin Olasky's World Magazine. As the former welfare guru to Gov. George W. Bush, Olasky coined the phrase, "compassionate conservatism." When Bush moved into the White House, he became the intellectual author of the Faith Based Initiative. Olasky's World Magazine is one of the largest evangelical publications in the country.

On February 4, World published a critical expose of Dobson's role in a 2002 Abramoff campaign to stop expansion of competition to his client, the Coushattas. A World reporter grilled Focus on the Family's Tom Minnery about Dobson's involvement. Minnery responded incredulously that Abramoff was "trying to take credit for" what Focus was supposedly already doing in Louisiana. He refused to criticize Reed, even though Reed clearly manipulated Dobson.

Two weeks later, Minnery and Dobson took to the airwaves in an attempt to defuse the conflict. Minnery claimed once again that "as it happens, we, Focus on the Family, we're fighting this new Indian casino in Louisiana at the very same time. Not because Ralph Reed asked us. Not because Jack Abramoff asked us." And he once again refused to criticize Reed. In fact, Minnery defended Reed, calling him "A wounded brother," who "regretted what he did, that he wouldn't do it again, and realizes that it was wrong." Minnery went on to attack Olasky's World:

"They [World] have a reporter who wanted me to dump on ralph reed because of Jack Abramoff. I wouldn't do it. So in the story they wrote, the made it seem like I was covering up for Ralph. they terribly misused the interview I gave them, and in the letter I wrote them, I tried to set the record straight. They refused to print it. So maybe I'm overreacting. But it is tough when your friends criticize you for something that shouldn't be."

Maybe Minnery was overreacting. Or maybe he was covering up for his old buddy Reed. In a follow-up piece for World, Olasky presented several Senate-subpeonaed emails between Abramoff and Reed showing Focus on the Family's involvement in their schemes. Olasky then suggested in as subtle a fashion as possible that Dobson and co. should come forward with the full story: "We hope that Focus on the Family will join us in insisting that Mr. Reed stop dodging and start explaining why his emails to Jack Abramoff stated that he was negotiating with Focus. Our sense is that Dr. Dobson is telling the truth, and our logical conclusion is that someone else was not."

Writing on his blog, Olasky had harsher words for Reed: "If Reed had been transparent, he would have faced disagreement but would not now be facing disgrace. He has shamed the evangelical community by providing evidence for the generally-untrue stereotype that evangelicals are easily-manipulated and that evangelical leaders are using moral issues to line their own pockets."

My sense is that this rift will deepen in the coming weeks as the mainstream press wakes up to its importance. Meanwhile, Focus on the Family will undoubtedly continue its face-saving effort, even if it means misleading both its supporters and the press. Dobson has been doing that for decades. Why should he stop now?

How the Right Handles Factual Criticism #15
From: "William Martin" Add to Address BookAdd to Address Book Add Mobile Alert
To: max@maxblumenthal.com
CC: "William Martin"
Subject: Max's logic.
Date: Fri, 3 Mar 2006 05:39:00 -0500
Hi,dumbshit.Bet you get up every morning and pinch your balls.W.M. P.S. Hate your assinine writing.

# posted by max blumenthal @ 10:55 AM 46 comments  

How the Right Handles Factual Criticism #14

My profile of Princeton's Robby George seems to have finally landed me on the public enemies list of the Family Research Council President Tony Perkins. (It's been a long time coming). In an email blast to his supporters, Perkins tries some good, old-fashioned red-baiting:

Over the past half century, this ultra-left journal [the Nation] has praised Soviet mass murderer Josef Stalin and labeled Cuba's dictator Fidel Castro a "hero." The Nation opposed Harry Truman's Marshall Plan and thought the Cuban Missile Crisis was due to J.F.K.'s "belligerence." But now, The Nation has targeted a clear and present danger to America: Princeton is tilting right! Yes, The Nation is very worried about Prof. Robert George and his influence among Princeton faculty and students. The Nation's hit man/writer, Max Blumenthal, acknowledges that Prof. George is popular with fellow professors. And he notes George's superlative credentials--Harvard Law and Oxford. But that even makes him a greater threat, don't you see?

Of course, like the rest of Robby George's indignant surrogates, Perkins does not -- and cannot -- challenge one single fact of my story.

Perkins may also have some old scores to settle. After all, he can't be happy that I publicized his past business dealings with David Duke, his speech before the white nationalist Council of Conservative Citizens, or the fact that he was suspended from the Baton Rouge Police Force for participating in a violent anti-abortion protest while on-duty. But don't believe me -- I'm just a commie pinko.

Alito Sends Dobson a Valentine
During his broadcast today, Focus on the Family founder and president James Dobson promoted his organization's annual ex-gay conference, Love Won Out, in which gays and their families are told that homosexuality is "preventable and treatable." Then, he presented evidence that "the pendulum is swinging back," informing his listeners that he had just received a thank you note from new Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito. Dobson praised his listeners for helping to helping to seat John Roberts and Alito in time for a partial-birth abortion case ("in this case, [your activism] absolutely affected history," he told his audience).

Not only is it unprecedented for a Supreme Court justice to send a thank you note to an interest group, it is highly unethical. Alito has admitted that he owes his job to a man who told his listeners today to "please be in prayer that by the time that probition on abortion reaches the Supreme Court, there will be one more conservative justice sitting there." From now on, plaintiffs and defendants in cases dealing with issues from abortion to gay rights to school prayer should demand that Alito recuse himself. Alito is deeply embedded in the pocket of the Christian right and perhaps more compromised than anyone could have imagined.


Here is the text of Alito's letter to Dobson, which Dobson read on air:

Dear Dr. Dobson:

This is just a short note to express my heartfelt thanks to you
and the entire staff of Focus on the Family for your help and
support during the past few challenging months.

I would also greatly appreciate it if you would convey my
appreciation to the good people from all parts of the country who
wrote to tell me that they were praying for me and for my family
during this period.

As I said when I spoke at my formal investiture at the White
House last week, the prayers of so many people from around the
country were a palpable and powerful force.

As long as I serve on the Supreme Court I will keep in mind the
trust that has been placed in me.

I hope that we'll have the opportunity to meet personally at
some point in the future.

In the meantime my entire family and I hope that you and the
Focus on the Family staff know how we appreciate all that you have
done.

Sincerely yours,

Samuel Alito