Month: November 2006

Nora Springs, Iowa, 7.45 am.

I’m not a conspiracy theorist but the simple facts in the Sarasota, Florida, congressional race seem to indicate obvious machine malfunction or malfeasance, rather than the will of the voters. On many ballots in one district, there was a strange absence of votes for Congress. This is the critical fact:

About 15 percent of ballots cast on Sarasota’s touch-screen machines registered no choice in the bitterly fought congressional race. That percentage was about six times greater than the undervote in the rest of the House district, which spreads into four other counties.

[My italics]. What evidence do we have that those missing votes might have gone to the Democrat rather than the Republican? Money quote:

The Sentinel reviewed records of 17,846 touch-screen ballots that included no vote in the tightly contested 13th District congressional race to determine whom voters selected in other major races. The analysis of the so-called "undervotes" examined the races for U.S. Senate, governor, attorney general, chief financial officer and agriculture commissioner.

The results showed that the undervoted ballots skewed Democratic in all of those races, even in the three races in which the county as a whole went Republican. In the governor’s race, for example, Republican Charlie Crist won handily in Sarasota, easily beating Democrat Jim Davis. But on the undervoted ballots, Davis finished ahead by almost 7 percentage points.

In the agriculture commissioner’s race, Republican Charles Bronson beat Copeland by a double-digit margin among all voters. But on the undervoted ballots, Copeland won by about 3 percentage points.

So what are the chances that strongly Democratic voters would have a position on the agriculture commisioner’s race, but not the Congressional seat? These machines either malfunctioned or were rigged. We need a federal investigation to find out which.

That was Hugh Hewitt’s first question to me on his radio show. So you’d think he might have some issues with Mitt Romney, wouldn’t you? Naah. He’s already on the case, with an upcoming book aiming to sell Romney to the evangelical right. Hewitt’s abiding faith – in Republican power for ever – never falters. I should add that on two key issues – fiscal restraint and healthcare policy – I find Romney an appealing candidate. If he were not running as an explicitly religious candidate to a sectarian base, and was less draconian on abortion and marriage, I’d like him a lot. His faith is irrelevant to me  if he were running as a secular politician. But, in the GOP primaries, he isn’t.   

The founder of Lexis-Nexis dies in front of his computer. I wonder if his search outlasted him.

That’s Washington Post reporter, Anthony Shadid’s description of the almost indescribable anarchy and carnage unleashed by the American invasion of Iraq:

"There was civil-war-style sectarian killing, its echoes in Lebanon a generation ago. Alongside it were gangland turf battles over money, power and survival; a raft of political parties and their militias fighting a zero-sum game; a raging insurgency; the collapse of authority; social services a chimera; and no way forward for an Iraqi government ordered to act by Americans who themselves are still seen as the final arbiter and, as a result, still depriving that government of legitimacy. Civil war was perhaps too easy a term, a little too tidy."

For good measure, we now discover that this anarchy has found a way to sustain itself financially for an indefinite period of time:

"A classified United States government report … obtained by The New York Times, estimates that armed groups responsible for many of the insurgent and terrorist attacks across Iraq are raising between $70 million and $200 million a year from illegal activities. It says that between $25 million and $100 million of the total comes from oil smuggling and other criminal activity involving the state-owned oil industry that is aided by ‘corrupt and complicit’ Iraqi government officials.

As much as $36 million a year comes from ransoms paid to save thousands of kidnapping victims in Iraq, the report said. It estimates that unnamed foreign governments — previously identified by senior American officials in Iraq as including France and Italy — paid Iraqi kidnappers an estimated $30 million in ransom last year."

Remember that only lasy month vice-president Dick Cheney was opining that the Maliki government was doing "remarkably well." These people cannot even lie competently, can they?

(Photo: Karim Kadim/AP.)

Another dip into heterosexual lifestyle. Duran Duran’s "Girls on Film" was banned from TV in the 1980s. And you shouldn’t click unless you’re prepared for one of the most sexist and sexy videos of the decade. Again: DO NOT WATCH if you do not want to see hot, naked women, mud-wrestling and sliding over goo-covered poles.

Click here to see the other entries…

A Mormon reader writes:

Many of us consider posting photographs of Mormon undergarments to be sacrilegious and offensive. Yes, we wear these garments at all times, except during swimming, athletic, bathing, and other activities where it would be impractical. They are made from a variety of textiles, and are comfortable to sleep in, being really not far removed from long johns. Many religious groups, and not just ours, wear clothing as a symbol of religious adherence. Ours, we wear as a reminder of our commitments, but not in public view, because we are reminding ourselves, not making a spectacle. Hence, underclothing. Additionally, they are cut in such a way as to require us to adhere to church modesty standards.

My policy on this site is to publish reality, within certain boundaries of religious respect. If I can publish a cartoon of Muhammad, I can sure publish tasteful pictures of Mormon underwear. Until today, I had no idea that LDS members even wore undergarments mandated by their church. The pictures provided come from Wikipedia. Is it sacrilegious for Wikipedia to publish them? I mean no disrespect. It’s a largely irrelevant issue. The racial history of the LDS church is far more pertinent to Romney’s candidacy. And none of this would be relevant at all, if the Republicans did not now base their politics on explicitly religious appeals. You wanna play by the rules of theoconservatism? Then deal with the consequences.

Here’s an official guide. Alas, no pictures. (If someone has some visuals, could they please send them to me?) So Mitt Romney will never have to answer the boxers or briefs question. But will he tell us whether he wears Mormon underwear at all times, including when asleep?

Update: we have pictures!

Spencertown, NY, 10 am.

Billy Idol’s "Cradle of Love" in which a younger, hipper version of Mickey Kaus stars.

Click here to see the other entries…