As Iranians go to the polls to elect a president, American neoconservatives are openly rooting not for moderate reform candidate and former prime minister Mir-Hossein Mousavi but for anti-U.S. hardliner Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. This is an obvious sign both of the neocons' preference for conflict over peace between the U.S. and Iran and of the generally bankrupt state of conservatism in America, reduced now to banking on failure for the Obama administration (see Huffington Post, Rachel Maddow).

Should the reformist Mousavi win the Iranian election and become president, it would likely signal a new and more positive direction for U.S.-Iranian relations as well as providing support for the "Obama Doctrine" of engagement with Iran and other adversaries. Such a development would at the same time undercut the neocon attitude of hostility and suspicion toward Iran, as well as undercutting the right-wing Israeli government's aggressive stance toward Iran. Indeed right-wingers in Israel like those in America appear to see nothing good for themselves in any warming of relations between the U.S. and Iran, as observed by M.J. Rosenberg at TPM and Yaakov Katz at the Jerusalem Post.

The unpleasant fellow you see pictured here is Daniel Pipes of the right-wing Middle East Forum, a raging neocon who said in a speech this week at the Heritage Foundation that he would vote for Ahmadinejad if he were allowed to vote in Iran (video). The American Enterprise Institute's Michael Rubin likewise told Kathryn Jean Lopez at the National Review that it could be better for Ahmadinejad to win, because a Mousavi win might give Obama the impression that diplomacy was working. Painting Iran as inherently and hopelessly evil, Rubin said of the Iranian election that "should someone more soft-spoken and less defiant -- someone like former prime minister Mir-Hossein Mousavi -- win, it would be easier for Obama to believe that Iran really was figuratively unclenching a fist when, in fact, it had it had its other hand hidden under its cloak, grasping a dagger."

Without so openly rooting for Ahmadinejad, other neocons are playing down the significance of a possible Mousavi victory, obviously worried that a shift in power will signal a fresh start for U.S.-Iranian relations that could leave American and Israeli hawks out in the cold. The same right-wing pundits who constantly point out Ahmadinejad's bad behavior as reasons to confront Iran now argue that it doesn't matter who the president of Iran is. Martin Peretz wrote at the New New Republic: "We've known for a long time that elected leaders do not carry the weight of those who have been anointed." Ilan Berman likewise wrote at the American Spectator: "Whoever ends up becoming president will have little real power -- and even less influence over Iran's geostrategic direction."

The prospect of peace in the Greater Middle East must give sociopaths like these nightmares the rest of us could scarcely imagine. 

Mark C. Eades
http://www.mceades.com

President Barack Obama's interview this week with Arab news network Al-Arabiya appears to have been a success. The president's first interview since taking office, his appearance with the network's Washington bureau chief Hisham Melhem was an effort to extend a hand of friendship to the Arab and Muslim world, and included Obama's acknowledgment that Americans "have not been perfect" in their dealings with that world:

"My job is to communicate to the American people that the Muslim world is filled with extraordinary people who simply want to live their lives and see their children live better lives...," Obama told Melhem in the interview, "...My job to the Muslim world is to communicate that the Americans are not your enemy. We sometimes make mistakes. We have not been perfect. But if you look at the track record, as you say, America was not born as a colonial power, and that the same respect and partnership that America had with the Muslim world as recently as twenty or thirty years ago, there's no reason why we can't restore that. And that I think is going to be an important task."

Obama's interview included a re-statement of his committments both to the Israeli-Palestinian peace process and to follow through on his promise to address the Muslim world from a Muslim capital during his first months in office. It also included an aknowledgment of his own personal connections to the Muslim world -- connections for which Republican bigots viciously attacked Obama during the 2008 campaign, but which can hardly hurt him now as he begins the work of repairing US relations with the Muslim world:

"My job is to communicate the fact that the United States has a stake in the well-being of the Muslim world, that the language we use has to be a language of respect. I have Muslim members of my family. I have lived in Muslim countries.... And so what I want to communicate is the fact that in all my travels throughout the Muslim world, what I've come to understand is that regardless of your faith -- and America is a country of Muslims, Jews, Christians, non-believers -- regardless of your faith, people all have certain common hopes and common dreams."

Obama's interview with Al-Arabiya comes as his new Mideast envoy, former senator George Mitchell, heads to the region to restart a peace process long neglected by Obama's predecessor, and follows his contact with Palestinian president Mahmoud Abbas immediately after his inauguration Jan. 20. Obama's overtures to the Muslim world are certain to offend many conservatives, who regard Arabs and Muslims with extreme hostility and suspicion, and who think that the only people in the Middle East we ought to be talking with are the Israelis. Many of these were deeply offended when Obama's first call to a foreign leader was to the Palestinian president instead of his Israeli counterpart, and are likely to be equally offended that his first interview was with Al-Arabiya instead of the Jerusalem Post.

I say tough cookies for them. Elections have consequences. While President Obama has neither said nor done anything to suggest that he is about to "abandon" Israel (as I'm certain his conservative critics would love to charge), he clearly recognizes that a Mideast policy based on an exclusive relationship with Israel and on callous disregard of Arab concerns has not worked. The time for change has come, and from where I sit it looks like President Obama is off to a damn good start.

See also Washington Post, Youtube. 

A new video from the Wasilla Project documents the controversial practice of charging rape victims for evidence-gathering exams under Sarah Palin's watch as mayor of Wasilla, Alaska. The video includes interviews from late September 2008 with former Alaska state representative Eric Croft, sponsor of the 2000 bill which made it illegal to charge victims for rape exams in Alaska; forensic nurse Tara Henry, who has conducted many such exams in Alaska; Wasilla city council member Dianne Woodruff (formerly a Republican but now an independent); Geran Tarr, chairperson of the Alaska Women's Lobby; and Dr. Colleen Murphy, formerly of the Alaska Violent Crimes Compensation Board. All attest to the wrongful nature of this practice, stubbornly pursued in Wasilla under Palin's watch even in the face of state legislation against it. This video follows a recent ad from Planned Parenthood hitting Palin on the practice of charging victims for rape exams.

Previous reports on Palin's rape exam controversy include a recent written report and video by CNN confirming that when Palin was mayor Wasilla did indeed cling stubbornly to the practice of charging victims for rape exams, even in the face of legislation against it sponsored by state representative Eric Croft. Croft told CNN that the only ongoing resistance he met was from Wasilla, where Palin was mayor from 1996 to 2002. "It was one of those things everyone could agree on except Wasilla...," Croft told CNN, "...We couldn't convince the chief of police to stop charging them."  While some of Palin's supporters say they believe she had no knowledge of the practice, critics call the suggestion "outrageous" and question Palin's commitment to helping women who are victims of violence. As Croft told CNN, "I find it hard to believe that for six months a small town, a police chief, would lead the fight against a statewide piece of legislation receiving unanimous support and the mayor not know about it."

Forensic nurse Tara Henry also spoke with CNN, confirming Croft's comments on Wasilla's intransigence in the matter of rape exams and telling CNN that while several local law enforcement agencies expressed difficulty paying for the exams, Wasilla was the most vocal in its opposition to paying. Charging victims for exams "retraumatizes them," according to Henry: "Asking them to pay for something law enforcement needs in order to investigate their case, it's almost like blaming them for getting sexually assaulted."

Wasilla police have claimed that their intent was not to charge rape victims for their exams, but to charge victims' insurance companies. This claim has yet to be substantiated, however, and provides no answer for what might happen in cases where the victim has no insurance. In any case, police departments have no more business charging rape victims or their insurance companies for rape exams than they have charging for any other type of criminal investigation: this is why we pay taxes.

As Dianne Woodruff notes in the Wasilla Project video, Mayor Palin redecorated her own office multiple times at public expense while Wasilla claimed that it could not afford to pay for rape exams.

With a rape rate 2.5 times the national average, as CNN observes, Alaska has the worst record of any state in rape and murder of women by men.

American women and all Americans should know about Palin's history of opposing fair treatment for rape victims.

Sarah Palin claimed during Thursday's vice presidential debate that, as governor of Alaska, she fought to protest atrocities in Sudan by dropping assets tied to the country's brutal regime from the state's $40 billion investment fund. "When I and others in the legislature found out we had some millions of dollars in Sudan," Palin said, "we called for divestment through legislation of those dollars to make sure we weren't doing anything that would be seen as condoning the activities there in Darfur." Reporting by ABC News and the Washington Post indicates otherwise.

In fact, Palin's administration opposed a measure to divest Alaskan holdings in Sudan-linked investments. "The [Palin] administration killed our bill," Alaska state representative Les Gara told ABC News. Gara and state representative Bob Lynn co-sponsored a bipartisan resolution (HB287) early this year to force the Alaska Permanent Fund to divest millions of dollars in holdings tied to the Sudanese government. Palin's administration openly opposed the bill, stating its opposition in a public hearing on the measure in February. Said Brian Andrews, Palin's deputy revenue commissioner, at the hearing: "The legislation is well-intended, and the desire to make a difference is noble, but mixing moral and political agendas at the expense of our citizens' financial security is not a good combination." Gara told ABC that opposition from Palin's administration was instrumental in killing the measure. "I walked out of that hearing livid," Gara recalled, noting that because of Palin's opposition to the bill, "We could not get a vote in that committee." Any expression of support from Palin for the Sudan divestment effort would come only at the end of the legislative session, after the Gara-Lynn measure's fate had been sealed.

The Alaska Permanent Fund currently holds $22 million in Sudan-linked investments, according to the non-profit Sudan Divestment Task Force. Palin's running mate, John McCain, has expressed strong support of Sudan divestment efforts, but was criticized when it was revealed in May that his wife Cindy held $2 million in investment funds owning shares of Sudan-linked companies. Mrs. McCain sold those holdings following inquiries from the news media.

Just in case you missed it, the latest installment of Sarah Palin's CBS News interview with Katie Couric shows her to be ignorant on any and all Supreme Court cases other than Roe v. Wade, the landmark 1973 decision granting American women the right to abortion, with which Palin disagrees. Asked by Couric what other Supreme Court decisions she disagreed with, Palin couldn't name any, offering instead the type of circuitous and vague reply that has become her trademark (see also Huffington Post, Politico):

COURIC: What other Supreme Court decisions do you disagree with?

PALIN: Well, let's see.... There's, of course in the great history of America there have been rulings, that's never going to be absolute consensus by every American. And there are those issues, again, like Roe v. Wade, where I believe are best held on a state level and addressed there. So you know, going through the history of America, there would be others but....

COURIC: Can you think of any?

PALIN: ...Well, I could think of … any again, that could be best dealt with on a more local level. Maybe I would take issue with. But, you know, as mayor, and then as governor and even as a vice president, if I'm so privileged to serve, wouldn't be in a position of changing those things but in supporting the law of the land as it reads today.

Palin also stumbled on our constitutional right to privacy as interpreted by the Supreme Court, a cornerstone of the Roe v. Wade decision: While she opposes Roe v. Wade, she agreed with Couric that the US Constitution guarantees the right to privacy to all citizens, but then seemed to feel that states have the right to overrule our constitutional right to privacy in the case of abortion. Here, again, Palin's reply borders on the wholly incoherent:

COURIC: Do you think there's an inherent right to privacy in the Constitution?

PALIN: I do. Yeah, I do....

COURIC: The cornerstone of Roe v. Wade.

PALIN: ...I do. And I believe that individual states can best handle what the people within the different constituencies in the 50 states would like to see their will ushered in an issue like that.

In other words, "states' rights" trump the US Constitution when it comes to a woman's right to privacy regarding her own body. I wonder what other constitutional rights Palin would like to see states given the power to take away.

Palin's Supreme Court gaffe is only the latest in a string of gaffes, in what has become something more like an epic saga than a mere interview. In past installments, Palin was unable to name for Couric a single newspaper or magazine she has read ("...All of 'em...."); was unable to provide a single example of John McCain's "maverick reform efforts" from his 26 years in the US Senate ("I'll try to find ya some and I'll bring them to ya."); and repeated her ridiculous claim that Alaska's proximity to Russia should be counted as foreign affairs experience ("...As Putin rears his head and comes into the airspace of the United States of America, where, where do they go? It's Alaska....").

This person should never be allowed within a hundred miles of the White House. 

Planned Parenthood will begin running a new ad on Thursday hitting Sarah Palin on the fact that, as mayor of Wasilla AK, she charged rape victims for emergency-room rape exam kits.

The ad is slated to run in the St. Louis MO, Madison WI, and DC/Northern Virginia markets. The ad begins with a testimonial from Gretchen, a rape victim. "I just didn’t think it would happen to me," the young woman says. "I was drugged and raped." Then an announcer states: "Under Mayor Sarah Palin, women like Gretchen were forced to pay up to $1,200 for the emergency exams used to prosecute their attackers." Tying Palin's policy to those of her presidential running-mate, the announcer then ads: "In the Senate, John McCain voted against legislation to protect women from these same heartless policies." Finally, Gretchen returns: "That is something to me that’s unthinkable. It scares me to death" (see Huffington Post, MSNBC).

Wasilla police have claimed that their intent was not to charge rape victims for their exams, but to charge victims' insurance companies. This claim has yet to be substantiated, however, and provides no answer for what might happen in cases where the victim has no insurance. In any case, police departments have no more business charging rape victims or their insurance companies for rape exams than they have charging for any other type of criminal investigation: this is why we pay taxes.  

With a rape rate 2.5 times the national average, Alaska has the worst record of any state in rape and murder of women by men.

American women and all Americans should know about Palin's history of opposing fair treatment for rape victims.

In a newly-released excerpt from Sarah Palin's CBS News interview with Katie Couric, the vice-presidential nominee was unable to name so much as a single newspaper or magazine she has read (see CBS News, Huffington Post):

COURIC: And when it comes to establishing your worldview, I was curious, what newspapers and magazines did you regularly read before you were tapped for this to stay informed and to understand the world?

PALIN: I've read most of them, again with a great appreciation for the press, for the media.

COURIC: What, specifically?

PALIN: Um, all of them, any of them that have been in front of me all these years.

COURIC: Can you name a few?

PALIN: I have a vast variety of sources where we get our news, too. Alaska isn't a foreign country, where it's kind of suggested, "Wow, how could you keep in touch with what the rest of Washington, D.C., may be thinking when you live up there in Alaska?" Believe me, Alaska is like a microcosm of America.

The fact that Palin was not able to name so much as a single national or international publication that she has read speaks volumes on how out-of-touch she really is with the world beyond her Alaska backyard. National leaders, and those aspiring to become national leaders, typically read such publications as the New York Times, Washington Post, Wall Street Journal, and Foreign Affairs. Those possessed of more curiousity about world affairs might look over any of the international news agencies available on the internet. Any average citizen might at least be able to refer to Newsweek, Time, or a regional daily paper that covers national and world news. It appears that, for Sarah Palin, "news" means tuning in at 6:00 for the local 30-minute news broadcast, 20 minutes of which consists of sports and weather.

Palin displays not only a lack of knowledge about the world, but also a lack of curiosity about it - a lack of the desire to know anything, a fatal flaw shared by the Bush administration, but perhaps even more dangerously pronounced in Palin.

Sarah Palin's stage-managed "meetings with world leaders" at the UN are nothing more than a ridiculous attempt to weave foreign-policy credentials out of thin air. What of any substance are we supposed to believe Palin discussed or negotiated in her brief photo ops with these leaders over two days at the UN? Are we really supposed to think that anything substantive took place as Palin rushed around Lower Manhattan posing for snapshots? Does the McCain campaign really expect anyone to take this nonsense seriously?

Unfortunately for McCain and Palin, this charade appears to have blown up right in their stupid Republican faces, highlighting nothing so much as Palin's inexperience and unpreparedness. First thing yesterday, Palin's photo op with Afghan president Hamid Karzai was spoiled by a press revolt over access to the meeting. It seems the McCain campaign initially allowed reporters into the meeting only for the polite preliminaries between Palin and Karzai, kicking them out after a 29-second exchange on the topic of children, and moving to limit coverage to brief photo ops for a still photographer and a TV camera. Obviously, Camp McCain was hoping to use the media to circulate some nice images of Palin "meeting with world leaders" while denying any substantive access to the meetings themselves. A full-on press revolt quickly ensued, however, as news agencies told the McCain campaign that they would broadcast no images of the meeting unless a reporter was also allowed in to observe. At this point the McCain campaign partly relented, allowing one CNN producer into the room while yet denying access to print reporters and wire services. Later, McCain press representatives claimed that the restrictions were the result of a "mix-up, a miscommunication among staff." A pool of reporters was then allowed to observe Palin's meeting with Colombian President Alvaro Uribe for 15-20 seconds (see New York Times, CNN, Huffington Post).

Republicans have suggested that Palin's two days of "meetings with world leaders" at the UN are comparable to Obama's summer tour of Europe, the Middle East, Iraq, and Afghanistan. The two are hardly comparable, however: Obama's summer tour was far from being his first-ever foreign affairs experience; and from his summer tour we have a substantive record of speeches, interviews, and press conferences to demonstrate that it was far more than a mere photo op or a game of catch-up. From Palin's "meetings" we have nothing but smiling snapshots and pleasantries.

The Republicans are trying to put one over on us, and I for one won't be taking the bait.

Since Sarah Palin's pick as John McCain's vice-presidential running mate, details of her years as mayor of Wasilla, Alaska, have included revelations that under her watch the town charged women for rape exams. This story was given a new pair of wings today by a written report and video at CNN confirming that when Palin was mayor Wasilla did indeed cling stubbornly to the practice of charging for rape exams, even in the face of state efforts to halt the practice.

As CNN reports, former state representative Eric Croft sponsored a state law requiring cities to provide free rape exams to victims. Croft told CNN that the only ongoing resistance he met was from Wasilla, where Palin was mayor from 1996 to 2002. "It was one of those things everyone could agree on except Wasilla...," Croft told CNN, "...We couldn't convince the chief of police to stop charging them."  While some of Palin's supporters say they believe she had no knowledge of the practice, critics call the suggestion "outrageous" and question Palin's commitment to helping women who are victims of violence. As Croft told CNN, "I find it hard to believe that for six months a small town, a police chief, would lead the fight against a statewide piece of legislation receiving unanimous support and the mayor not know about it."

Forensic nurse Tara Henry confirmed Croft's comments on Wasilla's intransigence in the matter of rape exams, telling CNN that while several local law enforcement agencies expressed difficulty paying for the exams, Wasilla was the most vocal in its opposition to paying. Charging victims for exams "retraumatizes them," according to Henry: "Asking them to pay for something law enforcement needs in order to investigate their case, it's almost like blaming them for getting sexually assaulted."

With a rape rate 2.5 times the national average, as CNN observes, Alaska has the worst record of any state in rape and murder of women by men.

American women and all Americans should know about Palin's history of opposing fair treatment for rape victims.

I hope that Saturday's anti-Palin demonstration in Anchorage will prove to be a taste of things to come for the Wacko from Wasilla. Organized by a local group known as "Alaska Women Reject Palin," the demonstration drew a crowd of around 1,500 - quite large for the sparsely-populated state, and in spite of attempts by local right-wingers to intimidate the organizers and preempt the event.

Following a press release by the organizers to Anchorage media outlets, local right-wing talk show host Eddie Burke broadcast their names and telephone numbers on the air. "They're a bunch of socialist maggots...," Burke told his listeners, "...a bunch of socialist baby-killing maggots." After Burke's broadcast the organizers began receiving harassing and threatening phone calls (see KTUU TV, Alaska Public Radio). Another anonymous Palin supporter contacted local media on Friday posing as one of the anti-Palin organizers and told them the rally had been cancelled; and yet another faxed a forged document saying that the Secret Service had cancelled the permit for the demonstration. It seems there was nothing to which local Republicans wouldn't resort to silence their fellow Alaskans.

The protest went ahead as planned, however, drawing a crowd that may have been the largest ever in the state's history. Most of the demonstrators were women committed to making it clear to America that Sarah Palin does not speak for them. Signs carried by protesters included a host of highly uncomplimentary slogans directed at the Alaska governor: "Bush in a Skirt" ... "Hey Hockey Mom: Keep the Puck out of DC" ... "Pro-Woman, Anti-Palin" ... "Another Alaska Woman NOT for Sarah Palin" ... "Keep Your Church Outta My State" ... "Flip-Flop Sarah" ... "Great Performance, But We're Not That Stupid" ... "Don't Insult My Pit Bull" ... "Women: Vote Issues, Not Gender" ... "My Daughter Deserves Better" ... "Palin=G.W. Bush with Lipstick" ... "We Love Alaska, Not Palin" ... "Wrong Woman, Wrong Message" ... "McCain/Palin: Unstable/Unable" ... "Hockey Mama for Obama" .... Photos and video of the event are available at Mudflats, Daily Kos, Huffington Post, KTUU TV, and Photobucket.  National and mainstream media coverage of the event has thus far been sparse, but the story has appeared in USA Today, at UPI, and on the Washington Post political blog in addition to the local Anchorage Daily News and KTUU TV. The story is circulating rapidly through the political blogosphere, meanwhile, and stands to gain more mainstream media attention as papers go to press Monday morning.

I hope to see many more such events as Palin travels the country attempting to convince voters that McSame is somehow McDifferent. 

 Register to vote, and send Voltage to play at the Democratic National Convention.  We have songs that are perfect for the event already written, and I am already the number one democrat at the DNC.