Author: Brendan Skwire

The folks at DFA are targeting Silvestre Reyes for his willingness to give Bush a win on telecom immunity. They’re encouraging people to call his office (202-225-4831), and to pony up some shekels so they can run an ad targeting the big coward.  You know how much I like a phone call.
Boy oh boy, was that office angry with me.

First, I brought up the fact that AT&T wrote FISA: how could they not know what they were doing was illegal?

Then I brought up the fact that this line about how it only protected law-abiding companies was nonsense, since A) if they didn’t break the law they wouldn’t need immunity, and B) anyone that participated BY DEFINITION broke the law.  Why would anyone give Bush the benefit of the doubt given all the lies surrounding Iraq. This was answered with a long-winded response about Reyes’ vote against the AUMF, which I pointed out wasn’t the reason i called.

Then I mentioned DFA and the upcoming ad campaign. They didn’t like that.

Then I mentioned Al Wynn. “Have you heard of him?”  

That’s when the woman got angry. “Yes, I know who he is,” she hissed. And then she began to talk over me, loudly to the point of yelling at me, as I pointed out that the fact that Reyes is running unopposed this year doesn’t make him immune to a primary challenge in the future or immune to ads targeting him for doing Bush’s bidding. “In fact,” I added, I think I’m going to give DFA a big fat donation to get those ads going. Congressman Reyes needs to stand up for the Fourth Amendment and stop doing Bush’s bidding.”

That’s when she hung up on me.  That Democracy thing… it’s HARD WORK.

Crossposted at Brendan Calling

I think most of us can agree that Nancy Pelosi has been an execrable disappointment as the first female Speaker of the House.  We were all hoping for someone tough, who would stand up to Bush, and who would drive the progressive agenda forward: instead we got a collaborator, an excuse-maker, a weakling who buckles to the slightest pressure.

Here she is allowing Blue Dogs to hold the Democratic Caucus hostage on FISA:

Pelosi says that she “absolutely” opposes retroactive immunity for the telecoms, but that she “didn’t want the fight to be so focused there that we neglect exclusivity.” Pelosi added that the House leadership was “at the mercy of the 17 or 18 Democrats in the Senate who are voting with the Republicans on this” and said that “we are trying to work with the Dems in the Senate to come to an agreement” on exclusivity, immunity, and other issues.

“At the mercy if the 17 or 18 Democrats”?  Memo to Speaker Pelosi: it’s called “arm-twisting”. Or as the always-eloquent Karl Rove once said of a political operative who refused to play ball, “We will fuck him. Do you hear me? We will fuck him. We will ruin him. Like no one has ever fucked him!”

So if you want your Democrats to vote your way, Ms. Pelosi, go get Congressman Clyburn and let your Democrats and Blue Dogs know that if they don’t vote down telecom immunity, that they will find themselves so utterly fucked they’ll taste their own scrotums whenever they belch.

It’s not that difficult a concept, especially with freshmen like Chris Carney, Jerry McNerny, and Jason Altmire who are going to need help to win re-election.  Threaten to withhold funds when they face their primaries.  Threaten to block their legislation. Threaten to defund their projects.  There’s a lot you can do.

Of course, this whole tactic would call on you to show integrity and spine, which is something you simply don’t have much of, Ms. Pelosi.  Instead, Americans see the unsightly spectacle of the Speaker of the House whining like a little baby, showing that she’s too weak to control her own caucus.

Is that the example you want to set?

Since the blogosphere is abuzz over whether Barack Obama is a sexist, and whether the word “periodical” has anything to do with menstruation (hint: it doesn’t), I’ve decided to disengage from the conversation: I’ve said my piece over at brendancalling and that’s that.  It’s a sad day when progressive and liberal bloggers act like Freepers.

Instead, I’m trying a new style: altbier.

The Germans are known for their crisp lagers, but lager yeast didn’t come along until the mid-1800s (first used in America in Philadelphia PA, near where the remains of Ortliebs Brewery stands today).  Before that, like everyone else, the Germans made ales. Alt (or “old”) is one of the few remaining German ale styles, yet like lagers, it’s conditioned at colder temperatures. The cold temperatures give the beer a certain clarity and smoothness.

I’m not sure if I have the patience to age mine for up to 4 months, but I’m not too worried about it: the recipes I’ve found on line have secondary fermentation times that begin with as little as 2 weeks.  Join me below for this experimental recipe…
I plan to use:
1/2 pound Crystal Malt(60 Lovibond)
1/2 pound Munich malt (11 Lovibond)
4 oz chocolate or black patent malt
6-9 pounds of pale malt extract
1 oz Perle hops, at 1 hour
1 tsp Irish Moss, at 15 minutes
1 oz hallertau, at 5 minutes
Wyeast 1007, German Ale Yeast

Boil three gallons of water the night before brewing and let cool in the fermenter.
Steep the crystal, munich, and chocolate malts in 3 gallons of 165 degree water for half an hour.  

Add your extract and bring to a rolling boil. Add the perle hops and set the timer for 1 hour.  Follow the rest of the directions for hops and irish moss additions.

After the hour is up, cool the wort to 70 degrees as quickly as possible, and add to the fermenter (you may have to dump out a little of the cool water). Pitch the yeast and allow to ferment for about a week.

Rack to the secondary fermenter, and ferment another 2 weeks to four months at about 50 degrees or lower (that extra fridge comes in handy here).  Bottle or keg.

I think this one is going to be a truly special beer.  Tomorrow we tap our ESB.  My tummy can’t wait!

Charles Schumer (D-Torture) paid a visit to daily kos today.

The stated reason was to discuss that “Winning the Presidency Isn’t Enough”, but really it was… well you be the judge:

The last time I posted here on DailyKos, I asked for your help recruiting quality candidates to run for the US Senate.  The netroots responded – Web sites urging candidates to run sprung up, blog posts and emails went out, and today we have a Democratic field in the Senate that’s loaded with talent.

Beating incumbent Republicans is always a challenge.   Our first goal was to recruit top-notch candidates in blue states – and today I can report that there are vibrant campaigns in states like New Hampshire, Maine, Oregon, and Minnesota.   Another goal is to remain competitive in states with retirements…

 In 2008, I expect that the netroots will play an important role in every winning Senate race – we simply can’t do it without the support and passion of the grassroots…

Thank you again for your interest, I’ll try and answer as many questions as possible in the time I have.

Alas, Senator Schumer answered but one question, and that just barely.  The flood began at question five (and I’ve deleted all the names and rec numbers since it made for crappy reading):

We should be able to have Senators from a state like New York that support their party and the Constitution rather than capitulate to the President by approving an Attorney General candidate who doesn’t even know if waterboarding is torture or if torture is illegal.

Once Senator Shumer tells me the DSCC is supporting primary challenges against Senators who betray the Constitution like that I’ll consider giving money again.

Oh, wait.  Maybe that isn’t very likely.

.

OOF.  That one left a mark. So did this one:

Senator Shumer, you let Mukasey through. When we ask for better Democrats, we want Democrats who will stand up for core American principals and not back down from a fight over stopping torture.

I am in Congressman Nadler’s district, and I am sorely disappointed by the representation I’ve been getting in the Senate.

Given the collapse on FISA, Mukasey, contempt charges and troop withdrawal, give us a reason to support the candidates of the establishment instead of finding our own

Ouch.

Mukasey!! FISA!! Your credibility is GONE,

Senator Schumer.
Smoke and mirrors is what we have gotten from this Democratic Congress…that has been “keeping its powder dry” for some big fight.

I haven’t seen ANY fight.

You are all talk.

Stand and deliver.

The likes of Schumer and Feinstein…
…are every bit as responsible for the lawless culture in DC as the repugs. Birds of a feather….

And it just gets worse. You can count the positive questions on one hand.  You can count Schumer’s responses on one FINGER.

Is it just me….
or does Mr Schumer seem particularly tone deaf to be posting this request today right after the Senate sold us out once again.

I wouldn’t give the likes of Schumer even a wooden nickle….

You are correct.

Winning the presidency is not enough to cure the ills facing this country.

We also need to make sure that we don’t have Democratic Senators giving cover to republican nominees who aren’t sure whether torture is illegal or not.

The Mukasey nomination which you pushed for isn’t working out so well, Senator.  Torture is being committed in all of our names, and a lot of us aren’t too happy about that.

And the trifecta:

Btw how’s that Mukasey

thing working out for you Senator? Last I heard USAG Mukasey said he would not ever question legal opinions out and signed off by the President’s politically appointed OLC…gee that sounds an awful lot like a new power the president’s handpicked lawyers have given him….you know the ability to interpret law whatever way he may want without suffering any potential oversight or investigation by the people’s lawyer to ensure that their legal opinions are actually valid and on solid legal footing/basis, not based in some sort of “tortured legal logic” if you get my drift. Well anyway, I’m sure John Yoo and David Addington are very grateful and relieved to have Mukasey on board representing the ummm “People” of the US.
—————————————————–

How about Mukasey?

Got an apology lined up for that travesty too?
———————————————

As a New Yorker I was outraged by Schumer’s vote
to confirm Mukasey, given what he said (or wouldn’t say) about waterboarding.

Senator Schumer, I sent you an email asking you to oppose him, and (unlike many members of Congress) your staff actually sent a detailed reply in your name. But it came weeks after the vote, and repeated the same unjustifiable arguments that it was better to have Mukasey than an “acting” AG.

In  fact, what really mattered was not that we have an Attorney General who says what Bush and Cheney want him to, but the fact that YOU as a Democratic Senator voted for him. No words of concern can possible outweigh the endorsement that comes from you with that vote.

I was extremely disappointed in you, and in all of your colleagues who didn’t have the courage to vote no.
————————————————

took Stones to show up here

and ask for our help on anything if you ask me. You have seriously let us down Sen. Schumer. I quit listening to you a few months ago. May I suggest you go read the Bybee Memo, you will need it.

To paraphrase the old Tootsie Pop ad, “How many uncomfortable questions does it take to make the Senator from NY run away?”

Only one, my friends. Only one.  Don’t let the door hit you in the ass on the way out.

UPDATED BELOW

UPDATED AGAIN
VIA TPM MUckraker, 21 Democrats in the House may sell out of FISA:

Senior congressional aides said there was no clear path to a compromise on the issue. But a series of recent defections by moderate Democrats in the House raises prospects that the White House position — or something close to it — eventually may prevail….

Reluctant to be portrayed as depriving the government of a key tool in the war on terrorism, 21 members of a bloc of moderate House Democrats signed a letter endorsing the Senate approach. Senior Democratic aides said those defections suggested there might be enough support in the House to pass the Senate bill.

Unfortunately, neither TPM nor the LA Times (the source) say who these 21 DemocRATS are.  I called Conyers’ office, but to no avail. They transferred me to the House Judiciary Committee, which couldn’t answer my question either.  

Who are these Democrats?  Constituents and citizens have a right to know who plans to sell the Fourth Amendment to the highest bidder.  

Does anyone know?

UPDATE: Via Daily Kos, now we know:

* Rep. Leonard L. Boswell, D-Iowa — Phone: (202) 225-3806, Fax: (202) 225-5608

* Rep. Marion Berry, D-Ark. — Phone: (202) 225-4076, Fax: (202) 225-5602

* Rep. Mike Ross, D-Ark. — Phone: (202) 225-3772, Fax: (202) 225-1314

* Rep. Earl Pomeroy, D-N.D. — Phone: (202) 225-2611, Fax: (202) 226-0893

* Rep. Robert E. “Bud” Cramer, D-Ala. — Phone: (202) 225-4801, Fax: (202) 225-4392

* Rep. Melissa Bean, D-Ill. — Phone: (202) 225-3711, Fax: (202) 225-7830

* Rep. Heath Shuler, D-N.C. — Phone: (202) 225-6401, Fax: (202) 226-6422

* Rep. John Barrow, D-Ga. — Phone: (202) 225-2823, Fax: (202) 225-3377

* Rep. Allen Boyd, D-Fla. — Phone: (202) 225-5235, Fax: (202) 225-5615

* Rep. Joe Baca, D-Calif. — Phone: (202) 225-6161, Fax: (202) 225-8671

* Rep. Dan Boren, D-Okla. — Phone: (202) 225-2701, Fax: (202) 225-3038

* Rep. John Tanner, D-Tenn. — Phone: (202) 225-4714, Fax: (202) 225-1765

* Rep. Jim Matheson, D-Utah — Phone: (202) 225-3011, Fax: (202) 225-5638

* Rep. Jim Cooper, D-Tenn. — Phone: (202) 225-4311, Fax: (202) 226-1035

* Rep. Lincoln Davis, D-Tenn. — Phone: (202) 225-6831, Fax: (202) 226-5172

* Rep. Brad Ellsworth, D-Ind. — Phone: (202) 225-4636, Fax: (202) 225-3284

* Rep. Tim Holden, D-Pa. — Phone: (202) 225-5546, Fax: (202) 226-0996

* Rep. Charlie Melancon, D-La. — Phone: (202) 225-4031, Fax: (202) 226-3944

* Rep. Dennis Moore, D-Kan. — Phone: (202) 225-2865, Fax: (202) 225-2807

* Rep. Christopher Carney, D-Pa. — Phone: (202) 225-3731, Fax: (202) 225-9594

* Rep. Zack Space, D-Ohio — Phone: (202) 225-6265, Fax: (202) 225-3394

If this bad bill is jammed through the House of Representatives, it will be their fault. Call them and tell them to support the RESTORE Act without modification, and to support the 21 day extension of the current law. Tell them to stop enabling the Republicans and Bush in taking away our civil liberties.

UPDATE 2: According to mcjoan at daily kos:

Update: The House Dems just prevailed, 222-196 in beating back the Rs effort to substitute the Senate version of the FISA bill for the bill currently on the floor, a 21 day extension of the Protect America Act. This was a procedural vote, but a good win. Now the vote is on extending the PAA.

Update 2: The 21 day extension fails, 191-229.

I don’t know what happens next.

Also available with extra spite.

Powell  May Support a Democrat or Independent This Year.

Former Secretary of State Colin Powell, a Republican who served under President Bush, said Friday he may not back the GOP presidential nominee in November, telling CNN that “I am keeping my options open at the moment.”

“I have voted for members of both parties in the course of my adult life,” Powell, a former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told CNN’s Wolf Blitzer. “And as I said earlier, I will vote for the candidate I think can do the best job for America, whether that candidate is a Republican, a Democrat, or an Independent.”

Hey Colin, big fave, mmm’kay? Fuck. Off.  Don’t come sidling around the Democrats, who already have PLENTY of credibility problems of their own, trying to clean up your reputation and make yourself out to be some kind of independent man of character and integrity.

No one, but NO ONE, forgotten your role in the Iraq debacle with your little vial of semen or whatever it was you were pretending was nerve gas at the UN.  Do you honestly think any Democrat with half a brain wants you showing up doling out your endorsement?  My God, NAMBLA would be preferable to you: at least they admit what they are.  Typhoid Mary would be preferable to a Powell endorsement.  ED FUCKING GEIN would be preferable to a Powell endorsement.

You are a disgrace, Mr. Powell, one of many directly responsible for the deaths of nearly 4,000 American soldiers and counting. How many of your compatriots have come home legless, armless, faceless, psychotic?  You knew the case for war was “bullshit”, and yet there you were holding up your sample to the UN.

If you had any honor at all in your Mai-Lai covering-up body, you would have taken out your service revolver long ago and put that thing to good use.

But do NOT, DO NOT, come slinking around the Democratic Party’s candidates or unaffiliated voters like the mangy dog you are thinking you can rehab your reputation through association.  I realize you’re desperate to remove the albatross you’ve hung around your neck, but dude it is WAY too late for that.  You will always be that guy that prostituted what remained of his integrity to enable a war based on lies.  I hope they paid you well.

Go jump in a lake.  Preferably from off a very tall bridge, with a cinder block or two chained to your ankle.

Ya know, it’s usually considered in poor taste, not to mention a violation of copyright, to publish an entire news article.

However, given Mukasey’s Refusal to Say Whether He Was Instructed Not to Enforce Subpoenas, I think it’s important to take a trip down memory lane to see how Charles Schumer defended his decision to confirm Gonzo 2.0.

Op-Ed Contributor
A Vote for Justice

By CHARLES SCHUMER
Published: November 6, 2007

I AM voting today to support Michael B. Mukasey for attorney general for one critical reason: the Department of Justice — once the crown jewel among our government institutions — is a shambles and is in desperate need of a strong leader, committed to depoliticizing the agency’s operations.

The department has been devastated under the Bush administration. Outstanding United States attorneys have been dismissed without cause; career civil-rights lawyers have been driven out in droves; people appear to have been prosecuted for political reasons; young lawyers have been rejected because they were not conservative ideologues; and politics has been allowed to infect decision-making.

We are now on the brink of a reversal. There is virtually universal agreement, even from those who oppose Judge Mukasey, that he would do a good job in turning the department around. My colleagues who oppose his confirmation have gone out of their way to praise his character and qualifications. Senator Sheldon Whitehouse, Democrat of Rhode Island, for one, commended Judge Mukasey as “a brilliant lawyer, a distinguished jurist and by all accounts a good man.”

Most important, Judge Mukasey has demonstrated his fidelity to the rule of law, saying that if he believed the president were violating the law he would resign.

Should we reject Judge Mukasey, President Bush has said he would install an acting, caretaker attorney general who could serve for the rest of his term without the advice and consent of the Senate. To accept such an unaccountable attorney general, I believe, would be to surrender the department to the extreme ideology of Vice President Dick Cheney and his chief of staff, David Addington. All the work we did to pressure Attorney General Alberto Gonzales to resign would be undone in a moment.

I deeply oppose this administration’s opaque policy on the use of torture — its refusal to reveal what forms of interrogation it considers acceptable. In particular, I believe that the cruel and inhumane technique of waterboarding is not only repugnant but also illegal under current laws and conventions. I also support Congress’s efforts to pass additional measures that would explicitly ban this and other forms of torture. I voted for Senator Ted Kennedy’s anti-torture amendment in 2006 and am a co-sponsor of his similar bill in this Congress.

Judge Mukasey’s refusal to state that waterboarding is illegal was unsatisfactory to me and many other members of the Senate Judiciary Committee. But Congress is now considering — and I hope we will soon pass — a law that would explicitly ban the use of waterboarding and other abusive interrogation techniques. And I am confident that Judge Mukasey would enforce that law.

On Friday, he personally made clear to me that if the law were in place, the president would have no legal authority to ignore it — not even under some theory of inherent authority granted by Article II of the Constitution, as Vice President Cheney might argue. Nor would the president be able to evade a clear pronouncement on the subject from the courts. Judge Mukasey also pledged to enforce such a law.

From a Bush nominee, this is no small commitment. In many aspects, Judge Mukasey reminds me of Jim Comey, a former deputy attorney general in the Bush administration who has been widely praised for his independence; he did not always agree with us on the issues, but was willing to fight administration officials when he thought they were wrong.

Even without the proposed law in place, Judge Mukasey would be more likely than a caretaker attorney general to find on his own that waterboarding and other techniques are illegal. Indeed, his written answers to our questions have demonstrated more openness to ending the practices we abhor than either of this president’s previous attorney general nominees have had.

I understand and respect my colleagues who believe that Judge Mukasey’s view on torture should trump all other considerations. For the Senate to make a bold declaration about torture and waterboarding by rejecting him is appealing. But if we block Judge Mukasey’s nomination and then learn in six months that waterboarding has continued unabated, that victory will seem much less valuable.

To defeat him would be to abandon the hope of instituting the many reforms called for by our investigation. No one questions that Judge Mukasey would do much to remove the stench of politics from the Justice Department. I believe we should give him that chance.

Charles Schumer, a Democrat, is a senator from New York.

Senator Schumer can be reached at 202-224-6542.  I’ve been calling his office every day since last week to find out if he plans to issue a retraction, an explanation, and a plan for rectifying his mistake.  I have been told repeatedly that no such editorial will be forthcoming.

Also, take note: after writing an editorial replete with Mukasey’s personal assurances and a reference to his “independence”, Schumer is “not surprised” by the stonewalling.  Does that make any sense?

After taking the time to write an op-ed for the Times that makes a strong (if flawed) case for Mukasey that points to the man’s independence, forthrightness, and personal assurances, the least Schumer could do is be surprised that he was obviously lied to and bamboozled.  What does that say about his judgement?

His staff didn’t have much of an answer for THAT question either.  In fact, they admitted they were flummoxed as well.

Apologies for my absence last weekend: I was playing a bluegrass festival in Northeastern PA, and by the time I got home late Sunday, i was just too damn tired to write anything.

Right now, we’re almost out of extract, and there’s not too much going on in the kitchen.  There’s a 5-gallon carboy filled with an ESB of some sort in the kitchen, and the keg of porter just ran out.  We’re talking about doing a red ale of some sort, but I might begin investigating Baltic Porters after having a couple with dinner the other night.  

Of all the Baltic porters, Poland has the best variety and the easiest to acquire, perhaps owing to the country’s brewing history and geographic location. The middle of the 19th century is generally regarded as a watershed for refined brewing technology. Chief among these advances was a more thorough understanding of bottom fermentation and lager beer production, which became the standard method in Germany, Bohemia and Austria. Polish breweries adopted this lager technology from their neighbors (much of Poland was actually under German and Austrian control during this period)…Be wary; they are the strongest as well, reaching 9.1 percent ABV.

I’ve only recently begun exploring Polish beers: as I began this diary I started bopping around the internet looking for a site that was informative, but nothing really great came up. My limited experience has been one of sweeter beers, with almost a honey aftertaste in lighter styles like Ococim Lager, combined with a massive alcoholic wallop.  I think my g/f had maybe a beer-and-a-half, and she was shitfaced.

No recipe this week (we start brewing again on Friday), so I’ll leave you with a brief history of the Polish Beer Lovers Party, which took 16 seats in the government in 1991.  

That’s a third party I can get behind, and they’re probably a lot more fun than Ralph Nader.

It’s been a long and frustrating day, so no recipe this time.  all I can say is thank god for beer: on tap, in the can, or in the bottle.  You know, like Hank sang.

This is a great video. No, that’s not me.

I gotta say, I am really too chilled out to even write.  I had four days off from work for Christmas and now i’m on another four days off for New Year’s.  Nothing like a Tuesday holiday!    

We tapped the brown ale yesterday (I told you it was a pretty quick brew).  It’s sweet and nutty, thanks to the Victory malt.  I brought a growler to a pickin’ party, where it went over really well.  The alcohol level’s fairly low, and it’s an excellent session beer.

Pretty quiet in comments last week, so this week’s porter is going to be really basic, and heavy on the malt.  I published that recipe last week.

Whaddya got in the fermenter?