Maureen Dowd in today's NY Times:

"More and more the timeline is raising the question of why, if the torture was to prevent terrorist attacks, it seemed to happen mainly during the period when the Bush crowd was looking for what was essentially political information to justify the invasion of Iraq."

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/17/opinion/17dowd.html?_r=1



(click image for bigger pic)

TPM's Josh Marshall on Thurs:

"More and more the timeline is raising the question of why, if the torture was to prevent terrorist attacks, it seemed to happen mainly during the period when we were looking for what was essentially political information to justify the invasion of Iraq."

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/2009/05/bubbling.php


(click image for bigger pic)

All Dowd did was change "we were" to "the Bush crowd was".

Now, I'm all for cutting & pasting. As a blogger I do it all the time, but I always give credit.

So, if this isn't outright plagiarism by a top NY Times Editorialist, than I'm a happily married, straight man with 4 kids, 2 dogs, a lovely 2nd wife of 15 years with a girl half my age on the side.

Which I assure you all, I am not.

check out my blog some time.....thejoshuablog.com

UPDATE: Turns out Dowd was heavily involved in exposing Joe Biden's plagiarism when he ran for President 20 years ago (h/t clonecone): The detail can be found in this article from Slate back in 2008: The Write Stuff? Oh, the irony!

UPDATE II:

Wonder if the Times plans on paying for the use of words as well? Hmmm

New York Times Considers Two Plans to Charge for Content on the Web

One includes a "meter system," in which the reader can roam freely on the Web site until hitting a predetermined limit of word-count or pageviews, after which a meter will start running and the reader is charged for movement on the site thereafter. He warned staff at the meeting that this pay model would be "tricky." If the word-count limit or page-view limit is set too low, it could chase readers off, compromising traffic and advertising revenue. He said the site presently makes "a lot, a lot of money" from digital advertising--though he wouldn't specify how much--and that executives at the paper believe it is "substantially more" than The Wall Street Journal currently makes on a subscription-based pay model. On the other hand, he said, set these bars too high and there will be little improvement in revenue.

UPDATE III:

From HuffPo's Marcus Baram:

Maureen Dowd Admits Inadvertently Lifting Line From TPM's Josh Marshall

New York Times columnist Maureen Dowd, in an email to Huffington Post, admits that a paragraph in her Sunday column was lifted from Talking Points Memo editor Josh Marshall's blog last Thursday.

Dowd claims that she never read his blog last week but was told the line by a friend of hers. In a follow-up email, she forwarded her desire to apologize to Marshall, writing that had she known, she would have gladly credited Marshall.

josh is right. I didn't read his blog last week, and didn't have any idea he had made that point until you informed me just now. i was talking to a friend of mine Friday about what I was writing who suggested I make this point, expressing it in a cogent -- and I assumed spontaneous -- way and I wanted to weave the idea into my column. but, clearly, my friend must have read josh marshall without mentioning that to me. we're fixing it on the web, to give josh credit, and will include a note, as well as a formal correction tomorrow.

Yeah, she was told "the line" by someone? The line? She should have just said it was an error and that she meant to credit him. This "heard the line" is, well, a line.

UPDATE IV:

Some other posts about this story:

From Politico:  Dowd lifts TPM passage; updates NYT column &  NYT defends Dowd in TPM flap

From Media Matters:  How would the NYT react if Joe Biden gave an excuse this lame?& NYT claims MoDo is "eager" to give credit; Tucker disagrees

From Bink (DailyKos): Maureen Dowd Caught 'Borrowing Text' in NYT? Dowd Responds ...

CSM:  A "plagiarized" account of Maureen Dowd's plagiarism

Newsbusters:NYT's Maureen Dowd Caught Plagiarizing Left-wing Blogger

Gawker:  Maureen Dowd Admits to an Act of Accidental Plagiarism

HuffPo: Say It Ain't So, modo & What Maureen Dowd is Trying to Tell Us

guardian.co.uk: New York Times columnist caught in plagiarism row

Media Bistro: NY Times Absolves Maureen Dowd

NY Mag: Which E-mail Pal Helped Dowd Plagiarize?

AP: NY Times columnist admits using blogger's words & Correction: Times-Dowd story

The Atlantic: Maureen Dowd's Astonishing Feats of Verbal Memory

Colorado Independent: Maureen Dowd: parasitic blogger

Greg Mitchell (Editor & Publisher): 'The Guardian' Covers Maureen Dowd Wrongdoing -- and Contributes its Own

The Weekly Standard: MoDo-gate: It's the Cover Up That Kills

The Insider.com: Maureen Dowd ripped off blogger, Talking Points Memo's Josh Marshall

The Political Carnival:  NY Times' Maureen Dowd Plagiarizes TPM's Josh Marshall

This is the 21st century people! Searching someone's bags is NOT the same as searching their computer. Our computers are our office, our home, our diaries, our phone calls, our letters. Stay the fuck out of it.

From the NY Times:

    Advocacy groups and some legal experts told Congress on Wednesday that it was unreasonable for federal officials to search the laptops of United States citizens when they re-enter the country from traveling abroad.

    [snip]

    The federal government says the searches are necessary for national security and for legal action against people who bring illegal material into the country.

    “If you asked most Americans whether the government has the right to look through their luggage for contraband when they are returning from an overseas trip, they would tell you ‘yes, the government has that right,’ ” Senator Russ Feingold, Democrat of Wisconsin, said Wednesday at the hearing of a Senate Judiciary subcommittee.

    “But,” Mr. Feingold continued, “if you asked them whether the government has a right to open their laptops, read their documents and e-mails, look at their photographs and examine the Web sites they have visited, all without any suspicion of wrongdoing, I think those same Americans would say that the government absolutely has no right to do that.”

read more | digg story

John Aravosis from AmericaBlog had this to say about it & it was priceless (I think):

    This is what happens when old men, like John McCain, frankly, try to make important decisions about new technology. They don't understand it, so they screw up. A search of a laptop computer, or a cell phone, is not a search of your luggage. It's a search of luggage that happens to contain the equivalent of a tape recording of every phone conversation you've had in the past ten years. Luggage that contains details of your sex life, including possible a recorded history of it. Luggage that includes your medical history. Nude photos of your spouse, or yourself. Your personal diary. A computer is not the same thing as an electric razor or a radio. It's an incredibly intimate look into the life of the bearer, and old men who know nothing about the brave new world of technology shouldn't be in the position of deciding how personal a computer really is (or isn't).

crossposted at thejoshuablog

That's what the Arizona GOP is saying about John McSame.

Forget trying to make Barack Obama into some secret Muslim bent on turning America into an Islamic nation ruled by Sharia law, John McSame is the REAL Manchurian Candidate.

From DK's Bo Jangles:

    This November, for the first time, McCain's name will appear on a national ballot. While Arizona residents know a lot about McCain's political history, the nation, as a whole, knows relatively little. His national image is largely a fantasy created by his public relations machine. It is time now that the nation learns the facts about McCain. What better place to begin than in his home state with his fellow Republicans?

    [snip]

    Bob Haney, the Republican state committee chairman in Arizona's 11th District, has described the situation to Max Blumenthal this way:

        "People would be calling in to [state committee] headquarters every week, absolutely enraged, threatening to leave the party because of some comments McCain made," Haney told me. "The guy has no core, his only principle is winning the presidency. He likes to call his campaign the 'straight talk express.' Well, down here we call it the 'forked tongue express.'"

    read more | digg story

Ouch. and Bo Jangles' article only gets better.

crossposted at thejoshuablog

Robert Greenwald's got himself a fun new project. Lieberman Must Go:

Joe Lieberman is a war hawk, plain and simple. He staunchly supports George Bush's War in Iraq and John McCain's plan to stay in Iraq for 100 years. But Lieberman's new alliance with the Republican Party runs even deeper. He has endorsed and stumped for McCain, wants to be the star of the Republican National Convention, and has even served on a 527 group that smeared Barack Obama with a nasty attack ad.

And yet Lieberman still holds a top rank within the Senate Democratic Caucus as chairman of the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee. The Senate Democratic Steering Committee needs to know just how much of a conflict of interest this is. That's why we created Lieberman Must Go.

Here's what you can do: Sign our petition today and tell the Senate Democratic Steering Committee to strip Lieberman of his leadership role in Congress. Then, e-mail this video to everyone you know.

Lieberman must go, sign the petition now: http://liebermanmustgo.com

read more & take action | digg story

crossposted at thejoshuablog

Nothing much to add to it except to say, I''m so glad someone's finally turning this into a mission!!  It's about time.

I wish we could post video into pour blog posts (hint hint).

I just finished sending copies of the U.S. Constitution to Steny Hoyer, Nancy Pelosi, Rahm Emanuel, Harry Reid & Jay Rockefeller.

Basically, my note in each packaged said, "You should try reading this sometime" with only a slight variation on each.

It cost $6.11 each, shipped from Barnes and Noble. They had to be shipped separately obviously, but it was, for me, well worth the cost.

Here's the link/book:

The Constitution of the United States: With the Declaration of Independence and the Articles of Confederation

I know it probably won't do jack shit, but I thought it was important to make a statement other than my usual fax or email rant.

Here are the addresses for these guys.

    Senator Jay Rockefeller
    531 Hart Senate Office
    Build.
    Washington, D.C., DC 20510

    Sen. Harry Reid
    528 Hart Senate Office Bldg
    Washington, D.C., DC 20510

    Rep. Rahm Emanuel
    1319 Longworth
    House Office Building
    Washington, D.C., DC 20515

    Rep. Nancy Pelosi
    Office of the Speaker
    H-232, US Capitol
    Washington, D.C., DC 20515

    Cong. Steny H. Hoyer
    House Democratic Majority Lead
    H-107, The Capitol
    Washington D.C., DC 20515

I'm sure there are others who need deserve to receive a copy, but I'll leave that to others. This is what I was able to do today.

You?

I had already given to ActBlue yesterday.

You?

I also had faxed Sen. Obama at his D.C. office, as well as at the campaign fax, also yesterday.

You?

    D.C. Office

    (202) 224-2854
    (202) 228-4260 fax

    Campaign

    (866) 675-2008
    (312) 819-2089 or 2088 (fax)

I'm so angry right now I'm dizzy.

digg this

crossposted at thejoshuablog

As someone else mentioned on digg, Cindy McSame is the fifth and final Cylon!

From 23/6:

Michelle Obama has been under quite a bit of media scrutiny lately, from her terrorist fist jab to the rumored (and non-existent) "whitey" tape, and the Obamas are preparing for even more wife-attacks to come.

And yet, we never hear too much about the other potential first lady.

So as a public service, from now until the second Tuesday in November, every time Michelle Obama is unfairly attacked or portrayed by the media or a Republican-backed 527 group, 23/6 will remind you of this terrifying and true fact about Cindy McCain:

must see picture | digg story

crossposted at thejoshuablog

This is really cool. It is also why Barack Obama isn't just going "to win", he's going "to win in a landslide." (see Poblano's in depth polling analysis over at Five Thirty Eight that is making news even among some of our nation's top pollsters).

From Pew, some highlights:

A record-breaking 46% of Americans have used the internet, email or cell phone text messaging to get news about the campaign, share their views and mobilize others. And Barack Obama's backers have an edge in the online political environment.

[snip]

A significant number of voters are also using the internet to gain access to campaign events and primary documents. Some 39% of online Americans have used the internet to access "unfiltered" campaign materials, which includes video of candidate debates, speeches and announcements, as well as position papers and speech transcripts.

Online activism using social media has also grown substantially since the first time we probed this issue during the 2006 midterm elections. Among the findings in our survey:

11% of Americans have contributed to the political conversation by forwarding or posting someone else's commentary about the race.
5% have posted their own original commentary or analysis.
6% have gone online to donate money to a candidate or campaign.
Young voters are helping to define the online political debate; 12% of online 18-29 year olds have posted their own political commentary or writing to an online newsgroup, website or blog.

Led by young voters, Democrats and Obama supporters have taken the lead in their use of online tools for political engagement.

74% of wired Obama supporters have gotten political news and information online, compared with 57% of online Clinton supporters.

read more | digg story

crossposted at thejoshuablog

Yesterday, I blogged about the new Rasmussen poll that showed Obama doesn't have a 'unity' problem within our party. 

Simply, put, if Obama is at 80% before HRC's concession/endorsement speech, than he's doing just fine when it comes to unity.   We're doing just fine with unity.

I'm not taking it for granted either; I'm just pointing out the facts to people who are worried about things that don't actually exists (at least not in the land of facts & figures which seem so diametrically opposed to our media's self-induced dramas).

Like, for instance, Obama's "Latino problem", which is also non-existence.  He blows McSame away with the Latino voters.  From the LA Times:

A new Gallup Poll summary of surveys taken in May shows Obama winning 62% of Latino registered voters nationwide, compared with just 29% for McCain. Others have found a wide gap as well. The pro-Democratic group Democracy Corps compiled surveys from March through May that showed Obama with a 19-point lead among Latinos. And a Times poll published last month showed Obama leading McCain among California Latinos by 14 points.

Republicans say McCain's numbers among Latinos at the moment are disappointing -- far below the goals set by a campaign that has long believed McCain could challenge the traditional Democratic dominance of the Latino electorate.

The numbers suggest that McCain's image has suffered after a competitive GOP primary in which he renounced some of the moderate views on immigration popular among many Latinos. For example, McCain, who was a chief sponsor of legislation creating a path to citizenship for most of the nation's estimated 12 million illegal immigrants, now says he believes the government must focus first on securing the U.S.-Mexico border before dealing with illegal workers.

Problems once promoted by the media (& HRC) as "huge" issues for Obama, aren't as problematic as they had us all believe.

Now that voters a have clear choice from both parties, cooler heads are prevailing and voters are looking our for their best interests and not holding any "perceived" grudges.

And again, this is from before HRC's concession/endorsement speech (which I'd like to say for the record was very impressive).

I suspect we'll be seeing more of the same when it comes to polls of white "working class" voters, women voters and whatever other voters we were force-fed to believe Obama has a problem with.

If I remember corrected, Obama is just 8% behind McSame in West Virginia.  EIGHT points?!  Oh yes, here it is:

John McCain begins the general election season with an eight-point advantage over Barack Obama in West Virginia. The first Rasmussen Reports telephone survey of this general election match-up shows McCain attracting 45% of the vote while Obama earns 37%.

Neither man is terribly popular in the state. McCain earns favorable reviews from 48% and unfavorable ratings from another 48%. The numbers for Obama are 40% favorable and 57% unfavorable. Those figures include 26% with a Very Unfavorable opinion of McCain and 35% with such a negative view of Obama.

Does Obama have work here?  Yes.  But an 8 point difference?  He lost by 41 points to HRC.

The overall point is that Primary & General Election polling, voters blocks, etc., can not be compared.  Apples & Oranges.

crossposted at thejoshuablog

Looks like the party is unifying even before this speech:

The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Saturday shows Barack Obama attracting 46% of the vote while John McCain earns 42%. When “leaners” are included, Obama now leads 48% to 45%. Leaners are survey respondents who initially do not favor either candidate but indicate their support on a follow-up question. One week ago today, McCain had the edge over Obama, 46% to 43%.

[skip]

Obama’s bounce is primarily the result of Democrats beginning to unify behind his candidacy. For the first time all year, Obama is supported by 80% of Democrats over McCain. In recent months, his support from Democrats has typically been in the high-60’s or low-70’s range.

McCain is supported by 84% of Republicans and holds an eight-point lead among unaffiliated voters. The bad news for McCain is that there are a lot more Democrats than Republicans. Obama’s party now enjoys a ten-percentage point advantage in terms of party identification.

There are other detail in the poll which is important, but this nugget seems appropriate today.

Must read by The Termite:

Conservative NRO blogger Jim Geraghty asks why the apocryphal Whitey Tape bears such an astonishing resemblance to a plot point in the 2006 political thriller novel The Power Broker, by Stephen Frey:

[skip]

If there was any lingering doubt as to whether this tape actually existed, this should drive a stake right through its heart. Not only was this a hoax; it was a poorly conceived hoax, designed by people with the brains of a garden slug and the morals of a nose hair trimmer.

Larry Johnson is a boil on the ass of the body politic. May he rot.

(my emphasis)

Love that last line. 

All I can say is, get thee to a therapist, Larry Johnson.  You are ill.

According to a new Rasmussen poll, Obama is down by just 8 points to McCain in West Virginia:

John McCain begins the general election season with an eight-point advantage over Barack Obama in West Virginia. The first Rasmussen Reports telephone survey of this general election match-up shows McCain attracting 45% of the vote while Obama earns 37%.

Neither man is terribly popular in the state. McCain earns favorable reviews from 48% and unfavorable ratings from another 48%. The numbers for Obama are 40% favorable and 57% unfavorable. Those figures include 26% with a Very Unfavorable opinion of McCain and 35% with such a negative view of Obama.

[skip}

While President Bush won 56% of the West Virginia vote in Election 2004, just 27% of the state’s voters now believe he is doing a good or an excellent job. Most—58%--say the President is doing a poor job.

By a 59% to 32% margin, West Virginia voters say it’s more important to get the troops home from Iraq than to win the War. Forty-five percent (45%) say victory is at least somewhat likely if John McCain is elected President. Just 20% say that victory is that likely if Obama is elected. However, 48% believe a President Obama would be at least somewhat likely to get the troops home within four years. Just 35% say a President McCain would be likely to do the same.

8 Points.  

EIGHT.

So much for the idea that Clinton's 41% "blowout" would mean Obama would be crushed as the nominee.

I suspect as more & more polls come out in the various states that Hillary beat him in by double digits (while claiming he wouldn't win in the GE) be be shown to be a campaign meme  by a desperate candidate who knew she had lost the the delegate race in just after Ohio & Texas.

The truth is, Democrats will come home to the Democratic nominee. 

Those who don't are those who never intended on voting for Obama in the first place - they include the hardcore racists that Hillary so enjoyed inflaming and the rethugs who only voted for her to keep her in the race to either cause trouble for Obama or with the hopes she might pull of the nomination and they could then run aaginst her (they're dream since 2000).

As Coroner I must aver,
I thoroughly examined her.
And she's not only merely dead,
She's really, most sincerely dead.

Then this is a day of Independence,
for all true Democrats and their descendants.

Period.  End of Story.

There mere fact Hillary Clinton is even sending out very strong signals – today of all days – exemplifies exactly why she’d be a nightmare choice as Obama’s VP.  She is a Narcissist.

Here are the numerous reasons, beside the narcissism, that make her ineligible for Obama’s VP:

1. If the first major decision Obama makes is seen as being forced upon him – as taking Hillary Clinton on as his VP pick would be – he’d immediately start from a weakened position.
2. Change: Senator Clinton DOES NOT represent change. She represents the status quo. She represents the exact opposite. We all know it. Republicans won’t forget that. Neither will Obama’s supporters.
3. 2 Senators on a ticket would be a disaster.
4. 2016: Hillary offers nothing for a 16 year run – these types of things must be considered if we are going to really turn back the clock on 40 years of destructive conservative rule.
5. New York State will be won no matter who Obama choose as VP.
6. Hillary’s numerous lies: Not just the recent ones like Sniper Fire, NAFTA, etc.
7. Hillary's ethics problems from the early 1970s while in Washington as a lawyer.
8. Hillary’s Rose Law Firm work: attacked the credibility of an alleged 12 year old rape victim
9. Hillary’s Union-busting WalMart work.
10. Hillary’s religious cult: Doug Coe.
11. Hugh Rodham
12. Norman Hsu: Over $800,000 in illegal donations. How many other Hsu’s are there?
13. Vince Foster (lie or not doesn’t matter).
14. NAFTA & The Clinton’s Chinese connections.
15. Bill: Saudi Arabia & his other foreign business dealings.
16. Bill: Impeachment
17. Bill: Library Fundraisers
18. Bill: Monica Lewinsky, Jennifer Flowers, Kathleen Willey, Juanita Broderick and ALL the current “affairs.”
19. Bill: “Speaking fees” from Foreign Governments that helped HRC loan money to her campaign.
20. Bill: Sandy Berger
21. Bill: 9/11 – True or not, he will be blamed.
22. Bill: Mena, Arkansas (state officials were involved in some way with alleged illegal cocaine importation, money laundering while Bill was Governor).
23. Bill: Webb Hubbell; Bill’s associate AG (Plead guilty on federal mail fraud & tax evasion charges).
24. Bill & Hillary: Whitewater.
25. Bill’s Pardons: Don Tyson (Chicken), Marc Rich
26. Bill: Illegal donations from Canadian tycoon Frank Giustra
27. And finally this must be said regarding Hillary's RFK remarks: God forbid something happened to you; she’d be LBJ to your JFK. NO WAY.

While unthinkable, Obama must seriously take this into consideration. LBJ didn’t end the war he knew JFK was about too. Neither would HRC regarding Iraq. She is a war hawk, just like Joe Lieberman. She is an entranced DLC sell-out who has no intention of standing up to the military industrial complex. Obama’s Vice Presidential pick must be someone who won’t immediately deviate from his policies if the unthinkable happens.

I truly believe Obama will to pick someone who emphasizes and magnifies the qualities he embodies and has been running on – not someone who conventional wisdom says must fill some “magical void” he has.

He will also pick someone who is also another from-the-beginning anti-Iraq war proponent; someone who like him, is an obvious change candidate; one who is progressive; from a state he or she can help us win and is not tied to the Clintons or the DLC in any way, shape or form.
Bill Clinton ignored conventional wisdom when picked another DLC southerner in Al Gore. It was one of the smartest things he actually did.

Hillary Clinton must not and I have every confidence in the end, will not be on Obama's ticket as VP.

AP tally: Obama clinches Democratic nomination

WASHINGTON (AP) - Barack Obama has effectively clinched the Democratic presidential nomination, based on an Associated Press tally of convention delegates.

The tally put Obama over the top Tuesday, ahead of the results from the day's final primaries in Montana and South Dakota. The Illinois senator becomes the first black candidate ever to lead his party into a fall campaign for the White House. Obama outlasted former first lady Hillary Rodham Clinton in a historic contest and now faces Republican Sen. John McCain of Arizona for the presidency.

THIS IS A BREAKING NEWS UPDATE. Check back soon for further information. AP's earlier story is below.

It's over.

Hillary's popular vote numbers are bullshit. Just like her "experience" claims have always been.

In order for her to be ahead, she conveniently leaves out these caucus states in order to come up with her bullshit figures:

Alaska
Colorado
Hawaii
Idaho
Iowa
Kansas
Maine
Minnesota
Nebraska
Nevada
North Dakota
Texas (Caucus only)
Washington
Wyoming

She also leave out ANY popular votes for Obama in Michigan.

Add ALL those votes into the mix (which means 400,000 net votes for Obama) and Obama is well ahead of her 'popular' vote voo-doo math.

That is approximately 183,067 votes in his favor (including Puerto Rico).

The women is a pathological liar.

This is why 75% of supers who have come out in this last month have come out for Obama. They aint' buying her bullshit.

She's a pathetic joke.
 
Check out Real Clear Politics for all the REAL figures. Hillary Clinton is a LIAR who can't stand the fact Barack Obama out Clintoned her.

OBAMA WON.
HILLARY LOST.

Get over it people.

RenaRF has a lot more in her post, My Math Beats Up Clinton's Math, (which has lots of charts and graphs for you intellectually bankrupt & brain dead, Clinton dead-end supporters).