April 24, 2024 / by
ATTENTION all Wheelhouse and FDL members, Ms. Marcy Wheeler will be on MSNBC TeeVee with David Shuster during the 3:00-4:00 pm Eastern time hour. She is at the studio now and will be helping to explain details behind the much discussed "secret program". For more background, see these recent posts here and, to a lesser extent, here.
Watch along with us and comment away! I will graft in the video when it is available.
Tomorrow, Monday morning July 13, 2009, Judge Sonia Sotomayor begins the hearing portion of her confirmation process. So far, there has been the expected (sadly) partisan yammering on her nomination. Then, on Friday, there suddenly emerged something that might seem to take hold as the focus of the obligatory partisan sniping. Frank Ricci. It came from Dahlia Lithwick at Slate:
Ricci is invariably painted as a reluctant standard-bearer; a hardworking man driven to litigation only when his dreams of promotion were shattered by a system that persecutes white men. This is the narrative we will hear next week, but it somewhat oversimplifies Ricci’s actual employment story. For instance, it’s not precisely true, as this one account would have it, that Frank Ricci "never once [sought] special treatment for his dyslexia challenge." In point of fact, Ricci sued over it.
According to local newspapers, Ricci filed his first lawsuit against the city of New Haven in 1995, at the ripe old age of 20, for failing to hire him as a firefighter. That January, the Hartford Chronicle reported that Ricci sued, saying "he was not hired because he is dyslexic." The complaint in that suit, filed in federal court, alleged that the city’s failure to hire Ricci because of his dyslexia violated the Americans with Disabilities Act. Frank Ricci was one of 795 candidates interviewed for 40 jobs. According to his complaint, the reason he was not hired was that he disclosed his dyslexia in an interview. That case was settled in 1997 with a confidential settlement in which Ricci withdrew his lawsuit in exchange for a job with the fire department and $11,143 in attorney’s fees.
In 1998, Ricci was talking about filing lawsuits again, this time over a dispute with his new employer, Middletown’s South Fire District—which had hired him in August of 1997. According to a Hartford Courant report of Aug. 11, 1998, Ricci was dismissed from the Middletown fire department after only eight months. He promptly appealed his dismissal, claiming that fire officials had retaliated against him for conducting an investigation into the department’s response to a controversial fire. A story in the Hartford Courant dated Aug. 9, 1997, has Ricci vowing "to pursue this to the fullest extent of the law."
From that already tangential report by Lithwick, has come the claptrapping by those wanting to buck up the Sotomayor nomination, unfortunately by mostly liberal voices, that Ricci is now to be tarred and feathered as a "serial plaintiff".
I am in complete accord with Digby:
Ricci may very well have been justified in filing all those law suits against his employers for different reasons. Some people are just unlucky. And it has no bearing on the facts of the case in question, obviously, at least at the apellate level which is where Sotomayor heard it.
But let’s face facts. Mr Ricci is obviously not the tough, manly public servant who was cheated out of his rightful job by a the lazy "you know whos" that free ride on the system. It looks like this guy would be a much better poster boy for tort reform than reverse discrimination. Maybe somebody in wingnut central got the file mixed up.
As far as I can tell, both sides are full of manure here. The Republicans should not be parading Frank Ricci around as if he is significant to the question of the nomination; he is not, it is sheer exploitation, what he personally has to say here doesn’t mean squat. But by the same token, for Democrats to be bringing up the Ricci character assassination tact is contemptible. That history had nothing whatsoever to do with his case as it involves Sonia Sotomayor, nor the facts underlying it from my look at the decisions of both Sotomayor and subsequently the Supreme Court. Beating him up with it is bullying and asinine.
One prior lawsuit the City of New Haven settled by giving Ricci the relief he sought and the award of attorney fees does not, by any convoluted stretch of the imagination, make Mr. Ricci some sort of despicable "serial plaintiff". The fact he contemplated later actions and never proceeded to filing a complaint means nothing either. And it sure as heck is not contained in either the factual statement of Sonia Sotomayor’s decision, nor is it in the facts of the Supreme Court opinion.
By the same token, Mr. Ricci has nothing admirable nor tangible bearing on any argument the Republicans have against the nomination of Judge Sotomayor. The use of him as a front man is cowardly and cheap. It is a shameful and distracting dog and pony show by both sides. They should both knock it off and focus on the legitimate merits.
UPDATE: In light of many of the comments, I thought I should add a little discussion to clarify why Ricci is irrelevant to consideration of Sotomayor’s nomination.
For all those that have not actually read the Ricci decision, it is not that long; you should read it. First off, the case was not about Ricci individually in any regard; as the case was postured in front of Judge Sotomayor and her appellate panel, he was one of a co-equal group of 17 plaintiffs. Ricci’s name by whatever happenstance simply ended up being the first name in the caption. The case is NOT about Ricci, it is about a testing process for the promotion of firefighters in New Haven.
Secondly, Ricci himself was not complaining about the test, nor did he argue that his alleged dyslexia affected his performance on the test whatsoever; that fact and the first lawsuit he filed in the 1990s had nothing to do with the case in front of Sotomayor or the Supreme Court. Nothing could be further from the truth; in fact Ricci was adamant that the test was fair and he strongly thought ought to be determinative in the promotion debate. In fact that is why he was a member of the group of 17 plaintiffs.
Federal judges, whether liberal or conservative – from Reggie Walton on Libby to Vaughn Walker on al-Haramain and the consolidated wiretapping cases in NDCA to the Republican appointees finally giving Guantanamo detainees Habeas consideration to the Supreme Court Justices that were the only check whatsoever on the unitary power grab of the Bush/Cheney brigade – live and serve in mostly quiet and unappreciated dignity.
That is certainly the case with Fourth Circuit Judge Karen Williams:
Karen Williams of South Carolina, the first female chief judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit, stepped down this week shortly after learning that she was in the early stages of Alzheimer’s disease, according to her family. Alzheimer’s, for which there is no cure, can cause mental deterioration and memory loss. Williams is 57 years old.
The 4th Circuit, an influential voice on national security issues, hears cases from Virginia, Maryland, West Virginia and the Carolinas. Earlier vacancies have whittled away its strong Republican majority, and the court now has five judges appointed by Republican presidents and five appointed by Democrats. Williams’s departure creates a fifth vacancy, so the court could gain a 10 to 5 Democratic majority during Obama’s term.
…
Williams’s eldest daughter, Marian Scalise, 39, said yesterday that her mother made a wrenching decision to leave a job she loves but did so promptly after her diagnosis to make sure she retired before any of her opinions could be questioned."The court has always been in her life. She has always loved the court, and serving the citizens, and making sure her opinions were correct as far as the law is concerned," Scalise said. "It’s so difficult for her to step away from that.
I had never heard of Judge Williams before tonight, and what seems to be her most famous decision, Dickerson v. United States, I take profound issue with. Heck, even the Rehnquist court, with Rehnquist himself writing the opinion, took issue with it and reversed Williams. That said, my hat is off to Judge Williams for making the call to retire quickly and completely. This is a terrible diagnosis the judge has received, the decision must have been brutal, but Williams appears to have not flinched and looks to have removed herself before she put decisions in serious jeopardy. And, yes, judges with lifetime tenure often do hang on when they have no business whatsoever being there.
Williams’ sudden retirement does present an interesting situation in the Fourth Circuit though. With a five to five split, the five potential Obama appointments could produce a seismic shift on a critical Circuit Court of Appeals.
My bet is Republicans will fight Obama appointments to the 4th like holy hell even though Obama will go out of his way to appoint worthless moderate schlubs. Any takers?
In early June, a critical hearing was held in front of Judge Vaughn Walker in the al-Haramain warrantless wiretapping case. As a result of that hearing, Judge Walker entered an order commanding the attorney for plaintiffs al-Haramain et. al to file a motion for summary judgement. Hot off the press, the motion was filed minutes ago, and it is a stunning demonstration of just how disingenuous and two faced President Obama and his administration have been on the seminal issues of warrantless wiretapping, protection of Constitutional rights, transparency and accountability.
The first words in the main body of the motion are a stark reminder to President Obama and Attorney General Eric Holder of the very words and promises they have spoken in the past on the issue of illegal wiretapping:
“Warrantless surveillance of American citizens, in defiance of FISA, is unlawful and unconstitutional.”
President Barack Obama, December 20, 2007“We owe the American people a reckoning.”
Attorney General Eric Holder, June 13, 2008
Apparently those words only were operative during the election, because that sure is not what Obama and Holder are saying and doing now. Instead, in pretty much as big of a Constitutional about face as is imaginable, Obama has decided to turn his back on his words and promises and throw his lot in with Bush and Cheney by asserting state secrets to protect the government from inquiry and accountability on its illegal and unconstitutional acts. It is not radical left wing bloggers saying that, it is distinguished US Senator Russell Feingold:
Of State Secrets, he said the Administration’s repeated assertion of State Secrets in litigation was reminiscent of the Bush Administration. He alluded to the cases before Vaughn Walker, and complained that the invocation of State Secrets would prevent Americans from finding out what really went on with the warrantless wiretap program
Senator Feingold is exactly right in his quote. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has also slapped Obama hard on his continuation of the Bush/Cheney policy. And lest there be any illusion that Bush wiretapping program was legal, the following uncontroverted facts from the motion for summary judgment dispatch that notion:
On May 15, 2007, in testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee, and on May 22, 2007, in written answers to follow-up questions by Senator Patrick Leahy, former Deputy Attorney General James B. Comey made the following statements demonstrating that defendants knew the warrantless surveillance program was unlawful yet continued it for several weeks in 2004 without the DOJ’s approval:
• As of early March of 2004, Comey and Attorney General John Ashcroft had
determined that the program was unlawful.• During a meeting at the White House on March 9, 2004, two days before the DOJ’s periodic written certification of the program was due, Comey told Vice-President Dick Cheney and members of his and President Bush’s staffs that the DOJ had concluded that the program was unlawful and that the DOJ would not re-certify it.
• On March 10, 2004, while Ashcroft was hospitalized, two White House officials went to Ashcroft’s bedside and attempted to obtain the written certification from Ashcroft, but he refused.
• Despite the advice that the program as then constituted was unlawful, President Bush did not direct Comey or the FBI to discontinue or suspend any portion of the program.
(citations omitted)
The program was illegal from the start, and by all accounts remains so to this date under President Obama. But the most critical, and definitively illegal, period during the existence of the warrantless wiretapping program was following the infamous Ashcroft "Hospital Incident". As the "Statement of Relevant Facts" in the al-Haramain Motion for Summary Judgment lays out, this was precisely the period the al-Haramian attorneys were under illegal surveillance.
The foregoing is not just troubling because of the illegal acts committed upon plaintiff al-Haramain and its licensed attorneys, it is a damning comment on the credibility and honesty of President Barack Obama, Attorney General Eric Holder and the people they have brought on board to serve in our name.
The Bush Cheney surveillance program was legally defended in a "White Paper" issued by the Bush Department of Justice on January 29, 2006. It was a scurrilous and convoluted argument typical of the cravenly politicized Bush DOJ. Take a look at what some of the other officials serving in the Obama Administration used to say about the illegal Bush/Cheney surveillance program on page 21 of the motion for summary judgment. The really damning section, however, is contained in pages 26-28 of the motion:
Again, not even President Obama or members of his administration agree with the White Paper’s radically expansive theory of inherent presidential power. Principal Deputy Solicitor General Neal Katyal has said: “Claims of ‘inherent’ power . . . fall flat given the fact that FISA has been enacted.” Katyal & Caplan, supra at 1034. Solicitor General Elena Kagan has called the Bush administration’s legal opinions justifying the TSP “expedient and unsupported,” written by “lawyers who failed to respect the rule of law” and who do not understand that “the law and its precepts reign supreme, no matter how high and mighty the actor and no matter how urgent the problem.” Elena Kagan, Address to Cadets at the United States Military Academy at West Point (Oct. 17, 2007), available at http://judiciary.senate.gov/nominations/ElenaKagan/upload/Kagan-Question-13d-Part- 1.pdf. President Obama’s nominee for Assistant Attorney General for the DOJ’s Office of Legal Counsel, Dawn E. Johnsen, has written that the White Paper’s inherent power theory is “extreme and implausible.” Dawn E. Johnsen, What’s a President To Do? The Constitution In the Wake of Bush Administration Abuses, 88 Boston U. L. Rev. 395, 405 (2008). Johnsen adds: “The Bush administration’s ‘unitary executive’ and Commander-in-Chief theories, in my view, are clearly wrong and threaten both the constitutionally prescribed balance of powers and individual rights.”
In an amicus curiae brief filed in another TSP lawsuit, Associate Deputy Attorney General Donald B. Verrilli, Jr. (then co-chair of Jenner & Block’s appellate and Supreme Court practice) compellingly debunked the Bush administration’s inherent power theory, calling it “particularly dangerous because it comes at the expense of both Congress’s and the judiciary’s powers to defend the individual liberties of Americans.” Brief for Amici Curiae Center for National Security Studies and the Constitution Project, ACLU v. NSA, 493 F.3d 644 (6th Cir. 2007), 2006 WL 4055623, Verrilli said that in the Steel Seizure Case “the Supreme Court established that Congress can, even during time of war, regulate the ‘inherent power’ of the President through duly enacted legislation. That is precisely what FISA does. In authorizing warrantless electronic surveillance in direct violation of FISA, the President is acting not only with power that is at its ‘lowest ebb,’ he is acting in violation of his constitutional duty to enforce the law as enacted by Congress,” Id. “Our Constitution was established to end – not enshrine – this kind of executive overreaching. . . . The NSA surveillance program upends the balance among the three
branches of government, and thereby threatens bedrock liberties the constitution and the Bill of Rights are designed to protect.” Id. at *14-15.President Obama himself has acknowledged: “The Supreme Court has never held that the president has such [inherent] powers.” Charlie Savage, Barack Obama’s Q&A, BOSTON GLOBE, Dec. 20, 2007. President Obama expressly rejected the inherent power theory when he stated: “Warrantless surveillance unconstitutional.” Id. (some citations omitted)
The amicus brief filed by now Assistant Attorney General Donald Verrilli (who is a driving force behind Obama’s legal positions on wiretapping in general and the consolidated cases in front of Judge Vaughn Walker in particular) is extremely telling. It was filed in the Sixth Circuit appeal from the famous ACLU v. NSA case where Judge Anna Diggs Taylor found the Bush/Cheney program illegal and unconstitutional.
All in all, the motion for summary judgment filed by plaintiffs al-Haramain et. al is one fantastic read, a concise set of proof of the case for entry of judgment against the government, and a damning blow to the credibility and honesty of Barack Obama, Eric Holder and other key members of the Obama Administration. Their actions are directly contrary to what they promised the nation when seeking office, and are not the standard of conduct the United States was founded upon nor deserves.
Ever since the stunning decision to quit her elected office, and abandon her constituents, Governor Sarah Palin of Alaska has been relentlessly repeating the line that she has been victorious in every ethics investigation against her. This ABC News report is typical:
But she said a major factor in the decision was the mounting legal bills she and the state have had to incur to fight ethics charges from her political adversaries. None of the accusations have been proved but, she said, the costs of fighting them have been enormous.
This is a demonstrably false statement and, yet, every major media source has allowed her to utter it without contravention and many have blindly repeated it.
Perhaps Sarah Palin has forgotten the most extensive and professional investigation performed of all, the one by longtime Alaska prosecutor Steven Branchflower, appointed by the Legislative Council of the Alaska State Legislature, which found that Sarah Palin Unlawfully Abused Her Power:
Governor Palin knowingly permitted a situation to continue where impermissible pressure was placed on several subordinates in order to advance a personal agenda, to wit: to get Trooper Michael Wooten fired. She had the authority and power to require Mr. Palin to case contacting subordinates, but she failed to act.
Such impermissible and repeated contacts create conflicts of interests for subordinate employees who must choose to either please a superior or run the risk of facing that superior’s displeasure and the possible consequences of such displeasure. This was one of the very reasons the Ethics Act was promulgated by the Legislature.
The Branchflower report was not the only problem Palin had before she quit her brief tenure as Governor. Oh no, there is also the matter of the travel expenses she attempted to bilk her state out of and that she was forced to repay:
Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin will repay her state for travel expenses for nine trips with her children as part of a settlement of a 2008 ethics claim, the attorney who investigated the matter said Tuesday.
Anchorage lawyer Timothy Petumenos said Palin’s office is still adding up the costs, but "I’m told it’s running about $7,000." Palin acknowledged no wrongdoing as part of the settlement, and her attorney said she has been "fully exonerated" by the investigation.
Complaints that Palin improperly took her children on state-paid trips emerged during the 2008 presidential campaign, when Palin was the Republican nominee for vice president. The state Personnel Board hired Petumenos to investigate that claim and others filed during Palin’s time on the GOP ticket.
Now, in fairness, by entering into a plea bargain settlement agreement with the state, and agreeing to promptly repay the ill begotten travel allowances, Palin was able to have the official record read that there was no abiding ethics violation, but the simple fact is if there was no wrongdoing, she would not have had to enter an agreement and repay the funds.
So, and perhaps the mainstream media should pick up on this, when Sarah Palin blissfully states she has been completely exonerated on all ethics complaints, and that she is oh so poor and picked on, it is a lie.
UPDATE: Edward Teller in comments gave a link to this information (h/t Henkimaa) on Palin that is further evidence of the dishonesty Sarah Palin has been engaging in with her convoluted and evolving explanations of her grounds for quitting:
Palin’s claim that $2,000,000 taxpayer (or rather, oil revenue dollars — this is Alaska, after all) have been spent on responding to ethical complaints against Palin.
Problem? Just two days before, on July 1, the Anchorage Daily News, the Juneau Empire, and the Associated Press all reported on figures released by the Alaska Personnel Board about the actual costs of its investigations into ethical complaints against Palin & members of her administration. The costs were considerably less than what Palin claims: $296,042.58.
…
What’s more, nearly two-thirds of that amount was attributable in no small part to an ethics case Palin filed against herself. As explained by Patrick Forey in his Juneau Empire story,[T]he timing, scope and other factors of the single largest expense appear to fit the case Palin filed against herself that cost $187,797 to investigate. That’s almost two-thirds of the total $296,042 of all Personnel Board investigations in the last two years.
The self-reported complaint was a means to have a legislative investigator’s findings in the “Troopergate” case reexamined by a Personnel Board investigator. She said publicly that her self-reported complaint was without merit. [Ref #6]
Without merit, huh? Do I hear the word frivolous?
Sarah Palin is engaging in terminal misrepresentations with nearly every word she utters; and, yet, the mainstream media laps it up as gospel. Basic research of the facts on the ground in Alaska would put the lie to her disingenuous spiel, but that appears to be too much to ask of the worthies.
As Edward Teller has reported, there are rumors of a criminal indictment involving Sarah Palin. I have obtained a copy of news hot off the press on this:
.
.
Okay, that is a bit o humor for the holiday. The graphic was around as a joke during last fall’s election; not sure of the original source (today’s version lifted from Dkos).
That said, if there is an indictment and I had to bet on the grounds, my money would be on the Palins giving hush money to Levi Johnston and/or his family to keep him in the fold in the lead up to the general election last fall.
Keep in mind that Levi’s mother, Sherry Johnston, has drug charges pending relating to possession and sale of oxycontin, a DEA scheduled narcotic. It has been reported by the AP that she is set to enter a plea to a single count of possession with intent to deliver. Makes you wonder if Sherry, whose family has no love lost whatsoever for the Palins at this point, might have been busy behind the scenes. Stay tuned, this may turn out to be a busy holiday weekend.
The same week she is blasted by staffers of her former running mate, John McCain, Sarah Palin has resigned:
Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin (R) stunned political observers Friday by announcing she will resign the governorship after just two and a half years in office.
The first-term governor and 2008 Republican vice presidential nominee made the announcement at her home in Wasilla. Some political observers had expected Palin to forgo an opportunity to seek re-election, but few expected Palin to resign office. Her reason for stepping down was not immediately clear.
Alaska’s NBC affiliate, KTUU, was the first station to report that Palin would leave office. Her departure paves the way for Lt. Gov. Sean Parnell to be sworn in; KTUU said he would take office at the end of the month.
The move, coming nearly a year before she would be forced to reveal her plans by filing deadlines, is sure to lead to widespread speculation that Palin will devote herself full-time to a presidential bid in 2012.
Analogizing herself to a crafty "point guard", Palin said in her announcement (transcribed from MSNBC) that she was resigning:
…So that Alaska may progress, I will not seek reelection as governor. And so, as I thought about this announcement that I wouldn’t run for reelection, and what that means for Alaska, I thought well about how much fun some governors have as lame ducks – travel around their state, maybe travel to other states, maybe take their overseas international diplomatic trade missions, so many politicians do that. Then I thought that’s what’s wrong – many just expect that lame duck status, they draw a pay check and milk it and I’m not going to put Alaskans through that.
I promised efficiencies and effectiveness, that’s just not how I am wired. I promised that four years ago, and I meant it. That is not what is best for Alaska at this time.
…
I am determined to take the right path for Alaska even though it is unconventional and not so comfortable
…
My choice is to take a stand and effect change and not just hit our head against the wall and watch valuable state time and money – millions of your dollars – go down the drain in this new political environment.We know we can effect positive political change from outside government at this moment in time and actually make a difference for our priorities, and so we will.
Okay, that is just a partial and hastily done transcript of Palin’s speech.
So, what is up here? Todd have his balls in a vise? Another daughter is preggers? Some other family scandal? More Alaskan corruption about to break? Is delicate Sarah just tuckered out? She needs the time to figure out where Putin’s head is?
This is bizarre. Listen, the baloney on MSNBC about her doing it to "free herself up to run for national office in 2012" is pure unadulterated horsepucky. Her term was up in 2010; plenty of time to honor her duties and still run for national office in 2012. Nor is the excuse now heard on teevee that she "needed a break". She is walking away from her job and duties, how is that going to read on her resume for national office? This lady doesn’t care about her constituents, her job, or anything else but herself. A narcissist to the core. If she is not done as a GOP political candidate, they are dummer than even I gave them credit for.
As Spencer Ackerman informs, the long awaited IG Report will be a little longer awaited, and will not be released today. Could be tomorrow, could be next week; what a shocker.
In the meantime, and in keeping with our coordinated push with the ACLU Accountability Project, I would like to draw attention to an article Andy Worthington has out today:
On Friday, I also wrote an article about torture for the ACLU’s Accountability Project, explaining how the hunger strikers at Guantánamo are part of the same torture machine — and, moreover, one that, unnervingly, is still operating today — but as a contribution to the specific topic of demonstrating to the US public, and the wider world, that torture techniques implemented by the Bush administration led to murders in US custody, I’m presenting below some relevant sections from my book The Guantánamo Files, from testimony provided by former prisoner Omar Deghayes, and from a recent report by investigator John Sifton, relating to ten murders in US prisons in Afghanistan, three of which, to the best of my knowledge, have never been investigated at all.
Following the outline proposed by Glenn Greenwald above, some of these murders may have involved a few “rogue” actions, but in general it’s clear that they followed methods authorized at the highest levels of the Bush White House — or variations introduced in a context where limits on abusive behavior had been reduced or eliminated, ostensibly to facilitate interrogation.
The prelude to two notorious murders — and, very possibly, three others — in the US prison at Bagram airbase began in the summer of 2002, when 14 soldiers from the 525th Military Intelligence Brigade at Fort Bragg arrived at the prison, led by Lt. Carolyn Wood, and were soon joined by six Arabic-speaking reservists from the Utah National Guard. Lt. Wood took over interrogations from a team led by an interrogator who later wrote a book about his experiences, The Interrogators, using the pseudonym Chris Mackey. This is how I described what happened next in The Guantánamo Files.
Please, go read the entire article, Andy lays out the case on ten murders in US custody in Afghanistan, taken mostly from his book "The Guantanamo Files," but also including testimony by released Guantanamo prisoner Omar Deghayes and research by John Sifton. It is a damning read.
Marcy is in transit back from New York and I have a couple of things I must work on. Give Andy Worthington a read in the meantime and I will check in.
This is it baby, the big finale. All the marbles come down to these two: One Red. One Black. One will leave with the Lombardi Trophy in hand, the other with the regret of the world’s biggest runner-up percolating in their gut for the entire off season, maybe for the rest of their lives.
Parting is such sweet sorrow; nevertheless, with this game will come the end of another season of football trash talk here at Emptywheel. Yes, we occasionally whip out a trash talk without football (March Madness and the start of the F1 Circus are certainly possibilities), but it isn’t the same without the pigskin in the air.
What a season it has been, from the tantalizingly close to perfect season by the Pats that came just a few points short to Good Eli and the Gents in Super Bowl 42, the entire complexion of the 2009 season inexorably changed with the loss of Tom Brady in the first few minutes of this year. For eleven games Brett was Favre and all was magical; then it wasn’t. The San Diego team looked like the Clippers for the first twelve games, then they caught lightning and were Chargers on into the playoffs where they again went Norval. When it was all said and done, it was the Stillers and the Cardinals, yes the Arizona freaking Cardinals, left standing. And, thus, here we are.
Who are the Arizona Cardinals’ fans? I’m not quite sure, but I appear to live in the town that houses almost all of what few there are of them. Oh, and even here I have not noticed the whole town being painted red and buildings redecorated in team colors and insignias like it was purple for Barkley and the Suns in 1993 and the Diamondbacks in 2001. Da birdz de rojo get no respect I tell ya. And if all that were not bad enough, now That One is climbing on the dogpile,
Q. The Steelers or Cardinals, sir?
THE PRESIDENT: I have to say, you know, I wish the Cardinals the best. Kurt Warner is a great story and he’s closer to my age than anybody else on the field, but I am a long-time Steelers fan. Mr. Rooney, the owner, was just an extraordinary supporter during the course of the campaign. Franco Harris was campaigning for me in Pittsburgh. So —
THE VICE PRESIDENT: Coach signed up with you, too.
THE PRESIDENT: Right, Coach Tomlin was a supporter. So I — you know, I wish the best to the Cardinals. They’ve been long-suffering; it’s a great Cinderella story. But other than the Bears, the Steelers are probably the team that’s closest to my heart.
Jeebus. Oh, and Vice-That One (D-MBNA) too. How special. Freaking frontrunners. Well, on that lustrous note, lets get down to business:
THE RED – The Cardinals? The Arizona Cardinals?? Good golly Miss Molly how did the NFC end up with the Cards as its representative? I mean, seriously, wasn’t everyone sure the NFC East was the best conference in football? What happened to that? Romeo of Dallas still has the bimbo jinx, ever plumping, girlfriend, TO is whining again, and all of the Giants’ receivers are in the gunshot wound clinic. The Packers probably could have been in the hunt if Ted Thompson hadn’t have traded the entirety of the team’s balls to the Jets. Bears and Vikes still don’t know what a quarterback is. And, so, hailing from the lowly NFC West, here come the Red Birdz! Gotta love it.
Hey, why not? Kurt Warner has got to be the most unappreciated two time league MVP, Super Bowl winner and MVP on the planet. Well, he is back. He really needs a certain kind of offense, with wild ass receivers and a back that can catch the release out of the backfield, but, hey, give him that and he is deadly. Turns out that the Cards have this spidey man dude, Larry Fitzgerald. And Anquan Boldin (who will be fine for the game by what I hear) and Steve Breaston are pretty darn good too. Like Nixon and Elvis, the Edge is rested and ready for these playoffs and he is playing for his future as a featured back in the NFL, watch for him to prove his worth with a big performance. The real reason the Cards are still here though is their defense, which has come on late and strong. Antrelle Rolle, Adrian Wilson and the Rookie, Dominic Rogers-Cromartie have given the already underrated line and linebackers some deep protection, and it has made all the difference in the world. If the Cardz stand a chance, it will be because their defense rose to the occasion, not the supposedly vaunted offense.
THE BLACK – Contrary to the Cards, we know how the Stillers got here. They slugged it out in death cage battles with every team in their path, and possess one of the most impressive defenses I have ever seen. Certainly didn’t hurt the Steelers that the Titans beat and pummeled the Ravens before narrowly losing, leaving the Ravens with not enough left in the tank for the Stillers. Before we move on, how about a shout out to Chad Pennington and the Fish; awesome effort this year. Tuna + Fish – who knew they went together so well?
The Steelers look pretty scary if you ask me. They were still beating top notch competition when Fast Willie Parker was slow and out; now that he is back you have the full offense. Big Ben is a better passer than people give him credit for, he just isn’t asked to be Dan Marino in the traditional grind it out Pittsburgh offense. All Ben does is win, and he will put the team on his shoulders when he has to. But, of course, the heart and sould of the Stillers is the defense. You already know about the Polynesian Wrecking Ball Troy Polamalu, but don’t forget Ryan Clark, the guy who about decapitated Willis Magahee. James Farrior has been solid at linebacker for a long time, and his pal on the outside backer spot, James Harrison, well no less than Tony Dungy thought he ought to be the league MVP over Peyton Manning. That is pretty high praise, and deserved too, Harrison is very good. And all coordinated by Dick Lebeau, another former Detroit Lion who has gone on to win Super Bowls with the Steelers (there are a lot of those).
So, there is my rundown, with some input from Marcy, please add yours in comments. Well, now for the hard part. And for that, I am going to stay consistent. I have made and laid my bones throughout the playoffs on one simple contention: The Cardinals suck, no way can they win. No way I gonna quit while I am ahead and the devious plan is working. Stillers baby!
[I would like to thank NewtonUSR for the video mix above, it was a special request and he really came through. If you want a little hard hitting theme music, check out The Red and The Black, that is where the concept for the post came from]
As I indicated in comments, I have a copy of the supposed final draft of Obama’s Executive order on Guantanamo. Perhaps I will append the main post later, but i want to get it up now. Especially since William Ockham reports that the ACLU has beat me to the punch. That is what I get for actually driving home and opening a bottle of wine for my wife I guess. Go figure.
Here it is. See you in comments to dissect it. Hey, you know, this change stuff is a lot of fun eh?
