The Aristocrats

Digby has a truly obscene version of that old joke here.

Priorities and Framing

At one of the NetRoots Nation 09 sessions a panelist, speaking about spin, noted that while you always hear from the right that Medicare/Medicaid/SSI is about to run out of money as a reason for why the program needs to be massively reformed/ended, you never hear, say, that the Defense Department is running out of money...

This made me think about that:



(h/t to Daily Kos)
.

More On Cheney's Use of Torture

It starts here.

After writer Lawrence Wilkerson, Secretary of State Colin Powell's former chief of staff, points out some obvious facts about the Bush Cheney administration, for example:

First, more Americans were killed by terrorists on Cheney's watch than on any other leader's watch in US history. So his constant claim that no Americans were killed in the "seven and a half years" after 9/11 of his vice presidency takes on a new texture when one considers that fact. And it is a fact.

he drops the big one on us:

Likewise, what I have learned is that as the administration authorized harsh interrogation in April and May of 2002--well before the Justice Department had rendered any legal opinion--its principal priority for intelligence was not aimed at pre-empting another terrorist attack on the U.S. but discovering a smoking gun linking Iraq and al-Qa'ida.

So furious was this effort that on one particular detainee, even when the interrogation team had reported to Cheney's office that their detainee "was compliant" (meaning the team recommended no more torture), the VP's office ordered them to continue the enhanced methods. The detainee had not revealed any al-Qa'ida-Baghdad contacts yet. This ceased only after Ibn al-Shaykh al-Libi, under waterboarding in Egypt, "revealed" such contacts. Of course later we learned that al-Libi revealed these contacts only to get the torture to stop.

Then there's this from McClatchy:

The Bush administration applied relentless pressure on interrogators to use harsh methods on detainees in part to find evidence of cooperation between al Qaida and the late Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein's regime, according to a former senior U.S. intelligence official and a former Army psychiatrist.

Such information would've provided a foundation for one of former President George W. Bush's main arguments for invading Iraq in 2003. In fact, no evidence has ever been found of operational ties between Osama bin Laden's terrorist network and Saddam's regime.

It leads us here. Robert Windrem at the Daily Beast reports:

Two U.S. intelligence officers confirm that Vice President Cheney’s office suggested waterboarding an Iraqi prisoner, a former intelligence official for Saddam Hussein, who was suspected to have knowledge of a Saddam-al Qaeda connection.

The former chief of the Iraq Survey Group, Charles Duelfer, in charge of interrogations, tells The Daily Beast that he considered the request reprehensible.

Much of the information in the report of the 9/11 Commission was provided through more than 30 sessions of torture of detainees.

While that intelligence official wasn't waterboarded, he WAS an official POW. For Cheney to suggest waterboarding a real life honest to goodness POW is disgusting in itself.

Joe Conason over at Salon.com adds:

Yet evidence is mounting that under Cheney’s direction, "enhanced interrogation" was not used exclusively to prevent imminent acts of terror or collect actionable intelligence -- the aims that he constantly emphasizes -- but to invent evidence that would link al-Qaida with Saddam Hussein and connect the late Iraqi dictator to the 9/11 attacks.

In one report after another, from journalists, former administration officials and Senate investigators, the same theme continues to emerge: Whenever a prisoner believed to possess any knowledge of al-Qaida’s operations or Iraqi intelligence came into American custody, CIA interrogators felt intense pressure from the Bush White House to produce evidence of an Iraq-Qaida relationship (which contradicted everything that U.S. intelligence and other experts knew about the enmity between Saddam’s Baath Party and Osama bin Laden’s jihadists). Indeed, the futile quest for proof of that connection is the common thread running through the gruesome stories of torture from the Guantánamo detainee camp to Egyptian prisons to the CIA's black sites in Thailand and elsewhere.

And he ends with:

Whether Bush, Cheney and their associates were seeking real or fabricated intelligence, they knowingly employed methods that were certain to produce the latter -- as American officials well knew because those same techniques, especially water torture, had been used to elicit false confessions from captured Americans as long ago as World War II and the Korean conflict.

Cheney now claims that he preserved the country from terrorism and saved thousands and perhaps hundreds of thousands of lives. We need a serious investigation, with witnesses including the former vice-president under oath, to determine what he and his associates actually did with the brutal powers they arrogated to themselves -- because instead their actions cost thousands upon thousands of American and Iraqi lives, all in the service of a political lie.

Investigate the torture. Prosecute the torture.

"I don't know what his beef is"

By now, I'll assume you've all seen the video of an Iraqi reporter throwing his shoes at President George W. Bush during a press conference in Iraq, but did you catch Bush's interview afterwards with ABC News' Martha Raddatz following the incident?




Here's a transcript of part of it:

Raddatz: It's also considered a huge insult in this world, the sole of a shoe, throwing a shoe.

Bush: I guess. Look they were humiliated. The press corps, the rest of the Iraqi press corps was humiliated. These guys were just besides themselves about, they felt like he had disgraced their entire press corps and I frankly, I didn't view it as, I thought it was interesting, I thought it was unusual to have a guy throw his show at you. But I'm not insulted. I don't hold it against the government. I don't think the Iraqi press corps as a whole is terrible. And so, the guy wanted to get on TV and he did. I don't know what his beef is. But whatever it is I'm sure somebody will hear it.

Ignoring Bush's ridiculous attempt to try to spin the humiliation part, it's this bit that's the real insanity (and it came after the heat of the moment):

"I don't know what his beef is."
Oh, I don't know, off the top of my head I can come up with one or two or a million or so reasons:

Iraqi war death estimates range from 151, 000 to over one million. And, who knows how many more wounded and mutilated.

At a bare minimum, ...at least one out of every seven Iraqis has had to flee his or her home due to the violence and chaos set off by the Bush administration's invasion and occupation of Iraq.

A new report on the American-led reconstruction of Iraq that depicts "a $100 billion failure" characterized by "bureaucratic turf wars, spiraling violence and ignorance of the basic elements of Iraqi society and infrastructure" and which was crippled by Pentagon planners before the war even started as they were "were hostile to the idea of rebuilding a foreign country."

You can see the interview here. It starts around the two minute mark (after the truly stupid CNN post game style coverage:


He really can't leave soon enough.
.

Obama: No Gitmo, No Torture, Will Start Drawing Down Troops in Iraq

Obama on 60 Minutes last night:


.

Depressing Headlines for a Cloudy Tuesday

1) White House ordered forgery to link al-Qaeda/Saddam to 9/11 attacks

2) After rape victim used cell phone to call for help, KBR bans use of personal phones in Iraq

3) McCain volunteers his wife for biker rally topless beauty pageant (Now he can use her in an ad with Paris Hilton against Obama!)
.

Jack Kelly Sunday

In this week's column, Jack Kelly revisits Moqtada al-Sadr and the Mahdi Army.

It's been only about a month and a half since his most recent column about "Mookie" and the Army (and here's my deconstruction of it).

He does his usual spin and his point, I would imagine - seeing as it's in the headline, is to point out:

1. How relatively unimportant Moqtada al-Sadr is and
2. How the media isn't saying that.

Indeed, here's his first sentence:

Few foreign leaders have received as favorable news coverage in the United States as has Moqtada al-Sadr, with less factual basis for it.

So let's see what the experts have to say about al-Sadr. At the Council on Foreign Relations, there's a slightly different story. While pointing out some downward trends in the numbers of the militia and the inconsistent revenue stream funding it, the Mahdi army is described (at a page updated only two days ago on May 16, 2008) this way:

Vali R. Nasr, a CFR adjunct senior fellow and expert in Shiite politics, says that by 2008 Muqtada had expanded his movement from being essentially a Baghdad street force into "a major Shiite movement, with parliamentary presence, political presence, as well as now a very large military presence on the street." Nasr says Sadr "now represents one of the two most important Shia blocs in the country." Yet Sadr is not alone in vying for the popular support of Iraqi Shiites. His chief rivals—including the Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq (ISCI) and Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki's Dawa Party—command support from the country's more conservative middle class. Some experts say clashes between Mahdi fighters, Iraqi forces, and ISCI's Badr Brigade are essentially a class struggle.

They also point out that estimates of Sadr's support base range from 3 million to 5 million.

In the course of his column, Jack also quotes Nibras Kazimi of the New York Sun. Not the first time he's used Kazimi as a source. Also not the first time he's described Kazimi with just:

a resident scholar at the Hudson Institute in Washington, D.C.

Not the first time he's omitted Kazimi's connection to the Iraqi National Congress (as listed in his bio at the Hudson Institute):

Nibras Kazimi is a visiting scholar at the Hudson Institute. He also writes a weekly column on the Middle East for the New York Sun. Previously, he directed the Research Bureau of the Iraqi National Congress in Washington DC and Baghdad, and was a pro-bono advisor for the Higher National Commission for De-Ba'athification, which he helped establish and staff.

Do I need to point out again how much good research came out of the Iraqi National Congress in the run up to dubya's war? Or what a good idea the de-Ba'athification of Iraq was?

A good example of Kelly's spinning happens here:

The sporadic fighting has gone badly for the Mahdi Army, which has lost nearly 600 men in Sadr City. This is why Mookie agreed to a conditional surrender on May 10. The Mahdi Army will cease all attacks. Iraqi government forces can enter Sadr City to serve arrest warrants and seize medium and heavy weapons, though the Sadrists may keep their small arms.

If the terms are lived up to, the Mahdi Army will have lost its last stronghold in Iraq. But in an amazing reprise of the bogus Basra narrative, some journalists described this conditional surrender as a victory for Mookie.

"Al-Sadr wins another round," said Mark Kukis of Time Magazine. Mookie "is still controlling the agenda tactically and politically," he said.

Here's Kukis' article from Time. Kukis writes about another hastily drawn up ceasefire and adds:

Details of the cease-fire remain largely unclear beyond an immediate end to the battles that have displaced thousands of residents from the Mahdi Army stronghold of Sadr City, a vast slum home to more than 2 million people.

In announcing the deal, al-Sadr aide Sheik Salah al-Obeidi said the agreement, "stipulates that the Mahdi Army will stop fighting in Sadr City and will stop displaying arms in public. In return, the government will stop random raids against al-Sadr followers and open all closed roads that lead to Sadr City."

Al-Obeidi, who issued a statement from the southern Iraqi city of Najaf, added: "This document does not call for disbanding al-Mahdi Army or laying down their arms."

The fact that a leading figure in al-Sadr's ranks announced the deal and pointedly rejected the Iraqi government's key demand to disarm suggests that the cleric is still controlling the agenda tactically and politically despite the most serious challenge his power the Iraqi government could muster.

Which is somewhat different from what Jack wrote.

But that's our Jack.

Why I blog

We've been told that what happened at Abu Ghraib wasn't torture.

Another View of "The Awakening"

We've heard some about the "Awakening" that took place in Iraq - how it's lead to a reduction in violence at about the same time as dubya's "Surge."

From the New York Times last April:

Anbar Province, long the lawless heartland of the tenacious Sunni Arab resistance, is undergoing a surprising transformation. Violence is ebbing in many areas, shops and schools are reopening, police forces are growing and the insurgency appears to be in retreat.

“Many people are challenging the insurgents,” said the governor of Anbar, Maamoon S. Rahid, though he quickly added, “We know we haven’t eliminated the threat 100 percent.”

Many Sunni tribal leaders, once openly hostile to the American presence, have formed a united front with American and Iraqi government forces against Al Qaeda in Mesopotamia.

And so on.

Reality, just like a fractal image, gets much more complicated the closer you get. From Rolling Stone:

Now, in the midst of the surge, the Bush administration has done an about-face. Having lost the civil war, many Sunnis were suddenly desperate to switch sides — and Gen. David Petraeus was eager to oblige. The U.S. has not only added 30,000 more troops in Iraq — it has essentially bribed the opposition, arming the very Sunni militants who only months ago were waging deadly assaults on American forces. To engineer a fragile peace, the U.S. military has created and backed dozens of new Sunni militias, which now operate beyond the control of Iraq's central government. The Americans call the units by a variety of euphemisms: Iraqi Security Volunteers (ISVs), neighborhood watch groups, Concerned Local Citizens, Critical Infrastructure Security. The militias prefer a simpler and more dramatic name: They call themselves Sahwa, or "the Awakening."

It's a long article, but it's worth working through. Basically, whatever "successes" the surge has brought has been tied to the continued bribing of both sides to stand down.

What do you think will happen when the money stops flowing?

McCain: "Make it a hundred" (years for our troops in Iraq)

Is it just me, or do some of the folks in the first row have their mouths open in disbelief while McCain is saying it's just fine and dandy with him if we're in Iraq for the next 100 years?


.

So...How's That AFGHAN War Going?

Not too good, according to this piece in the Washington Post.

A White House assessment of the war in Afghanistan has concluded that wide-ranging strategic goals that the Bush administration set for 2007 have not been met, even as U.S. and NATO forces have scored significant combat successes against resurgent Taliban fighters, according to U.S. officials.

The evaluation this month by the National Security Council followed an in-depth review in late 2006 that laid out a series of projected improvements for this year, including progress in security, governance and the economy. But the latest assessment concluded that only "the kinetic piece" -- individual battles against Taliban fighters -- has shown substantial progress, while improvements in the other areas continue to lag, a senior administration official said.

And there's something familiar about this, too.

This judgment reflects sharp differences between U.S. military and intelligence officials on where the Afghan war is headed. Intelligence analysts acknowledge the battlefield victories, but they highlight the Taliban's unchallenged expansion into new territory, an increase in opium poppy cultivation and the weakness of the government of President Hamid Karzai as signs that the war effort is deteriorating.

The contrasting views echo repeated internal disagreements over the Iraq war: While the military finds success in a virtually unbroken line of tactical achievements, intelligence officials worry about a looming strategic failure.

So I guess just focusing on the military successes misses the bigger picture.

Jack Kelly's piece in yesterday's P-G touched on the flip side of this argument - but focusing exclusively in Iraq. I got in too late yesterday to write it up so I'll try to tackle it tonight. On the issue of the reduction of violence in Iraq, all I can do right now is to point to this on-line chat at the Washington Post with Thomas Ricks, who's been covering the war in Iraq for some time:

Boonsboro, Md.: When will it be okay to state that we are winning in Iraq and all the naysayers ("the war is lost") were wrong? Even the New York Times is admitting things are going well.

Thomas E. Ricks: Well, things are going better. I just got back from Baghdad last week, and it was clear that violence has decreased. But it hasn't gone away. It is only back down to the 2005 level -- which to my mind is kind of like moving from the eighth circle of hell to the fifth.

I interviewed dozens of officers and none were willing to say we are winning. What they were saying is that at least now, we are not losing. But to a man, they were enormously frustrated by what they see as the foot-dragging of the Baghdad government.

And that's good news? At least we're not losing?

Heckuva job yer doin there, Bushie. Heckuva job.

Speaking of efficiencies . . .

You've heard about the US diplomats who are protesting being sent to Iraq, right?

Well, it appers that Rep. Duncan Hunter (R-CA) has come up with a solution:

Congressman Hunter intends to also suggest that State Department personnel who refuse deployment to Baghdad be replaced with wounded veterans at Walter Reed and Bethesda hospitals.

[snip]

"They are veterans of the Iraq and Afghanistan theaters and you can be sure that when called on for difficult assignments, they won't convene a town meeting to protest. Especially for those whose mobility has been impaired by wounds, State Department positions, not only in Baghdad but around the world, will provide excellent jobs as well as availing our nation of their enormous talent."

Nothing like dragging wounded, immobile soldiers out of their hospital beds and throwing them back into a war zone. And, who knows, their body casts might offer better protection than some of the shoddier body armor.

At this time, we are still trying to nail down the rumor that Hunter also has suggested that the US should avail itself of vets in Arlington National Cemetery because "the bodies of dead veterans of the Iraq and Afghanistan theaters would make excellent barricades when stacked upon each other around the Green Zone."

No one supports the troops like Republicans!
.

The real reason we'll be in Iraq for another 50 years

"Over time, we will have to shift the burden of the military fight from our forces directly to regional forces, and we will have to play an indirect role, but we shouldn't assume for even a minute that in the next 25 to 50 years the American military might be able to come home, relax and take it easy, because the strategic situation in the region doesn't seem to show that as being possible."
- Retired Army Gen. John Abizaid, October 31, 2007

"And I like to put it this way: As they stand up, we'll stand down."
- President George W. Bush, March 22, 2006

Recent Iraqi army training video:

I guess it's a good thing we're only waiting for them to "stand up." If we were waiting for them to achieve a level of proficiency in calisthenics that you or I mastered in the first grade, we'd be there another 100 years.

(h/t to Atrios for the video)
.

Scary if you're an Iraqi!

The surge ethnic cleansing is working!

Joe Christoff of the Government Accountability Office (GAO) said yesterday that a reduction of violence in Iraq should be taken with a grain of salt as it coincides with an increase there in ethnic cleansing, as well as massive numbers of Iraqis fleeing their country.

More here.

More "Phony" Soldiers

Start Spinning, Rush!

We've had sergeants and generals speak out against the war in Iraq. In today's Washington Post, twelve former captains weigh in:

There is one way we might be able to succeed in Iraq. To continue an operation of this intensity and duration, we would have to abandon our volunteer military for compulsory service. Short of that, our best option is to leave Iraq immediately. A scaled withdrawal will not prevent a civil war, and it will spend more blood and treasure on a losing proposition.

America, it has been five years. It's time to make a choice.

(h/t to Meteor Blades at Daily Kos)

The Loneliest Icelander

Remember a couple of weeks ago when Preznit Bush said "We thank the 36 nations who have troops on the ground in Iraq and the many others who are helping that young democracy” and we all laughed and laughed?

Well, now it's 35.

The Icelandic troop press aide has left the building.

His service is commemorated here:



(h/t to TPM)

In Honor of Sgt. Omar Mora & Sgt. Yance T. Gray(A Project of Comments From Left Field)

Did you catch this over at Comments from Left Field?

On Monday September 10, 2007 Sgt. Omar Mora and Sgt. Yance T. Gray died in a vehicle accident in western Baghdad, two of seven U.S. troops killed in the incident which was reported just as Gen. David Petraeus was about to report to Congress on progress in the "surge."

Both serving in the Army’s 82nd Airborne, America at large would not come to know Sgt. Gray and Sgt. Mora’s names until August 19th of this year. Omar and Tell joined with five other soldiers to pen a critical OpEd in the New York Times entitled, The War As We Saw It.

In honor of these men please join the bloggers of Comments From Left Field in making a joint contribution on their behalf to the Fisher House. We urge you to give what you can to this noble cause for only in this way can Omar and Tell continue to make the lives of their fellow soldiers better even after their passing. We can think of no honor more fitting of a soldier.

Click here to read the full post at Comments.

More importantly, click HERE to donate.
.

Hey! How's that war going?

Some recent headlines:

Report Finds Little Progress On Iraq Goals
GAO Draft at Odds With White House
By Karen DeYoung and Thomas E. Ricks
Washington Post Staff Writers
Thursday, August 30, 2007; Page A01

Iraq has failed to meet all but three of 18 congressionally mandated benchmarks for political and military progress, according to a draft of a Government Accountability Office report. The document questions whether some aspects of a more positive assessment by the White House last month adequately reflected the range of views the GAO found within the administration.

The strikingly negative GAO draft, which will be delivered to Congress in final form on Tuesday, comes as the White House prepares to deliver its own new benchmark report in the second week of September, along with congressional testimony from Army Gen. David H. Petraeus, the top U.S. commander in Iraq, and Ambassador Ryan C. Crocker. They are expected to describe significant security improvements and offer at least some promise for political reconciliation in Iraq.
More here

U.S. Weapons, Given to Iraqis, Move to Turkey
By DAVID S. CLOUD and ERIC SCHMITT
Published: August 30, 2007

WASHINGTON, Aug. 29 — Weapons that were originally given to Iraqi security forces by the American military have been recovered over the past year by the authorities in Turkey after being used in violent crimes in that country, Pentagon officials said Wednesday.

The discovery that serial numbers on pistols and other weapons recovered in Turkey matched those distributed to Iraqi police units has prompted growing concern by Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates that controls on weapons being provided to Iraqis are inadequate. It was also a factor in the decision to dispatch the department’s inspector general to Iraq next week to investigate the problem, the officials said.
More here

Pentagon won't make surge recommendation to Bush
By Nancy A. Youssef McClatchy Newspapers
Posted on Wednesday, August 29, 2007

WASHINGTON — In a sign that top commanders are divided over what course to pursue in Iraq, the Pentagon said Wednesday that it won't make a single, unified recommendation to President Bush during next month's strategy assessment, but instead will allow top commanders to make individual presentations.

"Consensus is not the goal of the process," Geoff Morrell, a Pentagon spokesman, told reporters. "If there are differences, the president will hear them."

Military analysts called the move unusual for an institution that ordinarily does not air its differences in public, especially while its troops are deployed in combat.
More here

Rep.: Iraq goal no longer should be democracy
By Kathy Barks Hoffman - The Associated Press
Posted : Saturday Aug 25, 2007 7:59:00 EDT

LANSING, Mich. — The top Republican on the House Intelligence Committee said Friday the president needs to move away from trying to establish democracy in Iraq and concentrate instead on security and stability.

“Establishing a democracy in the time frame that we’ve wanted to do it, over the period of three to five years, was too big of a reach,” Michigan Rep. Pete Hoekstra said after the taping of public television’s “Off the Record” program.

[snip]

“The president has to be willing to say, ‘I’m going to take democracy off the table. We’re going to aim for safety and stability,’ ” he said.
More here

Report Offers Grim View of Iraqi Leaders
By MARK MAZZETTI
Published: August 24, 2007

WASHINGTON, Aug. 23 — A stark assessment released Thursday by the nation’s intelligence agencies depicts a paralyzed Iraqi government unable to take advantage of the security gains achieved by the thousands of extra American troops dispatched to the country this year.

The assessment, known as a National Intelligence Estimate, casts strong doubts on the viability of the Bush administration strategy in Iraq. It gives a dim prognosis on the likelihood that Iraqi politicians can heal deep sectarian rifts before next spring, when American military commanders have said that a crunch on available troops will require reducing the United States’ presence in Iraq.
More here

Ammunition Shortage Squeezes Police
AP IMPACT: Ammunition Shortage Squeezes Police Nationwide; Officer Training Curtailed
By ESTES THOMPSON Associated Press Writer
Aug 17, 2007 (AP)

Troops training for and fighting the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are firing more than 1 billion bullets a year, contributing to ammunition shortages hitting police departments nationwide and preventing some officers from training with the weapons they carry on patrol.

An Associated Press review of dozens of police and sheriff's departments found that many are struggling with delays of as long as a year for both handgun and rifle ammunition. And the shortages are resulting in prices as much as double what departments were paying just a year ago.
More here

Bush Gets It Right!

Compares Iraq to Vietnam:




Countdown's take on that here:

ANTI-WAR events THU and FRI

Iraq Summer Campaign
Itinerary for Thursday 8/16 & Friday 8/17

Organizers Rory Casey (202-903-3229) and Caleb Payne (202-486-8607) or (412)828-5102 ext. 27

Thursday @ 10:00am Rally outside of Arlen Specter Town Hall Meeting Seton Hill University, Greensburg, Pa. Actual town hall will start at 11:00am and we will bring some of the protest inside as we demand Specter take a stand against this war.
One Seton Hill University Drive Greesnburg, Pa 15601

Thursday @ 1:00pm Rally outside of Specter Town Hall Meeting California University California, PA. Town Hall starts at 2:15 and just like in Greensburg we will bring the protest inside and demand Specter take a stand.
250 University Drive California, Pa

Thursday @ 4:30PM*** Deliver report card on Iraq War voting record, end the war cookies, brownies, and other goodies to Murphy's Mt. Lebanon office. Attempt to speak to Murphy and/or staff and once again invite him to the 8/28 take a stand event.

Thursday @ 5:00PM Drive time rally, followed by visibility canvass of local businesses within walking distance of Murphy's office.
504 Washington Road, Mt. Lebanon, PA 15228

Thursday @ 6:30PM Phone banking operation for recruiting turn out for the take a stand event at our office in Blawnox, PA.
237 6th St. Blawnox, PA 15237.

Friday @ 8:00AM Arrive at office in Blawnox, look up press clips, read local papers and blogs, prepare for 9:00AM state-wide conference call.
237 6th St. Blawnox, PA 15237.

Friday @ 10:30AM Yard sign canvass/distribution.

Friday @ 3:30PM Rally outside of Tim Murphy's office 504 Washington Rd. Mt Lebanon, Pa 15228

*** NOTE: Will Tim Murphy call the cops on his constituents again? The following video shows the second time a group of Rep. Murphy's constituents were refused entry into the PUBLICLY FUNDED office of their representative. The office doors were locked and the police were called.

What is Tim Murphy afraid of?
(Apparently baked goods.)


Here's a Post-Gazette story about another refusal by Murphy to talk to his constituents. Word has it that a New York Times reporter will be at today's protest.
.