5.29.2007

Paul Krugman: "Trust and Betrayal"

Apt. Very apt. Read it all here.

“In this place where valor sleeps, we are reminded why America has always gone to war reluctantly, because we know the costs of war.” That’s what President Bush said last year, in a Memorial Day ceremony at Arlington National Cemetery.

Those were fine words, spoken by a man with less right to say them than any president in our nation’s history. For Mr. Bush took us to war not with reluctance, but with unseemly eagerness.

Now that war has turned into an epic disaster, in part because the war’s architects, whom we now know were warned about the risks, didn’t want to hear about them. Yet Congress seems powerless to stop it. How did it all go so wrong?

Future historians will shake their heads over how easily America was misled into war. The warning signs, the indications that we had a rogue administration determined to use 9/11 as an excuse for war, were there, for those willing to see them, right from the beginning — even before Mr. Bush began explicitly pushing for war with Iraq.

In fact, the very first time Mr. Bush declared a war on terror that “will not end until every terrorist group of global reach has been found, stopped and defeated,” people should have realized that he was going to use the terrorist attack to justify anything and everything.

When he used his first post-attack State of the Union to denounce an “axis of evil” consisting of three countries that had nothing to do either with 9/11 or with each other, alarm bells should have gone off.

But the nation, brought together in grief and anger over the attack, wanted to trust the man occupying the White House. And so it took a long time before Americans were willing to admit to themselves just how thoroughly their trust had been betrayed.

[...]Here’s the way it ought to be: When Rudy Giuliani says that Iran, which had nothing to do with 9/11, is part of a “movement” that “has already displayed more aggressive tendencies by coming here and killing us,” he should be treated as a lunatic.

When Mitt Romney says that a coalition of “Shia and Sunni and Hezbollah and Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood and Al Qaeda” wants to “bring down the West,” he should be ridiculed for his ignorance.

And when John McCain says that Osama, who isn’t in Iraq, will “follow us home” if we leave, he should be laughed at.

But they aren’t, at least not yet. And until belligerent, uninformed posturing starts being treated with the contempt it deserves, men who know nothing of the cost of war will keep sending other people’s children to graves at Arlington.

Rest is here.

5.28.2007

Not That Blonde And Stupid Must Go Together...

[Ed. note: I live with a natural blonde (or so he says ::cough::) from a short line of MIT nuclear and metal engineers.]

But The View's Elizabeth Hasselbeck now not only believes she can engage in critical thinking (even if she can't spell it) and that Rosie is a force of one trying to bring her - and the smiles on the troops faces while being shot and bombed at - down. No, Bimbette also believes Dick Wolfe of "Law&Order" fame is out to get her.

"Flock of Dodos": Delusional Design v. Evolution

If you have SHOWTIME, they’re running a good documentary called “Flocks of Dodos” (mind you, I see it referred to with both singular and plural “flock”) about the intelligent design perpetrators and how poorly (if at all) they answer any of the multitude of questions their "theory" raises.

Of Catfights and Clintons and Cretins - Part 3

[Ed note: See Part I and Part II.]

Also as the holiday weekend revved came word of two Hillary Clinton books due out soon and another on the Clintons available long before the 2008 presidential election. Apparently ALL of these books "which have been touted as 'Hillary exposes".

And do you know what these scandal peddlers tell us BRAND SPANKING NEW about Bill and Hillary (which the right likes to call "Billary") Clinton? Here goes a list of items mentioned by mostly rightwing nutcases but also dim types like Chris Matthews:

That Hillary is calculating and competent. Really? Gee. How did that happen?

Oh wait... she went to good schools and was taught that critical thinking makes far more sense than "intelligent design." After all, MY GOD, what will we tell the children if they see a woman running for this nation's highest post is both calculating and competent? And remember the right's big cry during Monicagate? "What will we tell the children about blowjobs?!?

Is it much better to have a coke-addled dim bulb in the White House like Bush whose ONLY three skills are):

  1. Smirk
  2. Endanger America with every single act
  3. Pass off any really important and respected parts of decision making and country-building to the most incompetent and corrupt people to walk this continent's soil?

As for the "resurgency" of the Hillary-Only-Stood-By-Her-Man-2-Win-Votes, puh-leez! After all those millions Ken Starr wasted of OUR money while keeping our attention onto Monica Lewinsky and blowjobs and some "anatomical oddity with CLENUS' penis (noted by rocket scientist Paula Jones) while OFF Al Qaeda and clear signs of danger, do we really have to sit through this crap again?

Just as with every other American, it is no one's business what decisions and deliberations and dilemmas these two mature, intelligent people make toward the present and future of their marriage. Neither of them owe an explanation.

If anything, I'd say a lot of parties should apologize to Billary for letting them be turned into a soap opera. Then these same folks need to apologize to ALL of America for keeping its attention on Gary Condit and Clinton's penis and the West Wing creator being stopped by airport security for traveling with psychedelic mushrooms RATHER than upon clear and present dangers on the horizon as Bush took over.

Of Catfights and Clintons and Cretins - Part 2

[Update on Dizzy Lizzy here. Part 1 of this post is here; Part III here.]

Let's start with Rosie, Elizabeth, and the myth of the "cat fight".

Slice away from last week's so-called catfight on The View between O'Donnell and Hasselbeck and the only thing you're truly left with is the very post-9/11 Bush Administration's "loyalty oath" TV style dedication to the Bush "vision" for empire. Sorry, boys, there's just very little evidence that such a phenom (where a guy sees two women start to speak crossly to one another while the guy is riveted, hoping the two women suddenly kiss instead of argue.) has any truth as its base.

The media could not stop playing the footage even before O'Donnell quit show three weeks early (notably, The View had a jump in viewers ONLY one Rosie came aboard. Their argument got so bad:

  • the side of America (the 72%+++ majority) that thinks Dizzy Lizzy is one of those real-real right types who thinks like George Bush because they share roughly the same mental capabilities began to insist that Elizabeth was more right (is she ever!) and the victor
  • Donald "The Comb-over" Trump (who hates Rosie) called the fight for Omnipotent O'Donnell (which we expected to happen sometime soon after a snowball has cause to melt in Bush's brainpan)
  • made some folks wonder if the timing of this fight could have been better picked given that it hit the media most places just as the Memorial Day weekend wound up to speed (wow! serendipity! kismet!), a rightwing woman got center stage defending the troops and the lefty Rosie couldn't stand it and quit.

Wanna bet Hasselbeck gets an invite to a state dinner or even something more casual at the White House, in part to reward her giving Karl Rove the exact perfect message to play JUST AS people try to put this miserable war behind them for three days ?

[I didn't hear, as others insisted they did, that O'Donnell called the troops terrorists; I think it's pretty clear she meant the Bush Administration's orchestration of this, just one of his many wars. And many of us would agree that the Bushies operate far more like terrorists than "freedom fighters".]

5.27.2007

Of Catfights and Clintons and Cretins - Part 1

As we headed into the long Memorial Day weekend (which has more meaning than a day off and as much barbecue as you can pack in), there were at least four that got some/major play.

These stories were:

  1. The so-called catfight between The View's hosts Rosie O'Donnell and the human fulfillment of "the dumb blonde" joke, Elizabeth Hasselbeck, over the purported issue of "whether Rosie thinks America troops in Iraq are terrorists"
  2. How the Democrats "bent over and spread 'em" for Bush
  3. Hillary Clinton "Exposed" As Calculating and Capable and how she just stayed with Bill for the sympathy vote when she ran for New York senator (and her worst crime, according to the Bushies and the media, is that Hillary WON)
  4. Watch when a bird exacted some revenge by shitting all over The Commander-in-Cheat as he was giving a press conference telling us just how much he enjoyed making the Democrats "his bitch"

Notice any pattern here? Notice anything which seems like - except for #4 (divine providence, perhaps?) - a setup that Karl Rove could not miss (and should not, since it's much of what Felonious Rove has been pulling since he hitched his star to Debya).

[See Part II here with Part III here]

On This Memorial Day Weekend...

Let us appreciate America's 25 million living veterans (one in every dozen citizens), demand we stop unnecessary aggression against other countries, and begin to worry about our own massive problems. At the same time, think about all the many wars this Republican chickenhawk vice president (Dick Cheney) and chickenshit commander in chief, Mr. Bush, have started since they used corrupt court processes to take the White House in December 2000:

Besides those declared wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, and the proxy war Israel waged for Bush to break the spine of Lebanon in proxy:

  • War on the military and our veterans (asking so much while cutting services to them every damned day)
  • War on basic human rights
  • War on individual privacy
  • War not on poverty but against the poor
  • War on families (you have to be the "right" kind of family not to feel "intruded" upon
  • War on science
  • War on reason
  • War on truth and accountability as well as the whistleblowers who try to make the Bushies honest
  • War on public education and against the best conditions for our kids
  • War on young minds, trying to lure them away from high school or college with lies
  • War on drugs (which got rolled into the War on Terror which, as they say, is a bumper sticker motto but hardly a game plan) which includes the ability for Americans to afford them, to get them for their most urgent needs (ex: contraception, pain relief, and yes, even decongestants in cold formulas), and to make decisions about their own bodies
  • War on anyone who isn't of the Fascist Fundamentalist Christian "faith" (Muslims, especially)
  • War on America's honor, its reputation, its compassion
  • War on the sick (remember Terri Schiavo, kept alive when there was little brain left in her while the Bushies had no trouble discontinuing treatment to the ultra poor minority babies)
  • War on journalism
  • War on the United Nations, NATO, and other worldly agencies

Care to name some other wars?

Too Fat To Be Executed? 10 Tries to Kill A Man And You Blame It On The Convict?

This, from one of only five countries in the entire world to apply the death penalty to those less than the age at which they can enter into a legal contract (as in children less than age 18-21, often called "kids" as in "immature" and "not fully cooked"):

LUCASVILLE, Ohio (AP) -- Death penalty opponents called on the state to halt executions after prison staff struggled to find suitable veins on a condemned man's arm to deliver the lethal chemicals.

The execution team stuck Christopher Newton at least 10 times with needles Thursday to insert the shunts where the chemicals are injected.

He died at 11:53 a.m., nearly two hours after the scheduled start of his execution at the Southern Ohio Correctional Facility. The process typically takes about 20 minutes.

"What is clear from today's botched execution is that the state doesn't know how to execute people without torturing them to death," American Civil Liberties Union of Ohio attorney Carrie Davis said Thursday.

5.25.2007

"The Price Of Citizenship"

While military industrial complex businesses like Halliburton have set up a mail drop only in the Cayman Islands JUST to avoid taxes payment of appropriate taxes to the American/federal government/IRS, Prospect offers a recommendation that the ultra-rich (and the mega corps they own) lose U.S. citizenship :

"When the super-rich use offshore tax havens to avoid paying what they owe in taxes, the consequence ought to be the loss of their U.S. citizenship."
Let me propose an amendment: defense contractors who are American in nature CANNOT bid for contracts UNLESS they not only pay their share of the taxes we mere mortals already do; they also must be up-to-date with their tax payments.

A couple of years ago, there was quite a story about how many "favored" Bush no-bid defense contractors were in default for both very large sums of money due to the feds and sometimes for years at a time. Yet they were being pretty promptly handed checks for their invoices, as if the feds "overlooked" their whopping defaults to the taxmen.

Bush Does It Again! Promotes a Surgeon General With Extremely Questionable Skills And Agenda

What? Bush hire someone with an agenda (which is always totally supposed to promote only the benefits to the Bushies? You must be joking! [Or you're getting an early start on raising the blood alcohol as high as... well, quite possibly, NOT as high as the president's. Note too I refrain from past tense.

Here's a Buzzflash editorial on Dubya's next ass clown.:

Dr. James Holsinger was tapped by President Bush Thursday to be the nation's next Surgeon General. Sure enough, Holsinger's record is mired with incompetence, zealous conservatism, and, of course, sizable campaign contributions to Republicans.

As Chief Medical Director of the Department of Veterans Affairs under Bush's father, Dr. Holsinger was neglecting our vets long before Walter Reed made it fashionable. A government investigation found "several cases in which incompetence and neglect led to the deaths of patients." Dr. Holsinger was forced to admit blame for the deaths of six patients in less than a year at a single Chicago hospital alone.

But the problems weren't limited to Chicago. In a Wyoming, a patient scheduled for surgery for a treatable cancer died after he was ignored for 45 days following the resignation of the staff urologist over a contract dispute. Thirty VA hospitals were found to have "high numbers of patient complications and other indicators of substandard care."
It gets worse as you read on, including the Bushies' standard moralist homophobia.

Which leads us ever to the burning question, "Why Do George Bush AND Dr. Holsinger Hate Our Soldiers? And no, this is neither rhetorical nor mere sarcasm. The troops have had plenty enough trouble with the White House eager to veto a slight raise for American soldiers.

In The "More People Have Been Inside Paris Hilton Than Have Been In The Hilton In Paris Department

You know, life is just better when you can ignore the silly news the so-called news stations push at you. "Things" like Paris Hilton.

But I took umbrage this week when I saw that Paris, already having gotten her jail sentence halved for a parole violation before she ever got near a cell, was walking around carrying two books (and just her having a book seems ridiculous since it's clear she can't read). [You're welcome to guess the two books so long as you do so before you look below.]

  • The Bible
  • "The Power of Now"

Now, I happen to be a Christian who believes in God but believes the Bible to be a 2000-year-old work in progress that is FAR more of a fiction borne of myths perpetuated by different political and religious and moneyed rulers than the exact word of God or Christ (don't get me started on how many "gospels" were excluded).

But even then, seeing Paris with the Bible tucked just under her clearly freemoving nipple (although, indeed, God made nipples once he evolved us out of the sea!) just seemed pretty perverse. [Neither book showed any evidence, however, of ever having been open. This is a publicity/sympathy stunt.]

What hurt, however, was "The Power of Now." I read that book. It helped me a bit because I constantly operate in the future and past (although, by my current tense, you can tell I wasn't a complete success); specifically, what was presented about surrendering your resistance to come alive in the now. [Oh jeez; this is sounding stupid now like those stupid "self-help" books I've been asked to write but won't.]

Also, why would Paris need a book postulating "The Power Of Now"? I really can't believe she thinks. She seems to invest herself fully, if pink-and-gold fluffily, in whatever skanky now in which she participates.

Anyway, now that you know Paris is reading them, you may not want to bother reading it/them yourself.

Republicans Find New Ways To Suppress The 2008 Presidential Vote

Color me pissy (is that a chartreuse or a golden ginger ale sort of tint?):

Well, having successful stolen the last two presidential elections, Karl Rove and the GOP have found a new way to keep America from voting: the "polling tax" of the first digital millenium, guaranteed to make it nearly impossible for some to vote. For example, forget your ID and you don't get in. BradBlog has the story of the voter suppression tuck-in to the immigration reform act to either kill immigration reform OR greater voter participation.

But there's a bigger issue here. Many people - including some very thoughtful and learned ones I've talked with - find that the use of a photo ID makes it potentially much easier for operatives in a polling place to determine how you (that's little ole you) cast your votes. Then, if your candidate doesn't get in, the opposing party that did could use that vote against you.

Did You Miss The Unskilled, Unimpressive, And Certainly Skanky Monica Goodling?

Well, if you want to keep up on the latest in GonzoGate, read here. Nancy Pelosi's office blog offers video highlights.

For latecomers, GonzalesGate is the seemingly well-documented allegation that the White House forced the U.S. Department of Justice, through the corrupt actions of Karl Rove and Bush and the incompetency of U.S. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales (Bush's personal attorney and not exactly Bobby Kennedy kind of material), to morph into a situation where the nation's top cops and prosecutors into a taxpayer-financed GOP hit squad.

5.24.2007

If The Bird That Shat On President Bush Ever Makes It To Vermont

... I'd be most happy to feed that bird his due for dropping a poop nuke on Dubya during Thursday's LieFest Press Conference right on live TV.

Say hello to...

The Project for The Old American Century.

Ha! Take that, neocons!

TwoFer: Covert Iran War AND Frank Zappa

Happened to catch this post from Ezra Klein on "leaked" covert operations and potential for Bush waging war on Iran ("That sound you hear? Those are the drums of war.") , but also found this quote I adore posted in Comments. [Zappa was as astute about the American government as any musician I've ever heard.]

Government is the entertainment division of the military-industrial complex.

Excuse Me? Cheney Thinks Bush Takes Diplomacy With Iran TOO Far?

I must have read this story through seven times on Cernig's Newshog (aka The Newshoggers) before I could get my jaw up from my toes (yeah, I'm short, but not THAT short it doesn't hurt). It still has me speechless, which I've already been at least five times today just in pol reading.

Steve Soto has a tale for you - a tale of dumb and dumber...or more like crazy and crazier.
    Multiple sources have reported that a senior aide on Vice President Cheney's national security team has been meeting with policy hands of the American Enterprise Institute, one other think tank, and more than one national security consulting house and explicitly stating that Vice President Cheney does not support President Bush's tack towards Condoleezza Rice's diplomatic efforts and fears that the President is taking diplomacy with Iran too seriously.

    This White House official has stated to several Washington insiders that Cheney is planning to deploy an "end run strategy" around the President if he and his team lose the policy argument.
Wait!

Let me picture this.

George "Nuke 'em first, then we'll see if they're the enemy!" Bush is just TOO willing to let diplomacy take its course. The same man, we're told, who's been upset with Condi Rice because (allegedly) she tells the president he should not have this "give Israel anything it wants, damn the criticism" because it's messy up the entire Middle East and hurting the U.S. [And if true, the only true "reason" we have ever heard from this Secretary of State.]

On Bush's Iraq War Second Blank Check; How They Voted

David Sirota updates us on the House Dem vote and proposed filibuster on the latest Bush demand for a blank check in Iraq (see here for the earlier post and keep reading to hear how opinion polls - notably the latest New York Times/CBS News poll - tell us this war is now more unpopular with Americans than at ANY time in its four-plus year combat history).

To update my post earlier today, House Democrats passed the key rule vote by a vote of 218-201. This is the most important vote on Iraq since the authorization in 2002, because it deliberately sets the stage to give president Bush a blank check for the Iraq War. The Roll Call vote can be found [here].

Those Democrats with the courage to vote no were: Waters Harman, Clay, Moore (WI),McNerney, Kucinich and Stark. Democrats not voting were Cardoza, DeGette, Engel, Gutierrez, Jones (OH), Lewis (GA), Oberstar and Shea-Porter. House Democrats are expected to be delivering speeches later tonight claiming they actually oppose giving Bush a blank check because they are expected to vote against a Republican amendment. But as noted earlier today, this is an obvious effort to confuse the public. The rule vote that most Democrats voted for was the key vote in that it deliberately set up the situation whereby Republicans could pass their blank check amendment.

In other news, Sens. Kerry and Leahy are the latest Senate Democrats to issue statements saying they will vote against the blank check in the Senate, but to date not a single senator has indicated they will filibuster. This all happened just as the New York Times put a story on its website announcing that "Americans now view the war in Iraq more negatively than at any time since the war began, according to the latest New York Times/CBS News poll."

More Dirty Tricks on Iraq?

David Sirota writes that Dick Cheney may have been onhand to help "hide" who really voted today to give Bush's latest dark fantasy a blank check re: Iraq War funding.

Bush Gives Kiss of Death to Dems on Day That Will Live in Ignominy

You have to hand it to Dubya. (I doubt the spoiled frat boy thinks these up himself since it would interfere with his naps, his four days off from every seven day week, and scratching himself. Also, that's why he's got The Dick Cheney and Karl(oad) of Rove on hand.)

Today, he walked into the White House Rose Garden and gave the Democrats the kiss of death - much as he planted on Senator Joe Lieberman (D... no, I.... who the F knows anymore) on that infamous night a few years ago at one of his famous addresses.

By "kissing" the Dems today with his thanks for their capitulation on Iraq, he made sure that the vast majority of thinking Americans will be SURE to hold the Democrats responsible for the work of his corrupt administration that still holds razor grip on all of Capitol Hill. [Did you also note how Bush was saber rattling even louder at Iran as well? Is this the reason for doubling the American troop presence in Iraq when he originally wanted to send less than 20K more soldiers to Iraq?]

I suspect the Democratic 2008 presidential candidates who can show their concern for the troops WITHOUT letting Bush steamroll anymore are the ones most Americans will listen to in the coming months. So far, I'm not seeing standouts (and we need them, badly).

Your take?

The New Big Damned Bush Lie: "The Troops Will Have to Walk Home If We Don't Fund This War!"

Excuse me, but this is a total lie. One of so damned many. It's another Bush-Rove-Cheney spin to keep the weak-minded going "America's #1 So Let's Rustle Up Some Muslims and Their Oil." The media then repeats the damned lies until most of America knows the story by heart.

If the war stopped tomorrow, there would be plenty of money to bring all these troops home. What will hurt our troops is one more day on the job, and May's looking to be the deadliest this year for our soldiers, not to mention Iraqi civilians.

What the president - none of the Bush Administration in fact - will NOT tell you is that they want this funding bill signed not to pay for what we've done, but to:

  • secure the Iraq oil we're stealing through a forced mandate to the Iraqi government in which we demand oil/energy companies get record-high takes on Iraqi crude that we've already been stealing for four plus years now
  • help Republican politicians who are happy to use U.S. troops and Iraqi civilians as expendable photo ops
  • shore up Bush's delusional base
  • (quite probably) help fund Bush's next mecca: an (extremely ill-advised and not just bordering ON the lunatic) attack on Iran

Bush and the loyal GOP have proven everyday, in every way (cuts in services, filthy or ill-equipped medical services, opposition to combat pay and pay raises, educating troops' children - I could list these all night) that an American soldier or an Iraqi citizen does not begin to rate the value of billions and billions of dollars of crude oil.

This isn't about our soldiers at all, folks. It's about An Empire of Diminishing Crude Oil" and those lovely coming $4-5-6? dollar per gallon fuel prices we're paying while the Bushies tell us we need to write big corporate welfare checks to mega-profitting energy companies to build their refineries for free. This, while they de-fund fuel alternatives.

5.23.2007

Falwell Vs. Phelps: Quite A Dynamic Duo

Oh, I just love this. I do. Both the late (but hardly great) Rev. Jerry Falwell and the Rev. Fred Phelps deserve - and if justice prevails will be eternally assigned - a spot in the far lower molten dungeons in hell in which not even Satan will visit. Maybe if they're really lucky, Jerry and Fred can bunk together and have their own "Chemical Romance" of a conjugal nature. ::choke::

Poetic justice among those who too often and too rabidly confuse extreme fascism with fundamentalist Christianity, reported by 365Gays.

"(Not that I'm naming anyone and I certainly did not myself infer that the (purple?) teletubby was gay or that liberals were to blame for September 11th (9-11-01)!" - I learned this kind of disclaimer from Falwell.)

[Hey, perhaps it kept Phelps' hateful screwballs from attending the funeral of some dead Iraq or Afghanistan combat-American soldier snuck back into the U.S. in flag-draped coffins usually under cover of darkness.]

Leo Iacocca: President Gets Free Pass To Ignore Constitution

I dunno... I don't picture someone who headed one of the country's bigger auto manufacturers as much of a liberal lefty lotus eater. Do you? But I'm sure the rightwing does... at least now.

This headline from Buzzflash about the piece here says it all:

An outraged Lee Iacocca spells out Bush's personal shortcomings: Curiosity, Creativity, Communication skills, Character, Courage, Conviction, Charisma, Competence, Common Sense, and Crisis response skills. That's a good list, Lee, but what about the other 25 letters of the alphabet?
This discusses former auto czar Lee Iacocca's book, "Where Have All The Leaders Gone?"

My favorite quote? This:
You can't call yourself a patriot if you're not outraged.
[Note: I passed outrage six years and six months ago.]

Of Hitler, Chamberlain, Iraq War I Revisited

[The reference to the "Neville Chamberlain Moment" was made in Keith Olbermann's Special Comment from Wednesday's Countdown on MSNBC available by transcript and video link here. Also, I strongly recommend - if you have the chance - to catch HBO's reshowing of the entry into the first war a Bush (Dubya's dribbling dad)... it's a POWERFUL retrospective compared against this Bush's war. And if you don't know who Neville Chamberlain is, shame on you and get thee to a Wikipedia immediately!] I happened to catch Keith and then flipped the channel to HBO-West which was just starting to show "Live From Baghdad", an HBO film of high quality that recounts CNN's days in Baghdad and Kuwait just as George Bush (the 41st) declared war with Iraq (from a book by Robert Weiner, part of the CNN production team on the ground and getting bombed in Baghdad). I also wrote about Olbermann's piece here and here.]

The degree of retrospective comparisons between THEN and Bush 43rd horrific NOW is astonishing, including:

  • how quickly the American public was sold on lies of "dumped incubators" killing babies in Kuwait (disproven as any substantial event)
  • how hard the press was bashed for everything from interviews with Saddam Hussein and high Iraqi officers (and we repeated this in March 2003, Dan Rather was hated for interviewing Saddam again and CNN's main war reporter in the Bush 1 Iraq War was hated then and during Bush 2's great adventure, fired from MSNBC for suggesting there might be two sides to the story)
  • Bush 41's comparison of Saddam to "Hitler Revisited" (a powerful comparison, given that Bush 43, 41's son, may now be responsible for more deaths of Iraqi civilians than Saddam ever was) when I think a case can be made for seeing Bush 43 as a perpetrator of racial hatred (substituting Muslims for Jews in the terrible old saying, "When all else fails, gather up the Jews") against what Keith said about the Dems' Neville Chamberlain moment
  • Just see the difference in the city then as opposed to now, after all those years of sanctions (estimated to have claimed the lives of UP TO one million Iraq children, primarily through incredible restriction on medical care and food that turned one of the most advanced countries in the Middle East into a shell of its former self)
  • As Weiner wrote, "When the talking stops, that's when people die. So let's keep talking until we're old men."

Keith Olbermann Rates Home Run Status For His Special Comment on Government Failure with Iraq

Keith Olbermann in a special comment tonight on Countdown on MSNBC took no prisoners, extremely critical of the president's lies to take us to war in Iraq, of the Republicans who always prop up the puppetmaster in chief (we know this isn't Bush, but whether it's Karl Rove, Dick Cheney, or Dr. James Dobson is anyone's guess), and of the Democrats whom, Keith said, "had their Neville Chamberlain moment" yesterday in falling (again) under the wheels of the Energy Corps and Defense Contractor's Biggest Ever Wet Dream of Iraq Funding called the Bush Administration policy of Iraq War Surge.

No American should miss reading or viewing this special comment here. Snippets:

You, the men and women elected with the simplest of directions—Stop The War—have traded your strength, your bargaining position, and the uniform support of those who elected you… for a handful of magic beans.

A Special Comment about the Democrats’ deal with President Bush to continue financing this unspeakable war in Iraq—and to do so on his terms:

This is, in fact, a comment about… betrayal.
Story continues below ↓
Few men or women elected in our history—whether executive or legislative, state or national—have been sent into office with a mandate more obvious, nor instructions more clear:

Get us out of Iraq.

Yet after six months of preparation and execution—half a year gathering the strands of public support; translating into action, the collective will of the nearly 70 percent of Americans who reject this War of Lies, the Democrats have managed only this...

And this President!

How shameful it would be to watch an adult... hold his breath, and threaten to continue to do so, until he turned blue.But how horrifying it is… to watch a President hold his breath and threaten to continue to do so, until innocent and patriotic Americans in harm’s way, are bled white.

You lead this country, sir?

You claim to defend it? And yet when faced with the prospect of someone calling you on your stubbornness—your stubbornness which has cost 3,431 Americans their lives and thousands more their limbs—you, Mr. Bush, imply that if the Democrats don’t give you the money and give it to you entirely on your terms, the troops in Iraq will be stranded, or forced to serve longer, or have to throw bullets at the enemy with their bare hands.

How transcendentally, how historically, pathetic.

Any other president from any other moment in the panorama of our history would have, at the outset of this tawdry game of political chicken, declared that no matter what the other political side did, he would insure personally—first, last and always—that the troops would not suffer. A President, Mr. Bush, uses the carte blanche he has already, not to manipulate an overlap of arriving and departing Brigades into a ‘second surge,’ but to say in unequivocal terms that if it takes every last dime of the monies already allocated, if it takes reneging on government contracts with Halliburton, he will make sure the troops are safe—even if the only safety to be found, is in getting them the hell out of there.

Well, any true President would have done that, Sir.

You instead, used our troops as political pawns, then blamed the Democrats when you did so.

Pretty Please?

[Could someone please bring back the nicer Monica? The one who wanted to get screwed by a president (heretofore known as a Lewinsky), rather than the one wanting to screw with every damned one of the rest of us who aren't to the far right (Badthing... er... Goodling)? Pretty please?]

Turning The Face Of American Justice Into A Partisan Clown Parade

Anyone who watched (or read the transcript from) today's "testimony" (what Washington calls what any of us would call a bullshit session) from former Dept of Justice White House liaison Monica Goodling, who cried "5th Amendment" (and damn, I'm not sure DoJ honchos RATE that right given how they hold our lives in their filthy talons) then ran and hid, only coming out under "limited immunity", should be far more than infuriated. [bhfrik did a good piece on this here.]

What U.S. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales and the White House, particularly Karl Rove and George Bush, have done is turn the highest level of justice of our nation into no less than criminal and leans heavily toward treasonous. For if the American people cannot believe in the possibility their duly elected government will behave responsibly, then we won't be much beyond where we said the Iraqi people were under Saddam Hussein.

In this case, there was no one simple infraction. We have a huge staff hired with a heavy tilt toward a law school which is considered among the worst possible in the nation (where the fundamentalist fascist form of Christianity is what they teach rather than law), that staff administered by people with no competency and then used exclusively to suppress investigations into corrupt Republicans (lawmakers, election fraud, lobbyist payoffs, et al) while forcing investigations (even when their own people reviewed the facts and found no reason to proceed with cases) of Democrats and Democrat supporters.

If we let this slide, we say, "Fine. Turn the DoJ into another wing of the extreme fascist right. It's just dandy with me if they decide to toss up a charge on me with nothing but partisan hate to back up their claims, prosecute me, and then give me the only right of ultimate appeal being the now completely partisan Supreme Court which Bush and Rove and Cheney already rigged."

Personally, I'm not willing to say that. You? [Scary part is how many Americans are far more concerned tonight with who won American Idiot... Idol.]

Fellow Independent Voters: Time To Stop Fence Sitting?

What do you think?

If the Democrats could not get a secure majority to override a veto from Bush on the Iraq War timetable/exit strategy issue, is it time for like-minded registered Independent voters to jump off the fence they sit upon and register Democrat so they can better participate in the process? Remember, most states require only registered Republicans or Democrats can vote in a primary; fairly few allow independents to cast a vote for presidential nominee.

5.22.2007

Carter Is Worth More Than A Stinking Bush With Root Rot Anyday

Over the weekend, there was much hooing and hawing in Washington and the media as a whole about remarks ventured forth by former President Jimmy Carter that touched on, among other things, foreign policy - how men like Nixon and even Reagan (to some degree) worked the idea while the current (Bush) administration is either "anything goes" kissing cousins or "we'll nuke ya if we don't like the set of your eyes".

Bush fired back with his dismissive smirk, in which he not only dismissed Carter as irrelevant but more than 7 out of 10 of his fellow Americans because they don't see the great Bush "vision". [I also hear Bush gets very ticked when any former president is addressed as "Mr President" when that is the proper address.]

Hey, Carter was not a perfect president, but he's probably the most intelligent, walks the walk as well as talks the talk, well reasoned, and American-and-world loving a former president we have... or have had. Carter's built homes, monitored voter fraud watches, and done so much more since he left office that it's not hard to day Jimmy became a great man only after he left the Oval Office. Compared to the "never will be a MAN" in office since January 2001, give me Jimmy anyday. Bill Clinton's gifts to America need another decade yet to see if any of his acts do more than for his memory and Hillary.

Cheerfully signed, one of only two thirds of all Americans whom Bush finds irrelevant.

5.21.2007

Of Kings and Dissidents

With this news piece that the necropolis of King Herod the Great has been uncovered in Jerusalem, can it really be any surprise that this man, so hated by Jews and allies of Christ alike as a pawn to Rome, that the whole chump's body is long since gone?

It's believed his "non" fans broke the extremely unique sarcophagus and did not nice things to the remains perhaps not so long after he died and was interred.

Note to Herod the ingrate in the White House. You may end your reign, but - God(s) willing - history, even the shortest history, will NOT be kind to you.

Rock, Paper, Scissors... and Politics

I have a rather uh.... um... sad ass thing to admit. I mean besides by Web host ate some of my graphics.

I understand the childhood game of "rock, papers, scissors" about as well as I do politics. I mean, I get the whole bit about paper covering rock and such. I just don't understand why anyone would possibly bother playing this.

Same being true for politics. We've made this huge, megolithic "rock, papers, scissors" bureaucracy of politics when all we need to do is bring two minds together and make a decision based on all available evidence.

So why does anyone play either?

Missing Rove Emails Show How The Bushies Hijacked American Democracy And Accountability to Citizens

Here's the piece at Truthout, but I'd call it more like treason that a mere violation of the records act.

Three years ago, Robert Luskin, the attorney who defended White House Political Adviser Karl Rove in the CIA leak case, made a startling discovery: a July 2003 email Rove sent to then-Deputy National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley that proved Rove was far more involved in the leak of covert CIA operative Valerie Plame Wilson, and the campaign to discredit her husband, former Ambassador Joseph Wilson, than he had let on during interviews with federal investigators and in testimony before a federal grand jury.

Curiously, the email Rove sent to Hadley that Luskin had found never turned up during an exhaustive document search ordered a year earlier, in September 2003, by Alberto Gonzales. At the time, Gonzales, who was White House counsel, enjoined all White House staff members to turn over any communications pertaining to Plame Wilson and her husband, a vocal critic of the Iraq war, who had accused the Bush administration of twisting pre-war Iraq intelligence. Gonzales's order to turn over documents and emails came 12 hours after former White House Chief of Staff Andrew Card had informed him that the Justice Department was launching an investigation into the leak.

The order Gonzales sent to Karl Rove and other administration officials demanded "documents that relate in any way to a contact with any member or representative of the news media about Joseph C. Wilson, his trip to Niger in February 2002, or his wife's purported relationship with the Central Intelligence Agency."

The Rove/Hadley email was not included in the thousands of pages of documents turned over to the FBI. The reason? Apparently the "right search words weren't used," Luskin told Newsweek in October 2005. The email Rove sent to Hadley in July 2003 has never been released publicly. It's unclear whether the email was sent via the White House computer system or from Rove's email account maintained by the Republican National Committee (RNC), which, according to the National Journal, is what Rove uses to conduct 90 percent of his White House business, in what would appear to be a violation of the Presidential Records Act.

"Bush Won't Fire Alberto Gonzales, But YOU Can Impeach Him!"

I don't usually hand out press releases verbatim, but hey, some folks are noticing that Vermont has been the most vocal and demanding of accountability on the Iraq War of ANY state in this damned nation. Is Vermont small? Hell, yes! There aren't a million of us total, not even if you count moose and fishers (fishers is not the kind with rods but the kind with four feet and a taste for kitties). [Black fly season, however, we probably match mainland China. ::cough::]

Viral Video and Nationwide petition Call for Attorney General Alberto Gonzales's Impeachment Robert Greenwald's Brave New Films and Democracy for America launch impeachgonzales.org and lead major Movement for Impeachment

Petition States: "President Bush won't fire Attorney General Alberto Gonzales... but YOU can!"Los Angeles and Vermont? A nationwide campaign calling for Attorney General Alberto Gonzales's impeachment was launched today by Filmmaker Robert Greenwald's Brave New Films and Democracy For America.

A viral video about Gonzales and a petition calling for the House Judiciary
Committee to begin the Impeachment process are being circulated across the
internet, YouTube and at the website
impeachgonzales.org today in a
nationwide movement for his removal.

The petition at impeachgonzales.org calls for the House Judiciary committee, the committee that can begin the impeachment process, to "Impeach Gonzales and restore accountability and ethical leadership to the United States Justice Department." Both Democratic and Republican leaders and citizens across the country have been calling for the Attorney General's removal over the firings of U.S. attorneys. Evidence against Gonzales has continued to mount and today's launch marks the start of an organized, nationwide effort to remove the Attorney General by Impeachment.

"Americans around the country are standing up to voice opposition to Attorney General Alberto Gonzales and his politicization of the Department of Justice," said Democracy for America chair Jim Dean. "Our message is clear: Impeach Gonzales."

"President Bush will not fire the Attorney General, but the American people can call for his Impeachment" said filmmaker Robert Greenwald who directed the Impeach Gonzalez video "the video shows Gonzales has no respect for the truth, for the rules of Congress and for the people of this country- how can he lead our Justice department?

The petition will be sent to all members of the House Judiciary committee, who can begin the impeachment process as outlined in Article II of the U.S. Constitution. This massive call for impeachment comes at a time where Senate leaders Diane Feinstein and Chuck Schumer are calling for a Senate No Confidence vote against the Attorney General.

Democracy for America is a political action committee dedicated
to supporting fiscally responsible, socially progressive candidates at all
levels of government?from school board to the presidency. Robert Greenwald's
Brave New Films uses film and viral video to create social
change.

5.18.2007

At (Wolfo)Witz End: Who's The Next Corrupt Bushie at the World Bank?

The World Bank needs another corrupt, incompetent, crony-loving, misleader to make it even tougher for poor, third world countries to survive.

So who's next, once Paul Wolfowitz resigns while insisting he did NO wrong?

Sadly, the Bush Administration seems to have an endless supply of corrupt incompetents from whom to choose. Keith Olbermann on "Countdown" last night suggested the brain dead Alberto Gonzales. Others have said perhaps Tony Blair for those times when he's not, in retirement, humping his master, George Bush's, leg.

Ideas?

5.17.2007

Frank Rich: "Earth to GOP... The Gipper Is Dead"

I love this column! Read it all here:

Of course you didn’t watch the first Republican presidential debate on MSNBC. Even the party’s most loyal base didn’t abandon Fox News, where Bill O’Reilly, interviewing the already overexposed George Tenet, drew far more viewers. Yet the few telling video scraps that entered the 24/7 mediasphere did turn the event into an instant “Saturday Night Live” parody without “SNL” having to lift a finger. The row of 10 middle-aged white candidates, David Letterman said, looked like “guys waiting to tee off at a restricted country club.”

Since then, panicked Republicans have been either blaming the “Let’s Make a Deal” debate format or praying for salvation-by-celebrity in the form of another middle-aged white guy who might enter the race, Fred Thompson. They don’t seem to get that there is not another major brand in the country — not Wal-Mart, not G.E., not even Denny’s nowadays — that would try to sell a mass product with such a demographically homogeneous sales force. And that’s only half the problem. The other half is that the Republicans don’t have a product to sell. Aside from tax cuts and a wall on the Mexican border, the only issue that energized the presidential contenders was Ronald Reagan. The debate’s most animated moments by far came as they clamored to lip-sync his “optimism,” his “morning in America,” his “shining city on the hill” and even, in a bizarre John McCain moment out of a Chucky movie, his grin.

The candidates mentioned Reagan’s name 19 times, the current White House occupant’s once. Much as the Republicans hope that the Gipper can still be a panacea for all their political ills, so they want to believe that if only President Bush would just go away and take his rock-bottom approval rating and equally unpopular war with him, all of their problems would be solved. But it could be argued that the Iraq fiasco, disastrous to American interests as it is, actually masks the magnitude of the destruction this presidency has visited both on the country in general and the G.O.P. in particular.

By my rough, conservative calculation — feel free to add — there have been corruption, incompetence, and contracting or cronyism scandals in these cabinet departments: Defense, Education, Justice, Interior, Homeland Security, Veterans Affairs, Health and Human Services, and Housing and Urban Development. I am not counting State, whose deputy secretary, a champion of abstinence-based international AIDS funding, resigned last month in a prostitution scandal, or the General Services Administration, now being investigated for possibly steering federal favors to Republican Congressional candidates in 2006. Or the Office of Management and Budget, whose chief procurement officer was sentenced to prison in the Abramoff fallout. I will, however, toss in a figure that reveals the sheer depth of the overall malfeasance: no fewer than four inspectors general, the official watchdogs charged with investigating improprieties in each department, are themselves under investigation simultaneously — an all-time record.

Maureen Dowd: "Labors Love Lost"

MoDo takes on Tony Blair's successor in Great Britain:

Gordon Brown’s smile does not look at home on his face. It sits there uneasily, like an uninvited guest at a party, until his features can resume their comfortably dour grooves.

The brooding Scot ended his decade-long run as a hefty Heathcliff to Tony Blair’s chatty Cathy, stepping out of the shadows Friday with visible relief to begin a campaign for prime minister that he has already won.

Grumpy Gordon is an enigma compared with Captain Showbiz, as the glib Mr. Blair is called by a morning TV host here. The 56-year-old son of a Presbyterian minister, with hooded eyes and frugal charm, will be hard pressed to compete on the European stage with Iron Frau Angela Merkel and Nicolas Sarkozy, dubbed “Thatcher without petticoats.”

Mr. Brown’s school friends came on TV to say he was more fun than he looked. “He enjoys a good glass of wine,” said his pal Bill Campbell.

The chancellor has been striving to move beyond his reputation as a man so obsessed with the budget that he wouldn’t even share the details in advance with Tony Blair. He traded the green eyeshade for pastel ties. He told a women’s magazine that he liked the rock band Arctic Monkeys, but later couldn’t name any of their songs.

Mr. Brown was considered the uncool half of the Cool Britannia team that swept into power on a wave of Champagne, celebrities and Cherie Blair’s New Age guru. But thanks to his role as W.’s interlocutor and translator, Tony Blair is uncool, too.

The first boomer prime minister got a blazing start in trying to make Britain more modern and tolerant. But he fell in with an American crowd of bullies who were turning back the clock on modernity and tolerance, and Tony abused Britons’ trust.

Dr. Dobson, Don't Let The Door Hit You In The Ass On Your Way Out The Door

It's moments like this when I'm sorry Jerry Falwell didn't take the "Focus on the Family" folks, Pat Robertson, and others when he went (and trust me, their destination will NEVER be heaven).

Religious conservative leader James Dobson will sit out the 2008 presidential election if former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani is the Republican presidential nominee, he wrote Thursday in an online column.

In a piece published on the conservative Web site WorldNetDaily, Dobson wrote that Giuliani's support for abortion rights and civil unions for homosexuals, as well as the former mayor's two divorces, were a deal-breaker for him.

"I cannot, and will not, vote for Rudy Giuliani in 2008. It is an irrevocable decision," he wrote.

"If given a Hobson's -- Dobson's? -- choice between him and Senators Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama, I will either cast my ballot for an also-ran -- or if worse comes to worst, not vote in a presidential election for the first time in my adult life. My conscience and my moral convictions will allow me to do nothing else."

The Far Right Bleeds Over Immigration Bill's Success

No sooner was it announced that a bill looks set to go that would toughen border security (yeah, sure, right) while at the same time offering to put 12 million immigrants on the track for citizenship status has the far right, especially, bleeding more than a Texas Chainsaw Massacre sequel.

Pat Buchanan tonight - and mind you, Pat used to be the face of the extreme right until they went so far out there that Pat now often seems somewhat moderate - declared this "the end" of the United States while others proclaimed that those who supported this bill, like John McCain, can kiss their presidential bids goodbye since "all law abiding Americans" will strike hard against those who want to "reward" illegal entry into America.

One of the "beauties" of the Bush years: small minds just get smaller ALLLL the time.

Surge in Violence? "Iraq On Verge of Collapse"

Sadly, just seeing this Reuters headline made me ask, "You mean it hasn't been on the verge of collapse almost every single day since Bush forced troops into Iraq to force a war built on lies in March 2003?"

But yes, the situation there is worsening every second it seems. Perhaps "the surge" Bush referred to was the response Iraqis would show in face of his stepped up military response (while at the same time even Bush said the solution is not military... (what?)). From the piece:

Iraq's government has lost control of vast areas to powerful local factions and the country is on the verge of collapse and fragmentation, a leading British think-tank said on Thursday.

Chatham House also said there was not one civil war in Iraq, but "several civil wars" between rival communities, and accused Iraq's main neighbors -- Iran, Saudi Arabia and Turkey -- of having reasons "for seeing the instability there continue."

"It can be argued that Iraq is on the verge of being a failed state which faces the distinct possibility of collapse and fragmentation," it said in a report.
Doing a heluva job there, George!

On Eve of Wolfowitz's "Resignation", Bush Says, "Done A Heluva Job, Wolfie!"

NBC News just reported that the resignation deal is complete (which many assume will, as he demanded, will made no admission of wrongdoing) re: Paul Wolfowitz, currently the head of the World Bank, formerly Rumsfeld's assistant at the Pentagon who insisted the Iraq war "would pay for itself."

At the same damned time, President Bush is falling all over himself with praise for "stud" Wolfowitz, whose latest "excuse" for his wrongful deeds at the World Bank is that he was too afraid of his live-in girlfriend whom he gave an unbelievably lucrative salary (with no experience to match it).

Wolfie also had no expertise with money or development or people or.... well, let's just say, President Bush ADORES incompetence and demands all those who work for him (mind you, he thinks he OWNS them although we pay the salary!).

Perverted Justice: Bush Promises Veto of Troop/Combat Widow Pay Raise


Is this sick, or what?

This story would sound like big drama if describing a rapid-fire sere tennis championship or hysterically funny if it were a Firesign Theater bit. But this situation is anything but light-hearted when it involves men and women forced to sacrifice their lives everyday for yet another lied-us-into war.

The way the Bush Administration and top GOP lawmakers and candidates rush for any chance of a photo op with troops (especially when it doesn't put them in the same dangerous situations our soldiers endure) while they hand billions to defense contractors seems pretty sick. But pair it with the grave reality that the Bushies and GOPees simultaneously race to cut services (pay, medical, support) for American service men and women is well past perverted.

Yet right now, President Bush is threatening to veto a bill to provide a troop and combat widow salary increase that passed by an extremely high majority in the House of Representatives. Mind you, it's not even a significant payroll raise being discussed here. But any amount is too much for Bush who would prefer to give the money to Halliburton, Bechtel, Blackwater, and other Republican f(r)iends.

The only irony here is that just in what Donald Rumsfeld - who left the Pentagon as Secretary of the Defense Department but now gets a HUGE paycheck while still there as a "consultant" - makes a year for his services, we could pay for a LOT of soldiers AND proper protection for them.

5.16.2007

Gonzo's Greaaaattt Adventure

The one glaring truth to come out of all we've seen and heard from and about U.S. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales and his machinations with the Bush White House to turn federal prosecutors into the SS officers AND kangaroo partisan political party courtships is that Gonzo, much like his "bestest" pal George Bush, doesn't have a frickin' clue what his job is, cannot tell the truth even when offering countless versions of the same story.

Also like Bush, Gonzo admits no wrongdoing, uses the U.S. constitution (and other documents and provisions such as the Geneva Conventions) as toilet paper, a spitoon, and quaint and foolish items written by old men long sense dead.

Here's what The Times has to say:

There were many fascinating threads to the testimony on Tuesday by the former deputy attorney general, James Comey, who described the night in March 2004 when two top White House officials tried to pressure an ailing and hospitalized Attorney General John Ashcroft into endorsing President Bush’s illegal wiretapping operation.

But the really big question, an urgent avenue for investigation, is what exactly the National Security Agency was doing before that night, under Mr. Bush’s personal orders. Did Mr. Bush start by authorizing the agency to intercept domestic e-mails and telephone calls without first getting a warrant?

Mr. Bush has acknowledged authorizing surveillance without a court order of communications between people abroad and people in the United States. That alone violates the 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. Domestic spying without a warrant would be an even more grievous offense.

The question cannot be answered because Mr. Bush is hiding so much about the program. But whatever was going on, it so alarmed Mr. Comey and F.B.I. Director Robert Mueller that they sped to the hospital, roused the barely conscious Mr. Ashcroft and got him ready to fend off the White House chief of staff, Andrew Card, and Mr. Bush’s counsel, Alberto Gonzales. There are clues in Mr. Comey’s testimony and in earlier testimony by Mr. Gonzales, Mr. Ashcroft’s successor, that suggest that Mr. Bush initially ordered broader surveillance than he and his aides have acknowledged.

Mr. Comey said the bizarre events in Mr. Ashcroft’s hospital room were precipitated by a White House request that the Justice Department sign off on a continuation of the eavesdropping, which started in October 2001. Mr. Comey, who was acting attorney general while Mr. Ashcroft was ill, refused. Mr. Comey said his staff had reviewed the program as it was then being run and believed it was illegal.

So someone at the White House (and Americans need to know who) dispatched Mr. Gonzales and Mr. Card to Mr. Ashcroft’s hospital bed. Mr. Ashcroft flatly refused to endorse the program, Mr. Comey said. Later, he said, Mr. Bush agreed to change the wiretapping in ways that enabled Justice to provide a legal rationale. Mr. Comey would not say why he opposed the original program — which remains secret — or how it was changed.
Read the rest here.

Karl Rove, GonzalesGate, And The Plot To Turn Justice Department Into Kangaroo Republican Courts

JP at Welcome to Pottersville has an excellent piece up covering many of the big - and oh so shameful, criminal, and unconstitutional let alone completely unhealthy for the America we like to believe in - issues surrounding Bush's "brain" Karl Rove, US Attorney General Alberto ("Sorry, don't ask me, ask my underlings because I gave all my power to them and cannot be held responsible for what they did.") Gonzales.

Here's a generous bit, but please, visit Pottersville to read the post in its entirety:

What kind of a country do we live in where psychopaths like Ann Coulter get free interference run for them by the FBI and the Department of Justice gets its marching orders from Karl Rove? As Blue Girl puts it in “How Very Soviet of Him?”, “What, in the name of all that is sacred and holy, motivated Karl Rove to turn the Department of Justice into the enforcement arm of the Republican National Committee?”

You have to admit that Rove has yet to exhaust his powers of breathtaking audacity in siccing Alberto’s goons on four US attorneys who’d been accused of being lax in prosecuting cases of alleged voter fraud, at least one of which (David Iglesias in New Mexico) turned out to be bogus or trumped up.

Where was Karl the Krusader when we needed him in the wake of the 2000, 2004 and 2006 elections, in which massive amounts of evidence pointed to voter fraud and attempted voter fraud? Oh, right. That would’ve led the eagle-eyed hounds of the DOJ straight to Rove’s self-bugged office.

Think about it: The Department of Justice have to take its cues from a blubbery-lipped Inner Party hack like Karl fucking Rove in order to catch lazy US attorneys who couldn’t or wouldn’t prosecute ginned-up cases of voter fraud for a massive Aha! moment in time for the mid-term elections. But nary a word or an investigation into the most massive corruption of our electoral system since the good old days of Tammany Hall.

And not a single African American attorney was hired to work in the Civil Rights division of the Justice Department.

Democrats and suspected Democrats were sniffed out like escaped chain gang criminals by Monica Goodling and the other legal beagles milled out of Pat Robertson’s Regent University.

And all under the dead nose of Alberto Gonzales, a man who has done for American jurisprudence what Rush Limbaugh has done for figure skating.

On Wolfowitz and Gonzales: Volunteers To "Resign" Them On The Toes Of Our Boots?

Hey, if we can get rid of the Wolfe at the World Bank and the moronic US Attorney General with just the toes of our (steel-reinforced, please!) boots, I suspect we can find thousands if not millions of volunteers.

First them, then perhaps Rove, Cheney, and Bush!

A Birthday Toast to Studs Terkel

[Ed. note: While I cross-posted this at All Things Democrat, Studs at 95 has MORE on the ball than 95 (or 1,995) men a quarter his age! Happy birthday, Studs!]

Today is Studs Terkel’s 95th birthday. And if you ask, “Studs who?”, get yourself to Wikipedia or other resources, because this man is very well worth knowing about. You can also find a prolonged interview with Studs conducted today by Amy Goodman of “Democracy Now!”

As I wrote yesterday re: the passing of Jerry Falwell, that he was a man for whom the planet was much worse (IMHO) for his influence, I think the exact opposite is true (and an understatement to call it just “exact opposite”) of Studs, a man who has contributed so much, for so long, and so admirably on topics like labor, American culture and society, social justice, McCarthyism, free speech, and much more.

On milestones like this (and 95 is still a milestone!), it makes me think of the recent passing of Kurt Vonnegut as well as those older but ever-so-wise distinctly American minds, voices, and contributors such as Noam Chomsky, Gore Vidal, Jimmy Carter, Helen Thomas, and (thankfully) countless others who are now much older. I worry that we don’t have the strong minds coming along that the generations that produced these fine minds nurtured.

But please, make me eat my words. Become a fine mind like Studs or Helen or George McGovern, et al. America and the entire world needs you!

5.15.2007

And We Need a War Czar Why?

"Czars" in American government are what a president appoints to create a lucrative new position for someone owed a political favor and what amounts to a way to pass the blame of a problem around to more people.

Interestingly enough, among those in the know, almost all said the perfect "war czar" for America, if one had to be apointed at all, is Colin Powell, former head of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and former Secretary of State for Bush. However, all these same people acknowledged that Bush couldn't and wouldn't call on Powell because, IF Powell accepted (and this was in doubt), it was likely Powell's first act would be to bring U.S. troops home from Iraq as immediately as possible.

So we get this general instead.

And what are we paying the folks at the Pentagon if we need a war czar, too?

In New York City, A Race of Mayors For President Brings Surprises

While the Washington Times reports that current New York City mayor, Michael Bloomberg, will run as a third-party 2008 presidential race candidate, a poll in New York shows that in a race between Bloomberg and former NYC mayor, Rudy Giuliani, Bloomberg wins.

If Paris Hilton Really Wants To Be Traumatized...

then the heiress who's a clown ass should try to spell the word, "traumatized."

Likely, this could take longer for her to do than the 45 days she's supposed to spend in prison (my God, imagine pretty-in-pink Paris in a cheap prison jumpsuit!).

Although I was amused that the "big Paris Hilton support rally" in Manhattan only had eight attendees (or just 3 if you count the 5 tourists there taking pictures of the silly Americans participating).

If Arnold "the governator" Schwarzenegger is smart (and he's not always), he will NOT "fix" the punishment for her.

Falwell Dies; Satan and St. Peter Are Already Barring The Gates From His Entrance

[Ed. note: I posted this elsewhere. And, btw God, this was not bad, but I'm still hoping for the birthday gift I requested. Still, thank you.]

As the good folks at Cernig's Newshog point out, most of us have been well-trained to not speak ill of the dead (although, as they suggest, they wonder if the nutcase Fred Phelps will picket the funeral) which can make it damned tough to comment on the death of "moral" majority leader and radical right extremist, Jerry Falwell.

Still, I find it hard to be quiet about a man who talked of love but spewed only hate, who called himself godly but was more like the Judas Iscariot radical right fundamentalist bullshit rather than exhibit any of the best qualities of Jesus. A man (I'll grant him that much) who would smile at you at the same time he stabbed you in the back.

Also, Farwell was the (relatively) rare person for whom the entire world was a much nastier, nightmarish place for his existence. Sadly, he isn't alone there; we still have Dobson, Pat Robertson, Ted Haggard, among others.

Let me end this post by stating my fervent belief that, wherever Jerry's headed, I can assure you that it's NOT heaven. I'm not convinced Hell would take him either (Satan can't hold a candle to Falwell in terms of nasty hellishness).

Five Excuses Against Impeachment

If you thought you had heard ALL the excuses against the impeachment of George Bush, Dick Cheney, and all the lesser Bushies, CounterPunch delivers the whole shebang.

5.14.2007

Red Cross: Israel Violates Humanitarian Rights

Sadly, this latest report - the conclusions of which have been echoed elsewhere for years, such as with Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International and others - is no surprise. And, as long as Israel continues its inhumane treatment of Palestinians (and the U.S. keeps making certain Israel has the money and military might to do that), there will be no peace in the Middle East.

Thompson Out On Show/In As 2008 Prez Candidate?

With the happy news this week that NBC will continue the long-lived Law & Order TV series (one of my favorites and this from a person who watches damned little TV). there is also some very sad news, but sad for what it bodes.

NBC announced that Fred Dalton Thompson (the same self-important shitbag on the show as he seems to be in real life) will not return as Manhattan D.A. with the series.

Does this mean Dalton will try to run for GOP nomination for President?

The Missing Soldiers and RFID

I posted at All Things Democrat my deep questions about how we can possibly believe what the Pentagon tells us - and believe even less what the Pentagon tells us Al Qaeda/terrorists tell us - given their everlasting love affair with lying through their well-capped teeth.

But it struck me last night that, especially given the Bush Administration's thirst to remove every hint of privacy normal mortal citizens have, it would seem like they would force troops to wear RFID chips if not implant them into the soldiers (which could be done without a G.I.'s knowing).

What am I missing?

"The Danger in Drug Kickbacks"

This op/ed in The Times' today confirms what I've heard and read:

The explosion in the use of three anti-anemia drugs to treat cancer and kidney patients illustrates much that is wrong in the American pharmaceutical marketplace.

Thanks to big payoffs to doctors, and reckless promotional ads permitted by lax regulators, the drugs have reached blockbuster status. Now we learn that the dosage levels routinely injected or given intravenously in doctors’ offices and dialysis centers may be harmful to patients.
As Alex Berenson and Andrew Pollack laid bare in The Times on May 9, wide use of the medicines — Aranesp and Epogen, from Amgen; and Procrit, from Johnson & Johnson — has been propelled by the two companies paying out hundreds of millions of dollars in so-called rebates. Doctors typically buy the drugs from the companies, get reimbursed for much of the cost by Medicare and private insurers, and on top of that get these rebates based on the amount they have purchased.

Although many doctors complain that they barely break even or even lose money on the costly drugs, for high-volume providers the profits can be substantial. One group of six cancer doctors in the Pacific Northwest earned a profit of about $1.8 million last year thanks to rebates from Amgen, while a large chain of dialysis centers gets an estimated 25 percent of its revenue, and a higher percentage of its profits, from the anemia drugs.

It seems likely that these financial incentives have led to wider use and the prescribing of higher doses than medically desirable.

Although the drugs are deemed valuable in fighting severe anemia, there is scant evidence they help much in moderate cases and some evidence that high doses can be dangerous. Half of the dialysis patients in this country are now receiving enough of the drugs to raise their red blood cell counts to levels deemed risky by the Food and Drug Administration. And last week a panel of cancer experts urged the F.D.A. to impose additional restrictions on use of the drugs in patients receiving cancer chemotherapy, based on studies that the drugs might make some cancers worse or hasten the deaths of patients.

Iran, Here We Come?

With Vice President Dick Cheney's nasty rhetoric about Iran delivered while in that part of the world late last week, is it any surprise that the national average per gallon price for gas is now $3? Much of the country is already paying far more than that, with no obvious obstacles to hitting $4/gal prices this summer.

I'm also worried about this report from the International Atomic Energy Agency (or IAEA, the nuke watchdogs of the United Nations), claiming that Iran may have overcome problems which might otherwise slow down their technological work regarding nuclear weaponry. Very recently, the IAEA was saying quite the opposite: that the U.S. was manufacturing propaganda about Iran and its nuclear efforts to perhaps justify an attack there.

While I've read several articles on this matter since last night, it is not immediately apparent to me whether it's "right" to say Iran is well on its way to nuclear weaponry or whether, with the change in U.N. secretaries, the IAEA may be getting pressure from the Bush Administration to make their reports sound scarier re: Iran. Stranger things have happened, and much of them since January, 2001.

5.12.2007

Would Everyone Who Is NOT Corrupt, Please Disqualify Yourselves?"

OK, I don't believe for a minute that every Republican or even every Republican politician is corrupt or in favor of corruption. So why is it that in Bush and Karl Rove's GOP America, only corrupt Republican politicians stand a chance of succeeding?

From Talking Points Memo:

lWhen it comes to the GOP's culture of corruption, even the loyal GOP base has a breaking point.

When Rep. John Doolittle (R-Calif.) was forced to give up his seat on the powerful House Appropriations Committee due to an acute case of Abramoff-itis, the GOP leadership had a chance to set things right by replacing him with a respected lawmaker of unimpeachable integrity. Instead the leadership tapped Rep. Ken Calvert (R-Calif.), who was himself recently named one of Congress' most corrupt lawmakers.

Calvert, of course, is the subject on an ongoing FBI probe of his own. As CREW's Melanie Sloan asked, "Why would the minority choose to replace one member under federal investigation with another member also under federal investigation?"
Some conservatives are starting to ask the same question. RedState, one of the leading far-right blogs, ran an item yesterday under the headline, "An Open Declaration of War Against The House Republican Leadership." RedState recounts Calvert's many alleged misdeeds, concluding that the "House Republican Leadership just does not get it." A variety of conservative blogs endorsed the challenge.

Maureen Dowd: "Get Off The Chaise Lounge"

And we're talking Paris, France, not Paris Hilton (thank God!). Read the rest here.

Paris - Beauty has been chased off by the Beast.

Now France waits to see just how feral and domineering Nicolas Sarkozy will be.

The lovely SĂ©golène Royal — more phenomenon than politician — ran a maternal, Manichaean campaign painting her intense, Napoleon-sized opponent as an immoral political animal and a brute whose election would spark riots and “a sort of civil war.”
The luminous Sego did not even deign to address the “dark” Sarko by name, either in the debate or in her concession speech Sunday night.

Cartoonists have depicted the tough guy — who bullies rivals, betrays mentors and calls young troublemakers in low-income housing in the Paris suburbs “scum” — as a gargoyle, Dracula, an evil sorcerer and a devil.

The imagery of the presidential duel tapped into mythic Gothic tales of France, like “Beauty and the Beast,” “The Phantom of the Opera,” and “The Hunchback of Notre Dame.”

With Hungarian, Greek and Jewish roots, with a father who deserted and belittled him, with his jittery ambition and pugnacious talk, Sarko is jolting the inbred, insular and introspective world of elite French politics. The far right has called him “a foreigner with an unhappy marriage,” and a Sego adviser scorned him as “an American neocon with a French passport.”

“He’s an arriviste,” said Bruno Ract-Madoux, the owner of a vintage shop in Paris. “From the beginning, he was someone who would sell his mother as fast as possible to get ahead.”

Or as an elegant Parisian woman who voted for Sego warned guests at a postelection dinner party, “He’s like a little Donald Trump.”

Sego was serene and protective — but vague; Sarko was kinetic and pushy — and concrete. As it turned out, the French wanted to be prodded even more than they wanted to be pampered. Perhaps they have decided they have to stop being sluggish so they can continue to be supercilious.

Liberals mocked Sarko’s campaign theme: “A France that wakes up early.” GĂ©rard Biard wrote a piece in the far-left weekly paper Charlie Hebdo: “At dawn, I ripped myself out of bed. I took a cold shower, put on some mismatched socks and downed eight espressos, as I headed out to meet France in the morning. The France that wakes up early would rather stay in the sack.”

But even some who voted for the woman who would have been the first La France PrĂ©sidente admitted that they did not want their country to calcify. “Who has a 35-hour workweek?” said Phillippe Rosenthal, who sells leather chairs.

Sarko wrote in his political book “Testimony” that France “is not a museum” and “must find the energy” to succeed. In his acceptance speech, he said he would “rehabilitate” work, and an adviser promised he would be “a presidential entrepreneur.” (Just as soon as he comes back from his yachting vacation.)

One expatriate friend of mine observed that the French are not lazy, they just want a leisurely lunch.

Blair Gets Booted, But We're Still Bushwhacked!

Let me paraphrase one of the few decent things I heard on Friday's "Real Time with Bill Maher" on HBO:

"Tony Blair cited his reason for stepping down from leading Great Britain
as a desire to spend more time (not with his family BUT)
humping Bush's leg, just like a good little lapdog should."

Vermont's Lone House Rep, Pete Welch, Takes Heat Over His Non-Impeachment Pursuits

Today (the 12th), the newly-elected (he replaced Bernie Sanders who went to the U.S. Senate to replace Jim Jeffords) Peter Welch (Dem), Vermont's only House Rep, took serious heat in a public hearing in Hartford, VT because he will not support impeachment efforts against Bush and/or the entire Bush Administration.

People here are NOT happy about Welch (or Sanders, who has also refused to take up the impeachment gauntlet) and statements like, "Impeachment would get in the way of more important things" (I guess a functioning democracy is a bit too much to ask for anymore) and "Impeachment will just drag out the Iraq War longer" (as if Bush is just racing us out of there as it stands now).

As regular readers know, I am NOT a fan of impeachment. However, there are genuine and very legitimate reasons why the Bush Administration should be removed compared with the whole "blue dress" debacle the GOP perpetrated against Bill Clinton in the latter 1990s.

I continue to feel that the charges to be leveled against the Bushies do not spell impeachment, but treason.

5.11.2007

Majority of Americans Dislike Bush's Veto Of Iraq Funding Bill With Timeline Attached

OK, I fully and completely understand why 54% of Americans dislike Bush's presidential veto. What I don't get is that more than 40% of Americans APPROVE of Bush's veto.

A majority of the U.S. public disapproves of President Bush's decision to veto a war spending bill that called for U.S. troops to leave Iraq in 2008, according to a CNN poll released Tuesday.

The poll found that 54 percent of Americans opposed Bush's May 1 veto, while 44 percent backed the president's decision to kill the $124 billion bill.Now that the veto has been cast, 57 percent of Americans said they want Congress to send another spending bill with a timetable for withdrawal back to the White House, the poll found -- but 61 percent would support a new bill that dropped the timetables in favor of benchmarks for the Iraqi government to meet to maintain American support. (Full results [PDF])

While it found that more Americans believe Congress, rather than the president, should be responsible for setting policy in Iraq, the survey may give the Democratic leadership some pause. The percentage of people saying Democratic control of Congress is good for the country dropped from 59 percent in a March poll to 51 percent now.

"Lights! Camera! Killing! Action!"

From Reuters yesterday, a story that just stuns me re: a soldier filming after a very controversial killing of an Italian intelligence agent during the freeing of an Italian journalist held hostage:

A U.S. soldier on trial in absentia in Italy for killing an Italian intelligence agent in Iraq two years ago filmed the scene moments after he opened fire, an Italian television channel said on Tuesday.

Mario Lozano's lawyer said the U.S. soldier, who denies any wrongdoing in firing at agent Nicola Calipari's car, gave the video to TG5 channel, apparently after recording an interview with him in the United States. Italian prosecutors investigating the case immediately seized the tape, judicial sources said.

Hazy footage of the video showed a white car with bright headlights stopped at the side of a road with an open door, while voices of U.S. soldiers could be heard in the background.

Lozano went on trial in absentia in Italy last month for firing at the car carrying Calipari and newly freed Italian hostage Giuliana Sgrena to Baghdad airport in March 2005.

The U.S. and Italian governments have said the shooting was an accident, but an Italian judge has charged Lozano with murder and two counts of attempted murder of those in the car.

5.10.2007

Bush and Benchmarks: More Lies and Games At Expense of U.S. Troops' and Civilians' Lives


Why is everyone applauding President Bush for his statement yesterday that he thought "benchmarks" might be a good idea re: Iraq?
First, Bush should NEVER have been given a blank check to do whatever he wanted, whenever he wanted, no matter what cost (financial, logistical, and human lives) in Iraq (and for this, I hold every single member of Congress as responsible as I do Cowboy Clown Dubya). I was one of a large but often none too vocal group who saw quite clearly that Bush and Cheney and the Neocon Express were taking us into Iraq on a case made of lies and greed. To this day, more than four years after the first American forces landed in Iraq, Bush and Cheney continue to promote the idea that Iraq somehow had some large part in planning and executing the September 11th, 2001 (9-11) attacks on the U.S. when it seemed clearly untrue back in 2003 and disproven countless times since then.

Second, Bush won't allow ANY compromise on his part whatsoever. He may say that benchmarks may be a good idea, but he certainly won't allow any checks and balances applied to what he wants to do in Iraq. He says this only to fool Americans into thinking he'll play ball; he doesn't even care that now a majority of Republican voters want troops out of Iraq in the next six months.

Third, don't fool yourself. Bush will be out of office before the U.S. is out of Iraq.

5.09.2007

Goodbye, Cool Brittania

No more lapdog for Bush? No more bridge between the U.S. and Europe?

Read what The Newshoggers (Cernig, especially) have to say on the matter of Blair's anticipated resignation tomorrow.

Wew.

Bush To Congress And American People: "Just In Case You Forgot I'm Dictator, Fuck You"

Sadly, this sentiment on Bush's part applies to almost every issue that has come up in Washington, D.C. since even before his dad's pals on the U.S. Supreme Court selected him president in December 2000. Just as sad (and downright mad, in the sense of complete separation from reality), far too many Americans have been willing to accept his dangerous and completely undemocratic (not to mention insane) self-portrait.

However, here, this refers to Bush's swaggering, cocky promise to veto yet another Congressional bill on Iraq funding in answer to Bush's veto of last week's bill that provided all the funding Bush wanted WHILE it also set a timeline to begin to withdraw troops starting in the fall of this year.

From AP:

The White House threatened on Wednesday to veto a proposed House bill that would pay for the war only through July — a limit Defense Secretary Robert Gates warned would be disastrous.

The warnings came as Democratic leaders wrestled with how to support the troops but still challenge President Bush on the war. Bush has requested more than $90 billion to sustain the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan through September.

Democrats were unbowed.

"With this latest veto threat, the president has once again chosen confrontation over cooperation," said House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.

In a flash of defiance, House Democratic leaders this week promoted legislation that would provide the military $42.8 billion to keep operations going through July, buy new equipment and train Iraqi and Afghan security forces. Congress would decide shortly before its August recess whether to release an additional $52.8 billion to fund the war through September.

"In essence, the bill asks me to run the Department of Defense like a skiff, and I'm trying to drive the biggest supertanker in the world," Gates told senators Wednesday. "And we just don't have the agility to be able to manage a two-month appropriation very well."

The veto threat came from White House spokesman Tony Snow, traveling aboard Air Force One with Bush to tour tornado damage in Kansas.

"There are restrictions on funding and there are also some of the spending items that were mentioned in the first veto message that are still in the bill," Snow said.

House members planned a vote Thursday, just two days after David Obey (news, bio, voting record), D-Wis., chairman of the Appropriations Committee, briefed White House chief of staff Josh Bolten on the plan.

The stern White House response also reflected the high stakes involved for Bush, who is struggling to beat back congressional skepticism about his Iraq strategy. In recent days, Bush has tried to shore up support by personally reaching out to moderate Republican and Democratic rank-and-file.

The Bushies Breed Greed

Now the 20,000 or so extra soldiers they called up for Bush's felonious, futile, and foolhardy are not enough for Bush's surge/excalation. They want at least 35,000 MORE troops in beautiful, beaucolic, bright downtown Baghdad.

Hat tip to Buzzflash for the link.

5.07.2007

LA Times To The Bushies: Withdraw From Iraq

I'm sure Bush and Rove will insist this is just a tiny focus group since the LA Times, in calling for withdrawal of our troops from Bush's "slam dunk" war on Iraq, only boasts the fourth largest circulation of any newspaper in this country.

Bush's Wars: Strangely, They Can Only One In Three Direction: Worse, Worser (eh?), And Worst

While Afghanistan's Taliban (the same people Bush and Cheney claim to have annihilated six years ago) adopts President Bush's rule to only allow journalists and the rest of what calls itself media to report lies, the violence in Afghanistan and its neighbor, Iraq, only continues to defy all laws of basic statistics by worsening each and every day (even a lame coin toss should give you the occasional "win" but Bush makes us lose each and every damned time).

Here's what I noted at All Things Democrat:

April was the nation’s bloodiest overall month (we set terrible new records there all the time) since we arrived and May is off to a tragically busy start; many U.S. soldiers along with more than 100 Iraqi civilians were killed in operations just this past weekend.

It’s not a case that this escalating violence is completely about Bush’s so-called surge or escalation of military actions in Iraq. First, we already sent many of the “surge” troops in already and second, many forces are already working on new “surge” orders on the ground. So it’s a fabrication to claim that the heightened violence is only because “insurgents are scared and doing what they can now because they know that Bush means business THIS time.”

Hugely nasty attacks occurred yesterday (Sunday) in Iraq, with bodies found all over Baghdad, including those of at least eight American GIs. [Afghanistan worses every day as well.] At the same time, a major general, in a piece in the Boston Globe, says Iraq will get FAR deadlier still (quite the effortless slam dunk promised):
    BAGHDAD — A US Army general yesterday forecast a rise in deaths among American forces in the coming months, a prediction underscored by the announcement that a roadside bomb had killed six US soldiers and a foreign journalist north of Baghdad. Five other American troops died elsewhere over the weekend.

    Major General Rick Lynch, commander of the Third Infantry Division, said casualties will climb as American troops dig into enemy territory as part of a stepped-up military operation ordered by President Bush in January. Lynch, who oversees a swath of territory to the south and east of Baghdad, gave his bleak prediction on the heels of the deadliest month this year for American forces in Iraq.

    In April, 104 troops were killed, the fourth time since the beginning of 2005 that US deaths exceeded 100 in a single month. At least 25 troops have been killed in May, a grim start to a month in which Democrats are expected to keep up pressure on the White House to plan a withdrawal from Iraq.