Iggy Junior

Hill's Deciept Continues: Obama's Campaign Fires Back, Hitting Hard on Their Words

2008-03-13T17:07:00.002-04:00

Hillary's campaign put out a press release that essentially painted Obama's campaign as one in a downward spiral that put the best old barn stormers to shame. Unfortunately, it just really isn't true, so, the Obama campaign felt it necessary to set a few things straight. Here is their annotated version (Notes Bolded), pulled from NPR:

To: Interested Parties
From: Clinton Campaign
Date: Wednesday, March 12, 2008
Re: Keystone Test: Obama Losing Ground [Get ready for a good one.]

The path to 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue goes through Pennsylvania so if Barack Obama can't win there, how will he win the general election?

[Answer: I suppose by holding obviously Democratic states like California and New York, and beating McCain in swing states like Colorado, Iowa, Minnesota, Missouri, Virginia and Wisconsin where Clinton lost to Obama by mostly crushing margins. But good question.]

After setbacks in Ohio and Texas, Barack Obama needs to demonstrate that he can win the state of Pennsylvania. Pennsylvania is the last state with more than 15 electoral votes on the primary calendar and Barack Obama has lost six of the seven other largest states so far -- every state except his home state of Illinois.

[If you define "setback" as netting enough delegates out of our 20-plus-point wins in Mississippi and Wyoming to completely erase any delegate advantage the Clinton campaign earned out of March 4th, then yeah, we feel pretty setback.]

Pennsylvania is of particular importance, along with Ohio, Florida and Michigan, because it is dominated by the swing voters who are critical to a Democratic victory in November. No Democrat has won the presidency without winning Pennsylvania since 1948. And no candidate has won the Democratic nomination without winning Pennsylvania since 1972.

[What the Clinton campaign secretly means: PAY NO ATTENTION TO THE FACT THAT WE'VE LOST 14 OF THE LAST 17 CONTESTS AND SAID THAT MICHIGAN AND FLORIDA WOULDN'T COUNT FOR ANYTHING. Also, we're still trying to wrap our minds around the amazing coincidence that the only "important" states in the nominating process are the ones that Clinton won.]

But the Obama campaign has just announced that it is turning its attention away from Pennsylvania.

[Huh?]

This is not a strategy that can beat John McCain in November.

[I don't think Clinton's strategy of losing in state after state after promising more of the same politics is working all that well either.]

In the last two weeks, Barack Obama has lost ground among men, women, Democrats, independents and Republicans -- all of which point to a candidacy past its prime.

["A candidacy past its prime." These guys kill me.]

For example, just a few weeks ago, Barack Obama won 68% of men in Virginia, 67% in Wisconsin and 62% in Maryland. He won 60% of Virginia women and 55% of Maryland women. He won 62% of independents in Maryland, 64% in Wisconsin and 69% in Virginia. Obama won 59% of Democrats in Maryland, 53% in Wisconsin and 62% in Virginia. And among Republicans, Obama won 72% in both Virginia and Wisconsin.

But now Obama's support has dropped among all these groups.

[That's true, if you don't count all the winning we've been up to. As it turns out, it's difficult to maintain 40-point demographic advantages, even over Clinton]

In Mississippi, he won only 25% of Republicans and barely half of independents. In Ohio, he won only 48% of men, 41% of women and 42% of Democrats. In Texas, he won only 49% of independents and 46% of Democrats. And in Rhode Island, Obama won just 33% of women and 37% of Democrats.

[I'm sympathetic to their attempt to parse crushing defeats. And I'm sure Rush Limbaugh's full-throated endorsement of Clinton didn't make any difference. Right]

Why are so many voters turning away from Barack Obama in state after state?

[You mean besides the fact that we're ahead in votes, states won and delegates?]

In the last few weeks, questions have arisen about Obama's readiness to be president. In Virginia, 56% of Democratic primary voters said Obama was most qualified to be commander-in-chief. That number fell to 37% in Ohio, 35% in Rhode Island and 39% in Texas.

[Only the Clinton campaign could cherry pick states like this. But in contrast to their logic, in the most recent contest of Mississippi, voters said that Obama was more qualified to be commander in chief than Clinton by a margin of 55-42.]

So the late deciders -- those making up their minds in the last days before the election -- have been shifting to Hillary Clinton. Among those who made their decision in the last three days, Obama won 55% in Virginia and 53% in Wisconsin, but only 43% in Mississippi, 40% in Ohio, 39% in Texas and 37% in Rhode Island.

[If only there were enough late deciders for the Clinton campaign to actually be ahead, they would really be on to something.]

If Barack Obama cannot reverse his downward spiral with a big win in Pennsylvania, he cannot possibly be competitive against John McCain in November.

[If they are defining downward spiral as a series of events in which the Clinton campaign has lost more votes, lost more contests and lost more delegates to us ... I guess we will have to suffer this horribly painful slide all the way to the nomination and then on to the White House.]

[Thanks for the laughs guys. This was great.]

Jumpin' Pelosi-phat!

2008-02-29T10:19:00.002-05:00

In what I would describe as a stunning, yes, STUNNING turn of events, Nancy Pelosi has finally taken it under advisement that she better start listening to her constituency. According to the Wall Street Journal today, Pelosi has asked the DOJ to take up the case of Harriet Miers and Josh Bolten for their activities in covering up for the White House with regard to the termination of several federal prosecutors. Further, Pelosi, aware that the DOJ will not likely be cooperative in this matter, has added a threat for insurance purposes. Read below:

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi asked DOJ: To open a grand jury investigation and pursue misdemeanor charges against Harriet Miers, the former White House counsel, and Joshua Bolten, President Bush’s chief-of-staff for contempt of Congress. Miers refused to testify to Congress regarding the dismissals of federal prosecutors in 2006. As for Bolten, he failed to turn over White House documents related to the dismissals.

She gave him one week to respond and said refusal to take the matter to a grand jury would result in the House’s filing of a civil lawsuit against the Bush administration.

Naturally, the Obstructplicans have cried foul ball. Pelosi reportedly gave them the finger. (By the by, all you Republicans out there looking for retribution for DICK Cheney's hearty "Go fuck yourself" on the Senate floor, THIS WAS SARCASM. Pelosi's got more manners than you do.)

John Boehner, House Republican leader, Put in Two Cents:
“This sort of pandering to the left-wing fever swamps of loony liberal activists does nothing to make America safer.”

Well, I'm sure that'll be a quote that the neocons will eat up. Aside from that though, the fever swamps have a message for you, Mr. Boehner (heh, he said boner):

This sort of pandering to the right-wing cess pools of crazy conservatives has done nothing to make America safer for the past seven years that you've had near complete control of the government. In fact, you've made us less safe. We did learn one thing that has proved useful for us from you though. Go fuck yourselves.

State of the Union

2008-01-28T21:10:00.001-05:00

Let the lying begin...

Mike Gravel Demands Impeachment

2008-01-25T13:27:00.001-05:00

Mike Gravel's Impeachment Statement

Some excerpts from the text:

As a Candidate for President, and most importantly as an American, I firmly believe that our most important and highest priority, both as individual American citizens and as a whole Nation, is to protect, defend, and nourish the foundation of American Democracy: the US Constitution and Bill of Rights. Every other issue is of secondary importance.

Mike, you don't even come close to expressing the urgency with which these matters must be addressed. Even if we choose to start impeachment proceedings soon, it may well be too late to effect any real change (though unlike Pelosi and her cowardly compatriots (channeling Colbert: "I'm looking at you, Reid."), I don't see this as a reason to stop).

The illegitimate authority of this newly constructed imperial Presidency – this Supreme Commander-in-Chief created by Cheney and Bush – has replaced the Rule-of-Law based on the Constitution and Bill of Rights.

Our system of co-equal branches of government, the unique and revolutionary principle of American Democracy, the great leap of faith that people could actually govern themselves, has been subverted. It is now almost dead.

This sums up the fight we are in better than anything said on the campaign trail by any of the leading candidates in the entirety of their political careers.

Read on. It's worth it.

Kucinich Drops Out of Presidential Race

2008-01-25T12:12:00.000-05:00

Dennis Kucinich has dropped out of the presidental race. It's a big loss to the country, but hopefully he will continue the good fight in the Senate.

Keith Olbermann Tells the Administration What to Do With Itself

2008-01-18T16:52:00.000-05:00

ANOTHER Republican Sentenced For Child Molestation

2008-01-18T16:02:00.000-05:00

Is it just me, or are the Republicans just really picking up the lowest form of scum they can find and electing them without ANY second thoughts as to who these people might be?

(Notice that Fox also waits until the last possible second to mention that this guy's a Republican?)

From Faux News:

PIERRE, S.D. — A former state lawmaker was sentenced Thursday to 44 years in prison for raping two foster daughters in phony medical examinations he said would help them sell their reproductive eggs to infertile couples.

Only Congressman Who Actively Supports Terror is Republican

2008-01-17T09:53:00.000-05:00

Well, neocons, congratulations; You've routed out the first congressman who actively supported terrorist organizations, then lied about it. There's only one teeny tiny little issue:

He's a Republican.

From the story:

A former Michigan congressman and delegate to the United Nations was indicted Wednesday on charges of being part of a terrorist fundraising ring that allegedly sent more than $130,000 to a supporter of al-Qaida and the Taliban.

Mark Deli Siljander, a Michigan Republican when he was in the House, was charged with money laundering, conspiracy and obstructing justice for allegedly lying about lobbying senators on behalf of an Islamic charity that authorities said was secretly sending funds to terrorists.

The 42-count indictment, unsealed in U.S. District Court in Kansas City, Mo., accuses the Islamic American Relief Agency of paying Siljander $50,000 for the lobbying -- money that turned out to be stolen from the U.S. Agency for International Development.

Siljander, from southwestern Michigan, served two terms in the U.S. House of Representatives during the 1980s and was appointed by President Reagan to serve as a U.S. delegate to the United Nations for one year in 1987.

Fred Upton defeated him in the 1986 primary.

Siljander could not immediately be reached for comment Wednesday, and his attorney in Kansas City, J.R. Hobbs, had no immediate comment.

The charges are part of a long-running case against the charity, which had been based in Columbia, Mo. In 2004, the Treasury Department designated the charity as a suspected fundraiser for terrorists.

Wow. You guys just have to have everything, don't you? What next won't you become outstanding hypocrites on?

I Love Being Quoted When Silencing Neocon Fools

2008-01-17T09:44:00.001-05:00

As I said, I just LOVE being quoted when it comes to shutting down morons. My username below is ncc74656m.

Orphans from "Annie" to Kucinich: "We love you Mr. Kucinich."

2008-01-11T11:41:00.000-05:00

Dennis Kucinich has asked the state of New Hampshire for a full electoral recount. So is it just a 2000 Redux? No. It seems that Mr. Kucinich is concerned with something much larger than himself.

From The News & Observer:

DETROIT - Democratic Presidential candidate Dennis Kucinich, the most outspoken advocate in the Presidential field and in Congress for election integrity, paper-ballot elections, and campaign finance reform, has sent a letter to the New Hampshire Secretary of State asking for a recount of Tuesday's election because of "unexplained disparities between hand-counted ballots and machine-counted ballots."

"I am not making this request in the expectation that a recount will significantly affect the number of votes that were cast on my behalf," Kucinich stressed in a letter to Secretary of State William M. Gardner. But, "Serious and credible reports, allegations, and rumors have surfaced in the past few days...It is imperative that these questions be addressed in the interest of public confidence in the integrity of the election process and the election machinery - not just in New Hampshire, but in every other state that conducts a primary election."

I think that for point of fact alone, Mr. Kucinich may yet win my vote for the primary. Thank you, Dennis, for taking this fight right back to the theives in power, and make them know that we won't take it anymore!

Benazir Bhutto Killed in Suicide Bombing/Shooting

2007-12-27T09:30:00.000-05:00

This morning it has been reported that Benazir Bhutto, former Prime Minister for Pakistan, was killed by a suicide bomber. Updated reports indicate that she may have survived the initial bombing, and was shot in the aftermath.

From CNN.com:

Bhutto was rushed to Rawalpindi General Hospital -- less than two miles from the bombing scene -- where doctors pronounced her dead.

Someone Explain This to Me?

2007-12-12T14:01:00.000-05:00

So, according to a magazine from the American Bar Association (ABA), Alberto Gonzalez is the "Lawyer of the Year."

In what country, guys!?!?!

Now, this may not be as bad as it seems. According to the Guardian, the picks have historically been based upon the amount of media coverage surrounding them, and that would make their case undeniable, certainly. But still... Does this slimeball need more attention?

Bush: "Quick Dana, Play Really Stupid! Then They'll Stop Thinking We're Lying!"

2007-12-10T13:20:00.001-05:00

To which Mrs. Perino was heard to have replied: "Play stupid, sir?"

Ok, well, it's a known fact that a great deal of the Bushies are either so loyal they are willing to look absolutely retarded and thoroughly irresponsible (See: Alberto Gonzalez), or that they are actually just cosmically stupid (See: Monica Goodling), but this obviously just takes the cake.

Crooks and Liars has a clip of Mrs. Perino on a radio show recently that is either simply another post-Rovian attempt to throw a small piece of bait off their trail, or shows the genuine stupidity of the people that work for this administration. Either way, as Keith Olbermann would note, either the administration is genuinely incompetent and grotesquely stupid, or they are using the guise of it to be menacingly decietful and perhaps one day evade actual scrutiny for their many crimes.

The real heart of the matter though is that they're still criminals, it is only a debate about whether or not they are stupid criminals.

Trent Lott: "I'm Not Gay (Right Now)"

2007-11-28T12:37:00.000-05:00

So a couple days ago, word leaked out that Sen. Trent Lott (R) would be resigning by the end of the year. The usual excuses followed, that he was tired, and wanted to spend time with his family.

Apparently, he was tired from a variety of "alternative lifestyle choices," I think that's the phrasing now, and spending so much time away from his family with male escorts.

A quote from the male escort in question (italics are mine):

“Here’s my public comment, on-the-record: Sen. Lott and I have no current affiliation with one another. I’m sure he would appreciate no further scrutiny.”

So, two things grab my attention here. First, "on-the-record." So, off the record, could there be another version of this comment? And he also stated that he has no "current" affiliation. So he is not presently engaged with Mr. Lott, but yesterday he could've been?

Is this guy afraid to say he "never" had any affiliation with him? Boy, if nothing else, the Republicans are starting to learn how to dodge a question or two, as they were so keen to point out about Bill Clinton.

Warning, the pic on the article COULD be NSFW.

http://coedmagazine.com/news/3880

Rove: Bush "Pushed" Into War by Democrats

2007-11-28T12:28:00.000-05:00

Wow. I really don't know what to say about this. Rove is now trying to claim that the Democratic Senate forced Bush's hand in the war with Iraq. Even though he was the one who provided the "faulty (read: faked) evidence" (Downing Street Memo). Even though he asked for the war authorization. Even though he disputed the UN weapons inspectors claims (Hans Blix). Even though he "made an example" out of his critics (Valerie Plame Wilson).

All I know is that with another year of this garbage, I WILL need to go on anti-psychotics.

Here's the Huffington Post article about it: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/paul-abrams/rove-congress-pushed-bu_b_74039.html

Mike Gravel: "Why Won't You Let Me Say What I Want to Say?"

2007-11-28T12:09:00.000-05:00

Found this little gem on another blogger's site, The True Adonis.

So, for your viewing pleasure, here's "Why Won't You Let Me Say What I Want to Say?"

Oh, and yes, I'm back. Power to the people!

Bernard Kerik Indicted for Corruption: Giuliani Suddenly "Distances" Himself

2007-11-09T13:20:00.000-05:00

Bernard "Bernie" Kerik, New York City's former chief of police, has been indicted on 14 charges surrounding corruption while in his post. Most of the corruption charges are simple, namely accepting various amounts from groups, including mobsters, and failing to report taxable income.

Among some of the more heinous charges are accepting an apartment that virtually overlooked Ground Zero after September 11th, where he frequently met up with his mistress at the time.

He was briefly nominated for Director of Homeland Security, when most of the charges against him were initially brought up.

From the BBC Article:

If convicted, he could face up to 142 years in prison and $4.75m in penalties, the Associated Press news agency reported.

I say that he should get every last day and penny of that sentence, and then entered into New York's least cop-friendly maximum security prison.

I Want to be a Liberal Vigilante

2007-10-10T15:06:00.000-04:00

What makes me say "liberal," you ask? Well, let's review some vigilantes and superheroes, and you'll see what I mean.

First, an example of the real thing:

The Minutemen: This group of lovely right-minded people so strongly opposes illegal immigration that they take things into their own hands. I'm not entirely opposed to their mission, but I do feel that groups like this (Blackwater, for example) are prone to abusing their powers, and it's only a matter of time before something bad happens as a result.

Now, for the sci-fi and comic book type:

Iron Man aka Tony Stark: This guy was born rich, and became an industry leader at a young age. With a keen business sense, the first thing that he does is get involved in the Vietnam War to help our side. This sets him up to be a Republican, a defense contractor, and possibly a war profiteer.

Superman aka Clark Kent: Ok, come on now. Alien, so therefore you can associate him with Roswell and coverups. I'm already smelling a Republican. He was raised in a small town in Iowa, too? Oh, well now... So what's his day job? He's a reporter! I mean come on people, the liberal press just doesn't exist anymore! I wouldn't be surprised if the Daily Planet was owned by Rupert Murdoch!

The Punisher aka Frank Castle: C'mon people! Gun nut! You must know this guy has his NRA license tattooed into his arm or something. That, and he's in favor of the death penalty!

Ok, so, have I proved my point here? What I'm saying is that the liberals don't really have anybody cool on their side. So follow my reasoning:

Larry Craig, Mark Foley, Ted Stevens... These guys are all blatant criminals. And they're not even the worst of it. For perhaps the first time in history, there doesn't seem to be a good guy in the entire upper echelon of our government! Not even a Deep Throat of our time!

We need a new hero, someone who can rise to the challenge! Someone who is inherently good: A Liberal!

The Liberal will fight for truth, e-mail records, the Justice Department, and the American Flag! He'll use alternative transportation (c'mon, if Al Gore's son can do 100 in a Prius, surely we can come up with a great alternative transportation method for our hero!)! Power his secret lair entirely with geothermal energy (because after all, if it's a lair, it must be underground, so therefore is closer to the naturally warm core of the earth)! And he'll force the Truth from the evil Republicans!

His powers would be the ability to find lost e-mails, no matter how hard you've tried to lose them, see through deceptive media practices, locate billions in missing Iraqi Reconstruction funds, and reveal the truth behind the Cheney energy conferences!

Working names: The Liberal, Liberal Scum...

Ok, so, I need more creativity, and besides, "Cindy Sheehan" was taken.

Democratic Legislator Found to Have NORMAL Porn on USB Stick

2007-10-04T11:42:00.000-04:00

From CNN:

A state legislator surprised a high school class when the computer he was using projected a photo of a nude woman during a lecture on how a bill becomes a law.

State Rep. Matthew Barrett (D) was giving a civics lesson Tuesday when he inserted a data memory stick into the school computer and the projected image of a topless woman appeared instead of the graphics presentation he had downloaded.

Ok, well, first of all, accounts describe him as reacting pretty surprised when this popped up, and he was able to maintain his composure when it happened, so somehow, I think a) he wasn't expecting it, and b) it's a pretty harmless thing.

I mean, sure, INTENTIONALLY showing porn to high schoolers (against their will, anyway) is one thing (many may have been underage, though it was a class of seniors), but an accident for which he may not have been at fault is completely another. I'm not saying to cut the guy off the hook, I'm just saying let's hear facts before we hear Fox.

Anyway, I just wanted to note that it's kind of interesting that even if this guy had a huge stash of his own porn, so far it seems that it was all legal aged and WOMEN. Not men. Not little boys. Not that I have a problem with gays, it's just that I have an issue with closet gays who bash open gays and then try to legislate their rights away ::coughFoleycoughCraig::.

In fact, it would appear that there weren't even any laws broken here! Not, say, preying upon underage children, or, say, lewd conduct, or any of that.

I'll just paraphrase Mr. Craig here: "I'm going to speak out for the citizens of my country, who in the majority think that Republicans are probably even nasty, bad, naughty boys."

Or old, out of touch, in the closet, white men...

Hiatus

2007-10-02T13:29:00.000-04:00

To any of my friends and readers: I will be taking some time off from blogging. Keep an eye out for my eventual return.

A Mother Returns After 7 Months in Iraq

2007-09-21T13:10:00.000-04:00

I can't imagine what this kind of separation would do to a person. Bless our soldiers for everything they sacrifice, willingly or unwillingly.

Let's bring them home.

Six Years On

2007-09-11T10:45:00.000-04:00

May the victims of the September 11th attacks, both direct and indirect, as well as the soldiers that at this very moment work to protect our country forever be in our hearts.

I would normally ask that today not be misused for political gain, but I do ask people to be mindful of the abuse it has already suffered.

Human-Animal Hybrids Could be Coming True...

2007-09-06T17:24:00.000-04:00

Jesus Tap-Dancing Christ! Bush was right!

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=14191423

Kiva.org

2007-09-06T16:07:00.000-04:00

A friend showed me this site today, Kiva.org.

Kiva is a micro-finance or micro-loan organization, but with a critical difference that separates them from others in their category: They allow you to make the loans yourself. You choose what amount you wish to donate (though currently, due to heavy site traffic, they are restricting loan amounts to a maximum of $25 per person per business), and to what business.

What do these micro-loans pay for, you might ask? The loans pay for just about everything a business owner might need: raw materials, merchandise, tools and equipment, even education for themselves and employees (which are usually family in small close knit communities).

So, if it's a loan, how does it get paid back? Well, the same way they recieve the money: Local groups called Field Partners, who also go out to visit the businesses and help determine loan amounts and worthiness, also facilitate repayment of the loans. Being that these are no-interest loans to honest hard working people, the loans are almost always repaid on time and in full.

Since this is a loan, you will also get your money back if the loan is successfully repaid. Also, there is no hidden costs that drain your money before it reaches your borrower: Every dime you give helps the person you choose directly.

So how does Kiva.org operate? Through charitable donations directly to them. At the time of your loan, they will add an optional 10% donation to your checkout.

If the donation is optional, why do they add it for me? Well, they don't. I misspoke. They bring you to a page that explains what the donation is specifically, and they let you either skip that page in its entirety, or change the amount to any amount you wish. (I recommend donating, of course, especially with the increase in business they've been seeing, which adds to their operations costs.)

Anyway, over the course of the loan's life, they will repay it slowly, and as the money becomes available, your account will be repaid. Usually, the life of the loan is only 6-12 months, but some will become available slower.

What if they don't repay the loan? Well, unfortunately you do lose any money you gave to that borrower. It's the risk you take. That's why I don't recommend, as it were, putting all your eggs in one basket. You should spread the amount you loan around, and allow the rest of the community to fill in the void.

For those of you on Facebook, I've created a group for it, and we hope to use this to spread the word about Kiva and increase its support. Here's our group: The Helping Hands at Kiva.org

Our goal in our group is to increase the awareness of Kiva and similar organizations, and to get all of our members to make at least four loans per year (of any denomination that Kiva accepts). If you want to help meet this goal, please join us. If you can't meet that commitment, well, that's ok, we'll still take you. Just help us spread the word.

Apple Introduces the New iRack

2007-08-31T12:07:00.000-04:00

Aww, hell, rather than screw with the code to try to get it to be embedded, here's the direct link:

Apple Introduces the New iRack

Gonzales Resigns

2007-08-27T09:38:00.001-04:00

Here it is folks, from CNN: http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/08/27/gonzales/index.html

I'm not entirely sure whether or not to be ecstatic or more worried, knowing that Bush will probably appoint someone more insidious (the current move, according to the article, looks like it will be Chertoff).

Anyway, a good way to start the morning, because I'm now reasonably sure his "memory" will clear up.

Rove Resigns

2007-08-13T11:35:00.001-04:00

Well, I'm happy, but like Iggy Sr, for a different reason than most. As other members of the inner circles of Bush's group have learned in the past, the assumed (and relatively unchallenged) "Executive Privilege" claim is no longer valid for members who've left the administration (DUH!).

Rove will now be subject (moreso than before) to the full range of powers that Congress will bring to the table to coerce answers from Mr. Rove. I'm pretty happy about this one, I must say. We'll see if the Democrats take the chance or throw the ball away.

I Hate These Liars

2007-08-09T20:17:00.000-04:00

How, honestly, in this day and age of video records, sound bytes, transcripts, etc, how is it that these idiots continue to believe they can get away with this crap? You know what my theory is? Bush honestly still thought he'd gotten away with his BS attempts to "allow" his former staffers to "testify" behind closed doors without being under oath or transcribed. Ah well, read this swamp of shit for yourself:

Q: Mr. President, I wanted to ask you about accountability. You're a big believer in it, you've talked about it with regard to the public schools. But given the performance of Iraqi leaders, given your decision to commute the sentence of Lewis Libby, you've also stood by the Attorney General recently -- there have been a lot of questions about your commitment to accountability. And I'm wondering if you could give the American people some clear examples of how you've held people accountable during your presidency?

THE PRESIDENT: Lewis Libby was held accountable. He was declared guilty by a jury and he's paid a high price for it.
Al Gonzales -- implicit in your questions is that Al Gonzales did something wrong. I haven't seen Congress say he's done anything wrong. As a matter of fact, I believe, David, we're watching a political exercise. I mean, this is a man who has testified, he's sent thousands of papers up there. There's no proof of wrong. Why would I hold somebody accountable who has done nothing wrong? I mean, frankly, I think that's a typical Washington, D.C. assumption -- not to be accusatory, I know you're a kind, open-minded fellow, but you suggested holding the Attorney General accountable for something he did wrong.
And as a matter of fact, I would hope Congress would become more prone to deliver pieces of legislation that matter, as opposed to being the investigative body. I mean, there have been over 600 different hearings and, yet, they're struggling with getting appropriations bills to my desk.

I love Dennis Kucinich

2007-08-07T19:34:00.000-04:00

On tonight's MSNBC Democratic Open Forum, Dennis was asked his opinion on whether China is an ally or an enemy, and he, like most of the candidates said "Competitor," but his added response was even better.

"In Cleveland, they say that if you dig a hole deep enough, you'll be in China. Well, we're there."

Wow... I LOVE this guy.

"Bummer"

2007-07-19T10:25:00.000-04:00

I think I'm just a little too happy about this story: Bummer

So apparently this guy bought a Hummer, and a couple days after he got it, it got trashed overnight with the statement "For the environ" scrawled on the side. The whole thing got royally wrecked, with the windows broken and tires slashed. Sounds like the ELF is spreading.

Ok, so, to my personal take on this. I freely admit to being overjoyed at one fewer of these pieces of garbage floating around the road. The guy looks like some middle aged loser (he is 32 and LIVES WITH HIS MOM!!!), and he probably hasn't gotten any in the last 10 years and is trying to make up for this. The fact of the matter is that this needed to start happening, and hopefully it will happen more.

As to the guys who actually did it, I can't help but give out a little "way to go!" Of course, the fact of the matter is that it was still illegal, and in my opinion, the wrong way to go about it. The best way to deal with this is to pressure your local politicians to institute new efficiency regulations that mandate that any vehicle must get over a certain MPG rating to be allowed to drive on public streets. I could see that putting a damper on this guy's fun. Then he'd be left with a car that he can't drive, and can't sell, and he's out $40,000. That'll impress da ladiez.

See, I've known douchebags like this guy. Fortunately for the one in particular that comes to mind, he got over his "all day at the gym to impress da ladiez" phase, and underneath the douchebagginess, was actually a nice guy. I just worry for all the guys that don't get over it that one day they'll meet the actual thugs they seem to worship, and more likely than not, it'll be in a jail cell.

Attempt at Filibuster Breaking All-Nighter Fails

2007-07-18T15:41:00.000-04:00

Well, I admit to having mixed feelings on this whole subject. Last night Harry Reid organized an all-nighter for the Senate, originally stating that his intention was to do a role call several times throughout the night. The point of which would obviously be to embarrass Senators who refused to show up.

By the time the action started, or moreover, finished, it had dwindled to only 2 separate roll calls, and very little in the way of an effort to embarrass the Republicans. In fact, many (Republicans) would note that the Democrats were far more likely to have been embarrassed by their lack of solidarity in the matter... Well, aside from the fact that all 51 Democrats voted to end the debate (and thus the filibuster, allowing for nothing but a string of symbolic, if not meaningful, votes to be vetoed by Bush, thus placing the blame for Iraq squarely on his shoulders), not near enough Republicans sided with them to end this mess. Perhaps it's just not close enough to next November, then?

While I'm disappointed that Reid didn't keep his promise on role calls, and that he didn't threaten to continue into the next night, or the night after that, until the Republicans finally break, I am not unhappy that they fought. I just wish they'd fight harder.

In some pseudo-Asian wisdom: Wet bamboo is flexible and bends with the storms, but dry bamboo hits much harder.

Pat Tillman's Death Less Important Than Bush's Image

2007-07-16T20:14:00.001-04:00

So apparently, Pat Tillman's death is now the subjetct of Executive Privilege. Translation: Bush and members of his administration have the right to lie and be entirely above the law, even when the things they lied about border on the completely irrelevant (with no offense to Corporal Tillman, a hero if there ever was one).

In a move of complete disrespect to Tillman and his family, Bush has claimed Executive Confidentiality... I have a strong suspicion that Bush is aware of the public backlash that will hit when the full scale of the White House's direct involvement is revealed, and he's genuinely afraid. Of what?

Lower polls? Or perhaps just confirming what we knew, that nothing, even and especially dead heroes is too gruesome a photo op for Bush.

Let Them Win!

2007-07-16T20:06:00.000-04:00

Well, Mr. Graham, do you want them to win, or do you just want to use catch phrases and buzzwords to hide your own cowardice?

Watch as Jim Webb totally tears down Graham and his puppeteer show as he sounds remarkably like Bush, Cheney, and Tony Snow.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=KG3m_kGyKEE

Paranoia Sucks

2007-07-13T16:53:00.000-04:00

So I'm flying again for my boss to set up computers ahead of her, in this case, on an emergency basis. Obviously, I'm happy about missing my weekend, but at least I work for a nice guy, so that makes it easier to live with. But that's not what I'm here to write about. Mostly.

So I have arrived at JFK Airport, and found the one seat near my gate that has a power plug so I can charge my laptop (which will hopefully last me through enough time to watch a movie). I knew that people would start arriving at the gate shortly for the flight, so I didn't want to lose my seat.

Two people came and sat next to me, and I wanted a bottle of water. Given that this shop is right across the hall from where I'm sitting (completely in view from the seats), I decided to ask if they'd mind watching the bag or the seat for a minute. Words can't describe the look of horror on their faces, like I am Osama bin Laden sitting next to them.

Now, I can see how this would be an easy mistake: I'm 6'4" and white as can be, so clearly, an easy mistake on their part. I admit, I don't fault them for not wanting to, but I think the reaction was just a bit strong. In their defense, they were Australian, so maybe they feel they're more at risk, somehow. Who knows.

My bigger point here is that we shouldn't allow paranoia to ruin our daily lives, or an occasional kind act on someone else's behalf. I've watched bags for people, and as long as I know where they're going and it's in my sight, who cares? Yes, it violates rules, yes, it might possibly vaguely be dangerous in today's world, but somehow, I think that all the ridiculous overly strong security in today's airports does override this at least slightly.

Be vigilant, but be smart, people.

Harriet Miers Subject to Contempt of Congress Charges

2007-07-12T15:09:00.000-04:00

Ooooh, this is just getting too good to be true. Harriet Miers, obviously dumb enough to believe that George Bush could and would protect her from the big bad Congress, and that he had the power to do so in the first place, is now open to Contempt of Congress charges, among the most serious in our nation's lawbooks.

These and similar charges have been threatened against other officials in the Bush administration, but as of yet, the House and Senate have refused to actually pursue any of these charges. Now, in a move showing stunning resolve by the Democrats, officials have cleared the way for Harriet Miers to be coerced to testify.

Naturally, a string of other charges could result from this in the event that it is proven that she had direct knowledge and authority in the matter of the attorney firings scandal, including obstruction of justice. In the meantime, however, until Miers either testifies or is brought up on more serious charges, Bush will be able to do nothing other than sit back and watch his supposed friend rot in jail, as Bush has no legal authority to override Congress' powers in this matter.

On a personal note, I am not sure if we should be happier if she chooses to testify, or if she gets to rot for a while.

Bush Orders Miers to Defy Congress

2007-07-11T16:52:00.000-04:00

In a move that will undoubtedly set up Bush to snap the ever so fragile spines of Congress, Bush has ordered Harriet Miers, the one-time White House counsel and brief appointee to the Supreme Court, to break the law by defying Congress.

Are these guys crazy? Bush is once again flouting the separation of powers and the system of checks and balances and may well get away with it. When will someone not only stand up to Bush, but where is the outrage and renewed calls for impeachment?

Once again, I need to remind the American population that when an administration becomes tyrannical, it is our Constitutional DUTY to stand up and revolt! This is one of the single most outstanding reasons that our right to own a gun has been so carefully preserved.

I urge everyone to call, write, and visit their representatives and demand their support for impeachment proceedings and the immediate repeal of all of these Constitutional erosions.

Bush Pardons Entire GOP

2007-07-11T16:51:00.000-04:00

From Iggy the Senior: Too Good to Miss

Cheney Implicated by DC Madam Logs? Ohhh, PLEASE be True

2007-07-11T13:33:00.000-04:00

Oh, how sweet it would be if this were true: Dick Cheney is on the DC Madam's Phone List.

Now, I'm angling to say that this is not necessarily true, but certainly plausible. The allegations state that at the very least, he and his aides were involved in buying "entertainment" for foreign clients while he was CEO of Halliburton. Given his and Halliburton's history, this is entirely within the realm of possibility, and more likely than not, at least half true.

The implications of this are simple: Either Dick Cheney used escort services personally (well, how else is he going to get some?), or he requested them or ordered his aides to request them for clients at Halliburton. If this is found to be true, there can only one course: Impeach the bastard.

PS: To my loyal Republican readers (I'm sure I have at least one neocon fan out there. C'mon BillO, fess up.): Even if this is not true, what separates the Democrats/Liberals from using the same dirty lying factless tricks you use every day?

Conclusive Paper States "No Sun Link" in Regards to Global Warming

2007-07-11T12:41:00.000-04:00

Well, here it is FoxNoise; there is no conclusive evidence to support the "theory" (read: bogus diversionary tactics for people too lazy or stupid to research on their own) of increased solar activity that would cause the Earth's temperature to increase.The article from the BBC states:

Dr Lockwood initiated the study partially in response to the TV documentary The Great Global Warming Swindle, broadcast on Britain's Channel Four earlier this year, which featured the cosmic ray hypothesis.

"All the graphs they showed stopped in about 1980, and I knew why, because things diverged after that," he told the BBC News website.

"You can't just ignore bits of data that you don't like," he said.

What is being said bluntly is that Fox and Britain's equivalent Channel Four have, oooh, shocker here, LIED!

The "Presidential Advance Manual" Available Online

2007-07-06T13:57:00.000-04:00

The RNC internal document known as the Presidential Advance Manual is now available online from the ACLU. As you might guess, a great majority of it is redacted before being made available, but the real meat and potatoes is still there. It fully details the RNC's plans for dealing with protestors, from just basic countermeasures including counter demonstrators, to complete removal from the area of the event.

As detailed by 2600.com, the Republicans have no qualms about circumventing civil rights and intimidating people expressing theirs. This is a perfect reason why Michael Bloomberg should never be allowed another public office for his complicity in this plot.

Are We THAT Dumb?

2007-07-06T11:12:00.000-04:00

There are sad facts about our country that are just inexcusable in today's world, facts that must be dealt with before we can ever hope to truly overcome the forces that have been working to tear our country apart.

Did you know that in the last fifteen years, as much as 20% of our country could not name the President of the United States? This still continues today, particularly in remote areas of our nation.

A newer study has found that 20% of Americans also believe that the sun revolves around the Earth, a belief that can only be propogated with a complete lack of any critical reasoning and poor education.

In an older article in the New York Times that I stumbled across today on Digg, well, I'd like to say that I was surprised, but in light of Dick Cheney's 9% approval rating, Bush's 28%, and Congress' equally dismal 28%, it does make sense to discover that people don't even know why they continue to approve. It is prudent to note here that the article only lightly touches on the political spectrum of today, and doesn't even mention Bush by name.

The overall point of the article is that the democracy of our country is threatened, often times by orders of magnitude more by our own ignorance than by external threats, including terrorism, communism, fascism, and really any other threat you can imagine. Including bears.

Again, I'm forced to ask the country: Are we THAT dumb?

What happened to the great nation that was destined to lead the world into the future? Somewhere along the way, our country got hijacked by fear-mongers and those who would prefer to prey upon ignorance by appealing to the most basic instincts of humans, instead of the reasoned debate our nation was built upon.

Categorically speaking, one could argue that the nation's populace has grown in collective intelligence by leaps and bounds since its founding, and yet our country is in ever more danger from its own ignorance. Perhaps this has to do with the changing face of the political landscape, and how politics has become much more about the game, the game of winning, than it has about the original cause, that of the greater good.

I mourn the loss of our nation's collective intelligence, and worse, the will to battle it with knowledge and fact.

And They Come Out of the Woodwork

2007-07-05T20:02:00.000-04:00

And so the scum starts to flow outward. A man was found loitering outside the hotel where Barack Obama was staying while campaigning. After his arrest, it was discovered that he had an eight inch knife 'concealed' in his car.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2007/07/04/man-with-knife-arrested-outside-obamas-hotel/

Between this, the Bush Administration, the war, and the rest of the world, I really do wonder where the Four Horsemen are, and how soon they're getting here.

"Throw the Bums Out"

2007-07-05T17:59:00.000-04:00

Rarely has there been a more simple and fitting statement regarding the Bush administration. I can heartily say that I am one of the proud Americans who has agreed with "rabidrobot" here.

I pride myself on having held these opinions since the day Bush took office. I never trusted him. I felt he was at best incompetent and later, at worst, completely malevolent, as stated in the article below. I thought he was riding "Daddy's coattails." After we began the misbegotten war with Iraq, and the Patriot Act was passed, I took down my American flag off my wall, folded it carefully, and put it away in my closet, not even sure when it would come back out.

Reality Relentless in Bashing Bush
Admin spokesperson says, "We were never big fans of reality to begin with."
By rabidrobot
Posted Wednesday, July 04, 2007 on rabidrobot XTreme!
Discussion: US Domestic

Have you ever bought prescription pills sold from obvious spam, poorly worded and spelled and clearly bogus? Me either. But someone does, that's why spammers continue to try and find new, ever more insidious ways to simply get their message viewed; that is the way spam works, you send out such a wide net that the odds are that you'll catch enough suckers to pay the bills plus some.
What about the Nigerian 419 scam? You ever think that by giving someone your bank account, that they will then take that information in good faith? That they will not rob you blind, but instead fill your account with tax free millions? I never fell for that. No one I know fell for that. But I have seen people on TV, and read online about people who have. People who are so stupid, ignorant, and greedy that they keep the con men in business, milk, and honey.
Another popular spam technique is the "pump and dump". I find this one particularly fascinating, because it depends on people taking stock market investment tips from ever more doubtful and incredulous, anonymous, gif-making tipsters. What would posess someone with enough capital to be making investments in random stocks to risk that money on an obvious scam? I mean, this is an OBVIOUS scam, not a legitimate stock tip, and still many people are sufficiently greedy to try and cash in on it. The canny spammer, in control of the timing, makes away with all the loot. This just blows my mind. It is a relative pain in the ass, as far as I can tell, for the spammer himself, and depends on a coincidence of wealth and idiocy and incompetence and timing that seems very unlikely.
Nevertheless, pump and dumps are big business. Now, my point here, is that as much as I despise the spammers, I am also aware that without the idiots who buy bogus pills, send cash to anonymous Africans, and act on stock tips out of the ether, without these morons the spammers would not exist. Spammers are conniving, manipulating deceivers, yes, but the people who support them are also part of the problem.
Now, I'll just say this once, because I can't contain it, and I hope that you will continue reading afterward. I told you so. When it came to the Bush administration, and I don't claim to be alone, I had these assholes pegged all along.
But I can understand how one might have trusted them, wanted their cheap snake oil jingoist panacea. The $300 tax rebate for every citizen that was a bait and switch to give ludicrous tax breaks to huge corporations. I mean, he gave me $300, he must be on my side. If this is tax cuts Bush style, bring it on. But, like the Nigerian scammer, Bush took that trust and twisted it to achieve his own agenda, eventually taking each of us for much, much more. Just in dollars, setting aside actual lives affected, Bush gave us each $300, but then ran our debt up to $20,000 apiece. Now, I can see how one might have liked how it sounded at first, but now, now we are all justified in wondering if our trust was misplaced.
And the pump and dump of a mushroom cloud, the Weapons of Mass Destruction that made investment in invasion seem positively genius. There too, in a comedy of timing and errors, Bush and company played us all for suckers, lying the country into supporting an aggressive invasion of a country, despicable or not, that posed no threat. And not only that, but it has been FUBAR ever since. The analogy plays here too, because it is this series of shotgun lies and misstatements and misdirections that to me was CLEARLY bullshit, but so many people were buying into it because they wanted to believe--just boggled my mind.
But today is a new day. We can all look at each other as Americans. We can look at each other united in patriotism. We can stand together as one and say, “No More! I'm mad as hell and I'm not going to take it anymore!” I don't have to tell you how this series of con-jobs on the American people has come to a head with the administration holding itself above the law, unaccountable, and unrepentant for SCREWING EVERY SINGLE ONE OF US. A royal Cheney-style, "Go Fuck Yourself" is what they are trying to sell us now.
And, even though the administration is obviously ignorant, incompetent, or malevolent, we must also consider each other. Because without people to buy this Snake Oil, they wouldn't be in business. And at this point, like people dumb enough to support spammers, people dumb enough to continue to fall for this Administration's baloney are also part of the problem.
Let's make ourselves proud again; be part of a solution. Repent our misdeeds, and make atonement. Make the United States of America again represent the best humanity has to offer, a beacon of freedom, equality, and recognition of inalienable rights. The pinnacle of civilization we deserve and desire to be. On this Fourth of July, we should reflect on the standards of decency, honesty and democracy that the United States used to, and still can, stand for. Lets us do this together, and put these dark days behind us.
Throw the Bums Out.

Well said, sir.

Scooter Free!

2007-07-03T10:13:00.000-04:00

In something of a sick paraphrase of Kevin Mitnick's famed bumper stickers and campaign slogan, Scooter Libby is now essentially a free man. He's still got that $250,000 fine and two years of probation, but that's worthless. He's not some drug dealer who's going to be back on the corner next week, so he's now off the hook.

Apparently, Bush has forgotten his pledge:

"I want to know who it is ... and if the person has violated law, the person will be taken care of." - George W. Bush - Sept. 30th, 2003

I suppose that Bush was using word play there, because he has certainly 'taken care of' Scooter Libby. He's made sure that he doesn't serve a real prison sentence for a crime that most people would be shot for, and will undoubtedly issue a full eleventh hour pardon for, come January 2009.

On a more resolute note, Sen. Joe Biden has asked Americans to flood the White House with calls today expressing our rage at this evasion of justice.

Senator Biden reacts to President Bush commuting Scooter Libby's Sentence

Hours after a federal appeals court ruled that I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby would have to begin serving his prison sentence while appealing his conviction for crimes of perjury, obstruction of justice and lying to investigators, President Bush commuted his sentence.

Last week Vice President Cheney asserted that he was beyond the reach of the law. Today, President Bush demonstrated the lengths he would go to, ensuring that even aides to Dick Cheney are beyond the judgment of the law.

It is time for the American people to be heard.

I call for all Americans to flood the White House with phone calls tomorrow expressing their outrage over this blatant disregard for the rule of law.

202-456-1414

Remind George Bush what he told staffers during a swearing in ceremony for White House staff back in January 2001:

"[We] must remember the high standards that come with high office. This begins with careful adherence to the rules. I expect every member of this administration to stay well within the boundaries that define legal and ethical conduct. This means avoiding even the appearance of problems. This means checking and, if need be, double- checking that the rules have been obeyed. This means never compromising those rules. No one in the White House should be afraid to confront the people they work for, for ethical concerns, and no one should hesitate to confront me as well. We are all accountable to one another. And above all, we are all accountable to the law and to the American people."

Click here to watch the video of George Bush addressing staff: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wjwLlfFKerU

Mike Gravel, How Do We Love Thee, Let Me Count the Ways

2007-06-25T17:32:00.000-04:00

Sen. Mike Gravel is probably one of the toughest guns in the entirety of the American government. He's held stern beliefs so steadfastly, and since joining the election has come out swinging, almost at his own party (rightly so!) as he has the Bushies and Republicans.

Previously, he said that he felt that his Democratic fellows do not have the moral authority to lead this country, because most of them voted for the war, and many continued to support the war after it had been started. I am so proud to be a member of a party where a man who remembers what politics were supposed to be about, and is doing something about it.

Read his latest blast here: Why Hillary Scares Me

Mr. Gravel, thank you for your honest words.

BillO Gets Smacked Down

2007-06-22T09:26:00.000-04:00

In perhaps one of the best scenes to ever come off the O'Reilly Factor, a student from Boulder High School appeared, if not to defend the recent student forum on drugs and sex, then to defend his school and the people responsible for it from baseless attacks by the mindless zombies that worship BillO.

Seen below is the exchange between that meager little worm, and the not only honorable, but brave Jesse Lange, who would go on here to utterly destroy BillO and take just a little more air out of his delusions.

A slightly better writeup can be found here on News Hounds, which details the backstory as well.

Rudy Giuliani is an Asshole

2007-06-20T09:12:00.000-04:00

Iggy (the Senior) found this little gem: Giuliani Quit Iraq Panel for Politics

I'll admit, I'd be angry and upset with him, except that this kind of garbage is expected from him and his ilk now. So when I walked in this morning, I checked my Google Desktop ::hugs Google::, and found this extra little gem:

South Carolina Treasurer Indicted on Cocaine Charges

What makes this so special? Well, this:

COLUMBIA, South Carolina (AP) -- South Carolina Treasurer Thomas Ravenel, a former real estate developer who became a rising political star after his election last year, was indicted Tuesday on federal cocaine charges.
Ravenel is also the state chairman for former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani's presidential campaign.

I'd say that it is too good to be true. Of course, with Rudy, clearly the more fantastic the story, the more likely it is to be true.

"Hey, did you hear Rudy was a crossdresser?" - True Story

Rudy Giuliani Threatens to Whack Ron Paul

2007-06-15T12:52:00.001-04:00

Ok, so, maybe not, but I just couldn't help posting this:

Rudy Giuliani Threatens to Whack Ron Paul

The campaign manager for Ron Paul advised reporters that the matter was reported to the White House and that Alberto Gonzales promised an immediate investigation right after the 2008 election.

Somehow, I just found this entire thing to be wonderfully hilarious. Hey Rudy, maybe you oughta hire Bernie Kerrik? I heard he's looking for extra 'work.'

Republicans Are Stupid, Just Look

2007-06-04T18:18:00.000-04:00

Ok, honest to god, there is no way anyone who DIDN'T evolve from an ape can think like this. People like this man right here prove evolutionary theory, because as we all know, sometimes you wind up with a turd in the gene pool. Apparently, the head of the Arkansas Republican Party, Dennis Milligan, said we need another major domestic terrorist attack to appreciate Bush!

“At the end of the day, I believe fully the president is doing the right thing, and I think all we need is some attacks on American soil like we had on [Sept. 11, 2001 ], and the naysayers will come around very quickly to appreciate not only the commitment for President Bush, but the sacrifice that has been made by men and women to protect this country,” Milligan said.

At this point, it's gotta be pretty much obvious that these yokels don't have a clue about terrorism, and as long as someone keeps putting a microphone in their face, they will keep spouting garbage like this.

Hey moron, don't you think that another attack would actually prove that Bush had completely failed in his policies to secure America and prevent further attacks??? This is, of course, assuming that he hasn't already, which he has. Yo, jerk! Guantanamo, Abu Ghraib, Iraq, Afghanistan, the failure to capture bin Laden... The list goes on and on.

Do we really need people like this to represent America to the rest of the world? All this, and I bet this asshole can't even tell you how many people died in the towers, or how many soldiers we've lost in Iraq. Go back to your shack in the hills, you fool.

Something Good is Missing From the World

2007-06-01T13:11:00.001-04:00

I just found a Digg link thanks to my Google Desktop (and no, I'm not advertising!) that links to a story about Fred (Mr.) Rogers. The article contains 15 Reasons Mr. Rogers was the Best Neighbor Ever. This got me thinking, and perhaps wondering if, in some way, the modern world and the passing of our beloved Mr. Rogers were truly intertwined.

On a hunch, I remembered that he left us in 2003, and so I looked it up: Wikipedia lists Mr. Rogers' death as February 27th, 2003. Less than one month later, March 20th, the United States invaded Iraq.

I'm no conspiracy theorist, and I never bought the garbage hoaxes that ran around the 'net briefly about Mr. Rogers, but if one thing is certain, I can say that an unparalleled force for good died with Mr. Rogers, and maybe, just maybe, if we all took the time to remember one good man, the world would be better for it.

Joe Lieberman IS a Republican!

2007-05-31T18:27:00.001-04:00

Ok, so we knew this when the RNC endorsed Lieberman for Connecticut as an independent, and we knew it when Lieberman repeatedly endorsed the war and began to sound eerily like George Bush. Now we have photographic proof!

From Crooks and Liars:

Then Lieberman walked in, wearing a pair of sunglasses newly purchased from an Iraqi market that the military had taken him to in southeast Baghdad. He'd been equipped with a helmet and flak vest when he toured the market, which he described as bustling.

Somehow, I'm gathering that there were once again 100+ troops, some tanks, Humvees, and Apaches in the immediate vicinity. This sounds familiar!

John McCain was in Iraq recently too! He also visited a heavily guarded marketplace and wore the latest in Iraqi fashion trends: a bullet proof vest!

Is it just me, or is this the new vacation hotspot for Republicans?

Enough is Enough

2007-05-30T17:23:00.000-04:00

We knew two years ago when Moqtada Al Sadr, commander of the Mahdi Army, rose to power that he was a dangerous man. We knew when we let him escape the Imam Ali Shrine that he was even more dangerous, having successfully stared down the American and Iraqi armies. Then we allowed him to escape briefly to Iran, where he vowed to return.

Now he has returned within the past months, and true to his form, he has started stirring trouble again. According to NPR.org:

Radical cleric Muqtada al-Sadr's Mahdi Army may be responsible for the kidnappings of five Britons from an Iraqi government office, an Iraqi official said Wednesday.

Unsurprisingly, local religious leaders have once again had to come to the table to deal with and negotiate with Al Sadr as has happened in the past with various hostages in Iraq. These types of negotiations, although frequently successful in freeing captured hostages, have served to do little except support claims of legitimacy within the militias who frequently demand to be recognized.

With Al Sadr becoming a growing thorn in the side of Iraq's growing civil war, and having widely recognized political power and social appeal, hasn't the time come to find him, and people like him, and end their continued efforts to destabilize Iraq?

If we're to remain in Iraq for now, shouldn't we at least do something productive in the short term? If not, then we need to bring them home and stop sacrificing our men and women like sheep.

The Senate Passes the Supplemental Spending Blank Check

2007-05-24T20:57:00.001-04:00

Well, the Democrats did it.

On the upshot, Hillary and Obama did vote against it... after the bill already had enough votes to pass. Now it would seem that this is a bad thing, but somehow, I doubt that either Obama or Hillary would even consider being dumb enough to support this at this point.

They are too far into the race and they know that the people will not support any Democrat who supported this bill. The Democrats, as said before, were mandated to end this war at all costs. If they ran Bush into a corner and simply ran the military out of funding (which by the way wouldn't actually do any harm to the troops, it would just give Congress room to end this war in short order), they would be viewed as better for it.

At this point, the only lesson we can take away is "Never trust a politician."

As Promised... And as the Democrats Lied...

2007-05-24T20:47:00.000-04:00

From MSNBC.com:

OLBERMANN: And lastly, as promised, 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. It is, in fact, a comment about betrayal. Few men or women elected in our history, whether executive or legislative, state or national, have been sent into an 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: the Democratic leadership has surrendered to a president, if not the worst president, then easily the most selfish in our history, who happily blackmails his own people and uses his own military personnel as hostages, to his asinine demand that the Democrats give the troops their money.

The Democratic leadership has agreed to finance the deaths of Americans in a war that has only reduced the security of Americans. The Democratic leadership has given Mr. Bush all that he wanted, with the only caveat being not merely meaningless symbolism about benchmarks for the Iraqi government, but optional meaningless symbolism about benchmarks for the Iraqi government. The Democratic leadership has, in sum, claimed a compromise with the administration in which the only things truly compromised are the trust of the voters, the ethics of the Democrats, and the lives of our brave and doomed friends and family in Iraq.

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. You may trot out every political cliche from the soft soap inside the beltway dictionary of boiler plate sound bites about how this is the beginning of the end of Mr. Bush‘s carte blanche, about how this is the first step.

Well, Senator Reid, the only end at its beginning is our collective hope that you and your colleagues will do what is right, what is essential, what you were each elected or reelected to do. Because this first step is a step right off a cliff. 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. 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 a 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 would be stranded or forced to serve longer or what, have to throw bullets at the enemy with their bare hands? It is moronic.

We have defunded wars before, sir, and this is not even close to a true defunding. No harm has come to our troops. How transcendently, how historically pathetic. Any other president from any other moment in a 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 ensure personally, first last and always, that the troops would not suffer. A president, Mr. Bush, uses the carte blanche he already has not to manipulate and overlap arriving and departing brigades into a second surge, but to say in unequivocal terms that if it takes every last dime of the money 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. Not that these Democrats, who had this country‘s support and sympathy up until 48 hours ago, have not earned all of the blame they can carry home. We seem to be very near the bleak choice between war and shame, Winston Churchill wrote to Lord Moyne in the days after the British signed the Munich Accords with Germany in 1938. “My feeling is that we shall choose shame and then have war thrown in a little later.” That‘s what this is for the Democrats, isn‘t it, their Neville Chamberlain moment before the second world war.

All that is missing is the landing at the airport with the blinkered leader waving a piece of paper, which he naively thought would guarantee peace in our time, but which his opponent would ignore with deceit. The Democrats have merely streamlined the process. Their piece of paper already says Mr. Bush can ignore it with impunity.

But where are the Democratic presidential hopefuls this evening? See they not that to which the Senate and House leadership has blinded itself? Judging these candidates based on how they voted on the original Iraq authorization or waiting for apologies for those votes, that is ancient history now. The Democratic nomination is likely to be decided tomorrow, but talk of practical politics, the buying into the president‘s dishonest construction, fund the troops or they will be in jeopardy, the promise of tougher action in September is falling not on deaf ears, but rather falling on Americans who already told you what to do and now perceive your ears as deaf, as closed to practical politics.

Those who seek the Democratic nomination need to, for their own political futures, and 1,000 times more solemnity and importance for the individual futures of our troops, denounce this betrayal, vote against it, and if need be, unseat Majority Leader Reid and Speaker Pelosi if they continue down this path of guilty, fatal acquiescence to the tragically misguided will of a mono-maniacal president.

For ultimately, at this hour, the entire government has failed us. Mr. Reid, Mr. Hoyer and the other Democrats have failed us. They negotiated away that which they did not own, but had only been entrusted by us to protect, our collective will as the citizens of this country, that this brazen war of lies be ended as rapidly and safely as possible.

Mr. Bush and his government have failed us. They have behaved venomously and without dignity, of course. That is all at which Mr. Bush is gifted. We are the ones providing any element of surprise or shock here. With the exception of Senator Dodd and Senator Edwards, the Democratic presidential candidates have, so far at least, failed us. They must now speak and make plain how they view what has been given to Mr. Bush and what is yet to be given away tomorrow and in the thousand tomorrows still to come, because for the next 14 months, the Democratic nominating process, indeed the whole of our political discourse, until further notice, has, with the stroke of a cursive pen, become about one thing and one thing alone, the electorate figured this out six months ago.

The president and Republicans have not, doubtless will not. The Democrats will figure it out during the Memorial Day recess when they go home and many of those who elected them will politely suggest that they stay there and permanently. Because on the subject of Iraq, the people have been ahead of the media, ahead of the government, ahead of the politicians for the last year or two years or maybe three.

Our politics is now about the answer to one briefly worded question:

Mr. Bush has failed. Mr. Warner has failed. Mr. Reid has failed. So, who among us will stop this war, this war of lies? To he or she fall the figurative keys to the nation. To all the others, presidents and majority leaders and candidates and rank-and-file Congressmen and senators of either party, there‘s only blame for the shameful and bipartisan betrayal. Good night and good luck.

Keith Olbermann Layeth the Smackdown

2007-05-23T21:00:00.000-04:00

You all know that I've had enough of the Democratic leadership and their complete lack of willingness to confront and take down Bush on his misbegotten war effort. I've had enough of this, and worse, their feigned action.

Do they have their reasons? Sure. They want to leave this war intact long enough into next year that all the Republican constituents fall away from their people and consider the Democratic opponents. The catch is that they're now stepping down to Bush's level and playing games with American servicemen and women's lives.

This whole macabre game is just disgusting.

Tonight Keith had a Special Comment on this subject. It will be my intention to post the full transcript of that as soon as it's available.

Extraordinary Rendition, Wiretapping, and Guantanamo: Bad Things?

2007-05-17T20:07:00.000-04:00

Ok, hear me out...

Personally, I wouldn't want any of these things happening to me, or anyone I know personally. But what about Bush and his cronies? Clearly, they all think these are great things, and I agree. They're very useful for extracting vital information and confessions, and holding the accused indefinitely until you get everything you want from it.

Personally, I think that it would be GREAT to wait for Bush's term to expire, then let the next president keep these items available, and use them... on BUSH! That's right, pick Bush up off the street somewhere, and ship his ass off to, say, Afghanistan to be "forcefully questioned." Condi's phones tapped. Cheney swept off to Guantanamo and held for a few years without charges, lawyers, phone calls, any of the things he would undoubtedly be demanding angrily while his blood pressure rose. We could then take his entire staff and stuff them away in secret prisons throughout Europe that still exist, waiting until we decide drum up support for war crimes charges.

Eh, eh?

Pat Buchanan is Nuts

2007-05-16T21:25:00.000-04:00

Ok, so, I've found myself occasionally agreeing with him, but watching Scarborough right now, it's easy to see how Democrats don't like him. His repeated point in an argument with Arianna Huffington was that "the Boy Scouts were booed out of the Democratic Convention because they didn't allow gays to join" and that the Democrats are "pushing the Gay Agenda."

I take some offense to this. You see, when I was a kid and brought up to play nice, share, and treat everyone equally, I never thought ill of anyone without a good reason... like if they didn't give me their damned pudding, even under duress. Seriously though, black, white, Mexican, I knew all three colors, and didn't think any less of any of them.

Ok, again, seriously (this time for real), I was raised (by a flagrantly racist mother, no less) to respect everyone equally, to be fair, and to understand that, in truth, all people were created equal. Even if some people weren't equal due to disabilities, this didn't lessen their value as a person with potential to me (perhaps because I grew up in the days of Stephen Hawking).

So anyway, on to the real meat of this... As a liberal, I take offense to the accusation that I am pushing the "Gay Agenda." I have always felt that I have pushed the Equality Agenda... And in the end, isn't that what these same people have ALWAYS been against? Well, Pat?

The Summation of the Case for Impeachment

2007-05-14T13:52:00.000-04:00

Damn, this is just sooo good. From The Baltimore Chronicle:

Impeach Bush or Get Rid of the Impeachment Clause
What is it about impeachment that has the Democratic Party leadership so frightened?
Talking with members of Congress, one hears the same refrain: “I know Bush and Cheney have committed impeachable crimes, but impeachment is a bad idea.”
The rationales offered are many, but all are either specious or based upon flawed reasoning. Let’s consider them separately:
Excuse one, offered by Speaker Nancy Pelosi, is that impeachment would be a diversion from Democrats’ main goals of ending the Iraq War, and passing important legislation. The reality, of course, is that many of the administration’s impeachable acts relate directly to the war, so hearings would only build support for ending it. Meanwhile, with the slim majorities in both houses, Democrats cannot pass any significant progressive legislation that could survive a veto (or a presidential signing statement) and the record shows it.
Excuse two is that impeachment is divisive. This seems the height of absurdity. When voters handed Congress to the Democrats, they knew they were setting the stage for divided government. That was the whole point. Moreover, divisiveness in Washington has largely emanated from the White House, not from Congress. Anyhow, given administration intransigence on all the issues that matter to Democrats, they have no alternative but to take a stand.
Excuse three is a claim that the public opposes impeachment. This is simply wrong. The few straightforward scientific polls done on impeachment, such as one published by Newsweek last October, show a majority of Americans to want it. Furthermore, if Bush has committed impeachable acts, it is inappropriate for House members, all of whom swore to uphold and defend the Constitution, not to act.
Excuse four is that old canard that impeaching Bush would mean making Cheney president—a deliberately scary prospect but one which any politician in Washington knows is garbage. Firstly, if Cheney were to become president because of a Bush impeachment or resignation, it would only be for a few months, and given his stunning lack of support among the public—currently about 9 percent and falling—he would be the lamest of lame ducks, unable to do anything. But more importantly, his own party would be certain to remove him before any removal of Bush, and for exactly that reason—they would not want to be going into the 2008 election with Cheney as party leader. This is exactly what happened to Spiro Agnew, whom a Republican attorney general managed to indict and remove before the collapse of Nixon’s presidency. The same thing can be expected to happen to Cheney, who would surely face either a sudden health crisis, or an indictment for corruption.
Finally, excuse five is that the president’s crimes and abuses of power need to be proven before any impeachment bill. This is completely backwards. An impeachment bill can be filed by any member of Congress who believes the president has violated the Constitution. At that point, it is up to the House Judiciary Committee to consider the bill’s merits and decide whether to ask the full House to authorize impeachment hearings. It is at an impeachment hearing where investigations should proceed. After all, only after the Judiciary Committee votes out an impeachment article can the full House consider whether to actually impeach. Calling for investigations before an impeachment hearing is like asking for an investigation before a grand jury investigation. It’s redundant, simply a dodge.
Besides, some of this president’s high crimes are self-evident. Take the case of Bush’s ordering the National Security Agency to spy on Americans’ communications without a warrant. A federal judge has already labeled this violation of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act a felony. There is no denying this felony occurred, or that Bush is responsible. The only question the House needs to vote on is whether the felony is a “high crime” warranting impeachment.
The same applies Bush’s refusal to enact over 1200 laws or parts of laws duly passed by Congress. Bush doesn’t deny that he has usurped the power of the Congress, as laid down in Article I of the Constitution. Rather, he asserts—with no basis in the wording of that document—that as commander in chief in the war on terror, he has the “unitary executive” authority to ignore acts of Congress. Again, there is no need for an “investigation” to establish whether this happened. What Congress must do is decide whether this usurpation of its Constitutional role is an impeachable abuse of power.
Likewise the president’s authorization of kidnap and torture. We know the president okayed torture. We know too, that he used his “unitary executive” claim to refuse to accept a law passed overwhelmingly by the last Congress outlawing torture. Finally, we know the president did not, as required by US and international law, act to halt torture and punish those up the chain of command who oversaw systematic, widespread torture.
There are many impeachable crimes by this president (and vice president), such as obstruction of justice in the Valeria Plame outing case, conspiracy (or treason) in the Niger “yellowcake” document forgery scandal, conspiracy to engage in election fraud, lying to Congress, criminal negligence in responding to the Katrina disaster, bribery and war profiteering, etc., which would require Judiciary Committee investigations.
In the meantime, though, Democrats need to step up to their responsibility.
If this president is not to be impeached, Congress may as well amend the Constitution to remove the impeachment clause. It will, in that case, have become as much an anachronism as prohibition.
- Dave Lindorff

The simple fact is that Bush has been angling for an impeachment since he took office, doing so little in his first months as President, and doing only bad things in his years after September 11th, which allowed him to gain the power and the political capital to do the evil he's done. Impeach him now or risk forever losing our country's soul and spirit. End his war, and let's rebuild our country as one.

A warning to Senate and Congressional Republicans, while I'm at it: If impeachment does come to the table, be careful about standing behind your man too closely. You will be facing a Democratic Senate, Congress, President, and perhaps in the next few years, even Judicial branch, and could wind up seeing your entire agendas being completely ignored, particularly if the majority grows to overwhelm any hope of a successful filibuster.

You know what the saddest part about the Republicans is? That unlike you, we Democrats will be able to acheive all this without needing to use a single one of your dirty tricks: We won't need to redraw districts to allow for more Democratic victories; We don't need to threaten a 'nuclear option' to destroy the only balance in a house divided; We don't need to erode the walls of the separation of powers, packing the Judiciary with biased and unqualified candidates.

But in the end, it will be those dirty tricks that you clung to as your last refuge from the power of an angry American public that will have given us this power, proving beyond a doubt, perhaps for generations, that Republicans simply cannot be trusted.

"It seems that fate is not without a sense of irony." - Morpheus, The Matrix

Has Walter Reed Been Shut Down?

2007-05-13T23:48:00.000-04:00

No? Then why has the majority of the media just become thoroughly silent on the issue?

Is it because the fight over the Iraq Spending bills have taken center stage? Well, partly, but is that the actual reason? No.

I think that at least in part, it's because something more interesting has come along.

Something more important, you mean, Iggy?

No. I mean more interesting. I'll elaborate. In the news recently we've been bombarded with the latest scandal to hit Washington, but as far as that town goes, it's small potatoes. Of course, I'm referring to the DC Madam scandal. This seems to be the biggest thing to hit Washington since Bill Clinton's dick, or at least insofar as the mainstream media goes. Bill, don't think I'm knocking on you, I was one of the ones who said "Ok, and what's the big deal here?"

What happened is that once again, America's notorious attention span has drifted. Nothing juicy enough was coming out of this. We should be ashamed of ourselves that the removal of Sanjaya from American Idol and the fact that a few politicians got blowjobs (no doubt on taxpayer money, my dear Republicans, so please by all means, explain your outrage about Bill Clinton, and your silence in this case).

Let's see if I can recount a few of the major headlines since this whole story blew up in the administration's face: DC Madam, Sanjaya, Republican and Democratic debates (which both seemed to avoid the topic), the Queen's visit... The list goes on. All big stories, mind you, especially Sanjaya... (Read between the lines there. Full disclosure: I watched the first season, and after that I just did NOT care)

I should clarify; I'm not even saying that Walter Reed needs to be page one news every day. If there's nothing new to report, you don't have to say something about it every day, for Pete's sake! What I am saying is that it shouldn't be allowed to just fade from America's consciousness like it has, like the same yellow ribbon magnets have on thousands of cars around the country, and yes, and like the travesty of the petty fighting over the corpse of Ground Zero (the World Trade Center site, for those of you with American memory*). Six months after 3,000 Americans were brutally murdered (including and especially 343 heroic firefighters (yes, I actually still know that number off the top of my head)), Britney "Stupid White Trash" Spears was back on the front page for whatever stupid escapade she was doing this time.

John Stewart of the Daily Show morbidly joked "America is ready to care about stupid shit again." (I couldn't find the specific quote so don't crucify me for it)

Don't let these people be forgotten, neither the soldiers nor the people responsible for the criminal neglect of our soldiers. Either is a dereliction of duty on behalf of the American public.

The People Have Spoken

2007-05-01T20:08:00.000-04:00

"I've listened to a lot of voices; people in my administration heard a lot of voices." George W. Bush, Feb. 14, 2007

Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi today passed the Iraq Spending Bill to Mr. Bush. The "President" vowed to veto the bill since the moment the elected Democratic majority promised that they would push this bill through. Infighting is already promising to turn the tides against the Democrats, as key Democrats have been announcing their intention to construct another Blank Check Bill for Mr. Bush. Obviously they feel it would be unpatriotic to uphold the system of checks and balances...

What Mr. Reid and Mrs. Pelosi seem to have failed to grasp (perhaps because they were incumbents during this past election) is that the Democrats were granted their positions by the American people to end this war. Now they balk at doing precisely that, and worse, intend to do exactly what the Republican lead Senate and Congress did since this war began. When so many Democratic leaders campaigned on the promise of ending this war and bringing honesty back to Washington, how can we trust any of them?

What should happen is that the Democrats should sit back on their laurels, debate why the Yankees suck (and yes, I am a Yankees fan who just happens to be fed up), and wait for Bush to ask nicely for the funding under whatever terms the elected officials dictate.

Passing the Buck... Err, Bill

2007-04-27T12:20:00.000-04:00

So, yesterday, the Senate passed the Iraq funding bill with $124 Billion available to support the war effort in Iraq. Bush promised to veto it as soon as it reached his desk, and said he would continue to do so as long as it was contingent on withdrawal.

From ABC.com:

"If they want to try again that which I've said is unacceptable, of course I won't accept it," the president said during a news conference here with Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe. "I hope it won't come to that."
"I invited the leaders of the House and the Senate to come down soon after my veto so we can discuss a way forward," the president said. "I'm optimistic we can get a bill, a good bill and a bill that satisfies all our objectives."

What Mr. Bush means by this, of course, is that if the Senate and Congress want to put on a good dog show and show the country how they follow his lead like loyal puppies, then they can come and visit with him so he can tell them what to do. Unfortunately, it seems like it's already working.

Early word is that the Democrats are already working on a 'fall-back' draft that will remove any mention of withdrawal, and will go for less, and even more fluidic "benchmarks" for the Iraqi government that will represent "deadlines." One would be wise to point out that numerous other deadlines have been proposed, accepted, passed, and faded in this war, though.

I think I can speak for a number of Democratic Americans (and others) who voted for change last year, only to find that the party of spineless wimps remains largely inhabited by the same invertebrates who let this get as far as it has in the past six and a half years. We are sorely disappointed that our team represents not the "cut and run" attitude that the Republican media machine would have us believe, but instead, a "hide and cower" attitude that backs down every time some Republican weasel utters the word "unpatriotic."

To them, I say; For shame! Go and hide your heads in the sand. If you can't take this heat, get out of DC, and let someone who cares give it a try. How dare you use your candidacy just to further your own name! You're no better than the president which you publicly oppose and privately embrace. Out of one corner of your mouth, you would have us believe that you represent our values and wish to end this senseless war, while out of the other, you would duck and cover at every opposition that comes your way.

If you believe as we do that this war should end, you should make your plan, end this pointless infighting among the party, and stick to it. If Mr. Bush decides he does not want to support the troops, and would sooner have them stay and continue to die for nothing but his personal gain, then let him. The military will run out of funding, and then you will have to override the President's ill thought out plot and bring them home right then and there.

I think we have discovered Mr. Bush's true plot: His intention is not now, and perhaps never was to finish this war. He wanted to get himself and his enablers into the Middle East for pure monetary gain, particularly the rich oil fields of Iraq. He has succeeded in his mission, and cares not for the will of the American people, nor for the troops that are killed every day.

The entire purpose of the war has been nothing more than personal gain, and now, the intention of saving his own name so that some history book does not record him as the man who started and lost the War on Terror, if you can even call this sham a real war. The only reason we stay now is so that Halliburton and others can continue to suck money from our very own national pockets, as well as those of the Iraqis. If Saddam Hussein deserved to die, then you better believe that these lousy excuses for Americans deserve no better.

In addition to holding fast to forcing the administration to withdraw our troops, investigations should be launched into all the war profiteers, and nothing but the harshest sentences should be handed down. If our country has any sense of the great nation we once were, we would accept no less.

Presidential Motorcade

2007-04-24T20:16:00.000-04:00

So the "President" was in town today. How do I know and why do I care?

Well, I know because it was a pain in the ass getting home tonight. Several subways were shut down, roads were blocked off, and Central Park was being bisected. First he takes away our rights, and now he wants to keep me from getting home so I can go out biking and enjoying our lovely weather?

I care because of the same reasons. Sure he was here on 'official' business, but when has this guy conducted any real business of national import since he took office? I mean, for the better?

I really wanted to ask him to tell Gonzalez to testify, but that just isn't going to happen...

Karl Rove is Just Green... Well, OK, he's not Green at All

2007-04-23T20:35:00.000-04:00

So Sheryl Crow and Laurie David (producer of Inconvenient Truth) met with Karl Rove at the Correspondents Dinner. There are always two sides to every story... So far, when Karl Rove's story has come into play, I am always prone to doubting it.

Anyway, the story goes that they stopped Rove at the Dinner, and mentioned their views about global warming. Rove immediately tried to walk away, and Sheryl attempted to stop him. Debate rages about how she stopped him, but it's clear that she didn't grab his arm, strong arm him back, and say "Listen up Porky." Of course, she'd have the respect of millions of Americans if she did.

In its own way though, she earned a lot of respect for the way she confronted him about his callousness. When she stopped him, he turned around and spat out "Don't touch me."

Crow responded "You can't talk to us like that, you work for us." Rove spat out "I don't work for you, I work for the American people," to which Crow responded "We are the American people."

Now, we can't be positive of what happened, but honestly, who's story do you buy?

Of course, today the Wicked Witch of the Hill (Dana Perino) down played... or, well, up played the incident, depending on who's point of view you're using. Of course, her story was that Rove was hostily confronted and cornered. Seeing Sheryl Crow's hulking mass and her known violent streak would confirm that, of course. In fact, the "large hulking man" supposedly seen with Alec Baldwin's daughter is actually Sheryl Crow. They were just out on the town for a day.

Somehow, this whole thing is just stunning, isn't it?

Tagged

2007-04-23T09:41:00.000-04:00

Iggy the Senior tagged me this Friday, and also noted that I've been going silent for too long of a stretch since starting this thing... Well, he's right, and I'd be lying to say that I'd be able to make his number of posts, but I'll try to manage one every two days at least, and work it up from there.

I'll let you know my tags as I find them.

Self-(read:Imposed) Censorship

2007-04-22T17:33:00.000-04:00

So, with the recent media feeding frenzy over the fresh corpse of Don Imus' career (who I must say looked like a walking corpse) finally past us, I thought now would be as good a time as any to dredge that topic back to the surface. Not his comments mind you, or those of his critics, but the whole topic of offensive public commentary and the like, and there's a lot of it out there.

First, but probably not the biggest firestarter is foul language. Of course, after seeing a kid of less than 5 years old at the park yesterday saying "Look, you big fucking bitch!" because he wasn't getting the attention he thought he deserved, this is certainly one that should be addressed. Possibly as long as radio has been around in this country, the use of foul language has been taboo, and with good reason. Initially it was probably not regulated, except by standards of excellence from the broadcasters. Of course, now the FCC regulates this.

Of course, it's reasonable to say that this is a significant issue, because clearly, both from television/movies, and undoubtedly from within the home, this kind of language has an impact on children and people in general. Crude, vulgar, and almost always angry, it has the power to demean anyone using it, and becomes a reflection of them, their upbringing, and even education. Certainly, adults use it and always have, but the issue today has more to do with the lack of control with which it is used, particularly as regards in front of children, or even directed towards them. In doing so, even if the parent chooses to scold the child for use of the language, it signifies to the child that at some point, it is still acceptable, it just depends on to whom and when.

As demonstrated by the first example I gave, clearly the child knows the word, knows its negative connotation, and knows how and when to use it. Of course, if he knows that word, it's undoubtable that his vocabulary is much more extensive. That brings me to my next topic.

Racist terminology has been around for nearly as long as humanity has been able to distinguish one group from another. In the past, it was more than just race, of course: Class, national, and regional origin have also been considered acceptable attributes by which to segregate and demean someone. Naturally, this proud tradition continues, though it is considered more acceptable to mainstream culture these days.

We all remember the wonderful warm fuzzy feeling we all got from the repetition ad nauseum of Don Imus' comments two weeks ago. Was it a bad joke? Sure. Was it completely off color? Of course. Does that mean a comedian isn't allowed to make a bad joke? No, naturally it doesn't. Does that mean that a white comedian isn't allowed to make a racist joke? Yes, apparently it does.

I admit that I didn't really know what to think, say, or do, when the backlash against Don Imus started. I recall thinking that I didn't hear anything about it in the near week long stretch since he supposedly said it, and would come to realize later that it was because nobody actually DID say anything until then. Then I looked at who was saying something about it... Not the Rutgers' women, not Don Imus, or any of his loyal listeners, or even CBS/MSNBC... It was Al Sharpton. Naturally, red flags came up.

Let me be clear on this point. I less often question WHAT Sharpton and those like him say, unless it's the same hateful rhetoric they accuse others of saying, because he does say that. It is how and why Sharpton says it that makes me question him. Usually in front of a lot of cameras, probably with full makeup on, and surrounded by the obligatory group of lackeys that seems to follow him from each "sad denigrating incident."

Anyway, back to the point at hand. Sharpton has for years been on a quest to silence anyone who would say anything bad about the black community or its people, and has occasionally rented himself out to other groups to gain their support as well. This has included more than just white people, but this represents the largest selection of his targets. Who does he go after? Not outspoken clan leaders, or flagrantly racist radio hosts like Rush Limbaugh. He goes after the Don Imus in the crowd.

I'll be the first to admit that Imus' comments were offensive, but they were meant as a joke. That's all. Sure, bad jokes, and yes, he should've toned it down, but no more or less than other comedians needed to keep down their racial jokes. He shouldn't have been fired over this any more than another comedian should've been fired for his jokes, or a rapper over their lyrics (which it's fair to argue have a much more significant impact on the mentality of youth these days, see my very first point above).

Now, after the backlash against Sharpton for targeting only Imus and allowing the rap and African American comedy community to get away with murder compared to Imus' veritable jay-walking, he makes a token gesture of 'meeting' with rap moguls in an effort to 'address' the concerns about lyrics.

Anyway, the whole thing about this that got me started on this post (aside from that child I saw in the park), can be found here:

http://www.illwillpress.com/topical2.html

Thank you, Foamy.

Words Cannot Express this Loss

2007-04-16T20:32:00.000-04:00

A tragedy today as over 50 people were shot and 32 killed at Virginia Tech. Recalling my thoughts upon hearing of the breaking story of two people shot earlier in the morning, I remember thinking "How sad."

Upon later hearing from my boss that there were at least 20 people dead, and then 30, I thought "Oh no... not again."

During my time in high school, I took part in an anti-violence group, and my group chose to do a special on school violence. I don't remember the specifics or statistics in it. We did our presentation in the fall of 2000, a year and a half after the massacre at Columbine. I do remember the address that day by President Bill Clinton. Simple, poignant, and respectful.

Today though, the immediate response from our political groups, as well as gun lobbyists of both sides, is to begin a debate on gun control, using this tragedy to further their own interests. For those of you who would turn this into some misguided political debate, it should be understood that this is not for you to stick your opinions into.

For now, all we can do is to offer our thoughts and prayers tonight for the lost, and the friends and families of those as well.

Green Zone Bombed in Iraq (Again)

2007-04-12T09:35:00.000-04:00

Well, I guess it's just the "one or two bombings a day" that make the news, isn't it Mrs. Bush?

So today, the Iraqi Parliament building's cafeteria was bombed at the height of the lunch hour, killing at least two members of the government and injuring an unknown number more. Numerous government vehicles were seen shortly thereafter racing away from the building, armed security forces clinging to the sides to prevent any ambushes.

In addition, a major bridge in Baghdad was also destroyed by a truck bomb on the same day. All this has happened SINCE the start of the push to secure Baghdad itself (let alone the rest of the country). It would stand to reason that more enemy forces would converge on the largest concentration of American and Iraqi troops, but it should also stand to reason that these troops would be doing a better job of protecting Baghdad.

Unless, of course, the infusion of 20,000 additional troops really was so miniscule that it would make little to no impact on the security of our people there.

2007-04-11T16:42:00.000-04:00

Absolutely priceless. From TruthDig.

The Decider

2007-04-11T16:39:00.001-04:00

http://decider.cf.huffingtonpost.com/

Tony Snow's Cancer Has Returned

2007-03-27T10:05:00.000-04:00

First they try to kill off Mrs. Edwards, now Tony Snow? He must not have been doing as well they'd hoped. I knew the Bush Administration would stop at nothing to silence the opposition, but c'mon, at least take the man hunting or something.

Well, as much as I'd like to say "none better suited," or something like that, I'll just give him the same well wishes that he gave Mrs. Edwards, presumably out of the shared experience that they have had.

Maybe this is why he keeps sounding so bored and tired when he's feeding the public the administration's lies?

Good luck, Mr. Snow, get better soon. We're counting on you to feed us our daily 'truthiness.'

Snow Job?

2007-03-21T13:19:00.000-04:00

Regarding the attorney firings in a press conference today:

Reporter: "So, you're saying this is your final offer?"
Snow: "Yep."

The fight is on.

They're describing the offer to 'interview' (vs. take sworn testimony) the requested people (Rove and Miers) as a "generous offer."

Mr. Snow, did nobody ever tell you or your bosses that you don't have a choice? If you think you do, go right ahead and try, and find out what "Contempt of Congress" means.

Bush Pushes His Limits

2007-03-20T21:01:00.000-04:00

Well, tonight, GW decided that there was no way he'd let Harriet Miers or Karl Rove be dragged in front of Congress to be questioned in the attorneys' case. Chuck Schumer came back swinging hard and stated bluntly that they'll simply subpeona them. By all accounts, they will be forced to testify, or be held in contempt of Congress.

Add to that the slap in Bush's face with the 94-6 vote today to reject presidential powers to appoint the replacement attorneys without Senate approval.

Stephen Colbert's No Friend of Democrats?

2007-03-16T20:58:00.000-04:00

Rahm Emanuel doesn't like Stephen Colbert, and he doesn't want you to, either.

Well, maybe that's a bit of an overreaching statement. In a lecture to freshmen Democrats, he warned his colleagues to stay away from Mr. Colbert's show for fear of embarrassment.

What does this mean, though? What does this do to Colbert, who's obviously a Democratic ally, and to his relationship with Democrats? Apparently very little. Immediately after this warning, Rep. Steve Cohen had an interview with Colbert.

While some might feel that Colbert could damage a candidate, it's clear that more than anything Colbert seems to target whether a candidate knows what they're talking about. In the end, isn't it better to know that our representatives really do have our interests at heart and have a fuller understanding of our needs?

Rahm has a good point. Colbert just has more and better points.

Binding Resolution for Withdrawal from Iraq

2007-03-12T10:32:00.000-04:00

The Democrats have finally learned how to play the game. I'm sorry to say that they have to play 'games' with Iraq and veteran healthcare, of course, but if it beats back the Republicans (maybe permanently), and gets us out of that sandy hell-hole, I'm all for it.

Apparently, with Thursday's Binding Resolution introduced by key Democrats and supported by a few Republicans, the Democrats also carefully laid a trap for Republicans who would oppose the bill by inserting a key part of the bill calling for greater aid for veterans. In a time where our nerves are raw from constant reports of decreases in veteran aid, closing of VA hospitals, and scandals such as the continuing saga of the Walter Reed Medical Center, it would become political suicide for any Republicans to oppose this bill, particularly for those who will be up for reelection in 2008.

It seems to me now that simply covering ones' car in yellow ribbons just won't do the trick anymore, or, as John Prine would've said, "Your Flag Decal Won't Get You Into Heaven Anymore."

A message to all Republicans (and "Democrats", Mr. Lieberman): Support the troops. Bring them home now, and take care of the ones that are already here, and the families of those who will never again come home.

Scooter Libby is Guilty

2007-03-06T14:40:00.000-05:00

...no matter how they try to spin it, or worm out of it. I'm sure he'll get a reduced sentence and pardoned before the end of the Bush regime, though, because there just seems to be no prayer in hell that the Democrats will grow enough spine in time to start impeachments.

I say go scorched earth and prosecute all the lower crimes by aides that can be done, and then do trade-ups to nail Bush and Cheney.

Bush Needs a "Good Whoopin' "

2007-03-01T17:44:00.000-05:00

You know, it's amazing to read the news every day and to read about detainees being tortured (sometimes American citizens), Iraqis being raped and murdered in cold blood (both by their own countrymen and ours), and our soldiers suffering humiliation and some of the poorest medical care in the world. All that, and you're not even counting the daily reports of the carnage in Iraq and Afghanistan, or the inscrutable divides within our own country's borders, be they ethnic, religious, political, social, or economic.

Some things may always exist. In some country somewhere in the world, a violent dictator may be oppressing his people who only want the basic freedoms every man, woman, and child is entitled to. Here in our own country, racial tensions have existed for the entire span of our nation's life, and they will be here for many years to come, if they truly ever cease. Our very founding occurred in part because of the persecution of religious groups in Europe, which also gave rise to our system of laws and our basic values of equality, which naturally have not always been equal.

For a time, however, our nation was united. It was united by many things, really; a strong and stable economy which more than just the top 1% of the nation shared; a strong sense of national identity that grew with fading hatreds and new alliances. Perhaps most of all, we were united in the horror of a single sunny morning in the symbolic cities of America.

In less than six years though, this has all changed. Perhaps more than at any time in our nation's history, we are divided in so many ways. So many sides have laid claim to sections of America, each one claiming "with me or against me" and leaving no middle ground, no room for compromise, and we have all been pulled down into the mire because of it. One of the most polarizing figures in this entire mess is no less than our 'President,' George W. Bush, the one man who should take it in his charge to ensure that we are all together as one voice and people. Instead, he too has famously said that "you're either with us or against us." He is a divider, despite his claims.

In our darkest hours as a nation, the good will of the American people and the will of the world towards our country was abused and squandered. In the eyes of the world, America stands tarnished and alone. I am forced to wonder, can our nation ever recover from some of the darkest eight years it has ever faced, indeed, that any nation has ever faced?

Now the Justice Department's IG Follows the Pentagon's IG!

2007-02-22T15:38:00.000-05:00

The Justice Department's Inspector General released a report yesterday describing, in detail, how the Justice Department, along with the Department of Homeland Security and FBI may have worked to inflate the numbers of terrorism related criminal cases in the US from 2001-2005. These numbers according to various sources include cases that were misfiled or originally filed as terrorism related and never changed.

The report suggests that there is no evidence to support claims of intentional inflation at this time, but given the stance of this administration towards facts, there is very little evidence to suggest that it wasn't intentional. At the very least, it would certainly be very convenient for the administration to ensure that the facts were never corrected if originally unintended.

So what's to gain by inflating the numbers, and perhaps more important, what's to lose?

Well, let's start with the gains: So-called "political capital," for one, fear-mongering for another. Basically, they go hand in hand, because by fear-mongering, the adminstration gains the acquiescence of American voters into allowing them to do what is "necessary" to curtail terrorism. Necessity can have so many definitions, among them "extraordinary rendition," warrantless taps, and the Patriot Act.

What's to lose? Well, for one, we can safely assume, given track records, that not even the people attempting to stop terrorism have a really good picture of what's going on. For another, what about directing Homeland Security funding? If "terror-related" cases are misreported, it could easily tip the scales in the wrong direction, for example, when nearly deserted mid-west states received more funding per capita than NYC did. If we actually have to weigh the likelihood of a terror attack in, say, Idaho, vs. NYC, hands-down NYC would win... or lose, depending on how you look at it.

There are a host of reasons that this, and other similar incidents are truly disgusting. But for now, let's suffice to say it's just more reason never to trust Republicans again.

Texas is its Own Country!

2007-02-15T20:57:00.000-05:00

So, I saw this when I was in London two weeks ago... It was pointed out to me by my girlfriend, and we both had the same reaction when we saw it. "Bush really ISN'T the President! Texas isn't part of America!"

So what is he, then? Pretender to the throne? A modern day Prince John?

According to Wikipedia, John was known for treachery, lies, a history of throwing his allies to the wolves when they become inconvenient. Somehow, this all seems familiar.

Anyway, the entire point was just to see if we couldn't protest Mr. Bush's claim to the throne on that basis alone. And to have some fun.

Pentagon Inspector General Releases His Own Version of the Downing Street Memo

2007-02-09T09:09:00.000-05:00

What more do we need now? The evidence is not only crystal clear, it's now coming from within our own government, and under Bush's own administration.

This morning it has been revealed that Mr. Bush's own intelligence department fed him faulty reports based on the administration's pressure to find or make a link between Saddam and al Qaeda. The report calls these actions merely "inappropriate" but not illegal.

Of course, the response from current and former officials is to dismiss all of these allegations as petty political attacks. This is to be expected. But this doesn't matter, now. It's time to impeach, now more than ever. An overwhelming majority of Americans do not support the president, nor will they ever again. What's more is that now, there can be no doubt whatsoever about the validity of these accusations, and the sheer unwillingness to listen to any evidence countering their talking points.

Impeach them all.

Hey, That Extravagance of Power Was Different!

2007-02-07T21:19:00.000-05:00

Nancy Pelosi wants a military plane provided to her for use as a state transport plane while traveling around the country (and presumably, world) in her duties as Speaker of the House. What's her request? A C-32 aircraft from Boeing (757). Why in one nation's name would she want that beast?

Simple. She needs a plane that can accomodate herself and ten guests (specifically related to her duties, or family), and that can fly cross country (Washington to California) without refueling. Based on the reasoning for providing former Speaker Hastert the same accomodations (Sept. 11th, and successor to the President and Vice President), this hardly seems unreasonable. Not the C-32, mind you, but an aircraft that meets these requirements. If the only one that fits the bill is the C-32, then what is the issue?

We all know that Bush mysteriously disappeared on Sept. 11th leaving us to cry for our lost (some would say fortunately), but the overall point is that we were without a leader when our nation needed one most. In order to prevent that from happening on a more long term basis, it only makes sense to protect Ms. Pelosi in whatever manner is deemed necessary in a worst-case scenario.

Naturally though, the Republicans are bawking. It's not necessary to protect the Speaker, especially in this modern age. I mean, seriously, what's the worst that could happen? It's not like there are terrorists running around everywhere killing people randomly.

Wait... What's that you say, Fox News? There ARE!?! Aww crap. There goes that one, I guess. But then, maybe Fox is just one of those liberal media stations. That must be the answer.

The problem is not that Ms. Pelosi doesn't need the aircraft. Honestly, I can't say for sure whether or not she does. I'd need to have detailed specs on the array of eligible military aircraft, and the actual stated requirements from Ms. Pelosi's camp. But who are the Republicans to claim foul on a tradition they established, being the party of "Extravagance of Power." Oh, that's right, they're Republicans.

President Burns?

2007-01-31T16:14:00.000-05:00

On an well known episode of The Simpsons, Mr. Burns concocted an evil plot to force Springfield to rely on his power plant more heavily for energy. This was to be accomplished by a giant arm with a plate attached to it that would block out the rays of the sun, forcing an eternal darkness on the denizens of Springfield.

Now, in something that seems straight out of The Onion, it appears that the US is asking the scientific community to pay for the US's continuing crimes against the environment by enacting just such a plan. The article states that the plan for this to be accomplished includes such potential 'work-arounds' as large solar mirrors, and scattering reflective particulate throughout the atmosphere.

The truth is stranger than fiction, indeed.

I don't know about all of you, but a while back, when Craigslist was running it's "transmit into space" concept, I signed a couple of ads up for that. I hope that these don't become my (and the human race's) legacy. In fact, I don't suppose there's anyway that they could beam me into space, eh? Just give me Discovery, some supplies, and I'll take my chances out there if this is the way we want to go.

Layeth the Smack Down (on Your Own Guy?)

2007-01-22T19:20:00.000-05:00

Face it, nation. Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama are the two candidates by far most likely to win the Democratic national primary. Hell, they might even make one another running mates for the election (almost guaranteed to sink them in the general election ::cough South cough::, but eh). Either way though, the Democrats might finally have the message down, and that is that unlike the Republicans (See McCain smear, North Carolina, 2004), you don't smear your own guys. Win the Primaries on your own merits, because you never know when those lies might come to bite the guy if he wins the Primary, and make your whole team lose the game.

Or do they?

According to the Washington Post, some of Senator Hillary Clinton's own people are rumored to have spread vicious lies about Illinois' Sen. Barack Obama. Specifically, the rumors (read: lies) state that Obama had attended a madrassa, an extremely fundamental Muslim school in his time in Indonesia. In fact, his school was a public school that "doesn't focus on religion."

Clinton's office has denied it (which, true or not, they're obviously going to). For one, I'll bite on Clinton's denial. I think she's smarter than that, and wouldn't have anyone in her group so obviously stupid. If she did though, I'll be the first one to throw this at her, and she'll certainly lose my vote over it (unless she's the Democratic winner, cause there's no way in hell I'm voting for Brownback).

So if she didn't do it, who else did? Simple.

Republican scum. Cue the Imperial March theme.

The Republicans (no doubt with help from Karl Rove, once again), are already launching their smear campaign, a full two years before the general elections. Why? Simple, once again. They're scared. They're really scared of Barack Obama. Why? Because he's black? No. (Well, maybe that plays into it, but that's not the real reason.)

Barack Obama has clout. He has a name. He has some serious staying power in Washington. He's young and in tune with his voters, and they're scared shitless about him. They know that they can take down Hillary (or at least they're pretty damned sure). But Obama? Well, they need to worry about him.

The Republicans know that the only way they can nail him is to make troubling allegations. Not big ones. Not just one. They know from experience (Clinton, the former) that those tricks don't work anymore. They learned from John Kerry that if they make lots of little chinks in the armor, it will eventually crack.

What are these chinks made up of? Name calling, disturbing rhymes, insinuations, and flat out lies.

Well, Republican scum, I've got news for you. You call yourselves Christians. LIARS!!!

The truth is that no Christian would make such bold-faced lies about another man, particularly when that man is a good one. Need a reminder? How 'bout them Ten Commandments ya'll (note the finger pointing at the South) hold to so dearly? Remember this one: "You shall not bear false witness"? Apparently not:

Stephen Colbert vs. Congressman Lynn Westmoreland

So, Republicans lied about being Christians. If they'll lie about that, what can you really trust them on?

Space is Ours, Dammit! Don't You See the Flag on the Moon?

2007-01-18T22:28:00.000-05:00

Oh jeez... If they're anything like the Native Americans, the Martians are gonna be PISSED!

ABC News is reporting that in addition to planning manned (and knowing Bush, armed) missions to the Moon and Mars, Bush has now amended US Space Policy "asserting the United States' right to deny adversaries access to space for hostile purposes."

Well, I guess it's good to know that the World Police are secure in their confidence of being the only ones responsible enough to safely put weapons and spy satellites in space.

Don't get me wrong. I think we need these assets. I also think that anyone putting their own stuff in space should be monitored, and even stopped depending on the circumstances. To be honest though, all's fair in love and war, right?

How are we allowed to have them when they're not?

I guess this is just more of the same Bushland hypocrisy.

Bush Bumper Stickers

2007-01-10T10:53:00.000-05:00

Stolen from Iggy who stole it from Sharon:

I put the best ones (IMHO) in bold.

Bush Bumper Stickers, And one quote, making the email rounds:

***************************

1/20/09: End of an Error

That's OK, I Wasn't Using My Civil Liberties Anyway

If You Want a Nation Ruled By Religion, Move to Iran

Bush. Like a Rock. Only Dumber.

If You Can Read This, You're Not Our President

George Bush: Creating the Terrorists Our Kids Will Have to Fight

Impeachment: It's Not Just for Blowjobs Anymore

America: One Nation, Under Surveillance

They Call Him "W" So He Can Spell It

Who's God Do You Kill For?

Cheney/Satan '08

Jail to the Chief

No, Seriously, Why Did We Invade Iraq?

Bush: God's Way of Proving Intelligent Design is Full Of Crap

Bad President! No Banana!

We Need a President Who' s Fluent In At Least One Language

We're Making Enemies Faster Than We Can Kill Them

Is It Vietnam Yet?

Bush Doesn't Care About White People, Either

Where Are We Going? And Why Are We In This Handbasket?

You Elected Him. You Deserve Him.

Impeach Cheney First

Dubya, Your Dad Shoulda Pulled Out, Too

Pray For Impeachment

The Republican Party: Our Bridge to the 11th Century

What Part of "Bush Lied" Don't You Understand?

One Nation Under Clod

2004: Embarrassed
2005: Horrified
2006: Terrified

Bush Never Exhaled

At Least Nixon Resigned

And one last one I saw in person:
Republicans for Voldemort

*********************************

"As democracy is perfected, the office of president represents, moreand more closely, the inner soul of the people. On some great andglorious day the plain folks of the land will reach their heart'sdesire at last and the White House will be adorned by a downrightmoron." - H. L. Mencken (1880 - 1956)

Who Needs Ethics?

2007-01-10T09:07:00.000-05:00

It's really very simple; Congress needs ethics. Not surprisingly, the Republicans are already up in arms about this, and upset over the fact that they are "being watched." I guess that prisoners also have the right to be upset that they are being incarcerated because of crimes they committed.

From The Guardian:

Sen. Trent Lott, R-Miss., warned his colleagues to be careful of overreacting and ``feckless positioning to make it look good.'' He said he was ``offended that somebody says that for the price of a meal I can be had by a lobbyist or anyone else.''

Well, Trent, let's assume for a moment that you're actually telling the truth (don't worry readers, I won't make that mistake very often), and you can't be bought for the price of a meal. What about for the price of airplane tickets to anywhere in the world in more than first class, in fact, in a private chartered corporate jet? What about for good tickets to your favorite team?

Still not, you say? Well, what if you were having weekly or even daily dinners with these people? Regular flights everywhere you needed to go in unparalleled luxury? Season tickets?

Even if you can say, with complete honesty, sir, that you would not sell out even for all this, it is well documented that a number of your coworkers could and did. Who are you to say, assuming again that you are being truthful, that these very same people would not again reek with the foul stench of corruption? Bah unto you, sir!

The UK Opens Ministry of Truth

2007-01-09T08:29:00.000-05:00

According to BBC Radio, the UK's MI5 is now offering Britons the chance to sign up for e-mail alerts regarding the terror threat level and "wants to do the same with text messages too."

Are these guys serious? I mean, honestly, at this point, they must know that the majority of their populous is completely disregarding these alerts, and the rest are less than conscious of it. WAIT! I've got it...

They think that by making it an ever-present reminder (via mobile e-mail), people will be constantly reminded and conscious of it, and it will seed the panic that they're hoping for.

I don't know, maybe I'm just being cynical?

Double or Nothing

2006-12-26T08:18:00.000-05:00

So this is Christmas: 2978 American soldiers killed in Iraq since the beginning of the war. That makes it official. We have equaled the number of Americans killed on Sept. 11th, barely a mile from where I am now.

I would ask what they died for, but no matter what, it wasn't necessary, it wasn't justified. Oil, revenge, or an honest belief in what they were doing, nobody can say for sure, well, except the ones who will never talk, but it doesn't matter.

2007 will see many calls from the Americans, the British, the Republicans, and even some Democrats to renew our forces (and sacrifice more soldiers) into the hell fires of Iraq. We must come together as a nation to say no to our lawmakers and to demand the immediate planning for a staged withdrawal and complete turnover of security to the Iraqi people and let them fight for their future.

Some of us may have broken it, but the whole country sure as hell doesn't have to pay for it.

Balancing on the Edge of a Scalpal

2006-12-14T12:16:00.000-05:00

South Dakota's Senator Tim Johnson (D) is in critical condition in a hospital after brain surgery today. His doctors have reported that Sen. Johnson "was found to have had an intracerebral bleed caused by a congenital arteriovenous malformation,” a condition often fatal. Unfortunately, SD law permits the state governor (Republican Gov. Mike Rounds) to name a successor if he resigns or dies. The natural conclusion is that the Republicans will name a Republican to succeed Sen. Johnson.

This puts Dick Cheney in the ominous position of being able to break any voting 'ties' in the Senate, which he would most assuredly do in favor of Republican plans.

I am not religious in any way, but if there is anything to be said of prayer and good will, I feel it necessary to ask all of this country's Democrats, and truly righteous individuals of all walks to wish or pray for a speedy recovery for Sen. Johnson. We can then hope that he feels it necessary to stay in his position for the duration of his term.

Power Play?

2006-11-28T20:17:00.000-05:00

Newt Gingrich just doesn't get it. Bush doesn't. Cheney doesn't.

Fear works. It only works for so long, though, before you either need to deliver on your promises (which also works), or change horses.

Newt suggested (stated outright) yesterday (at a First Amendment awards ceremony yesterday of all places), and at recent visits with the media, that perhaps the First Amendment is... wrong!!!

Once again, the Republican machine of bad ideas has stated that the government should have a 'habeas-corpus-at-will', disposable 1st Amendment, and a muddled (missing) separation of church and state (bah, evil Jews! Die, nasty Arabs! Christ killers, all of you!)... Everything that the 1st stands for. So... Was this, like, a memorial for the 1st?

Oh, and shop Crate and Barrel. Bill O'Reilly doesn't want you to.

Draft-y in Here?

2006-11-19T23:45:00.000-05:00

Rep. Charles Rangel (D-NY) said today that he'd like to see the draft reinstated with the advent of the new Democrat controlled House and Senate. His reasoning? He believes it will force future lawmakers (Republicans, specifically) to face their voting public if they choose to go to war in the future:

"There's no question in my mind that this president and this administration would never have invaded Iraq, especially on the flimsy evidence that was presented to the Congress, if indeed we had a draft, and members of Congress and the administration thought that their kids from their communities would be placed in harm's way."

I like his reasoning, but I think it's flawed. For one, as long as any elected official can easily get their children out of military service, or into the national guard divisions, why would they really worry? For another, when they actually do 'pull strings' for their children, there isn't actually a guarantee that said children will actually serve out their full time, as well we know with Mr. Bush. Finally, there is a reasonable chance that even a half-hearted push for this kind of bill by a Democrat controlled House and Senate could have a disastrous response at the next polls if it fails to deliver the point about the Republican war-hawks.

On the other hand, I could see this bill becoming very significant if they included a provision that states that any legislator seeking to back a war must commit their children to the war as frontline troops. I could see that making a serious impact on their decisions about future wars, since, unlike the voters, they MUST face their own children and families.

As for me, I'm no coward, but I won't fight for injustice and a false and lost cause: I'm saving up $16,000 and looking for a job in Canada.

Rum on the Rocks... Again?

2006-11-14T20:56:00.000-05:00

It's no big secret that Don Rumsfeld (to say nothing of the rest of the Bushies) is guilty of heinous war crimes. As the US Secretary of Defense, however, he was protected. Protected by Bush's doctrines that protect Americans from trial in the Hague (a doctrine sure to be overturned in a future Democratic presidency with the support of a sympathetic House and Senate), the Bushies have worked with impunity spreading fear and extracting misinformation from captive prisoners, lying if only to make the torture stop.

At this point, even John McCain is on board with this policy. Finally though, a ray of hope shines through the darkness this week as Rummy has resigned his post as Secretary of Defense after orchestrating what may become known as the worst military campaign in US history. Immediately following that resignation, former 'detainees' in Iraq's Abu Ghraib and Cuba's Guantanamo prisons have brought a suit into a German court seeking an investigation and possible criminal prosecution against Rummy, as well as subordinates believed to support this policy.

According to the former prisoners' lawyer, the point is not to get Rumsfeld to stand up and defend himself or face consequences, but instead to show that there will be no safe haven for him. In a greater ramification, this trial could easily be a referendum on the entire war on terror and its leaders, and set new ground rules for treatment of any kind of prisoner of war without allowing leaders to break those rules with impunity.

Let's Not Stop and Pat Ourselves on the Back

2006-11-11T22:03:00.000-05:00

As I'm sure any of my readers would've noticed, it's been 10 days since I've posted. Not for lack of effort, mind you. I've just been extremely busy lately, and it's been a long week and a half.

Of course, since I last posted, we know that the Democrats have conclusively won the House and Senate (even if by a narrow margin in the latter). What will the next two years hold? I don't know that. All I can say is that it will, for certain, not be George W. Bush's agenda.

Bolton won't be confirmed. If (unlikely) any new Supreme Court seats open, they'll be our choices. The Republicans will no longer hold a chokehold over Iraq policy, and hell, we may even get to bring our boys home soon. This will no doubt be a costly withdrawal, seeing as how Iraq could become the very festering pit of terrorism it was said to be at the beginning of this war. That's why it's time for Iraq to stand up for itself, and the rest of the world to pitch in if they don't want to see that happen.

It's not all of America's fault that this happened. Maybe in the next two years (and hopefully many more after that) we can convince the rest of the world that we're worth their trust again.

Anyway, don't expect me, or other truly righteously minded individuals to fade away or silence ourselves just because we won. Now is the time to rebuild our country and our reputation. We saw what happened the last time we allowed ourselves to be shut down, and all we can say is to remind ourselves and others that "All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing."

Bad Jokes? No, Bad Honesty

2006-11-01T14:33:00.000-05:00

There's much ado about something, namely, what John Kerry just said. John Kerry remarked yesterday that if the youth of today neglected their education, they would wind up stuck in Iraq. Immediately the Republican war machine launched a horrific and devastating attack against Kerry and did precisely what they aimed for. They slaughtered Mr. Kerry's political future.

I'm not going to debate the Republican moral standing that these attacks were based on, Kerry did a fine job of that himself:

"I'm sick and tired of these despicable Republican attacks that always seem to come from those who never can be found to serve in war, but love to attack those who did. I'm not going to be lectured by a stuffed-suit White House mouthpiece standing behind a podium, or doughy Rush Limbaugh, who no doubt today will take a break from belittling Michael J Fox's Parkinson's disease to start lying about me just as they have lied about Iraq."

What I am here to say and to make a point of is that, badly stated or not, Kerry was spot on. To understand why, you need to understand America, both then and now.

When John Kerry served America during Vietnam (as did John McCain, to whom I say "For shame, dirtbag, for attacking your fellow soldier on political grounds!"), the draft was alive and well, and the draft meant precisely what he said. If you were lax in school, you could easily find yourself in the mud of Vietnam.

In the America John Kerry serves today as a Senator, there is now a sort of 'back door' draft for today's Vietnam, Iraq. In poorer (and generally, uneducated) regions of America, the US military has launched a guerilla war to gain recruits for Iraq. The only viable way of escaping this is to get out of that, get smart, get an education, and make something of yourself (maybe even a Senator down the road).

John Kerry said nothing about soldiers in the military being stupid, or for that matter, uneducated. Some are. But then again, so are some Americans. And Frenchmen. And British. And Iraqis. That's not the point, though. What happened is that John Kerry misstated his point, and the Republican war machine let out a fatal barrage of misquotations, intentional wrongful paraphrasing, and demands for an apology for something he had no need to apologize for.

For shame, Republican scum.

Canadians Learn Faster Than Americans?

2006-10-25T11:04:00.000-04:00

Apparently, Canadians learn faster than we do when it comes to democracy. I'm not knocking our neighbors to the north by any means, I'm celebrating their independent (and apparently working) minds. I only hope we learn the same lessons in time for '08, in case '06 gets stolen too.

When You're Down...

2006-10-23T13:54:00.000-04:00

Call 'em ugly.

That's what John Spencer just did. Now, I don't need to do too much to end John Spencer's bid for Senate and probably his delusions of presidency. He does that well enough himself. What I do feel the need to do is relay to you this man's history in Yonkers where he was once mayor.

As mayor, he hasn't done a decent thing in his entire term. He's been a baby-kisser and a PR schmooze, but did nothing while in office except appoint his friends and family to high paying positions within the city government and get more than one mistress. Sounds like someone we already know, come to think of it.

Hillary might have some issues, but if you plan to run against her, you should at least attack her on the issues. Of course, if you're nothing but a simple Yonkers Republican halfwit, I guess that's about the best you can come up with.

This Just Crosses the Line

2006-10-19T12:29:00.000-04:00

The Guardian is reporting today that an unnamed Republican campaign office (presumed to be that of Tan D. Nguyen) has sent out approximately 14,000 Hispanic registered Democratic voters warning them of possible reprisals against them if they vote. Among suggested reprisals are possible jail time and the threat of deportation.

Presently (natually) Nguyen's campaign has not returned calls for comments about this, and I'm sure there's good reason for that. Even other Republicans are chiming in, though not without putting it on the spin cycle first:

Scott Baugh, chairman of the Orange County Republican Party, condemned the letter as ``an obnoxious, grotesque piece of work.''

``Regardless of who did it - Republican or Democrat - if it's a crime, then whoever did it should be prosecuted,'' Baugh said.

So now Democrats are trying to keep their own voters away? I can see where he's headed with this: The Democrats supposedly sent out these letters to disgrace local Republicans. The problem with this theory is that if they did that, they still risk keeping a large portion of their voters away from the polls because they may not know that this threat is invalid, and therefore might be too scared to try to vote.

I'm disgusted. First by the letter, second by the coverup. I hope that there is a voter rebellion across the nation because of incidents like this.

Americans, stand up for your rights and vote these weasels out of office!

Not Safer

2006-10-16T14:52:00.000-04:00

Put the pieces together, America. There's a lot of them, so follow closely.

Starting in 1993, the American homeland was first put under attack by Islamic extremists. In the eight years following that, we would suffer several more attacks, mostly by a group come to be known as al Qaeda, led by Osama bin Laden, who coincidentally was trained, armed, and funded by President Reagan. Fortunately, none of those attacks would fall on American soil again, until one sunny morning in 2001.

We were suddenly and terrifyingly thrust back into reality, with the knowledge that we were not safe, virtually in our own homes. Today, for most of the country, that feeling continues. For anyone who denies that they feel safer, you can ask them about the events from last Wednesday, and how they felt about the headlines they most likely heard first:

"Plane Hits Building in Manhattan"

I know what I thought, and while I don't feel like a sheep who follows the herd (I don't believe that only Bush can save me), I know what I thought. "Oh dear, not again."

Almost immediately, I calmed down a bit, because I got a couple of details, like that it was right off the river, and it was an apartment building, and it was nowhere near midtown. I knew that in all likelihood, it was some poor fool who went off course, with tragic results.

We would come to learn in the hours that followed that it was Cory Lidle of the New York Yankees. Our fears were alleviated, to be replaced with sorrow for the loss of a young man with his life in front of him and many more years of a brilliant career. For me though, it brought one thing to my mind in perfect clarity: We are not safer now than five years ago.

After the first plane hit the World Trade Center, many of us initially thought it was a horrifying accident. That is the thought pattern that we lost that day, and that the Bushies have failed to restore. We immediately are led to fear the worst, and with good reason. 'Homeland Security' is underfunded, national intelligence is anything but, and the war to make us safer has made us far more vulnerable and in a state from which we may never recover.

We're not safer.

Let it Never be Said...

2006-10-16T14:04:00.000-04:00

"President Barack Obama" definitely has no ring to it whatsoever. I'd much more closely expect that to be the name of a dictator in some foreign country. That said, there exists a very reasonable possibility that it could well become the name of our next president, and... ::gasp:: one of our most successful and wildly popular presidents of all time.

Don't get me wrong, I like Bill Clinton a lot, but I get the feeling that with a sufficient control of the House and Senate, he may become the most effective president as well.

Alas, I get ahead of myself. The man hasn't been elected yet, in fact, he hasn't even announced his official candidacy yet, and both sides of the aisle (for better or worse) are absolutely buzzing about it. He's well liked by politicians around the country and the world, and just as much so the people. There's an inherent sense of honesty and just 'a good guy' mentality that surrounds him.

Barring (true) horrifying charges against him, I know where my vote will be the day he runs.

Defense of Secretary Donald Rumsfeld

2006-10-16T10:06:00.000-04:00

Yes, I know... I meant what I said and I said what I meant. Read it, then read the post, you'll get the idea.

Rummy's in trouble again, as Democrats (and a few Republicans) are starting to remember that this whole mess is at least partly (more likely a great deal) his fault. Even through all this, key Republicans are standing by his side and defending the Secretary of Defense. These fine examples of men include Bush himself, Cheney, and Rick Santorum. So are they all, all honorable men.

Normally, the liberal (or even logical) blogosphere is screaming for his head on a silver platter. While this might make a certain amount (or worlds) of sense, I beg to differ. Why, you ask?

If Don is kept on staff and close to heart of the Bushies, you can most certainly note that it will be a blight (one of many) on the Republicans through this critical (like the life signs of an Original Series 'red shirt') election season. If they get rid of him now and adopt an even vaguely more centrist stance (suggesting that they are abandoning 'the course'), if only for the duration of the voting season, it might be just enough to keep waning conservative voters on the 'right' side of the fence and allow the rats to keep control of the House and Congress.

Now, I don't know about you, but this does not sound like a positive option. Therefore, without looking like you like the guy, support Bush in his efforts to keep losers like Don Rumsfeld.

Don't Blame Me!

2006-10-10T14:54:00.000-04:00

Hastert's a slippery bastard, isn't he? "No, I didn't know about it... except for those 'overly-friendly' messages... and neither did anyone on my staff... But if they did, they'll be fired."

Forbes.com is reporting now that Hastert has warned his staffers that if they were aware of Mr. Foley's situation and withheld information, they could be fired. I note, however, that he did not mention anything about himself. We can all hope that some staffer will come forward to state that they knew of a coverup, but it won't happen.

Needless to say, it's business as usual for the Republicans. Deny, deny, deny!

And then blame Democrats!