Simply Chimpy

The head ghoul in a ghost town

2005-09-16T06:45:00.000-07:00

A bizarre scene last night: Jackson Square cleaned up for His Majesty (obviously a much more important task than cleaning up a residential area, or perhaps picking up dead bodies), empty of even his normal hand-picked and pre-screened audience, illuminated by creepy blue lighting, and a horse over his shoulder that looked ready to either attack him at any moment or take a dump on him. Bush emerged from somewhere in the darkness and strode manfully toward his Hollywoodish lighting, dressed for workin' hard in a blue shirt with the sleeves rolled up (did he just pick up wreckage from Jackson Square? I don't think so). Nice dramatic entrance, right? Well, maybe, except whoever dressed little George buttoned his shirt wrong, as noted in the photo above.

Amazing that they felt the need to blow taxpayer money to have him in this weird setting rather than give his "address" from the White House. I hope everyone enjoyed it, since you paid for it - Air Force One guzzling fuel so expensive it's put two airlines in bankruptcy this week, his large security and staff detail dragged along, the stage lighting - all of it was on your dime.

With a jerking jaw Bush read his speech in the manner of a six year old struggling with a grade school text, but that was to be expected. Given his complete lack of a philosophy to deal with the large underclass in our society it might be surprising at first glance that he shoveled out some Great Society-like programs to address poverty, but as with anything with this puppet you have to look first at a philosophy he does embrace: keeping his wealthy base happy and (more) wealthy.

First, his offer of homesteading was interesting, but where is this federal land that will be part of his exciting lottery? Is it in the 9th ward of New Orleans, where many of those potential homesteaders lived? Of course not. Now that the poor population of New Orleans is scattered in the wind, the wealthy elite who have run the city for years has already decided they won't be welcomed back, as noted last week in the Wall Street Journal:

The power elite of New Orleans -- whether they are still in the city or have moved temporarily to enclaves such as Destin, Fla., and Vail, Colo. -- insist the remade city won't simply restore the old order. New Orleans before the flood was burdened by a teeming underclass, substandard schools and a high crime rate. The city has few corporate headquarters.

The new city must be something very different, Mr. Reiss says, with better services and fewer poor people. "Those who want to see this city rebuilt want to see it done in a completely different way: demographically, geographically and politically," he says. "I'm not just speaking for myself here. The way we've been living is not going to happen again, or we're out."

What better way to give his elitist friends a shiny new city with fewer poor people than planting them in Indian reservation-like settings outside of New Orleans? Of course, they'll keep them close enough so they can still bus in to take those great new minimum wage jobs Bush has created by suspending the Davis-Bacon act in the flood zone or clean the homes of the wealthy New Orleans elite.

He mentioned churches a lot, as though to draw his insanely religious followers back into the fold, and I laughed out loud - something I rarely do at a Bush speech, since I'm generally so nauseated - when he suggested that we give money to churches in Mississippi to help pay for their 'compassion'. Oh, yeah, I'm really going to shovel money at the regressive hateful knuckle draggers who want to outlaw abortion, persecute gays and lesbians, force creationism into the public schools, thump their bibles for a very cruel and un-Christian like war in Iraq, and generally drag our society back into the 16th century. I'm surely chomping at the bit to contribute to that.

As expected, the ninny proposed expanded executive powers for himself in using the military as his personal branch of domestic law enforcement:

"...It is now clear that a challenge on this scale requires greater federal authority and a broader role for the armed forces, the institution of our government most capable of massive logistical operations on a moment’s notice.

Of course, he determines the scale of the "challenge", so expect him to casually dismiss the Posse Comitatus Act with the same breezy cheerfulness with which he destroyed the Davis-Bacon Act in the event of a "challenge", say, from the American people when they take to the streets in anger against this corrupt puppet in the upcoming Civil War v2.0.

Whatever. His Republican base of fiscal conservatives (are there any left?) and racists alike are screaming about his 'liberal' proposals last night - Free Republic crowed that he had been transformed into "Lyndon Baines Bush" - and liberals distrust his homesteading plan and the corrupt process by which the $200B of funding will be disbursed. The only ones happy with last night's performance are the wealthy elite of New Orleans, who will get the ethnic cleansing they so desperately desire, and his corporate pals who'll rake in the chips in no-bid contracts. The public on both sides of the political divide can grouse about the speech all they want, but this wasn't for them. His plan is to benefit the top 2% - the "have mores" - and to turn our country into a police state. In this, it must be said, he succeeded in splendid fashion.

The strings of the puppet exposed

2005-09-15T07:46:00.000-07:00

Wow, the little monkey can't even take a leak without asking Condi's permission (and he's unsure of exactly how badly he needs to whiz: he "thinks" he "may" need to use the bathroom).

A real strong and decisive leader, isn't he?

One wonders if Condi scribbled her approval on his hall pass so he could show the Secret Service that he did, indeed, have permission to leave the room.

Place this note next to his arrogance, his sour nasty expressions, his obnoxious arms-akimbo strutting and you can see exactly what is false and what is real. The little tool can playact all he wants, but when a president has to ask a Secretary of State if he can use the can it's obvious that he's not in charge and never has been - and knows it.

Building a nation of serfs

2005-09-14T08:20:00.000-07:00

Another outrage for working people - the millionaire Bush is about to throw over yet more wage controls in the hurricane zone, so his millionaire friends can drive wages even lower and the millionaires in Congress are just fine with this.

In what may become the next major post-Katrina policy, the White House was working yesterday to suspend wage supports for service workers in the hurricane zone as it did for construction workers on federal contracts last week, administration and congressional officials said.

And as a prelude to the rape that Halliburton is about to visit upon Louisiana, Mississippi and the American taxpayer, the article continues:

At tomorrow's speech, the president is to outline his vision more comprehensively than he has to date. A top aide said he will stress that New Orleans officials will dictate how the city will be rebuilt, but will also make plain the reconstruction should reflect his vision of government -- including reducing regulatory obstacles and emphasizing entrepreneurship over big government, the aide said.

"Entrepreneurship" is, of course, no-bid contracts for his campaign contributers and Cheney's buddies at Halliburton. "Reducing regulatory obstacles" meanings gutting the Clean Air and Water Acts and allowing low-wage workers to toil in a toxic dump without legal recourse should they sicken and die. That's the Bush "vision of government", a serf-and-overlord nation where the rich get richer and the environment gets filthier and the poor work for - let's just say it, shall we? - slave wages until they die.

Who's going to defend us from this corruption, this immoral "vision", this death sentence? The Democrats? The ones who are about to confirm John Roberts, who will gladly hand Bush and his neocons and corporate cronies unlimited power in their quest for greed and war? Wake me up when the Bush administration is over - if, indeed, it ever is. Given who owns the voting machines, we're in for more of the same for our lifetimes.

Another power grab

2005-09-14T07:02:00.000-07:00

If you're wondering, as I am, what Bush could possibly say that's new in his grandiose "Address to the Nation" tomorrow night from Louisiana you're in good company. After all, he's already given us an inventory of the number of blankets sent to a semi-tropical region in one of the hottest months of the year, told us repeatedly how rebuilding the region will be 'hard work', we've already seen him look bored and indifferent during one of his many photo-op briefings, and I think we've seen him hug enough carefully chosen and appropriately screened for political background black children.

It might be time for us to prepare for yet another disaster tomorrow night. If 9/11 taught us anything (and it hasn't, not at all) we know that Bush and his cronies use these events and the ensuing public fear/worry/concern/apathy to attempt to seize more power for the executive branch, as they did with the Patriot Act. Tomorrow might well bring even more disaster down upon our Constitution and our civil liberties.

Why, you say? Weill, check out a trial balloon dropped by the Hearst newspapers yesterday:

Bush says he may need more power in disasters

He wants Congress to look into whether presidential authority should be expanded in times of catastrophes like Katrina

By STEWART M. POWELL

Hearst Newspapers

WASHINGTON — President Bush on Monday urged Congress to examine whether the White House needs stronger powers to deal with catastrophes like Hurricane Katrina.

Bush’s backing for the congressional inquiry raised the possibility that lawmakers might expand presidential authority to:

• Order mandatory civilian evacuations

• Dispatch U.S.-based armed forces for emergency search-and-rescue operations

• Grant wider leeway for active-duty U.S. military personnel to carry out law enforcement operations.

“It’s really important that as we take a step back and learn lessons — that we are in a position to adequately answer the question: ‘Are we prepared for major catastrophes?”’ Bush said during a tour of hurricane damage in New Orleans.

He said if there was a terrorist attack with weapons of mass destruction, such as germ-warfare agents, “we’ve got to make sure we understand the lessons learned to be able to deal with catastrophe.”

Asked whether the federal government needed broader authority to “come in earlier or even in advance of a storm that (is) threatening?” Bush replied: “I think that’s one of the interesting issues that Congress needs to take a look at.”

There's a reason why our Constitution forbids the military from being used as a domestic law enforcement agency, and that is to prevent the president from using the military to establish a police state or overthrow, say, a State government or even the Congress.

For Bush to seize on his own incompetence (or was it deliberate?) to now howl for more power, more power, more power is sick and unacceptable. The question now is will a rubber stamp Republican congressional majority give this president - the worst president possible to trust with such authority, as he proved with the Iraq War Resolution - the power to use military troops as law enforcement within the United States? Will he be able to call out the Marines in the event of, say, civil unrest in San Francisco or Los Angeles or New York or YOUR CITY?

I'm guessing that tomorrow night will be yet another power grab, a "give big daddy a bigger stick and I'll keep you safe" moment. There's really no other reason for him to give a prime-time address regarding a momumental failure in his personal leadership.

Be wary, be on alert, and if he does call for increased executive branch power be sure to give him the answer he must have: NO.

Our New FEMA "Expert"

2005-09-13T07:36:00.000-07:00

Scary Bloggerman entry:

Secaucus - If Michael Brown's resignation this afternoon as the head of FEMA was supposed to end the political controversy over the administration's response to Hurricane Katrina, it probably won't.

In another gesture symbolizing the continued confusion of the federal response, the man President Bush immediately named to succeed "Brownie," proves to have been the same FEMA official who, two-and-a-half years ago, suggested that Americans stock up on duct tape to protect against a biological or chemical terrorist attack.

David Paulison, then the govt's Fire Administrator, joined with the then-head of Homeland Security Tom Ridge, on February 10th, 2003, to say that duct tape and plastic sheeting should be part of any home's "survival kit" in preparation for a terrorist attack. That set off a run on duct tape at stores, and widespread criticism of the administration. It might have been the first time a large number of Americans wondered if the govt really knew what it was talking about when it came to disaster preparedness.

Is there any single person in this administration who isn't totally batshit?

Our big, brave Commander-in-Chief in New Orleans today

2005-09-12T10:07:00.000-07:00

Yes, that's his little tiny head cowering in the center.

President Photo-Op

2005-09-12T07:31:00.000-07:00

Bush is strolling through the French Quarter today - you know, Party Central of his drunken youth. Of course, the Quarter took very little damage and any angry African-Americans have long ago left the area, so it's considered "safe" turf for the little coward.

He can strut and roll up his sleeves and look in control for the cameras, but the lead article in this week's Newsweek strips the clothes from our Chimperor and exposes him for the fraud that he is.

The article begins with a tragedy - not the hurricane, but advising Bush that he has to cut his five-week long vacation short by two days.

Sept. 19, 2005 issue - It's a standing joke among the president's top aides: who gets to deliver the bad news? Warm and hearty in public, Bush can be cold and snappish in private, and aides sometimes cringe before the displeasure of the president of the United States, or, as he is known in West Wing jargon, POTUS. The bad news on this early morning, Tuesday, Aug. 30, some 24 hours after Hurricane Katrina had ripped through New Orleans, was that the president would have to cut short his five-week vacation by a couple of days and return to Washington. The president's chief of staff, Andrew Card; his deputy chief of staff, Joe Hagin; his counselor, Dan Bartlett, and his spokesman, Scott McClellan, held a conference call to discuss the question of the president's early return and the delicate task of telling him. Hagin, it was decided, as senior aide on the ground, would do the deed.

The article goes on to describe how out-of-touch and disconnected from the agony of the Gulf coast Bush was:

The reality, say several aides who did not wish to be quoted because it might displease the president, did not really sink in until Thursday night. Some White House staffers were watching the evening news and thought the president needed to see the horrific reports coming out of New Orleans. Counselor Bartlett made up a DVD of the newscasts so Bush could see them in their entirety as he flew down to the Gulf Coast the next morning on Air Force One.

How this could be—how the president of the United States could have even less "situational awareness," as they say in the military, than the average American about the worst natural disaster in a century—is one of the more perplexing and troubling chapters in a story that, despite moments of heroism and acts of great generosity, ranks as a national disgrace.

Remember when the national media in 2000 thought it was cute that Bush insisted on a 10:00 pm bedtime while on the campaign trail, and cooed over the personal pillow he carried? Maybe they should have considered the possible downside of having a president who considers his bedtime more important than American lives:

There are a number of steps Bush could have taken, short of a full-scale federal takeover, like ordering the military to take over the pitiful and (by now) largely broken emergency communications system throughout the region. But the president, who was in San Diego preparing to give a speech the next day on the war in Iraq, went to bed.

Really a take-charge kind of guy, huh? This makes the White House spin that the blame should be placed on the (Democratic) state and local governments even more putrid. This president is lazy, incompetent, and completely uncaring. Good to see the media finally reporting the truth about this monster.

Now the real looting begins

2005-09-09T06:38:00.000-07:00

While the nation is distracted by the horrific images of death and suffering coming from the Gulf coast, the Bush oligarchy is looking to fatten the wallets of the already wealthy.

Three examples will suffice, but be assured that Dick Cheney's visit to the region yesterday had nothing to do with storm victims and everything to do with laying the groundwork for Halliburton and other Republican donors to obtain huge contacts for the rebuilding - much as he mused over the maps of Iraqi oilfields prior to our "humanitarian" invasion. Look for many further atrocities to the federal treasury as Cheney plots a course of greed in the midst of a tragedy.

The first step to his "Rebuilding for Fun and Profit" plan has already been put in place. Corporate Republicans have for years tried to dismantle the Davis-Bacon Act of 1931, which requires that federal contractors pay the prevailing wages in the area in which federally funded work is conducted. Keep in mind that most construction work is performed by union workers - thus, prevailing wages in this type of work is generally understood to be union scale. Large construction firms really dislike union scale - that's money that could be in their pockets.

Well, yesterday, with the stroke of a pen, Bush destroyed the Davis-Bacon Act for Cheney's Halliburton friends.

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President Bush issued an executive order Thursday allowing federal contractors rebuilding in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina to pay below the prevailing wage.

In a notice to Congress, Bush said the hurricane had caused "a national emergency" that permits him to take such action under the 1931 Davis-Bacon Act in ravaged areas of Alabama, Florida, Louisiana and Mississippi.

Handy, isn't it? Now the only requirement for workers hired by Halliburton and other GOP-connected firms will be to pay the federal minimum wage - five bucks an hour. And these are the jobs that will be offered to the evacuees, many of whom are already poor, who will continue to live under the poverty line even as they do the hard and dangerous work of rebuilding their communities through layers of toxins and disease.

Are we ready for a revolution yet?

Further on this subject is my second example. Yesterday, CNN reported that evacuees had to sign a waiver to receive their $2,000 per family grant that decrees that they won't request further assistance from the government. When that $2,000 runs out - as it will quickly, as most of them only have the clothes on their back - what happens? Why are they being forced to waive the provisions of FEMA's own Individual Assistance Program, which provides cash grants of up to $26,200 per individual or family, forcing them to settle for less than a tenth of that amount?

See the (deadly) minimum wage jobs noted above. If that fails, there's always the deadly duty of being shipped to Iraq. Military recruiters are taking advantage of the large pool of evacuees at the Superdome to sign up new cannon fodder, which may be the only option left for people jobless, homeless, and without funds. See how those waivers come in handy?

Are we ready for a revolution yet?

Next on the hit parade is possibly the most outrageous exploitation of tragedy to push through the Bush agenda since 9/11. Hoping that the country will be distracted by the disaster which the Republicans did so much to contribute to, they're now planning on ramming through Bush's Social Security Privatization plan - the largest looting scheme in history - through a sneaky procedural vote, despite the fact that an overwhelming majority of the public opposes this plan.

Congressional Republicans, persisting in hopes of enacting some form of private Social Security option despite opposition from the public and the Democrats, are considering the same kind of maneuver that enabled them to pass a controversial Medicare drug bill two years ago.

That's the clear signal from key GOP congressional leaders and chief White House strategist Karl Rove, one of the main architects of the Social Security proposal that President Bush made his top 2005 priority.

Mr. Rove, speaking to college students and lobbyists before Congress went on its current recess, said the House would act next month and the Senate soon after, according to the congressional newspaper The Hill .

And Rep. Bill Thomas, R-Calif., chairman of the Ways and Means Committee and one of his party's canniest operatives, said without giving details that his panel would introduce a retirement security bill in September.

...None had as torturous a path to enactment as the bill to create a prescription drug program. It only passed in 2003 after three hours of early morning arm twisting and the help of misleading cost estimates that soon proved to have been understated.

Because the Senate had passed a similar bill, Republicans could take the measure to a Senate-House conference. By excluding most Democrats from any role, they crafted the kind of bill they wanted in the first place.

That would appear to be their hope for private Social Security accounts – pass a bill in the House authorizing private accounts, accept any Social Security vehicle in the Senate that gets the issue to conference and write a final version letting the White House proclaim success.

So, there you have it - wage laws destroyed, Social Security being leeched by Wall Street, lots of profits from hurricane rebuilding efforts going directly into the pockets of the oligarchy - no wonder Bush asked Nancy Pelosi in wonderment, "What went wrong?" He and his wealthy corporate friends hit another "trifecta".

"Oblivious, in denial, dangerous"

2005-09-08T06:01:00.000-07:00

Thank you, Nancy Pelosi, for finally telling the truth about the sociopath in the White House.

During a meeting with Congressional leaders on Tuesday, President Fruit Loops had the following exchange with Pelosi:

At a news conference, Pelosi, D-Calif., said Bush's choice for head of the
Federal Emergency Management Agency had "absolutely no credentials."

She related that she had urged Bush at the White House on Tuesday to fire Michael Brown.

"He said 'Why would I do that?'" Pelosi said.

"'I said because of all that went wrong, of all that didn't go right last week.' And he said 'What didn't go right?'"

"Oblivious, in denial, dangerous," she added.

We're so screwed. If he really is clueless and has no idea what "didn't go right", then he's incompetent. But of course he knows. This is more of his mission accomplished-style bullshit, denying reality to the American people while he follows his deadly agenda. The country can't afford a "What, me worry?" president who, despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary, assures us of victory in Iraq and tells us that the federal response in the Gulf was satisfactory.

I wonder what the thousands of people at the Superdome or the Convention Center in New Orleans last week - people who were degraded, forgotten, and left to die by George Bush - think of his "What didn't go right?" comment. Gee, might they think that his neglect was deliberate? That the deaths were something that went right? It's really an admission of genocide, isn't it?

Pelosi is right. This man is dangerous.

From bizarre to insane

2005-09-07T07:28:00.000-07:00

As evidence mounts of bumbling ineptitude on the part of our Republican government in handling the aftermath of hurricane Katrina, George Bush has proposed a novel idea sure to catch fire with the many Americans outraged by his handling of the disaster.

Yes, the president is going to investigate himself. Yes, he's going to personally head up the investigation into "what went right (!) and what went wrong" with his government's response to the crisis.

I'm reassured - aren't you? I wonder if he'll criticize himself for attending birthday parties and playing with a guitar and golfing and fundraising while residents of the Gulf coast went without emergency supplies and New Orleans drowned. No doubt the "I can't recall a mistake I've ever made" president will really crack down on the fact that his excessive vacation time seems to be a problem, given his lengthy downtime just before 9/11 and during the height of the greatest natural disaster in our country's history.

In bizarre "who are you going to believe, me or your lyin' eyes?" language, Bush said yesterday, "We've got to solve problems. We're problem solvers. There will be ample time for people to figure out what went right, and what went wrong. What I'm interested (in) is helping save lives."

What a sack of shit. Where was this interest in saving lives last week, when there were actually lives to save? Where was this problem solving prowess when FEMA turned away emergency supplies and rescue crews desperately trying to gain access into the affected areas? Why did our "MBA president" pack one of the most crucial federal agencies with political cronies with no experience in disaster management? Why hasn't he fired his top crony at FEMA, Michael Brown, who waited until after the storm hit to request a paltry 1,000 DHS employees to the region (and gave them two days to arrive - crucial days, as it happened) and listed one of the urgent duties of these workers as "conveying a positive image " about the government's response?

This sad document, asking for DHS employees to play a public relations role for George Bush rather than saving the lives the president suddenly claims to care about, exposes the sheer shallowness of this government. Everything is for show, everything is a stunt and a photo-op, everything is about propping up the puppet in the White House, even if thousands of lives are lost in the process.

We know what happens when the crooks in the White House investigate themselves - they give themselves a clean bill of health. It's time for the American people to demand not only a non-partisan investigation into this fuckup but to start demanding impeachment hearings.

Spinning Death

2005-09-06T06:41:00.000-07:00

As evidence mounts of the Bush administration's utter incompetence in dealing with Katrina, the White House is in a frenzy of spin, attempting to blame the mayor of New Orleans, the governor of Louisiana, and even the victims themselves for FEMA's failings.

An interesting confluence of headlines today. From AP comes a story entitled White House: Leave Blame Game for Later.

WASHINGTON (AP) - Criticized for its sluggish response to Hurricane Katrina, the White House said Tuesday that ``we're not going to engage in the blame game'' but instead would keep its focus on rescue and recovery efforts across the heavily battered Gulf Coast.

The "blame game" is used interchageably with the dreaded "pointing fingers" by Bush apologists, including former president Clinton.

Meanwhile, the New York Times reports that - oops! - the White House is indeed very much engaged in the "blame game" in a piece entitled White House Enacts a Plan to Ease Political Damage (a "plan" you see, is different from a "game").

WASHINGTON, Sept. 4 - Under the command of President Bush's two senior political advisers, the White House rolled out a plan this weekend to contain the political damage from the administration's response to Hurricane Katrina.

It orchestrated visits by cabinet members to the region, leading up to an extraordinary return visit by Mr. Bush planned for Monday, directed administration officials not to respond to attacks from Democrats on the relief efforts, and sought to move the blame for the slow response to Louisiana state officials, according to Republicans familiar with the White House plan.

When the Bush apologists aren't blaming state officials, they're blaming the victims of their incompetence by faux outrage that poor, elderly, or infirm African-Americans didn't have cars, or credit cards to finance hotel stays, or ready cash for plane tickets to evacuate New Orleans. This is the low tactic of sheer desperation, repulsive to an extreme, but the immorality of this particular "blame game" doesn't stop Republicans such as Larry King.

If you've flipped over to Larry King Live in the past few days, you were treated to the stomach-churning sight of King speaking in a slow, patronizing voice - the manner in which you'd speak to an idiot, or a small dense child - whenever he spoke to a displaced African-American at the Houston Astrodome. His first words to every single African-American he spoke to were, without exception, "Why did you stay?". These people, already brutalized by the government's lack of response, were further brutalized by King demanding them to put aside all pride, all dignity, and confess to being poor on national television. Never have I seen the Bush apologists sink so low, and you can find similar examples throughout cable television.

The public chiding and ridiculing of the poor continued over the weekend with former First Lady Barbara Bush saying in a radio interview that "it's sort of scary" that many former residents of New Orleans might permanently relocate to Texas, leaving one to wonder if it's "sort of scary" because they're poor and black or because many are Democrats. Pathetic enough, but she went on to say that "And so many of the people in the arena here, you know, were underprivileged anyway (chuckles), so this is working very well for them." Yes, you old pseudo-royal bitch, I'm sure that these poor blacks who have lost homes and the lives of family members and friends, who were left to die on a New Orleans sidewalk by your son, who are left with nothing are just sitting around plotting how to scam the system - which is exactly what she was inferring with her crude comments. To even think that victims of a major disaster and the criminal negligence of our government have things "working very well for them" is perverted, especially given that the only reason Barbara Bush isn't one of those desperate unfortunates she despises is that she married into a wealthy crime family.

Louisiana Burning

2005-09-02T07:10:00.000-07:00

It's Friday morning. Friday morning. And as I type this, people are dying in Louisiana, not from a hurricane that made landfall on Monday but from the criminal negligence of our federal government.

The stories are horrific. Patients at Charity Hospital in New Orleans are dying from lack of electricity and proper facilities and the corpses of the dead are being stacked like cordwood in stairwells. Doctors have been begging since Monday for patients to be evacuated from local hospitals - and they're still there, still dying.

Tens of thousands of citizens are abandoned at the Convention Center. Children, the elderly, families left without food or water since Monday. More corpses, more suffering, more despair.

Bodies are floating in canals and through the streets of New Orleans, a shocking health hazard that can't even begin to be addressed because more and more corpses are joining the floaters every hour. People are still on rooftops, with bodies of dead family members who were unable to survive for five days without food or water surrounding them. Police are tying the floating bodies to stop signs for pick up, whenever FEMA gets around to it.

Cops are looting stores and draining gasoline from abandoned vehicles because no food, no gas, no help has been provided to those expected to keep order. At least 30% of the New Orleans police department have abandoned their posts. Do you blame them?

And in the middle of the chaos, the man responsible is going to chopper over the area in an attempt to save his administration, because the American people have finally woken up to the gross incompetence of this puppet of the rich. Of course, his trip over New Orleans will require the airspace to be cleared, so the food, medical supplies, and above all water desperately needed by the thousands of people at the Convention Center will not be airdropped - but then, FEMA has had all week to do that and failed, so what's another day to these monsters? Bush is, at the moment I type this, at a worthless photo-op in Mobile where he's pretending to listen while Haley Barbour explains to him what a really, really baaaaad storm this was. Good god! If he doesn't know that much, we're in a hell of a lot of trouble, kids.

If the people at the Convention Center had been members of Bush's base - the "have mores" - is there any question that the federal government would have turned out a massive rescue response? Would they have allowed their wealthy white elderly supporters in wheelchairs to go without food and water for five days, pissing where they sit, in the blazing sun and killing temperatures?

Of course not.

What's so shocking in this nightmare is just how disposable poor African-Americans are in the scheme of "compassionate conservatism", how little their lives mean in the Bush food chain, how easily their dignity is destroyed, how their bodies are allowed to float through the streets of a dying city, abandoned and ignored in death as they were in life.

Never - and he's put us through a lot in the last four and a half years - have I hated George Bush with the intensity that I've felt this week. He's poured billions of our tax dollars into rebuilding Iraq and cuts funding to rebuild the levees in New Orleans. He sends floods of troops into Iraq to kill but can't send anyone into New Orleans to save lives. He plays guitar and eats cake while his fellow citizens are dying of his neglect, his lack of Christian caring, and his incompetence. He cuts taxes for the wealthy and asks us to pony up from our wallets for this disaster. And above it all, he does nothing but vacation and fundraise while the poorest, the most vulnerable, the most desperate in our society are simply abandoned to their fate to die.

At least our media isn't trying to hide the shocking incompetence of the buffoons in the government running this show. Even the right-wing lackies on cable news are reacting with outrage over the neglect of this government in dealing with this crisis. The scales have finally fallen from their eyes, and for once they're reacting with a spark of outrage and humanity.

I'm numb with fury over the scenes from New Orleans and the Gulf coast this week. This worthless, dangerous President of Death is allowing people to die of dehydration where they stand on the streets of an American city. How do you accept that? How do you even begin to grasp it?

Bush cut New Orleans flood control project 44% to pay for Iraq

2005-09-01T06:47:00.000-07:00

An infuriating article this morning in Salon.com
(you can get a free one-day pass to read the entire article - follow the link on the site).

Our tax dollars have been pouring into Iraq, leaving crucial work at home undone. Nothing illustrates this better than the butcher's bill Bush has presented to the people of New Orleans, who were left unprotected and vulnerable so he could pay for his pet war in Iraq.

"No one can say they didn't see it coming"
In 2001, FEMA warned that a hurricane striking New Orleans was one of the three most likely disasters in the U.S. But the Bush administration cut New Orleans flood control funding by 44 percent to pay for the Iraq war.

Aug. 31, 2005 | Biblical in its uncontrolled rage and scope, Hurricane Katrina has left millions of Americans to scavenge for food and shelter and hundreds to thousands reportedly dead. With its main levee broken, the evacuated city of New Orleans has become part of the Gulf of Mexico. But the damage wrought by the hurricane may not entirely be the result of an act of nature.

A year ago the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers proposed to study how New Orleans could be protected from a catastrophic hurricane, but the Bush administration ordered that the research not be undertaken. After a flood killed six people in 1995, Congress created the Southeast Louisiana Urban Flood Control Project, in which the Corps of Engineers strengthened and renovated levees and pumping stations. In early 2001, the Federal Emergency Management Agency issued a report stating that a hurricane striking New Orleans was one of the three most likely disasters in the U.S., including a terrorist attack on New York City. But by 2003 the federal funding for the flood control project essentially dried up as it was drained into the Iraq war. In 2004, the Bush administration cut funding requested by the New Orleans district of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers for holding back the waters of Lake Pontchartrain by more than 80 percent. Additional cuts at the beginning of this year (for a total reduction in funding of 44.2 percent since 2001) forced the New Orleans district of the Corps to impose a hiring freeze. The Senate had debated adding funds for fixing New Orleans' levees, but it was too late.

The New Orleans Times-Picayune, which before the hurricane published a series on the federal funding problem, and whose presses are now underwater, reported online: "No one can say they didn't see it coming ... Now in the wake of one of the worst storms ever, serious questions are being asked about the lack of preparation."

The Bush administration's policy of turning over wetlands to developers almost certainly also contributed to the heightened level of the storm surge. In 1990, a federal task force began restoring lost wetlands surrounding New Orleans. Every two miles of wetland between the Crescent City and the Gulf reduces a surge by half a foot. Bush had promised "no net loss" of wetlands, a policy launched by his father's administration and bolstered by President Clinton. But he reversed his approach in 2003, unleashing the developers. The Army Corps of Engineers and the Environmental Protection Agency then announced they could no longer protect wetlands unless they were somehow related to interstate commerce.

The entire article is a must-read. With public opinion already against Bush's war, this might be the straw that breaks the camel's back.

a'pickin' and a'grinnin'

2005-08-31T06:55:00.000-07:00

When Bush wasn't eating cake while the flood waters in New Orleans rose yesterday, he was clowning with a presidential guitar. Yes, the plight of his citizens truly tears at his soul - right?

Meanwhile, a crisis worsens in the city thanks to his policies.

Among emergency specialists, 'mitigation' -- the measures taken in advance to minimize the damage caused by natural disasters -- is a crucial part of the strategy to save lives and cut recovery costs. But since 2001, key federal disaster mitigation programs, developed over many years, have been slashed and tossed aside. FEMA's Project Impact, a model mitigation program created by the Clinton administration, has been canceled outright. Federal funding of post-disaster mitigation efforts designed to protect people and property from the next disaster has been cut in half. Communities across the country must now compete for pre-disaster mitigation dollars.

As a result, some state and local emergency managers say, it's become more difficult to get the equipment and funds they need to most effectively deal with disasters. In Louisiana, requests for flood mitigation funds were rejected by FEMA this summer. (See sidebar.) In North Carolina, a state also regularly threatened by hurricanes and floods, FEMA recently refused the state's request to buy backup generators for emergency support facilities. And the budget cuts have halved the funding for a mitigation program that saved an estimated $8.8 million in recovery costs in three eastern North Carolina communities alone after 1999's Hurricane Floyd.

Consequently, the residents of these and other disaster-prone states will find the government less able to help them when help is needed most, and both states and the federal government will be forced to shoulder more recovery costs after disasters strike.

In addition, the White House has pushed for privatization of essential government services, including disaster management, and merged FEMA into the Department of Homeland Security -- where, critics say, natural disaster programs are often sidelined by counter-terrorism programs. Along the way, morale at FEMA has plummeted, and many of the agency's most experienced personnel have left for work in other government agencies or private corporations..."

......And indeed, some in-need areas have been inexplicably left out of the program. "In a sense, Louisiana is the floodplain of the nation," a 2002 FEMA report noted. "Louisiana waterways drain two thirds of the continental United States. Precipitation in New York, the Dakotas, even Idaho and the Province of Alberta, finds its way to Louisiana's coastline." As a result, flooding is a constant threat, and the state has an estimated 18,000 buildings that have repeatedly been damaged by flood waters – the highest number of any state. And yet, this summer FEMA denied Louisiana communities' pre-disaster mitigation funding requests.

In Jefferson Parish, part of the New Orleans metropolitan area, flood zone manager Tom Rodrigue is baffled by the development. "You would think we would get maximum consideration" for the funds, he says. "This is what the grant program called for. We were more than qualified for it."

And more:

"Before FEMA was condensed into Homeland Security it responded much more quickly," says Walter Maestri, director of Jefferson Parish's Office of Emergency Management. Maestri has worked with FEMA for eight years. "Truthfully, you had access to the individuals who were the decision-makers. The FEMA administrator had Cabinet status. Now, you have another layer of bureaucracy. FEMA is headed by an assistant secretary who now has to compete with other assistant secretaries of Homeland Security for available funds. And elevating houses is not as sexy as providing gas masks."

Maestri is still awaiting word from FEMA officials as to why Louisiana, despite being called the "floodplain of the nation" in a 2002 FEMA report, received no disaster mitigation grant money from FEMA in 2003 ("Homeland Insecurity," Sept. 28). Maestri says the rejection left emergency officials around the state "flabbergasted"

Why did the Bush administration cut funding to Lousiana's flood mitigation program so severely? Walter Maestri, the emergency management chief for Jefferson Parish, told the New Orleans Times-Picayune the following on June 8, 2004:

It appears that the money has been moved in the president's budget to handle homeland security and the war in Iraq, and I suppose that's the price we pay. Nobody locally is happy that the levees can't be finished, and we are doing everything we can to make the case that this is a security issue for us.

Everything for Iraq, and nothing for the citizens at home who are paying taxes and expecting at least a basic level of federal services. Heavy military equipment that could be saving lives today in the Gulf coast - in Iraq (see below). Money earmarked to strengthen the levee system in New Orleans - cancelled, and sent to Iraq. The only thing shared by both Iraq and the Gulf states are dead Americans, thanks to the murderous and incompetent policies of the buffoon with the guitar.

Let Them Eat Cake

2005-08-30T07:44:00.000-07:00

Hurricane? What hurricane? Bush spent last evening at a fat-cat political fundraiser during his breezy five-week vacation while residents of the Gulf coast and New Orleans clung to rooftops, waiting for rescue.

He might have good reason to hide from this disaster. On August 1st - almost a month ago - the following appeared on the site of a New Orleans television station:

LA National Guard Wants Equipment to Come Back From Iraq

Yunji de Nies

August 1, 2005, 9:07 PM CDT

JACKSON BARRACKS -- When members of the Louisiana National Guard left for Iraq in October, they took a lot equipment with them. Dozens of high water vehicles, humvees, refuelers and generators are now abroad, and in the event of a major natural disaster that, could be a problem.

"The National Guard needs that equipment back home to support the homeland security mission," said Lt. Colonel Pete Schneider with the LA National Guard.

Why in the world would the Army need dozens of high water vehicles in Iraq? Wouldn't those have come in rather handy, as well as the generators, in New Orleans this week? In fact, wouldn't having the Louisiana National Guard in Louisiana be sort of helpful - given that a large portion of their mission is to deal with natural disasters in their home states - rather than in a hopeless quagmire in Iraq? Meanwhile, the flooding in New Orleans is reaching a crisis stage, while Guardsmen from Louisiana watch helplessly from their barracks in Iraq.

How bad is the situation in New Orleans, while Bush kicks back on vacation and Louisiana Guardsmen and their heavy equipment are in Iraq? Here are a few excerpts from the mayor's latest statement:

"We have 80 percent of our city underwater. In some parts of the city, the water is as deep as twenty feet.

"We have people still trapped on their roofs.

"We have an incredible amount of water in the city. Both airports are underwater."

"The twin spans in New Orleans East are destroyed. They're gone.

"We have three huge boats that have run aground. We have an oil tanker that is also run aground. And leaking oil.

"We have a serious levee break at 17th Canal. It's causing waters to continue to rise in certain sections of the city.

"I must tell people who are driving around that if you drive on the highrise, we're not sure about the structural soundness of the high-rise, because it appears that a barge has hit one of the main structures of the high-rise.

"All of Slidell is under water.

"We have gas leaks that have sprout out, and even when they are under water, you will see a flame shooting out of the water. It's not a pretty picture."

Having a local Guard unit mobilized near the event can be a handy thing. Last night, Jeanne Meserve from CNN was reporting live from New Orleans and broke down in tears from the horrors all around her. She reported that people were screaming from rooftops and rubble, begging for rescue, dogs howling because they were trapped in electrical wires, still alive - and no rescue available until morning. Perhaps having the Louisiana Guard staged in Baton Rouge yesterday morning might have alleviated some of last night's agony.

CNN is reporting this morning that Mississippi is scrambling to borrow Guardsmen from other states, as so many of their own Guard are deployed in Iraq. I'm sure those awaiting rescue will be glad to wait for other state's Guard units to be cobbled up and transported.

No wonder that Bush's only advice to Americans in the face of this natural disaster is to "pray". He's left the people of the Gulf coast no other option.

Chimpeach!

2005-08-29T09:35:00.000-07:00

Bush has been repeating his robotic lies about Iraq for months, and it's shocking how easily exposed his lies are - and how little they receive critical attention from the mass media.

The New York Times today exposes the murderous Bush lie that when the Iraqi Army builds up, we'll "stand down". Turns out that we're deliberately not building up the Iraqi Army, and are instead telling the Iraqis to rely on the permanent American bases in Iraq.

So much for "standing down".

EVEN though President Bush keeps saying American forces won't leave Iraq until its forces can fight on their own, the United States isn't rushing to give the Iraqi military heavy weapons.

There is an official explanation for that - that such things take time.

But there is also another reason to go slow, one that illustrates how tightly American military success is intertwined with the political prospects of Iraq itself. This reason is little discussed in public by military officers, but it was evident last week on the explosion-scarred streets of Baghdad, in the skirmishes between rival Shiite forces in Najaf, and in the confusion of Iraq's struggle to complete a new constitution.

Simply put, Iraq remains too fragile for any planner to know what shape the country will be in six months or a year from now - whether it will reach compromises and hold together or split apart in a civil war.

And that presents a conundrum for American military planners. With those questions up in the air, they have to fear that any heavy arms distributed now could end up aimed at American forces or feeding a growing civil conflict. And the longer Iraq's army has to wait for sophisticated weapons, the longer American forces are likely to be needed in Iraq as a bulwark against chaos.

Nice. But this major fuck-up gets worse:

In private, some officers acknowledge other concerns, too. "We're worried about civil war or a coup," said a senior American officer in Baghdad charged with outfitting Iraq's new army. He would not agree to be identified because the concerns he was discussing are so sensitive.

Indeed, Iraqi commanders are growing restive, saying their troops are dying at three times the rate of American soldiers because they lack basic equipment.

"Soldiers with Kalashnikovs and pickup trucks is not an army," said Gen. Abdulqader Mohammed Jassim, commander of the Iraqi ground forces, during a recent interview at his office in Baghdad. "To make the Iraqi Army stand on its own without American or coalition forces, we need command and control equipment, transport vehicles and training." He wants helicopters and artillery, more powerful guns and bigger tanks - weapons the Americans say he doesn't need now.

At the same time, the Americans are building at least four semi-permanent military bases that could hold 18,000 troops each. These are usually described as way stations on the eventual route home for the Americans, places where they will stay while ever-more-capable Iraqi troops engage the insurgents on their own. But that will clearly take time. Gen. George W. Casey Jr., the top military commander in Iraq, when asked this month about how the bases would be used, dismissed the question: "You're talking years away." And if Iraq's politics remain unstable, the bases could offer a continuing rationale for not providing heavier weaponry, since the Americans would still be close by for the Iraqis to rely on.

Bush repeated just last week, during his rant where he screeched like a madman at his hand-picked audience, that the U.S. would "stand down" as soon as the Iraqi Army could defend the country. But what Army?

"Just as there isn't one Iraqi people, there isn't one Iraqi army," said Peter Galbraith, a former United States ambassador to Croatia who is now in Iraq and has worked closely with the Kurds. "We won't be arming a national army, but armies that are loyal to three different groups."

Just how long will the American people put up with this major fucked-up mess before demanding that our elected officials in Congress get a fucking grip and start demanding policy changes from the incompetent Bush administration - and an end to the bald-faced lies?

Bring The Troops Home Now tour announced

2005-08-27T07:54:00.000-07:00

As peace activists prepare to leave Crawford this week in order to follow Bush back to Washington, plans are underway for a bus tour to bring the spirit of Camp Casey to cities that are on the route to the White House.

Three separate bus tours will be the focal point of rallies, interfaith services, and political action. To see if the tour will stop in your city visit the Bring The Troops Home Now site. They're also looking for organizers to help with the rallies, housing assistance for tour participants, and financial help - gas is expensive! - so have a look and see how you can participate or donate.

Fortunately, the tour will stop here on Thursday and I'm volunteering to help organize in my city. I'll be sure to get photos of the event and post them Thursday evening - that is, if the American Legion doesn't show up with pitchforks and torches and face paint to take us out.

It's Fuck You Friday

2005-08-26T07:45:00.000-07:00

A resounding fuck you to the fascists at the American Legion, who apparently don't understand the constitutional protections and freedoms that our soldiers are told daily they're fighting and dying for.

At their recent national convention, national commander Thomas Cadmus had the following to say about the uptick in organized war protests:

"The American Legion will stand against anyone and any group that would demoralize our troops, or worse, endanger their lives by encouraging terrorists to continue their cowardly attacks against freedom-loving peoples."

The delegates voted to use whatever means necessary to "ensure the united backing of the American people to support our troops and the global war on terrorism."

Use "whatever means necessary"? Exactly what "means" will force the American people to give "united backing" to Bush's war policies? For that's exactly what they're demanding. When you hear the phrase "support the troops" come from a right-winger - which, of course, everyone does, how ridiculous to imply otherwise - what they're really demanding is that you "support the war". So what kind of violence will the American Legion unleash upon the public to demand "united backing" for this war?

And did anyone else enjoy the crude irony of his considering us a "freedom loving people" while he recommends using "whatever means necessary" to quelch those same freedoms? Orwellian...

And the media calls the anti-war activists crackpots! Yet hardly a word has been said about the open threats of violence made by the American Legion this week, nor have they been taken to task or picked apart or openly attacked as Cindy Sheehan has been all month.

Cadmus didn't stop there. He continued:

"No one respects the right to protest more than one who has fought for it, but we hope that Americans will present their views in correspondence to their elected officials rather than by public media events guaranteed to be picked up and used as tools of encouragement by our enemies."

To this quote, Editor and Publisher added the following dry remark: "This might suggest to some, however, that American freedoms are worth dying for but not exercising."

Gee, I wish that my elected officials would give two shits about what I write them. I continue to do it, but it's like pissing in the wind. Never has there been a greater disconnect between the public mood and the actions of our elected officials, but that's the sole avenue the American Legion gives us before they start cracking heads.

Cadmus, obsessed with the notion that any hint of discord will bolster "the enemy" - you know, the people whose country we attacked without provocation, whose families we've killed with our bombing and casual shooting, whose cities we've destroyed, whose land is now permanently tainted with depleted uranium, whose water, sewage, and electrical systems are in tatters - goes on to again note that the insurgents are more interested in what we're doing here than the destruction we're causing there:

"We had hoped that the lessons learned from the Vietnam War would be clear to our fellow citizens. Public protests against the war here at home while our young men and women are in harm's way on the other side of the globe only provide aid and comfort to our enemies."

I wish to fuck we had learned the lessons of Vietnam!

So, I suppose that the 4,000 members of the American Legion who signed on to this doctrine will now become the brownshirts of the vaterland, wading into war protests and using "any means necessary" to stop them. I hope they understand that should they lay even one filthy paw on this "peace visualizing" war protestor, my foot will aim directly for their nuts.

Bush, the great "uniter", has not only created violent private militias in Iraq, but he's apparently created one here in the United States. By not publicly condemning the fatwa the Legion issued this week, he's encouraging blood in the streets at home courtesy of the "patriots" at the American Legion.

Republican "grassroots" activism

2005-08-25T07:24:00.000-07:00

Well, well, well....the You Don't Speak for Me, Cindy! (note the exclamation point to give the phrase a snappy, Madison Avenue-type oomph) anti-Sheehan bus tour is actually being run by -gasp!- a Republican public relations firm.

The Move America Forward website - the same site that is organizing and promoting the bus tour - is registered to the following:

Registrant:
Russo Marsh & Rogers
770 L Street, #950
Sacramento, CA 95814
US

This "grassroots" activism is actually a creation of Russo Marsh & Rogers, a Republican PR firm that is apparently so desperate for business they once ran an "Orin Hatch for President" campaign. Move America Forward not only shares an office with RM&R but also a receptionist. The bus tour is a paid-for GOP public relations campaign that they've had the audacity to present as some kind of grassroots movement. Keith Olberman on Countdown last night confirmed this swindle, which the media has been presenting as a sincere movement on the part of pro-war military families to mouth loving platitudes to Bush and his warlords.

Everything is faked theater with this crowd, from Armstrong Williams to Jessica Lynch to this phony "activism".

The exposure of this bus tour, of course, won't shut down the hypocritical right-wing media nutters who have been screaming that Sheehan is a "tool of the left". Who, exactly, do they consider "the left"? Those godless commies at MoveOn.org, of course. This is laughable, as is their entire campaign to portray MoveOn as some kind of wild-eyed Marxist outfit. Every MoveOn event I've attended - including one of those subversive bake sales - has been comprised of middle-class 30-somethings, suburban moms and dads with kids and two cars. Hardly crazed leftists screaming for the nationalization of industry, but the RNC and their mouthpieces have been at great pains to portray them as the "hard left". Why? MoveOn actually is an effective grassroots organization, unlike the above fake bus tour, that can mobilize millions of followers and raise huge amounts of cash - something the right-wing lacks, other than the evangelical "Christian" base exemplified by Pat "Call Me Lee Harvey" Robertson. They feel they must discredit MoveOn and other liberal groups because they have the numbers, the money, and the momentum and that threatens the right's death-grip on our government - who in truth fear and despise we, the people.

The question now, of course, is if the corporate media will allow anyone to even hint that the military families riding on this bus tour are now "tools" and "mouthpieces" of the right. They allowed Sheehan to be portrayed in this fashion, and what's sauce for the goose...

And now, a popcorn break

2005-08-24T06:53:00.000-07:00

Interesting all-day bloodletting that went on over at Kos yesterday, when he posted an entry he surely knew would rile up many of his readers (and contributors who fund his site):

I'm not anti-war. As I've said before, I'm a military hawk. I supported the Afghanistan War and I supported the Bosna and Kosovo interventions. I'm not one of these touchy-feely hippy types that thinks war is inherently bad. I laugh at people who think they can "visualize peace".

Unlike most people reading this, I grew up in a country at war. I've seen the effects first-hand. I also served in the Army. To me war isn't a video game or an abstract concept. It's real. Yet sometimes, many times, military force is a force for good. There are evil people in the world, doing evil things. And all the sanctions in the world, all the strongly worded denunciations, will never have the effect of a 1,000 pound bomb.

I oppose the Iraq War.

But I refuse to be labeled "anti-war". I'm not. I'm anti this war. Why? Because I'm a war pragmatist. I understand the costs of war, but I also understand the potential benefits.

...I oppose Iraq not because I'm anti-war. I'll have nothing to do with any of the anti-war rallies planned in the near term (and the crazy cast of characters that seek to inject their unrelated own pet causes into the proceedings).

Kos makes two separate but related points in this entry. First, he follows the DLC/GOP playbook by smearing a large swath of opponents to our occupation of Iraq as "touchy-feely hippy types" notwithstanding the fact that he isn't old enough to have actually experienced a "hippy type" from the 1960's and clearly hasn't grasped the underlying philosophy from that era. Perhaps a review of the 1968 Democratic National Convention - yes, the opposition was led by Yippies but who were the troops? - would modify his "touchy-feely" prose. I would also remind Kos that the '68 convention was a mutiny within the Democratic ranks refusing to accept another "war pragmatist" as our nominee, a lesson we should keep in mind for 2008.

I'm tired to the bone of so-called "war pragmatists" smugly throwing aside the very core of opposition to this war in an attempt to frame this struggle as a messy problem best left to the grownups. The anti-war movement stepped aside for another "war pragmatist" (with a Crackerjack-like salute and "reporting for duty" bray that made me literally want to vomit) who happened to be the Democratic nominee last year and it kept public opposition to our Iraq policies from crystalizing until this summer - far too late for any meaningful change. Our only hope was in 2004, and the "war pragmatists" guaranteed that the bloodbath will continue through the second Bush term.

If Kos truly opposes the continued occupation of Iraq, one would think that he'd accept a broad range of opponents, unwashed as he may consider them to be, or risk the anti-war movement becoming a simple policy debate, shorn of anger over the lies that led us to Baghdad or moral objections to the "Shock and Awe" that destroyed cities and lives for nothing other than a stragetic position in the Middle East to protect our oil supply in the event of destabilization in Saudi Arabia or Iran. The passion of our moral position is our greatest strength, but Kos would rather we step aside so the "war pragmatists" can support the concept of war to a war-weary public who, frankly, are sick of this militaristic bullshit but pick and choose which wars, with their attendant civilian casualties and destruction of entire societal structures, are good. All done, of course, while Kos "laughs at those who visualize peace".

This me=adult and you=unwashed hippy bullshit espoused by Kos, ridiculous as it is, won't harm the peace movement. It will only harm individuals such as Kos, who will find himself increasingly irrelevant because the call for an end to the bloodletting in Iraq is larger than any one individual. People will react according to their own moral beliefs, not because they sit and stew over how they can position themselves as "war pragmatists" so the big bad attack dogs of the GOP won't snap at our ankles. Fuck 'em. We have a war to end, and Kos can either accept all segments of the anti-war movement or be left on the sidelines with his granny-like lectures.

He also takes a me=adult you=crazed cast of characters tone when he addresses what I assume is the demo taking place in Washington in September and the participation of A.N.S.W.E.R. in this event. Yes, I believe that A.N.S.W.E.R. dilutes our message with the free Mumia crap, the Coca-Cola in India speeches and their insistence on addressing Palestine before Iraq. Still, they were the first organization that planned (and financed) many of the early war protests, and while I don't agree with many of their positions far be it from me to dismiss them as a "crazed cast of characters" and petulantly sit at home pecking away at my keyboard while thousands of Americans take to the streets next month to demand an exit strategy from Iraq and accountability for the lies that led us there. I have every intention to be in Washington next month - via the Peace Train from New Orleans - and I hope to blog from both the train and the demo. I can overlook the call to free Mumia and focus on what's important, rather than distance myself from the "crazy cast of characters" who so frighten and repulse Kos. I can do this, you see, because I'm an adult.

IraqNam

2005-08-23T07:35:00.000-07:00

Chuck Hagel was correct in comparing the situation on the ground in Iraq to Vietnam, but there's another parallel that is only going to grow in the months ahead - civil unrest and Kent State-like police tactics.

In Pittsburgh last week, a group of protestors who were attempting to shut down a military recruitment office were tasered, pepper-sprayed, and attacked by police dogs.

Meieran claimed some protesters were pepper sprayed and Tasered; he said a 68-year-old woman who was not resisting was bitten by a police dog.

Police spokeswoman Tammy Ewin initially said no pepper spray was used on protesters, but Sgt. Clint Winkler, a supervisor on duty, told The Associated Press he tried to use pepper spray on one woman who would not leave, but it hit her glasses. She was then subdued with a Taser, Winkler said.

The Taser victim and the dog bite victim were being treated at UPMC Presbyterian Hospital. Winkler confirmed that the older woman was bitten in the leg by a police dog when she refused a police order to disperse.

In Sacramento, a group of protestors confronted the obnoxious "You Don't Speak For Me, Cindy!" neocon bus tour.

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — Supporters of President Bush clashed with anti-war activists as they wound their way through California after rallying in the hometown of Cindy Sheehan, the mother who started a protest camp outside Bush's Texas ranch.

Conservative activists and military families embarked on the tour Monday, calling it "You don't speak for me, Cindy!" A verbal confrontation erupted when the caravan arrived in Sacramento and was met by anti-war protesters chanting for Bush to bring home the troops.

Some caravan members called the anti-war protesters communists and said they were "aiding and abetting the enemy." Those comments enraged Sheehan supporter Dee Ann Heath, who said she has two sons serving in Iraq and another preparing to leave.

Readers might want to check the itinerary for this pro-war, pro-death bus jaunt and let the right-wing organizers know your feelings when it zips through your town en route to Crawford.

Meanwhile, in Salt Lake City, thousands of citizens protested our Chimperor while he was mouthing the same inane platitudes for continuing the occupation.

Bush spoke to more than 6,000 people at the annual convention of the Veterans of Foreign Wars, while three blocks away about 2,000 people gathered to protest Bush administration policies and the war in Iraq.

...Salt Lake resident Hugh Musser, 74, said he was a Korean War veteran who came to the protest because of ``the lies about this war and the reasons we went into it.''

``I'm so opposed to our administration. I'm not politically motivated, I'm an independent. I think we have really lost our democracy,'' Musser said.

...Salt Lake City Mayor Rocky Anderson, who called for a strong showing from Utahns at the protest in an e-mail he sent last week to local activists, addressed both the VFW convention and the protest.

Anderson was booed in his speech to the veterans at the Salt Palace Convention Center about two hours before Bush's speech. After, he said challenging political leaders is being supportive of the troops.

``The message we want to send is that we are behind our troops, we care very much about our troops. That if their lives are going to be put on the line, they are going to be put in harm's way, that we're told the truth and our nation hasn't been told the truth,'' Anderson said.

Chants of ``Rocky!'' followed Anderson as he took the podium at the anti-war rally.

``Those who take a stand ... who stand up to deceit by our government. Those are true patriots. You are true patriots,'' Anderson said.

The quiet unease phase of this war is over. Cindy Sheehan has gotten people involved, in the streets, and active. The right wing nutters can hold all of the silly bus tours they want, but we have the numbers - overwhelmingly so - and we're on the right side of this issue.

Bush has divided this country in many ways apart from the war in Iraq, but it's the war that is providing the final fracture. There is no neutral ground.

Truth Be Told

2005-08-22T09:04:00.000-07:00

If you missed the op-ed by Frank Rich in yesterday's New York Times entitled The Swift Boating of Cindy Sheehan, it's a must read. Here's a snippet:

When these setbacks happen in Iraq itself, the administration punts. But when they happen at home, there's a game plan. Once Ms. Sheehan could no longer be ignored, the Swift Boating began. Character assassination is the Karl Rove tactic of choice, eagerly mimicked by his media surrogates, whenever the White House is confronted by a critic who challenges it on matters of war. The Swift Boating is especially vicious if the critic has more battle scars than a president who connived to serve stateside and a vice president who had "other priorities" during Vietnam.

A Ray of Light

2005-08-22T07:53:00.000-07:00

On July 26th, I posted the following on the blog:

The only leading Democrat who has come out strongly in opposition to this war is Gore, and it's doubtful he'll run in 2008. Perhaps it's time for Edwards to reconsider his position on Iraq and become his own man. I believe that Americans will be so weary of this bloodshed (as the majority now are) in 2008 that a pro-occupation policy will be poison for any Democrat, but a rapid turnaround on the issue will appear insincere and pandering. If Edwards came out now against the occupation, he'd be a lock in 2008. He'd then get the "unity" Clinton preaches for, and not destroy the party (as she will).

The Chicago Tribune this morning is speculating that this might indeed happen:

Edwards signals shift against war

Throughout his campaign for president and then vice president in 2004, former Sen.
John Edwards of North Carolina made it clear that the death of his teenage son in a car accident was off-limits, not for discussion in a political context.

But now his wife, Elizabeth, has sent an e-mail to supporters voicing a connection she shares with Cindy Sheehan, the mother of a soldier killed in Iraq. As Sheehan was camped near President Bush's Texas ranch, protesting the war, Edwards called on her own family's backers to support Sheehan.

And, in a departure from a campaign-trail silence that the Edwardses kept about the death of their 16-year-old son, Wade, Elizabeth Edwards noted that Sheehan's son, Casey, 24, died in Iraq eight years to the day after her own son.

For John Edwards, who voted as a senator to support the invasion of Iraq, his wife's outreach to subscribers of their One America Committee Web site bears a distinct anti-war voice that could augur a new tack for Edwards as he prepares for a potential run for president in 2008.

"The president says he knows enough, doesn't need to hear from Casey's mother, doesn't need to assure her that Casey's is not one small death in a long and seemingly never-ending drip of deaths, that there is a plan here that will bring our sons and daughters home," Elizabeth Edwards wrote in her e-mail last week. "He claims he understands how some people feel about the deaths in Iraq. The president is wrong."

The Edwardses left questions about the e-mail to spokeswoman Kim Rubey, who said, "When Elizabeth read about Cindy Sheehan and her son, she immediately felt a strong personal connection."

Rob Tully, a Des Moines lawyer who campaigned for John Edwards in 2004, suggests that Elizabeth Edwards' battle with cancer since the election has given her an added perspective.

"She has gone through her own life-threatening experience, and that is life-changing," Tully said.

Yes, the Chicago Tribune is a right-wing rag, evidenced by the fact that it's Elizabeth, and not John Edwards who is signaling a 'shift'. Still, I remain hopeful that John Edwards will make a major political address that will indeed signal a shift in his stance on the occupation, and do so sooner rather than later. Elizabeth Edwards is one of the most intelligent and influential political spouses around, and if she's on board that's an extremely hopeful sign.

You can sign Elizabeth Edward's statement of support for Cindy Sheehan at the One America Committee site (please do this), and you can also jump on their blog and encourage John to oppose the occupation. Unlike Bush, he actually listens.

Some Weekend Reading

2005-08-19T14:01:00.000-07:00

If there's no other reason to be interested in politics, the effect our government's policies have on real-life issues is a start. You won't read a better or more gripping tale of George W. Bush's America than in this account. Prepare to be saddened and infuriated.

It's Fuck You Friday

2005-08-19T06:38:00.000-07:00

To those Republicans who continue to tell us to "get over" the massive voting fraud that installed Little Boots in the White House for two horrible terms: fuck you.

In today's New York Times, Paul Krugman - one of the few journalists left at the Times who isn't either in jail or preparing to rot in hell for their massive disinformation campaign prior to the Iraq war - tells the stark truth about American "elections", and gives a frightening (and surely true) vision of the future of our electoral process.

By running for the U.S. Senate, Katherine Harris, Florida's former secretary of state, has stirred up some ugly memories. And that's a good thing, because those memories remain relevant. There was at least as much electoral malfeasance in 2004 as there was in 2000, even if it didn't change the outcome. And the next election may be worse.

In his recent book "Steal This Vote" - a very judicious work, despite its title - Andrew Gumbel, a U.S. correspondent for the British newspaper The Independent, provides the best overview I've seen of the 2000 Florida vote. And he documents the simple truth: "Al Gore won the 2000 presidential election."

...Meanwhile, the whitewash of what happened in Florida in 2000 showed that election-tampering carries no penalty, and political operatives have acted accordingly. For example, in 2002 the Republican Party in New Hampshire hired a company to jam Democratic and union phone banks on Election Day.

...We aren't going to rerun the last three elections. But what about the future?

Our current political leaders would suffer greatly if either house of Congress changed hands in 2006, or if the presidency changed hands in 2008. The lids would come off all the simmering scandals, from the selling of the Iraq war to profiteering by politically connected companies. The Republicans will be strongly tempted to make sure that they win those elections by any means necessary. And everything we've seen suggests that they will give in to that temptation.

I'll pair Krugman's article with an excellent analysis of the 2004 election fraud that appears in Project Censored, which lists 18 almost impossible facts you must believe if you accept the legitimacy of Bush's 2004 "victory". The entire article is well worth the read. I'll note a couple from his list of 18:

2) Even though first-time voters, lapsed voters (those who didn’t vote in 2000), and undecideds went for John Kerry by big margins, and Bush lost people who voted for him in the cliffhanger 2000 election, Bush still received a 3.5 million vote surplus nationally.(3)

3) The fact that Bush far exceeded the 85% of registered Florida Republicans’ votes that he got in 2000, receiving in 2004 more than 100% of the registered Republican votes in 47 out of 67 Florida counties, 200% of registered Republicans in 15 counties, and over 300% of registered Republicans in 4 counties, merely shows Floridians’ enthusiasm for Bush. He managed to do this despite the fact that his share of the crossover votes by registered Democrats in Florida did not increase over 2000 and he lost ground among registered Independents, dropping 15 points.(4)

4) Florida’s reporting of more presidential votes (7.59 million) than actual number of people who voted (7.35 million), a surplus of 237,522 votes, does not indicate fraud.

So while the world remains shocked that we'd elect this ninny not only once but twice, keep in mind that chances are excellent that George W. Bush has never actually won a single national election. Blame can, of course, be assigned to the apathy of the American people, who have allowed this blatant fraud for three consecutive election cycles (I'm including the 2002 midterms in this count, and the Project Censored article covers the extensive fraud in this election very well).

Until the American people - including independents and moderate Republicans and the people who don't vote and don't give a shit, until they lose a son or daughter in Iraq - demand their democracy back, Krugman is correct that this fraud will continue unabated. The crime of the new century is not Iraq - it's how the ones responsible for Iraq were illegally given office.

While Bush plays, his smear machine leaps into action

2005-08-18T06:48:00.000-07:00

Republican lies and smears aren't very imaginative, and they tend to be the same group of Frank Luntz-inspired verbs and nouns thrown into the air and burbled out of their assholes in the order in which they fall. Mindless, meaningless crap.

We'll start the Bush smears (yes, I know he's on his assigned playtime, but be assured - he does nothing to stop it, it's done on his behalf, and this "uniter not divider" deserves the full responsibility for his smear machine) with RNC toadie Ken Mehlman, who gave a nice speech full of racist code words in West Virginia yesterday:

WHEELING - Republican National Committee Chairman Ken Mehlman told Republicans in Wheeling Wednesday that today's Democratic Party "isn't your grandfather's Democratic Party" of President Franklin D. Roosevelt and the 1940s.

Democrats "used to tell people you have nothing to fear but fear itself," Mehlman said. "Now they have nothing to offer but fear itself."

I'll be glad to translate the coded race-baiting, although it's fairly obvious. Now, when a Republican goes into a state like West Virginia, or any southern state, and claims that today's Democratic party "isn't your grandfather's Democratic party", he's issuing a not-so-gentle reminder that their grandfather's Democratic party supported segregation, Jim Crow, and German Shepherds set upon small children. Today's Democratic party does not. Horrors! What's a racist to do, where to go? Thank God for Ken Mehlman, leading them into the arms of today's racist lily-white GOP.

The ridiculous claim about fear - the Republicans specialize in a'fearin' the red states, what with visions of mushroom clouds and all - is simply padding. Mehlman had one message to deliver to his audience, and he did it. You can see in advance the filthy coded tactics they'll use next year trying to unseat Robert Byrd.

The Bush Vacation Smears take on an entirely different tone when it comes to Cindy Sheehan, for while the smears are all so alike they must come from the same playbook they're far more personal and mean-spirited.

Leading the charge - at least until he passes out from drink - is Chris Hitchens, a Brit who seems to feel he has the right to lecture Americans about their insufficient warlust. MSNBC gave him airtime - why? Ask their bosses at war contractor General Electric - last night on Hardball, and while the transcript is not yet available I can report that he raved almost incoherently that Sheehan is a "liar and paranoid" and "hysterical" and a "fraud" (funny coming from him, really), that Camp Casey should be renamed "Camp Nuthouse", repeating the discredited "Casey died for Israel" smear and, in the most bizarre accusation of all, kept trying to tie her to David Duke. I suppose that attaching himself to Bush's ass pays the bar bills.

I'll add that Hardball guest host Nora O'Donnell was soaking this up like the gin in Hitchens' gullet, throwing out inflammatory questions ("will Sheehan hurt the Democrats?" she brayed repeatedly, almost screeching) and getting herself worked up in an absolute froth over Cindy Sheehan. Considering that she calls herself a "journalist", and not a pundit, she might consider a less emotional approach in the future (as well as not being an open advocate for the Right).

Earlier in the day, David Horowitz had this to say, again on MSNBC (funny how MSNBC keeps giving these kooks airtime, isn't it?):

HOROWITZ: This is way beyond just criticism of the war. It's very hard to have respect for a woman who exploits the death of her own son and doesn't respect her own son's life. This young man volunteered twice. This is not a draftee. This is somebody who volunteered, did a tour of four years and volunteered back for Iraq, and volunteered for the specific mission. I haven't heard one word out of Cindy Sheehan's mouth that respects what her son did. She portrays him as an idiot who was used by deceitful liars.

...REAGAN: You've said some pretty tough things about Cindy Sheehan. I'm not sure how you know that she disregards her son. That seems like a pretty ugly thing to say, frankly. And, frankly, it doesn't do much credit to your side.

HOROWITZ: Well -- look, I've got eyes, and so do you, Ron. This young man -- if I had a son who died and I opposed the war --

REAGAN: But you didn't, did you, David?

HOROWITZ: The first -- look --

REAGAN: You don't have a son who gave his life, do you, David?

HOROWITZ: I -- I have -- I have, myself, lost dear friends to the left in this country, who were murdered by the left. I know what pain is. I don't know what it is to lose a child. That's a terrible thing. But I am telling you, if my child had gone into a war that I disapproved of and was heroic in that war, the first thing I'd do is pay credit to him.

Props to Ron Reagan, who correctly nails Horowitz that his children are not currently slogging through the streets of Baghdad. I saw this segment and it brought Horowitz up short. It's a tactic we should use relentlessly with these warmongers. The bizarre claim about people "murdered by the left" is a sign of the hysteria Sheehan is creating among the nutters on the Right.

And of course no discussion of nutters on the Right would be complete without hearing from Ann Coulter, a woman who's never been married and has no children, attacking a mother who has lost her son in Iraq in a piece tastelessly titled Cindy Sheehan: Commander in Grief

To expiate the pain of losing her firstborn son in the Iraq war, Cindy Sheehan decided to cheer herself up by engaging in Stalinist agitprop outside President Bush's Crawford ranch. It's the strangest method of grieving I've seen since Paul Wellstone's funeral. Someone needs to teach these liberals how to mourn.

Call me old-fashioned, but a grief-stricken war mother shouldn't have her own full-time PR flack. After your third profile on "Entertainment Tonight," you're no longer a grieving mom; you're a C-list celebrity trolling for a book deal or a reality show.

Nice of Coulter, who has no idea what it is to be a "grief-stricken war mother" to take time from her cigarettes and booze to lavish advice on a subject in which she has no first-hand knowledge.

This shameless right-wing hysteria - which Bush is doing nothing to stop, so it's on his doorstep - shows what a tipping point Sheehan represents in this country. And I believe this truly isn't about Iraq, but about the case they're laying for a war with Iran. The country attaching itself to Sheehan's peace movement would end the Iranian adventure before it begins, and thus the hounds from hell are on her trail.

Pentagon Propaganda Walk Losing Steam

2005-08-17T07:28:00.000-07:00

So, the Washington Post has finally pulled out of the grotesque Warapalooza that is the so-called "Freedom Walk" sponsored by your friends in the Pentagon to exploit 9/11 and again attempt to tie that event into the war in Iraq.

Personally, instead of having the Pentagon celebrate the spectacular failure of 9/11, I'd rather hear them explain how they left the airspace over the Pentagon completely undefended by even a single fighter aircraft on that day. Honest answers would honor the victims of the Pentagon attack far more than a silly, foppish "Freedom March" that replaces thought with mindless jingoism.

It's surprising that the Post made this decision, since they themselves did so much to promote this senseless war with their unquestioning acceptance of the administration's claims prior to the U.S. led invasion, although the New York Times and Judy Miller managed to eclipse the Post's shameful record in this regard. The management of the Post didn't come to the decision to pull out of this event because of some earth-shattering cosmic sign from the universe, or even common sense; no, the hand of the Washington Post was forced by their own union employees (is it any wonder the right hates unions? They really do spoil their fun):

WASHINGTON - The Washington Post is withdrawing its offer of free advertising for an organized event by the Defense Department to memorialize the victims of the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks, the newspaper announced.

The Post backed out of the agreement after critics said the event, scheduled to take place four years after the attacks that hit New York and Washington and resulted in the crash of a commercial airliner over western Pennsylvania, would have a pro-war slant and that support of the event by the newspaper would compromise the Post's journalistic integrity.

"The Post has a code of conduct that says employees should avoid a conflict of interest or the appearance of a conflict of interest," said Rick Ehrmann, a Local representative for the Washington-Baltimore Newspaper Guild. "In this case The Post was sponsoring the Pentagon's Freedom Walk, which ties the attack on Sept. 11 to the Iraq war, and of course, The Post's reporters have proven ... that there is no connection between the two, that that link is false."

...Critics of media support for the event also pointed to the free concert by Clint Black that is to take place at the end of the march route. Black's Web site features lyrics to his song entitled "I Raq and I Roll," including "Our troops take out the garbage/ for the good old U.S.A."

This little ditty by Clint Black (who appears to have never served in uniform, natch) is one of the most disgusting pieces of trash to litter our cultural landscape in quite a while. Little wonder the rest of the world hates us with this ignorant flotsam churning through the airwaves:

"I RAQ AND ROLL"

Words and Music by Clint Black and Hayden Nicholas

YOU CAN WAVE YOUR SIGNS IN PROTEST
AGAINST AMERICA TAKING STANDS
THE STANDS AMERICA'S TAKEN
ARE THE REASON THAT YOU CAN

IF EVERYONE WOULD GO FOR PEACE
THERE'D BE NO NEED FOR WAR
BUT WE CAN'T IGNORE THE DEVIL
HE'LL KEEP COMING BACK FOR MORE

SOME SEE THIS IN BLACK AND WHITE
OTHERS ONLY GRAY
WE'RE NOT BEGGING FOR A FIGHT
NO MATTER WHAT THEY SAY

WE HAVE THE RESOLUTION
THAT SHOULD PUT'EM ALL TO SHAME
BUT IT'S A DIFFERENT KIND OF DEADLINE
WHEN I'M CALLED IN THE GAME

CHORUS
I RAQ, I RACK'EM UP AND I ROLL
I'M BACK AND I'M A HIGH TECH GI JOE
I PRAY FOR PEACE, PREPARE FOR WAR
AND I NEVER WILL FORGET
THERE'S NO PRICE TOO HIGH FOR FREEDOM
SO BE CAREFUL WHERE YOU TREAD

THIS TERROR ISN'T MAN TO MAN
THEY CAN BE NO MORE THAN COWARDS
IF THEY WON'T SHOW US THEIR WEAPONS
WE MIGHT HAVE TO SHOW THEM OURS

IT MIGHT BE A SMART BOMB
THEY FIND STUPID PEOPLE TOO
AND IF YOU STAND WITH THE LIKES OF SADDAM
ONE JUST MIGHT FIND YOU

CHORUS II
I ROCK, I RACK'EM UP AND I ROLL
I'M BACK AND I'M A HIGH TECH GI JOE
I'VE GOT INFRARED, I'VE GOT GPS AND I'VE GOT THAT GOOD OLD FASHIONED LEAD
THERE'S NO PRICE TOO HIGH FOR FREEDOM
SO BE CAREFUL WHERE YOU TREAD

BRIDGE
NOW YOU CAN COME ALONG
OR YOU CAN STAY BEHIND
OR YOU CAN GET OUT OF THE WAY
BUT OUR TROOPS TAKE OUT THE GARBAGE
FOR THE GOOD OLD U.S.A.

I ROCK, I RACK'EM UP AND I ROLL
IN THE USA
I ROCK, I RACK'EM UP AND I ROLL
I'M TALKIN' ABOUT THE USA

Another play patriot who writes tough lyrics such as "when I'm called into the game" who actually isn't "in the game" but sitting on his ass in his comfortable home while those actually fighting and dying are suffering in 100 degree heat, forced on patrols without the proper armour or manpower to support their mission.

One would think that their own empty hubris would embarrass moronic dress-up warriors like Clint Black, but they long ago lost any shame. Meanwhile, Black rakes in cash from his NASCAR loving fans for his bloodlust, profiting from the suffering and sacrifice of those "in the game". The right could hardly sink any lower.

Meanwhile, back to the Warapalooza: the big bash Rummy is planning has an odd twist given the "Freedom Walk" moniker. According to the registration form for the event, the walk is "free" (nice) and open to anyone who registers. If you send them all kinds of personal information, such as your name, home address, email address, phone number and age group you'll receive back from our warlords a registration number, which you must have to check in. The registration information goes on to note that "The first 1,000 to arrive for screening...will receive the official America Supports You campaign lapel pin."

Screening? You have to be screened to slog in a "Freedom March"? This sounds exactly like the screening that goes on prior to one of Bush's fake public events, where you must be a Republican and a Bush supporter to attend. No doubt the Pentagon is going to screen out any opposing voices in what is billed as a "Freedom Walk". Like I said...they have no shame.

Bush-style "Christians"

2005-08-16T08:40:00.000-07:00

Photo courtesy of TexasLady at Democratic Underground

Last evening we saw another example of the Christian "values" that Bush inspires.

A knuckle-dragger in a pickup truck stopped near Camp Casey, disembarked from the cab and attached a pipe to the trucks' undercarriage with a chain (talk about premeditated) and cut a swath through the crosses like an extra from Dukes of Hazzard. A witness from Crawford Update said that "we heard the pipe being dragged over the gravemarkers and the pick-up's wheels crushing them." Crawford Update reports that "out of the 800 crosses, 500 were knocked down and 100 are irreparable."

Given the idiocy of the act, it's not a surprise that the driver was caught red-handed, as he had crosses sticking out of the undercarriage of his truck and was quickly arrested. A real genius, this one.

Not only did this "patriot" desecrate crosses, he also destroyed the American flags that decorated them - the same flag the right-wing trumps up fake campaign issues over with their candy-assed and dreary flag-burning hysteria.

These extreme right-wingers cannot stand freedom of speech, or our two-party system, or the rights of citizens to protest their own government. These self-described "patriots" are anything but.

Will Bush take time from his daily naps and playtime to condemn this act of violence, and the desecration of both the cross and the flag? Will he discourage his extreme followers from committing further acts of violence against a peaceful protest? Will he even give a shit?

Nah.

Bush: "All right, let's go have fun."

2005-08-15T07:40:00.000-07:00

Our "war president" attempted to defend his cowardly avoidance of Cindy Sheehan Saturday with the following appalling statement:

Bush said he is aware of the anti-war sentiments of Cindy Sheehan and others who have joined her protest near the Bush ranch.

"But whether it be here or in Washington or anywhere else, there's somebody who has got something to say to the president, that's part of the job," Bush said on the ranch. "And I think it's important for me to be thoughtful and sensitive to those who have got something to say."

"But," he added, "I think it's also important for me to go on with my life, to keep a balanced life."

Isn't it swell that Little Boots can "go on with his life" when he's responsible for ending the lives of so many thousands? As usual, it's all about him and his selfish needs and the rest of the world be damned.

And how is he demonstrating his thoughtfulness and sensitivity to Mrs. Sheehan's concerns? This was his schedule on Saturday, the day he made these bone-headed comments:

In addition to the two-hour bike ride, Bush's Saturday schedule included an evening Little League Baseball playoff game, a lunch meeting with Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, a nap, some fishing and some reading.

Amazing stuff, eh? His nap is a higher priority than meeting with the mother of a dead soldier. How incredibly thoughtful and sensitive!

His "sensitivity" plummeted to new lows as he exchanged rollicking banter on his Saturday bike ride with the sycophantic press corps at their worst, asking fluff questions while ignoring the fact that Cindy Sheehan was within bike-riding distance, sitting in a ditch in the hot Texas sun surrounded by fire ants:

President Bush: We'll take a look at the countryside, come back, and that'll put us at about eight-and-a-half miles or so. And then we'll go down in these canyons and we can fool around on some trails. And for the unbelievably fit, there are some great mountains, little climb-outs that you're welcome to do -- I may join you; I may not join you.

I love the outdoors. If I'm not exercising here, I'll be fishing over there. If I'm not fishing, I'll be working with the chainsaw. I really enjoy being outside, and mountain biking is a way for me to spend a fair amount of time -- four or five days a week -- outdoors. I love exercise. Prior to learning about mountain biking, I was a jogger. And then, like a lot of baby boomers, my knees gave out. And I believe that mountain biking is going to be an outlet for a lot of people my age. I'm 59, and people are going to realize you get as much aerobic exercise -- if not more on the mountain bike -- without being hobbled.

I like speed. Again, it's not a race, but there's something exhilarating about heading down a hill at 25 mph on a mountain bike -- or trying to grind up a hill at 9 mph on a mountain bike. (Laughter.)

Question: Mr. President, you probably have the most stressful job in the world. And, yet, with your busy schedule, you make time to exercise. For Americans whose jobs are not as stressful as yours, what can you -- do you have any advice for them, for making time? [Note: Most Americans don't have a personal chef, valets, limo drivers or someone else doing their jobs. This question demonstrates just how out-of-touch our DC media barons really are.]

Bush: I do. I think it's -- first of all, it doesn't take that much to get some good exercise. If people were to walk 20 minutes a day, the incidence of heart disease would go down significantly. What people have got to understand is when you get into an exercise routine, your habits begin to change: your eating habits change, your sleeping habits change, your coffee habits change, your cigarette habits change.

I mean, exercise for me has been good preventive medicine. And it is a part of living a disciplined life. And I would hope Americans would exercise. Part of my responsibility as the president is to try to set a good example, and exercising on a -- I exercise six times a week; if I'm not mountain biking, I'll be on the elliptical machine or lifting weights. And it just doesn't take that much time. What it takes is organization and discipline and setting priorities. And I think exercise ought to be one of the top priorities for Americans.

Q: Do you have now in your possession, or have you ever had a pair of form fitting lycra shorts?

Bush: No, I have not, and probably won't have them. (Laughter.) I mean, there are certain things that age brings with it, and not wearing the form fitting lycra short is one of them, if you know what I mean. (Laughter.)

All right, let's go have fun. This will be great. Again, hang in there and do not force the President too hard. Be kind. Then afterwards we'll have a good visit.

Note that not one member of the press could stop laughing at his feeble-minded jokes long enough to ask when he might have a "good visit" with Cindy Sheehan. Heavens, no; they might lose "access" to things like joining this idiot while he plays on the monkey bars while Iraq burns.

Sickening. Nauseating. And this sociopath of a "war president" actually considers his juvenile in-your-face playtime to be "sensitive" to not only Cindy Sheehan but to the over 1,800 families who have had sons and daughters slaughtered in George Bush's war of choice. He's a disgrace to his office and he's not worthy to lead a country in peace, much less war.

Vomit Alert

2005-08-11T06:51:00.000-07:00

While there are many reasons to rue George W. Bush squatting in the White House, having this old bitch back in the spotlight is right up there on the list.

After her criminal husband made Massachusetts bashing fashionable in 1988 - a family tradition carried on by the cretin of a son in 2004 - it's astounding that they'd have the arrogance to don Red Sox jerseys in Boston last night and lord over the crowd in the manner that they did. They're lucky their evil asses weren't booed off of the field.

I'm weary to the bone of the entire Bush clan. Have I mentioned lately how much I hate them? Consider it mentioned.

Why Bush is afraid to meet with Cindy Sheehan...

2005-08-10T07:12:00.000-07:00

From today's New York Times:

BAGHDAD, Iraq, Aug. 9 - Armed men entered Baghdad's municipal building during a blinding dust storm on Monday, deposed the city's mayor and installed a member of Iraq's most powerful Shiite militia.

The deposed mayor, Alaa al-Tamimi, who was not in his offices at the time, recounted the events in a telephone interview on Tuesday and called the move a municipal coup d'état. He added that he had gone into hiding for fear of his life.

"This is the new Iraq," said Mr. Tamimi, a secular engineer with no party affiliation. "They use force to achieve their goal."

The group that ousted him insisted that it had the authority to assume control of Iraq's capital city and that Mr. Tamimi was in no danger. The man the group installed, Hussein al-Tahaan, is a member of the Badr Organization, the armed militia of the Supreme Council for Islamic Revolution in Iraq, known as Sciri.

The ever-evolving fairy tales about why we're in Iraq that have been fed to a gullible, child-like public continue to crumble under even the most casual scrutiny. Those fearsome WMD's? Not there. Ties with terrorists? Not there (until we invaded). Now, in a thousand different stories in a thousand different sources the lie about bringing "freedom and democracy" in Iraq is easily exposed, unless of course you're a patron of cable news and being spoon-fed a diet of missing white girls in Aruba or the latest Britney dish or the exciting "news" that some of the Jackson jurors think, gee, he probably is a pedophile. Lest you think this is news dumbed down, well, yes it is, but it's also the panicked act of a corporate media who's seeing their boy go down and are scurrying like rats in a graveyard to distract the public and bore them into a permanent zombie-like state of apathy. Meanwhile, between the layers of pap and silly celebrity news the big boys at Boeing and Lockheed Martin and Exxon/Mobile pony up for their propaganda channels by running continual ads for things you can't buy, like jumbo jets and massive defense systems. The corruption of our system is everywhere, beginning and ending in Iraq and the boys who profit from it.

Which is why the simple act of a mother of a dead soldier - cutting through the propaganda, the fake flag-waving "patriotism", the schlock that's given the label of "news" - camping out in Crawford until George Bush can answer her simple question, "Why did my son die in Iraq?" is so important. In an Orwellian era where reality tv is anything but, where black is white and war is peace and up is down it all boils down to exposing the final lie that's continuing to slaughter Americans and Iraqis alike daily. Iraq is clearly on the road to becoming an Iranian-style Shiite theocracy, so "freedom and democracy" is gone, dead, a corpse rotting in the sun. What could George Bush possibly tell this mother now? The truth, that we're there to plunder resources like drunken pirates, is generally understood in this country even by the ignorant "kick their ass and take their gas" hillbillies. We're just too ashamed to admit this self-evident truth out loud, so we stick to the latest soothing lie served up with a side of flag-draped coffins.

Cindy Sheehan refuses to accept the lies, since she owns one of the coffins. And she is not only Bush's biggest nightmare, but also the nighmare of a public eager to be deluded, unwilling to admit that filling their SUV's is worth the slaughter of Casey Sheehan and 1,838 of his fellow citizens. Cindy Sheehan is the country's tipping point, and that's a dangerous place to be given the powerful forces arrayed against her. I fear this won't end well.

Our "President" is Afraid

2005-08-08T10:56:00.000-07:00

As mother of slain Iraq war veteran Cindy Sheehan continues her occupation of Crawford, TX, according to Kos she's been told that if she doesn't leave by Thursday she'll be arrested as a 'threat to national security'. Mrs. Sheehan has also been blogging about her experience on Kos, and it's well worth reading.

Bush is too cowardly to meet with the mother of a soldier he's killed in his war of greed, and instead will have her arrested with the national media present. Okay, coward - bring it on!

It's Fuck You Friday

2005-08-05T06:58:00.000-07:00

To the filthy DLC corporate Democrat Evan Bayh: fuck you.

Bayh gave an appalling interview to the Associated Press yesterday while he was trolling for caucus votes in Iowa in preparation for a Joe Lieberman-style presidential bid in 2008. Bayh apparently learned nothing from Joementum's spectacular flameout in the primaries, to wit, Democrats tend to vote for Democrats. Bayh and Lieberman don't qualify.

Proving again that the DLC Democrats would rather see their ideological soulmates in the GOP win elections than true Democrats, Bayh took aim at the large portion of the Democratic party the tiny clique within the DLC can't control:

DES MOINES, Iowa (AP) - Democratic Sen. Evan Bayh, a possible presidential candidate in 2008, said Thursday that his party lacks credibility on national security and needs to convince Americans that Democrats are willing to use force when necessary.

Until the party can persuade voters, it will be unable to move the debate to issues that work for Democrats, Bayh said in an interview with The Associated Press.

"Unless the American people know that we will be good stewards of the nation's security, they're unlikely to trust us with anything else," said the two-term Indiana senator. "That's a very important threshold we have to get over."

Bayh said there are legitimate grounds to criticize President Bush's approach to fighting terrorism, but until Democrats establish more credibility on the issue, many voters won't listen.

"Many Americans wonder if we're willing to use force to defend the country even under the most compelling of circumstances," Bayh said. "The majority of Democrats would answer that question that, yes, there is a right place and a right time. We don't get to have that discussion because many people don't think we have the backbone."

Sounds eerily similar to Republican talking points, doesn't it?

Note that his comments assume that Republicans are trusted with "being good stewards of the nation's security". Rather than hold to this false assumption, perhaps Bayh should mention that despite overwhelming warnings that an attack on lower Manhattan was imminent a Republican president left the airspace over New York and Washington completely unguarded on 9/11. Provoking a war with a country that presented no threat that is now a complete quagmire was hardly "being a good steward of the nation's security". Allowing Afghanistan to fall into the hands of tribal warlords and Taliban remnants because of the rush to war in Iraq is hardly being a "good steward of the nation's security". Bayh could run an entire campaign based on Republican failures in the area of national security (Kerry tried, but his IWR vote doomed him from the beginning), but no, Bayh would rather repeat Republican lies about what is ostensibly his own party. One is left baffled how Bayh expects this tactic to garner Democratic votes.

This tired mantra from the DLC war wing of the party - Hillary, Biden, Bayh and Lieberman - is completely out of touch with the mood of the public, who are growing more doubtful of the policy of pre-emption daily. Despite our penchant for violence in our culture, we are not a warlike people. As we learned from the Vietman experience, the public will also not accept an endless war waged for unclear reasons with a vague definition of success. The DLC, however, is more interested in racking up a huge war chest from campaign donors who profit from war - so war it is.

To illustrate how Bayh is just as divorced from reality as his beloved war president, he adds this ridiculous claim:

Bayh said his electoral success in heavily Republican Indiana and moderate views are a model for Democrats to end their recent electoral failures. Summing up those failures are polls that show voters overwhelmingly trusting Republicans on national security, he said.

"We've got a few voices out there who would be a little bit more on the fringe," Bayh said. "Unfortunately, too often they define the entire party."

Okay, so since Bayh wins in a red state by voting for the Bush tax cuts, supporting a corporatist dicatorship and cheerleading for the war everyone in blue states should simply fall in line and lose what little representation they have by turning the party into a branch of the GOP? I'm sure Californians will love a little Indiana-type Democratic party. And typical of the DLC arrogance, Bayh casually brushes off the huge majority of Democrats as "the fringe". News to Bayh (whose late father Birch, a true populist, must be screaming from the grave): "the fringe" is now the majority of not only Democrats, but of the American public. Perhaps he should peruse the latest AP-Ipsos poll, which shows Bush tanking fast on those bedrock "national security" issues.

WASHINGTON (AP) - Americans' approval of President Bush's handling of Iraq is at its lowest level yet, according to an AP-Ipsos poll that also found fewer than half now think he's honest.
A solid majority still see Bush as a strong and likable leader, though the president's confidence is seen as arrogance by a growing number.

Approval of Bush's handling of Iraq, which had been hovering in the low- to mid-40s most of the year, dipped to 38 percent. Midwesterners and young women and men with a high school education or less were most likely to abandon Bush on his handling of Iraq in the last six months.

...William Anderson, a retired Republican from Fort Worth, Texas, said Bush "has the right intentions, but he's going about them the wrong way."

"Iraq is one of the issues that everybody has a problem with," Anderson said. "There are some big discussions about it around town. Everybody's got their agreements and disagreements. It seems like there's no end. Is it going to end up another Vietnam?"

Wow, even those hardy midwesterners - and Indiana was in the midwest, last time I looked - are turning against Bush's war. Bayh isn't even in touch with his own constituents, much less with the rest of the country. I suppose the coin of the realm is now campaign contributions from war profiteers above the true "national security" of our country.

Looking ahead to 2008 is more depressing by the day. So far, we have three candidates who are considering a run - Hillary, Biden, and Bayh - all controlled by the DLC and determined to keep this country under corporatist Republican rule. I would truly vote for Nader rather than any of this unholy trio and help throw the election to a Republican. What's the difference? At least I can vote my values. God help the Democratic party if we don't have a real Democrat heading up the ticket.

Expect the Christian Right to Howl...

2005-08-04T06:37:00.000-07:00

Surprising article about Supreme Court nominee John Roberts in today's Los Angeles Times:

WASHINGTON — Supreme Court nominee John G. Roberts Jr. worked behind the scenes for gay rights activists, and his legal expertise helped them persuade the Supreme Court to issue a landmark 1996 ruling protecting people from discrimination because of their sexual orientation.

Then a lawyer specializing in appellate work, the conservative Roberts helped represent the gay rights activists as part of his law firm's pro bono work. He did not write the legal briefs or argue the case before the high court, but he was instrumental in reviewing filings and preparing oral arguments, according to several lawyers intimately involved in the case.

...Jean Dubofsky, lead lawyer for the gay rights activists and a former Colorado Supreme Court justice, said that when she came to Washington to prepare for the U.S. Supreme Court presentation, she immediately was referred to Roberts.

"Everybody said Roberts was one of the people I should talk to," Dubofsky said. "He has a better idea on how to make an effective argument to a court that is pretty conservative and hasn't been very receptive to gay rights."

She said he gave her advice in two areas that were "absolutely crucial."

It might be the right, and not the meek left, that will torpedo this nomination. Kansas Senator Sam Brownback has already been making ugly noises that Roberts might not be as anti-choice as Brownback would like.

It's worth noting that many conservatives have been floating Scalia to replace Chief Justice Rehnquist when he finally retires, and more than a few Democrats have indicated in advance that Scalia would be an acceptable choice. For his hateful language in this decision alone, every Democrat should oppose his elevation to Chief Justice - or stop passing the hat in the gay community when reelection time rolls around.

The case was argued before the Supreme Court in October 1995, and the ruling was handed down the following May. Suzanne B. Goldberg, a staff lawyer for New York-based Lambda, a legal services group for gays and lesbians, called it the "single most important positive ruling in the history of the gay rights movement."

In the blistering dissent, Scalia, joined by Rehnquist and Thomas, said "Coloradans are entitled to be hostile toward homosexual conduct." Scalia added that the majority opinion had "no foundation in American constitutional law, and barely pretends to."

The Myth of the "War President"

2005-08-03T06:14:00.000-07:00

From today's Washington Post:

With Long Sojourn at Ranch, President on His Way to Surpassing Reagan's Total

WACO, Tex., Aug. 2 -- President Bush is getting the kind of break most Americans can only dream of -- 33 days away from the office, loaded with vacation time.

The president departed Tuesday for his longest stretch yet away from the White House, arriving at his Crawford ranch in the evening for five weeks of clearing brush, visiting with family and friends, and tending to some outside-the-Beltway politics. By historical standards, it is the longest presidential retreat in at least 36 years.

The August getaway is Bush's 49th trip to his cherished ranch since taking office and the 319th day that Bush has spent, entirely or partially, in Crawford -- nearly 20 percent of his presidency to date, according to Mark Knoller, a CBS Radio reporter known for keeping better records of the president's travel than the White House itself. Weekends and holidays at Camp David or at his parents' compound in Kennebunkport, Maine, bump up the proportion of Bush's time away from Washington even further.

And the violent backdrop to his loafing:

BAGHDAD, Iraq (CNN) -- A roadside bomb blast killed 14 Marines and a civilian interpreter Wednesday as they rode in a vehicle near Haditha, Iraq, U.S. military officials said.

The military said the bomb struck the amphibious assault vehicle about 1 mile (about 2 kilometers) south of Haditha, along the Euphrates River about 135 miles northwest of Baghdad. The military said one Marine was wounded.

On Monday, six Marine sniper team members were killed in a firefight near the same city and a Marine was killed in nearby Hit. Twenty-one Marines have been killed in the region in three days. The number of U.S. troops killed in the Iraq war stands at 1,820, according to U.S. military reports.

One would think that our almost 2,000 war dead would expect their Commander in Chief to work as hard as they did prior to their deaths in Iraq. Bush feels as little responsibility to them as he does to the public at large, so he's again jetting off to the pig farm to play on his bicycle and pretend to clear brush while the war that he started rages on with no end in sight.

Another Republican Drug Abuser

2005-08-01T15:18:00.000-07:00

"I have never used steroids. Period."

The owner of the above perjury, Baltimore Oriole Rafael Palmeiro, was suspended today for 10 games for testing positive for steriods. The sound you're hearing in the distance is Jose Canseco laughing his ass off.

So, not only is Palmeiro a cheater but he's a liar as well. Nice Republican "values". From OpenSecrets.org:

Palmeiro, Mary L Ms.Colleyville, TX 76034
REPUBLICAN NATIONAL COMMITTEE (R) $1,000
primary 08/18/04

PALMEIRO, RAFAEL MR.COLLEYVILLE, TX 76034
TEXAS RANGERS/PROFESSIONAL BASEBALL
BUSH, GEORGE W (R)PresidentBUSH-CHENEY '04 COMPLIANCE COMMITTEE INC.
$2,000 general 08/17/04

PALMEIRO, MARY L MRS.COLLEYVILLE, TX 76034
HOMEMAKER
BUSH, GEORGE W (R)PresidentBUSH-CHENEY '04 COMPLIANCE COMMITTEE INC. $2,000 general 08/17/04

PALMEIRO, RAFAEL MR.COLLEYVILLE, TX 76034
TEXAS RANGERS/PROFESSIONAL BASEBALL
BUSH, GEORGE W (R)PresidentBUSH-CHENEY '04 (PRIMARY) INC
$2,000 primary 07/23/03

PALMEIRO, MARY L MRS.COLLEYVILLE, TX 76034
HOMEMAKER
BUSH, GEORGE W (R)PresidentBUSH-CHENEY '04 (PRIMARY) INC $2, 07/23/03

Of course, Republicans such as Palmeiro and Limbaugh believe in throwing the book at drug abusers, unless said abusers are wealthy Republicans hypocrites.

It's Fuck You Friday

2005-07-29T07:41:00.000-07:00

A big Friday fuck-you to Republican shrew Jean Schmidt, candidate for Tuesday's special election in the Ohio 2nd for the US House of Representatives.

Schmidt is running against Democrat and Iraq war veteran Paul Hackett, and in true GOP form she and her surrogates have been smearing Hackett's service as a Marine reservist in Iraq, questioning if he was truly in combat there (he was) and dismissing his service as inconsequential to the race. As usual, Republicans love our Republican troops and swift boat the Democratic ones. Patriots, they are.

Despite the fact that this is one of the reddest congressional districts in the country, Hackett has been shooting up in the polls (the latest had him within 5 points) and the GOP is furiously dumping money into this race in a last-minute attempt to regain momentum.

This race will be a true test for the 2006 midterms and a test of Bush's true popularity amongst the Republican rank-and-file, since Hackett is openly running on an anti-Bush platform, publicly calling him a "chickenhawk". The New York Times profile on Hackett includes this nice tidbit:

Mr. Hackett has been bluntly dismissive of Mr. Bush, saying the United States should have focused on capturing Osama bin Laden instead of invading Iraq so quickly. In a public forum, he called Mr. Bush the biggest threat facing the United States, a remark that has infuriated voters, Republicans say.

It certainly would be satisfying in light of the skulduggery that occured in the general election last year in Ohio to pick up this seat. It would also be a major political blow for Bush and end the babbling about a "mandate".

If you can contribute anything, even a few bucks, to Hackett's campaign today it would help counter the flood of GOP money being dumped into advertising. This is the last weekend before the election, so a donation today might well help determine this race. You can click on the graphic above to spread a little Democratic love.

Bringing honor and dignity (and remarkable crudeness) back to the White House

2005-07-28T07:38:00.000-07:00

Question: Where's the morality in a self-proclaimed "Christian" flipping the bird to a bank of cameras? If the obscene gesture was a response to a shouted question about Rove, doesn't this fall into the dread category of "situational ethics" that Bush and his drab little minions endlessly preach against?

What will we tell the children? Oh, the humanity!

Looks like our warlord is getting a bit testy about the wave of treason that's about to break over his entire administration. Duck and roll, world - he might be edgy enough to launch a few more invasions.

Triangulation is, like, so 1990's

2005-07-27T07:27:00.000-07:00

Seems like Hillary laid a major stink bomb during her pandering speech to the warmongers and robber barons at the DLC this week.

Her appeal, nay, demand for 'unity' with the pro-war and pro-corporatist wing of the party backfired in a spectacular fashion, so much so that it evoked comment from the WaPo:

Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton's call for an ideological cease-fire in the Democratic Party drew an angry reaction yesterday from liberal bloggers and others on the left, who accused her of siding with the centrist Democratic Leadership Council (DLC) in a long-running dispute over the future of the party.

Long a revered figure by many in the party's liberal wing, Clinton (D-N.Y.) unexpectedly found herself under attack after calling Monday for a cease-fire among the party's quarreling factions and for agreeing to assume the leadership of a DLC-sponsored initiative aimed at developing a more positive policy agenda for the party.

... John D. Podesta, who was White House chief of staff to President Bill Clinton, said he interpreted Clinton's remarks as critical of those on both sides -- centrists as much as liberals -- who would devote more energy to internal party battles than to confronting the right . But he said Clinton may have underestimated the bad feelings within the party. "I think she was trying to push the DLC back a little bit, but she walked into a crossfire maybe she should have realized was out there," he said.

The DLC represents nothing more than a soothing, less troublesome form of Republicanism, one that preserves the domain of the corporate robber barons at the expense of working Americans while doing slightly less gay-bashing (only slightly; recall that Bill Clinton brought us DOMA and Don't Ask, Don't Tell, and that Bill Clinton advised John Kerry to come out against gay marriage in 2004). Abortion rights and separation of church and state are negotiable items to the DLC and their ilk, and they demand that this whole unsavory package be accepted by rank and file Democrats under the guise of a "positive agenda".

I'm tired of Hillary Clinton and her failed 1990's policies. She'll do nothing more than divide Democrats and unite Republicans if she runs in 2008, but the Clintons care little about the Democratic party or the country in their pursuit of political power - it was, after all, Bill Clinton who lost the Senate and the House for the Democrats, a failing that we've felt acutely in the Bush years. Hillary should just stay in New York, pander to the Republicans upstate, and leave the rest of us the hell alone.

How to be a Democrat (according to Hillary)

2005-07-26T08:07:00.000-07:00

This AP article makes for infuriating reading, as once more Hillary Clinton tries to dictate her "centrist" policies on the entire party. It's wrong on so many levels one hardly knows where to begin.

COLUMBUS, Ohio (AP) - New York Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, a potential 2008 presidential candidate, on Monday pressed Democrats to adopt a tough stand on national security and urged the party to show a united front to counter ``the hard-right ideology in Washington.''

Speaking to the Democratic Leadership Council, the centrist group that helped her husband, Bill Clinton, secure the White House, the senator delivered a broad speech that touched on foreign policy, health care, education and fissures within her own party.

``It's high time for a ceasefire,'' Clinton said.

A ceasefire, eh? My, Hillary has a short memory. Let me remind her of a very recent ceasefire within the Democratic party with two short words: John Kerry.

Last year, every wing of the party came together with one clear objective in mind - throw George W. Bush to the curb. Supporting a pro-war candidate was unsavory to me, but I threw my lot in with Kerry. Never, never again will I put aside my moral beliefs to support a pro-war candidate such as Hillary Clinton.

``Let's start by uniting against the hard-right ideology in Washington,'' Clinton said. ``All too often we have allowed ourselves to be split between left, right and center.''

Hillary is clearly demanding the same unified party that Kerry had, and it's won't happen in 2008. If, during the next presidential cycle the occupation is still dragging on - and every indication is that it will be - the party nominates a hawk such as Clinton she will completely and utterly shear off the left wing of the party, which she will need to have if she has any prayer of winning. She can pander to the gutless and de-nutted DLC, but she has absolutely no legs with the progressives in the party.

Kerry was a much stronger candidate in 2004 than Hillary would be in 2008, and he didn't win on a pro-war platform. It's time to give the voters a real choice in 2008 between war and peace, and Hillary is more of the same shit.

The only leading Democrat who has come out strongly in opposition to this war is Gore, and it's doubtful he'll run in 2008. Perhaps it's time for Edwards to reconsider his position on Iraq and become his own man. I believe that Americans will be so weary of this bloodshed (as the majority now are) in 2008 that a pro-occupation policy will be poison for any Democrat, but a rapid turnaround on the issue will appear insincere and pandering. If Edwards came out now against the occupation, he'd be a lock in 2008. He'd then get the "unity" Clinton preaches for, and not destroy the party (as she will).

Winning Hearts and Minds...

2005-07-25T07:51:00.000-07:00

Kudos to the generally conservative Los Angeles Times for offering a glimpse into a subject that most Americans don't care about or choose to ignore - the reckless slaughter of Iraqi civilians by US troops, committed at will and without penalty.

Bush can provide daily lip service about "freedom" and "democracy" in Iraq, but what actually exists is a US-run police state where American soldiers and mercenaries are given free license to kill. There are some who compare our occupation of Iraq to the Israeli occupation of Gaza and the West Bank, but the Israelis tend to be more public relations minded when it comes to shooting children and even Sharon doesn't make the bizarre and outrageous claim that their occupation is providing "freedom" and "democracy" to the Palestinians.

The Times story is a bit of a long read, but important in helping to understand the current dynamics in Iraq and the growth of the insurgency. Americans don't like to face unpleasant facts that might harm their self-image as beacons of freedom, but they need to realize that these atrocities are being committed in their names using their taxpayer dollars. Here are a few excerpts from the story:

BAGHDAD — Three men in an unmarked sedan pulled up near the headquarters of the national police major crimes unit. The two passengers, wearing traditional Arab dishdasha gowns, stepped from the car.

At the same moment, a U.S. military convoy emerged from an underpass. Apparently believing the men were staging an ambush, the Americans fired, killing one passenger and wounding the other. The sedan's driver was hit in the head by two bullet fragments.

The soldiers drove on without stopping.

This kind of shooting is far from rare in Baghdad, but the driver of the car was no ordinary casualty. He was Iraqi police Brig. Gen. Majeed Farraji, chief of the major crimes unit. His passengers were unarmed hitchhikers whom he was dropping off on his way to work.

"The reason they shot us is just because the Americans are reckless," the general said from his hospital bed hours after the July 6 shooting, his head wrapped in a white bandage. "Nobody punishes them or blames them."

... The continued shooting of civilians is fueling a growing dislike of the United States and undermining efforts to convince the public that American soldiers are here to help. The victims have included doctors, journalists, a professor — the kind of people the U.S. is counting on to help build an open and democratic society.

"Of course the shootings will increase support for the opposition," said Farraji, 49, who was named a police general with U.S. approval. "The hatred of the Americans has increased. I myself hate them."

... Abdul-Jabbar said he and his family had supported the U.S. troops when they first invaded Iraq, but no longer.

"This kind of incident makes people hate the Americans more and more," he said. "They don't care about the lives of the people. Each day they make new enemies."

... Salihee's widow, Raghad al Wazzan, said she accepted the American soldiers' presence when they first arrived in Iraq because "they came and liberated us." She sometimes helped them at the hospital where she works as a doctor. But not anymore.

"Now, after they killed my husband, I hate them," she said. "I want to blow them all up."

The Iraqi people didn't ask for Shock and Awe; they didn't invite American troops into their country so they could spray bullets into their husbands and wives and sons and daughters; they didn't ask for us to destroy their infrastucture and leave them without a reliable water or electrical supply in the dead of summer; they didn't ask anything of us. But still we came, in a blaze of freedom, democracy, God and flag-waving, shooting to kill.

The only thing the Iraqis are now asking of us is to remove our presense - to leave a place where we never belonged. Yet some Americans - now a minority, unless you're a Democrat with presidential aspirations like Biden or Hillary - still see this dance of death as some kind of political imperative, that we have the need to "stay the course" as though the future holds anything more than the kind of hatred and random bloodshed described in the article. Stay the course - for what? To what end?

It's Fuck You Friday

2005-07-22T07:21:00.000-07:00

A resounding fuck you to our modern-day robber barons, and the Republicans who enable them.

From MSNBC:

Oil Industry Awash in Record Cash
But a smaller portion of profits is going to find new oil discoveries

When major oil companies report their quarterly profits next week, they're once again expected to post record numbers. With crude trading around $60 a barrel, the oil industry is enjoying one of the biggest windfalls in its history. But as the industry looks for places to put that cash, it's finding it harder and harder to put funds to work finding new deposits of oil and natural gas.

By just about any measure, the past three years have produced one of the biggest cash gushers in the oil industry’s history. Since January of 2002, the price of crude has tripled, leaving oil producers awash in profits. During that period, the top 10 major public oil companies have sold some $1.5 trillion worth of crude, pocketing profits of more than $125 billion.

“This is the mother of all booms,” said Oppenheimer & Co. oil analyst Fadel Gheit. “They have so much profit, it’s almost an embarrassment of riches. They don’t know what to do with it."

Treason in the White House

2005-07-21T08:05:00.000-07:00

Looks like the Roberts announcement didn't divert the press attention too far from Rove/Libby.

The Washington Post today carries a front-page story about a memo that likely has formed the basis for the Fitzgerald investigation - and it's a stunner.

A classified State Department memorandum central to a federal leak investigation contained information about CIA officer Valerie Plame in a paragraph marked "(S)" for secret, a clear indication that any Bush administration official who read it should have been aware the information was classified, according to current and former government officials.

Plame -- who is referred to by her married name, Valerie Wilson, in the memo -- is mentioned in the second paragraph of the three-page document, which was written on June 10, 2003, by an analyst in the State Department's Bureau of Intelligence and Research (INR), according to a source who described the memo to The Washington Post.

The paragraph identifying her as the wife of former ambassador Joseph C. Wilson IV was clearly marked to show that it contained classified material at the "secret" level, two sources said. The CIA classifies as "secret" the names of officers whose identities are covert, according to former senior agency officials.

Anyone reading that paragraph should have been aware that it contained secret information, though that designation was not specifically attached to Plame's name and did not describe her status as covert, the sources said. It is a federal crime, punishable by up to 10 years in prison, for a federal official to knowingly disclose the identity of a covert CIA official if the person knows the government is trying to keep it secret.

So, someone in the White House "knowingly" leaked the identity of a CIA operative. Who? Well, here's a suspect:

The memo was delivered to Secretary of State Colin L. Powell on July 7, 2003, as he headed to Africa for a trip with President Bush aboard Air Force One. Plame was unmasked in a syndicated column by Robert D. Novak seven days later.

We know Powell wasn't the culprit. Could it have been Bush ordering Rove to leak the information? Could this be why Bush is standing by Rove, and not fulfilling his earlier promise to fire anyone "involved" with the leak?

It certainly is getting interesting...

The Spin Begins

2005-07-20T08:34:00.000-07:00

Young Master Roberts dances with glee, knowing that his upper-class white Christian male privileges will be protected for his generation. Yay!

The corporate media has been at some pains over the last 15 hours or so to assure us that the pro-corporate candidate for the USSC is a mainline conservative, a run-of-the-mill Republican lacking even the slightest hint of extremism. Russert and Co. solemnly assure us of a speedy, uncomplicated confirmation, thus setting the stage for Democrats to be branded as obstructionists should they take umbrage at the actual record of Mr. Roberts.

This record, to be sure, isn't good. But this fight needs to begin and end at the Roe decision, and despite the fact that the pundits waved this issue off last night as though his influence on Roe will be benign, he needs to be examined carefully on this during the confirmation process. While the press (wrongly) protrayed his views on Roe last night as somehow mysterious, those of his wife are well known and on the record. She's an Executive Vice President of Feminists for Life, a radical anti-abortion organization that offends and degrades the definition of feminism in that special Orwellian way that Republicans have of twisting the very meaning of language.

Despite the fact that the media has assured us that the fight is over, it's just begun - they also told us that Bolton would breeze through confirmation. This isn't over yet - not by a long shot.

Your Tax Dollars at Work

2005-07-19T08:34:00.000-07:00

The media has been unable to hide the grim facts that surround the bungled occupation of Iraq due to the high death tolls of both Americans and Iraqis. The thousands of car bombs that have taken place thus far this year are also difficult to shove underneath the carpet.

What has been effectively hidden is the bungled reconstruction effort in Iraq, which is turning into an endless rathole into which US taxpayer money is being poured directly into the pockets of Bush campaign contributers, ready to be wasted, embezzled, and then flipped into the next GOP campaign. Meanwhile, the billions of dollars that have already been drained from our treasury are accomplishing very little for the Iraqi people.

It's gotten to be so corrupt that the Iraqi government itself is beginning to act, begging nations other than the United States to do something and do it right, finally shaming the media to cover the corporate swindle that's taking place in Iraq. The Los Angeles Times today tells the shameful story (as does the New York Times - both stories are worth a glance).

AQABA, Jordan — In language both sharp and subtle, Iraqi and international officials on Monday criticized the U.S.-led rebuilding effort for moving too slowly to improve the lives of Iraqi citizens.Meeting for a donors conference at this Jordanian resort town sandwiched between desert cliffs and the placid Red Sea, the officials announced the expected approval of $4 billion in loans from Japan and the World Bank to help speed reconstruction.

They said the United States' $18.4-billion effort had fallen short of restoring essential services such as power, water and sanitation. The criticism reflected a growing belief in Iraq and elsewhere that the Bush administration had bungled the reconstruction by giving billions to private corporations to tackle major infrastructure projects.

"It is now clear that these mega projects, though essential, have not succeeded in providing quickly enough for Iraqis' basic needs," said Barham Salih, Iraq's minister of planning and development cooperation. "Iraqis throughout the country remain dissatisfied."

The State Department, in a little-noticed report released this month, acknowledged the necessity of "adjusting [U.S.] support" to improve the reconstruction plan.

More than $6 billion in U.S. funds and billions more in Iraqi money have been spent so far, but the country's electricity supply is far from meeting demand; oil production is below prewar levels; and barely half of Iraqis report having access to safe, stable supplies of drinking water.

Unemployment is estimated at between 25% and 50%; fuel and food subsidies have resulted in a significant budget deficit; U.S. and Iraqi audits have been unable to account for billions in spending; and at least three U.S. officials and scores of Iraqis, including two former government ministers, are facing corruption charges.

In addition, more than 350 contractors working on reconstruction have been killed; scores have been kidnapped. Insurgents have also targeted Iraqi civilians working with U.S. firms.

At Monday's conference, the World Bank announced final approval of $500 million in loans. Iraq, meanwhile, said it had agreed in principle to another $3.5 billion in loans from Japan.

Although couching criticism in diplomatic language, officials from the World Bank and the U.N. made it clear that the international community's $13.5-billion rebuilding effort would differ from the U.S. approach.

The United States in early 2004 awarded contracts to a handful of U.S.-based multinational firms such as Halliburton Co., Bechtel Corp. and Perini Corp. for massive infrastructure projects such as building power plants, hospitals and clinics and refurbishing water treatment facilities.

But many of the firms have had difficulty completing projects in the face of insurgent attacks, logistical difficulties and complicated U.S. contracting guidelines. At least one contractor, Contrack International Inc., has pulled out. Perini and Pasadena-based Parsons Corp. have had jobs taken away from them over concerns about rising costs.

The international officials said they had learned from the U.S. experience and would rely on Iraqi contractors. Besides being cheaper, Iraqi contractors often face fewer security concerns, said Michael Bell, a Canadian official overseeing part of the international reconstruction effort.

Bell said about 2% of World Bank and U.N. project costs are for security. The U.S. estimate for security costs is 16% to 22%.

"We can't afford to sit and wait," Bell said. "There are rather urgent needs."

Bringing "Democracy" to Iraq, Bush-Style

2005-07-18T07:17:00.000-07:00

It's hardly a surprise that after every phony pretense for the war in Iraq has been shattered the favored reason du jour for the carnage - bringing democracy to Iraq, ergo the Middle East - also now lies in smoking broken tatters in the gutters of GOP morality.

The Bush version of democracy in Iraq begins and ends with the Bush version of democracy in America - rigged elections.

As Sy Hersh writes in the current edition of The New Yorker (a must-have subscription these days), the Bush administration attempted to fix the much vaunted January elections in Iraq. The article makes for shocking reading, even if you thought you were immune from further shock from the sewers of Bush corruption.

Here are some key excerpts:

GET OUT THE VOTE
SEYMOUR M. HERSH
Did Washington try to manipulate Iraq's election?

The January 30th election in Iraq was publicly perceived as a political triumph for George W. Bush and a vindication of his decision to overturn the regime of Saddam Hussein. More than eight million Iraqis defied the threats of the insurgency and came out to vote for provincial councils and a national assembly. Many of them spent hours waiting patiently in line, knowing that they were risking their lives. Images of smiling Iraqis waving purple index fingers, signifying that they had voted, were transmitted around the world. Even some of the President's harshest critics acknowledged that he might have been right: democracy, as he defined it, could take hold in the Middle East. The fact that very few Sunnis, who were dominant under Saddam Hussein, chose to vote was seen within the Administration as a temporary setback. The sense of victory faded, however, amid a continued political stalemate, increased violence, and a hardening of religious divides. After three months of bitter sectarian infighting, a government was finally formed. It is struggling to fulfill its primary task: to draft a new constitution by mid-August.

Whether the election could sustain its promise had been in question from the beginning. The Administration was confronted with a basic dilemma: The likely winner of a direct and open election would be a Shiite religious party. The Shiites were bitter opponents of Saddam's regime, and suffered under it, but many Shiite religious and political leaders are allied, to varying degrees, with the mullahs of Iran. As the election neared, the Administration repeatedly sought ways--including covert action--to manipulate the outcome and reduce the religious Shiite influence. Not everything went as planned.

...A former senior intelligence official told me, “The election clock was running down, and people were panicking. The polls showed that the Shiites were going to run off with the store. The Administration had to do something. How?”

By then, the men in charge of the C.I.A. were “dying to help out, and make sure the election went the right way,” the recently retired C.I.A. official recalled. It was known inside the intelligence community, he added, that the Iranians and others were providing under-the-table assistance to various factions. The concern, he said, was that “the bad guys would win.”

Under federal law, a finding must be submitted to the House and Senate intelligence committees or, in exceptional cases, only to the intelligence committee chairs and ranking members and the Republican and Democratic leaders of Congress. At least one Democrat, Nancy Pelosi, the House Minority Leader, strongly protested any interference in the Iraqi election. (An account of the dispute was published in Time last October.) The recently retired C.I.A. official recounted angrily, “She threatened to blow the whole thing up in the press by going public. The White House folded to Pelosi.” And, for a time, “she brought it to a halt.” Pelosi would not confirm or deny this account, except, in an e-mail from her spokesman, to “vigorously” deny that she had threatened to go public. She added, “I have never threatened to make any classified information public. That’s against the law.” (The White House did not respond to requests for comment.)

The essence of Pelosi’s objection, the recently retired high-level C.I.A. official said, was: “Did we have eleven hundred Americans die”—the number of U.S. combat deaths as of last September—“so they could have a rigged election?”

Sometime after last November’s Presidential election, I was told by past and present intelligence and military officials, the Bush Administration decided to override Pelosi’s objections and covertly intervene in the Iraqi election. A former national-security official told me that he had learned of the effort from “people who worked the beat”—those involved in the operation. It was necessary, he added, “because they couldn’t afford to have a disaster.”

A Pentagon consultant who deals with the senior military leadership acknowledged that the American authorities in Iraq "did an operation" to try to influence the results of the election. "They had to," he said. "They were trying to make a case that Allawi was popular, and he had no juice." A government consultant with close ties to the Pentagon's civilian leaders said, "We didn't want to take a chance."

I was informed by several former military and intelligence officials that the activities were kept, in part, "off the books"--they were conducted by retired C.I.A. officers and other non-government personnel, and used funds that were not necessarily appropriated by Congress. Some in the White House and at the Pentagon believed that keeping an operation off the books eliminated the need to give a formal briefing to the relevant members of Congress and congressional intelligence committees, whose jurisdiction is limited, in their view, to officially sanctioned C.I.A. operations. (The Pentagon is known to be running clandestine operations today in North Africa and Central Asia with little or no official C.I.A. involvement.)

"The Administration wouldn't take the chance of doing it within the system," the former senior intelligence official said. "The genius of the operation lies in the behind-the-scenes operatives--we have hired hands that deal with this." He added that a number of military and intelligence officials were angered by the covert plans. Their feeling was "How could we take such a risk, when we didn't have to? The Shiites were going to win the election anyway."

In my reporting for this story, one theme that emerged was the Bush Administration's increasing tendency to turn to off-the-books covert actions to accomplish its goals. This allowed the Administration to avoid the kind of stumbling blocks it encountered in the debate about how to handle the elections: bureaucratic infighting, congressional second-guessing, complaints from outsiders.

Thus ends the sad sham of "bringing Democracy to Iraq" - a sham that has claimed almost 1800 American lives and countless Iraqi lives. What casus belli remains? The only one that truly matters in the twisted, greedy minds of the Cheney faction that really runs the show - oil.

It's Fuck You Friday

2005-07-15T07:21:00.000-07:00

First: Alfonso Soriano, fuck you (nothing personal) for breaking up Rich Harden's perfect game in the 8th inning last night with a lame little dink into short center.

Next, a Friday fuck you to the GOP spinners who are making Karl Rove into some kind of saint for committing an act of treason. The fact that it's Joe Wilson - one of the two victims of the smear, the other of course being his wife - who they are publicly assailing as a "liar" would be laughable if you could overlook the unwholesome fact that this gang, so bristling with contempt for the law and morality, are putting the interests of the Republican party above our national security. We need no reminder, of course, of Campaign 2004, the centerpiece of which was the ability of the Republicans to "keep us safe", an illusion completely shattered by the shameless leaking of a CIA operative who was attempting to track the global movement of WMD's - you know, the same fearsome weapons Bush convinced us we had to invade Iraq to find and destroy.

Hypocrisy and treason, all tied together in one very ugly package.

A final Friday fuck you to the spittle-chinned GOP hack Chris Matthews for turning Wednesday's program over to the reprehensible RNC chief Ken Mehlman, allowing him to spin and lie about the Rove matter without any rebuttal from a less biased source. Certainly Matthews, who portrays himself as a tough journo, even naming his platform for GOP flacking "Hardball", did nothing to challenge the lies and distortions of Mehlman. Here's a bit of the transcript from Wednesday's show, illustrating just how hard-hitting Matthews really is:

MEHLMAN: And the fact that folks are using that information to say someone ought to lose their job or be charged with a crime is remarkable, outrageous and it's a partisan smear.

MATTHEWS: Fair enough.

A little later....

MEHLMAN: Karl Rove and the entire White House is fully cooperating, which is what they should do. And the folks on the other side of the aisle should stop the partisan smears.

MATTHEWS: OK.

Really tough, isn't he? Matthews, you vile GOP-flacking whore, another big fuck you for allowing this Dr. Goebbels-like Big Lie to be broadcast completely without challenge.

To Whom It May Concern

2005-07-14T07:12:00.000-07:00

The last couple of months have seen the rise of issues that have engaged those on the left of the political process - the Downing Street Minutes, the O'Connor retirement, and Rove's treasonous leaking of Valerie Plame's identity to at least one reporter. Big stuff.

As a result, my email has been flooded recently with entreaties from politicians and political groups whose mailing lists I've joined (and several from lists I haven't joined, such as a creepy blurb I received yesterday from the Clinton Foundation), and there's a common thread to almost all of them. They ask for two things:

1. Sign a petition, and
2. Give money for the "big fights" ahead

If there's any vehicle more ineffective in making an impression on our thuggish GOP ubermeisters than a petition I'm unaware of its existence. Imagine, if you will, the laughter and scorn a delivered petition earns from the likes of Tom DeLay, Bill Frist, Andy Card, Scooter Libby or Karl Rove. These are people who have abused our voting rights, and we think petitions are going to have some kind of impact? Dream on. It's a waste of time and effort. Yet, in the face of the abuse of public trust and outrages committed daily against our democracy, all we're asked to do is sign endless petitions destined to be delivered to people who don't give a shit.

The funding requests often do little more than provide salaries for the petition senders, depending on the group. MoveOn, at least, runs ad campaigns with their funding so I always throw them a few bucks. DFA conducts grassroots activist training seminars, so they get a few bucks. True Majority does fun and creative stuff, like the Pants on Fire vehicle that toured the country last year, so I've given to them.

Some of the beggers seriously annoy me. I answered a plea last year from Kerry to fund a war chest to allow the campaign to investigate any voting irregularities, and then watched him concede the election before the massive numbers of provisional ballets in Ohio - mostly cast in heavily Democratic, African-American wards where the GOP vote suppression tactics were at their peak - were even estimated. This, after he repeatedly assured us that he'd make sure - this time - that "every vote would be counted". Kerry, by the way, is still sitting on millions of dollars he raked in from dumb slobs like myself, although he's recently promised some of it to the DNC.

And he's still asking for money!

I have a better idea for our Democratic leadership and the many organizations that purport to speak for them: screw the petitions, and get your fucking shit together. Here's my generic answer to them:

To Whom It May Concern,

Thank you for your request for funds in exchange for the exciting prospect of signing a petition. I know that President Bush will seriously consider my liberal point of view on Supreme Court Nominations, Bolton, the war in Iraq, war profiteering and the treason committed by his Deputy Chief of Staff (insert laugh track here).

Rather than asking a neoconservative and shill for the religious extremists in this country to consider my point of view, I'd rather have the Democratic party on occasion represent my point of view.

I'll be glad to shovel money your way if you can promise me - with certainty - that senators such as Nelson of Nebraska or Landrieu of Louisiana or Lieberman or Biden won't cave on a radical, pro-corporate, pro-God in every household, anti-choice whackjob Supreme Court nominee. Can you do that? No? Then what fucking good - excuse the language - will draining my bank account do when the battle is lost before it's begun?

Rather than begging George Bush to nominate a moderate for the USSC - an outcome as likely as Jenna turning down a vodka collins - perhaps you should beg our senate Democrats to pull their heads out of their asses and stand for something.

Love 'n Kisses,
SimpChimp

Twisting in the Wind, Part Deux

2005-07-13T14:45:00.000-07:00

Actually, it's part three, as this is the third day in a row Scott McClellan has been grilled like a halibut by the White House press corps (it's shocking, isn't it, that they're finally doing their jobs?).

Enjoy.

Convert a Jew, Get a Tax Break

2005-07-13T06:52:00.000-07:00

NOTE: You can earn tax breaks for converting Jews and you can be appallingly ignorant while you're doing it - notice how your "pallet" will be pleased eating their Christo-fascist slop.

Florida, long the batshit capital of the United States, has sunk to a new low.

A Christian theme park (their site, I might add, is a blood-curdling experience) in Orlando was recently granted an exemption from paying back property taxes of $786,000 and annual property taxes of $215,000 by a Florida judge who ruled that The Holy Land Experience theme park exists to "spread what it considers to be God's word."

The operator of the park is a nondemoninational Christian ministry which calls itself Zion's Hope, and their stated mission is to convert Jews to Christianity. They had previously filed for tax-exempt status with the Orange County Property Appraiser's Office and their filing was denied when the Office ruled that the property was not a church but a tourist attraction.

Not to be deterred from their quest of making a buck out of converting Jews to Christianity, Zion's Hope filed an appeal with the circuit court, and as the Associated Press reports they received this favorable ruling from judge Cynthia McKinnon:

In a ruling issued July 5 that Zion's Hope attorneys didn't receive until Monday, Judge Cynthia MacKinnon ruled all of the park was off-limits to taxation -- not just the onsite administrative and education facilities already granted exemption.

"The undisputed evidence before the court is that (Zion's Hope) is using the property to spread what it considers to be God's word to many people at one time. This is in contrast to Disney World's and Anheuser-Busch's use of their properties, Epcot and Sea World, respectively, which is indisputably to make money for the companies."

She also ruled the park's roughly $35 admission cost didn't preclude it being a nonprofit because museums charge admission and at least one other church has for holiday events.

...Zion's Hope, which is devoted to converting Jews to Christianity, opened the park in February 2001. It offers recreations of scenes from ancient Jerusalem and biblical settings complete with costumed characters.

A gift shop sells books and religious-oriented gifts, and the Oasis Cafe sells food, all exempt from the state's 6 percent sales tax.

One has to wonder if, using this ruling as a precedent, you can convert your home into a Christian 'ministry' devoted to ensnaring Jews into your faith and declare that this activity makes you exempt from paying property taxes on your home. Can you refuse to pay sales tax on the food you buy since "massive Goliath burgers" provide the fuel for your Convert-A-Jew zeal? The tax evasion opportunities are endless, even if you don't convert a single Jew - just make that your goal and it's tax break city, baby. Thank our Christian God for these "activist judges" who make Christianity such a profitable (and fun! Rides 'n everything!) enterprise.

It's tragic that the large Jewish population of Florida now has to foot the bill for a missionary group whose sole purpose is to disrespect their faith. In the event Florida Jews get untidy in the face of this outrage, the theme park carries this disclaimer in their site:

"We recognize that people of various faiths and denominations will visit The Holy Land Experience, and we appreciate and encourage the worship of God. However, we reserve the right to remove anyone (or any group of people) from the facilities if their religious activity, in our judgment, causes a disturbance."

Your "democracy" in action.

Rove is goin' down

2005-07-12T09:16:00.000-07:00

Screamingly funny stuff.

He Just Never Shuts UP

2005-07-11T08:17:00.000-07:00

I had MSNBC on this morning and was listening to Blair begin his remarks to Parliament regarding the subway bombings when, to my horror, they quickly switched to Bush giving another one of his cliche-ridden speeches at the FBI training center in Virginia.

One wonders if the timing of his speech - it contained nothing new - was planned to pre-empt Blair and put the focus once again on Bush. It's clear that the administration's fear was that the opposition parties in Britain would have a field day with Blair and such open dissent or questioning isn't allowed in our political system. The views of a real opposition - unlike our weak Democratic version - might flip on a light in the collective heads of the American public, causing them to sit up (finally) and say What the fuck? (Update: BBC reports that both the Tories and Lib Dems went easy on Blair today).

Having the public listen to a point of view not preapproved by the neocons is apparently not acceptable, so instead we were forced to listen to a tired rendition of the same ol' whoppers and lines that would be laughable if his fuckups weren't so tragic - "These terrorists refuse to allow freedom to dissent" would be a sidesplitter when you place it alongside our frightened little man's First Amendment Zones. And, lest we be in touch with the reality of what actually took place last week, he again claimed that "we're fighting the terrorists there so we don't have to fight them here," following the GOP credo that if you repeat a lie often enough, even in the face of overwhelmingly contradictory evidence, it will gain acceptance as the truth. Certainly we know that the media won't challenge this claim, but simply repeat it as fact.

Each time his hand-picked audience applauded, his idiot face would beam, his head would bob, and a nasty smirk that purports to express pleasure would flare across his mouth. The visuals alone were repulsive, but not as stomach-churning as his attempts to once again draw political gain from the deaths of civilians. It was a "Rally 'Round Me, Boys" speech to prop up his poll numbers and deflect from the fact that the attacks were the direct result of his failed and disasterous policies in the Middle East.

Democrats are hesitating to use this event as an illustration of just how botched this "War on Terror" has been, fearing that they'll be accused of politicizing the London bombings. This weak-kneed mewling, in light of this morning's Bush pep rally, is completely unacceptable. Democrats need to not only focus on the lack of funding that's causing shortfalls in providing transportation security here, but they need to be attacking the larger picture - that the overall strategy post-9/11 has been a tragic failure. Of course, if Kerry had done this last year, the election would have been won in late summer. What in the fuck is wrong with the Democrats? They have public opinion on their side, people are begging for responsible leadership, yet their silence continues.

It's Fuck You Friday

2005-07-08T06:59:00.000-07:00

To Saddam Hussein: Fuck you. How dare you plan and execute a hideous attack on civilians in London?

Oh...wait. Nevermind. It's the guy we didn't catch who's likely behind yesterday's atrocity.

Lest anyone think our invasion of Iraq has not, in fact, made us one fucking bit safer, Fox News yesterday went utterly batshit in their coverage of the event, flailing wildly in their attempts to excuse the failed policies of Bush and Blair that led to this disaster.

Sean Hannity had perhaps the most tortured role of all as he attempted to reason that if we hadn't overthrown Saddam, the London attack would have been worse.

Hannity: Isn't this the fact, though, General... that what we witnessed here was pure evil, what we saw on 9/11 was pure evil and doesn't (sic) events like this actually prove that the president is actually right inasmuch as we knew Saddam used chemical weapons and biological weapons against his own people? We knew he wouldn't abide by the cease fire agreement or the UN resolutions. The French told us he had 'em, John Kerry told us he had these weapons. And Bill Clinton did - that we can't take a chance that those weapons with people like him get in the hands of people that commit acts like today?

See, you silly proles? Saddam could have given the chemical and biological weapons he didn't have to the London attackers! Get with the program!

One wonders how Hannity can get through an entire show with his head up his ass.

The Fox clown show continued all day, with Brit Hume musing about the lush pickings on the futures market courtesy of those unfortunate dead British civilians, John Gibson expressing his sadness that it wasn't Paris that had been hit, and Brian Kilmeade dribbling through his asshole that the attacks "work to the Western world's advantage". Aren't these dead civilians great? You can pick up some extra cash for ciggies and beer and gloat that their deaths work to our advantage. Fox loves these terrorist acts, and are apparently hopeful that Bush and Blair can continue to expose our citizens to danger through their utterly failed policies.

The biggest Fox lunatic yesterday, by far, was their deranged "military analyst" David Hunt, who had these gems on the O'Reilly Factor:

HUNT: ...Three: Money. There's too much money in the Muslim world that's unaccounted for that's goin' to terrorist funding. This operation in London took six months to a year, thousands of dollars, passports, logistic cells and you have to get at that money. [What] I mean by that is - the Bank of Saudi Arabia, the Bank of Yemen. If you've got money, we're taking it and redistributing it. I'm talkin' about Biblical Justice to stop this. We've got to get people's attention ...

O'REILLY (overtalks): Let's - let's - let's take the money. What - you can't force banks in the Arab world to tell you where their money ...

HUNT: No.

O'REILLY: ... is going, can you?

HUNT: No, but I can get inside their bank - and people listening in the business know this. You can get inside a bank's computer - hit "send" and take it. I'm tellin' you - you asked what to do. You get at this money...

HUNT: And a lot of this money is getting to the terrorist organizations. I'm just - this is aggressive. Nobody's gonna like it, but it would definitely get their attention.

HUNT: We have to go after countries, Bill, that have - that are harboring these people, not war with them, but deal with them very, very aggressively.

O'REILLY: Well, ya' got ....

HUNT: Biblical justice.

This insane babble is what passes for commentary on Fox.

So, in a single day, in the face of the butcher's bill our leaders handed us, Fox gave us the full menu of GOP "morality": profiteering, French-bashing, lies about Iraq's nonexistent arsenal, playing a tragedy to political advantage and biblical justice. How exhausted they must have been at the end of the day!

So, a big Friday fuck you to the shameless whores at Fox "News".

What's Next? Beware.

2005-07-07T06:58:00.000-07:00

Despite the curious fact that early reports indicate that an Al Qaeda group no Western intelligence agency has heard of has claimed responsibility (the kind of thing that makes you go...hmmmmm) it's still too soon to determine exactly who was responsible for today's London bombings. Of one detail, however, you can be sure: we'll be affected in the United States.

Bush has already gloried in the spotlight today, strutting and marching to the microphones to tell the assembled press, "I was most impressed by the resolve of all the leaders in the room. Their resolve is as strong as my resolve."

As usual, it's all about him.

No mention, of course, of the "we're fighting them there so they won't fight us here" rhetoric. I suppose we can scratch that new reason for the war in Iraq.

The timing of this attack happens to coincide with the newly-emerging Rove scandal, public support for the war and for Bush plummeting, the public dismissal of his little war chat at Ft. Bragg, and the latest Halliburton outrage. Bush's political handlers must be breathing a sigh of relief to get the public focus back on terra, terra, terra.

How Bush will react here is the concern. On Tuesday's Hardball, former Bush speechwriter David Frum - still an insider in this administration - made a number of statements with an odd emphasis that caught my attention.

FRUM: I'm sure he would love to be the—to appoint the first Hispanic Supreme Court justice. But I think it's really quite unlikely that he would choose Gonzales, and not for the reasons that people have been talking about earlier, but for this point.

One of the things that this administration has been very concerned about, especially since 9/11, is restoring executive power, that they see the executive powers worn away in the 1970s and '80s, and they want to bring it back. And that's going to come up in a lot of war issues.

...MITCHELL: David Frum, are there other issues that are more important to conservatives than Roe?

FRUM: ... So, there are property rights issues. There are the same-sex marriage issues. And there are going to be all of these war powers issues that are going to be very important, especially to the president.

MITCHELL: During a period of war and the war on terror.

...FRUM: I think it is a serious point and not just a neat one.

The president—the war on terror threw up, has created a lot of unprecedented legal questions. And we've had a lot of them come before the court. How do you treat these detainees? What if they're an American citizen? What if they're an American citizen captured on a foreign battlefield? And those have been—I think, if you were to look back over the last four years and say, inside the White House, what were the decisions they were most unhappy about, that affect the—made it most difficult for them to do their job, it was those kinds of decisions. And that also is going to be very much on the president's mind

These comments make one curious if the upcoming Supreme Court nomination will have anything at all to do with Roe, or if that will be a mere diversion. It looks more likely that Bush is going to appoint someone who will swing the court to allow for a very broad expansion of Bush's "war powers". This should concern us all.

How Bush responds to this London attack, therefore, will be instructive. Rather than doing the sensible thing - which to date he hasn't done, namely, spending money on security for our own transportation systems rather than handing the treasury over to Halliburton and spending $300 billion dollars in Iraq - Bush may well indeed use the attack to stoke fear in this country and attempt to push through an even more draconian version of Patriot Act II. We know - boy, do we know! - that he'll use any tragedy for political gain and expanded executive powers, and in the days to come the administration response will have to be watched carefully.

The Empty Shell

2005-07-06T07:58:00.000-07:00

I've written before about Cindy Sheehan, the Vacaville, CA woman whose son was killed in Iraq in 2004.

Since his death, she's taken on an activist role against the war and has begun an organization called Gold Star Families for Peace. She's made extensive media appearances, and was featured in the Congressional forum on the Downing Street Minutes. She recently appeared on Democracy Now and told a horrific story about her meeting with George Bush - the sort of "meet the widders and mourn with them" PR stunt that he often brags about in his speeches when he's unsuccessfully attempting to convey empathy for the families of the soldiers whose lives he so recklessly ended.

She recently did a print interview about this meeting, and it exposes the empty shell of a wrecked soul that our "war president" really is.

So when Sheehan received an invitation to meet privately with President Bush at the White House two months after her son died, the least she could have expected was a bit of compassion or a kind word coming from the heart.

But what she encountered was an arrogant man with eyes lacking the slightest bit of compassion, a President totally "detached from humanity" and a man who didn’t even bother to remember her son’s name when they were first introduced.

Instead of a kind gesture or a warm handshake, Sheehan said she immediately got a taste of Bush arrogance when he entered the room and "in a condescending tone and with a disgusting loud Texas accent," said: "Who we’all honorin’ here today?"

"His mouth kept moving, but there was nothing in his eyes or anything else about him that showed me he really cared or had any real compassion at all. This is a human being totally disconnected from humanity and reality. His eyes were empty, hollow shells and he was acting like I should be proud to just be in his presence when it was my son who died for his illegal war! It was one of the most disgusting experiences I ever had and it took me almost a year to even talk about it," said Sheehan in a telephone conversation from Washington D.C. where she was attending a July 4th anti-war rally.

Sheehan said the June 2004 private meeting with the President went from bad to worse to a nightmare when Bush acted like he didn’t even want to know her name. She said Bush kept referring to her as ‘Ma’ or ‘Mom’ while he "put on a phony act," saying things like ‘Mom, I can’t even imagine losing a loved one, a mother or a father or a sister or a brother.’

"The whole meeting was simply bizarre and disgusting, designed to intimidate instead of providing compassion. He didn’t even know our names," said Sheehan. "Finally I got so upset I just looked him in the eye, saying ‘I think you can imagine losing someone. You have two daughters. Imagine losing them?’ After I said that he just looked at me, looked at me with no feeling or caring in his eyes at all."

Sheehan said what really upset her about the meeting is that Bush appeared to become annoyed and even angry at her daughter Carley, 25, who also attended the White House get-together.

"My daughter said to him directly ‘I wish I could bring my loved one back’ and he said something like ‘so do we.’ Later she told me that after he made his remark he gave her one of the filthiest looks she had ever had gotten in her life.

"I just couldn’t believe this was happening. It was so surreal and bizarre. Later I met with some of the other 15 or 16 families who were at the White House the same day and, sure enough, they all felt the same way I did.

"It’s interesting that they put us each in separate rooms. I heard this was done to prevent any type of group outburst and since it’s easier to control a situation when people are separated. Looking back, all I can say is that the meeting with Bush was one of the most disgusting experiences in my life. "

I saw Sheehan on Hardball a couple of weeks ago. She appeared immediately after a segment with former Bush speechwriter David Frum, who had enraged me when he implied that anti-war protesters were "crazy". Before Sheehan began her interview, she took Frum down for his comment in a perfectly devastating manner. I was so impressed I wrote to her organization thanking her for the interview and for correcting Frum's shockingly un-American neocon spin. I was surprised when, a couple of days later, I got an email back from an AOL account I wasn't familiar with - it was Sheehan herself thanking me for my support and urging me to continue this fight against the war. Very classy. She travels the country speaking out against this war, and any money you can contribute to GSFP keeps her in the fight. Please help if you can.

When You Lie Down With Dogs...

2005-07-05T07:46:00.000-07:00

A real gem today from the Washington Post:

LONDON, July 4 -- President Bush told British Prime Minister Tony Blair to expect no favors at this week's Group of Eight summit of major industrialized countries in return for backing the war in Iraq.

... "I really don't view our relationship as one of quid pro quo," Bush told Britain's ITV1 television in an interview. "Tony Blair made decisions on what he thought was best for keeping the peace and winning the war on terror, as I did."

The poodle Blair is now officially used Kleenex to our warlord. It's bad enough that Bush expressed this sentiment privately to Blair, but then to trumpet his smackdown in a program televised in Blair's own country - a deliberate tactic - illustrates what a complete and utter failure Bush is in the realm of foreign policy. If Rice encouraged this, she's as incompetent as he is.

This public humiliation and repudiation of Blair may seem, to those of us who detest his participation in the Iraq war, a satisfying event. The larger issue of the damage our untrustworthy president does to our reputation in the world, however, remains.

As an aside, note the Orwellian language: starting a war of aggression is now "keeping the peace". It's enough to make your head explode.

Independence Day Thoughts (letter from a red state)

2005-07-02T09:11:00.000-07:00

Living in California, being a Democrat is a natural condition and one that doesn't embroil you, particularly, in a lot of heated political debate other than the circumstance of Dianne Feinstein's husband being a war profiteer and questioning why in Christ's name this woman even calls herself a Democrat. You hear that a lot among California liberals.

Republicans are so rare in San Francisco that when a real estate office on 24th and Noe started displaying Bush propaganda in their front window, passers-by would roll their eyes or laugh at the freaks from outer space. The little cowboy boots in their window were funny, aren't these zany people just precious? Arent we tolerant for allowing this trash to live amongst us without breaking their FUCKING WINDOW AND BURNING THE JOINT TO THE GROUND?

Ah, for the days when Republicans were as sparse as Tom DeLay's ethics. Since I moved to one of the reddest of the red states two years ago, I find myself now in the position of freak from outer space and boy, at times it ain't pretty. But with challenge often comes reward, if you're not adverse to looking for such diamonds in the shit mine.

Here, being a Democrat involves more than throwing cash to the DNC and casting your futile ballot for John Kerry. It involves being forced to examine and re-examine your political beliefs, and to be prepared to defend them. It means being able to state, succinctly and without hysteria, why you oppose George Bush, his policies, and his war. If you can do so, people will listen - and think.

What I've gained most from being here is that I no longer take being a Democrat for granted. It's a precious legacy that I love and nurture. I have to, to survive being surrounded by the Party of Christ and their followers. And the small victories mean something here, even if it's having steadily increasing numbers of people ask you about your anti-war button while you're out running errands and finding that these former war supporters now agree with you. You can't see the tide turning in Bush's America from the coasts, and you can't contribute much to the effort from behind a blue-state fortress.

Living here has radicalized me far more than living in San Francisco ever did. Here I see first-hand how the vicious and decidedly un-Christian policies of our Republican ubermeisters steal from the poor to give tax cuts to the rich. I've seen how the religious right infiltrates our institutions, forcing sham debates on evolution and pushing anti-gay initiatives using hateful invective on our citizens. It's one thing to chuckle over Republican outrages from a coffeehouse on Market Street, and quite another to live under their terrible governance and Holy Roller-style gassy condemnation.

This Indepedendence Day represents a turning point in our country, as we sit on the brink of a true one-party dictatorship with the final piece of the Republican puzzle falling into place as they take over the Supreme Court, leaving them with total control of all three branches of government. If you value your independence to be a Democrat or a Green or a Socialist or even nothing at all get involved. Contact your senators, regardless of their party, and demand a centrist Supreme Court. Let them know that the voters will hold them accountable if they allow the extremist wing of the Republican party to take over what should be an impartial judiciary - and what's more, they'll pay at the polls if they support a nuclear option for this nominee.

If we don't act now, we'll all be living under red state rules - and I can guarantee, from first hand experience, this isn't something you'd find attractive. Now go celebrate your independence and make your voices heard.

It's Fuck You Friday

2005-07-01T09:26:00.000-07:00

To the people who didn't vote in the presidential election last year: fuck you.

The announcement today of Justice O'Connors retirement is a disaster, a fucking disaster. Bush will have not one but two Supreme Court nominations to make, and O'Connor has long been the swing vote on the court that has protected Roe v. Wade and has acted as a buffer to the extremism of the hard right conservative justices.

You lazy fucking assholes who didn't bother to vote, get ready for a Supreme Court filled with Scalia-type crackpots who will rule against your rights. Look for bible-thumping "morality" to become the law of the land. Enjoy your new Southern Baptist overlords, because they'll have a tremendous influence in your lives and how you're allowed to live them.

This is a fight that we can't win. The Republicans will do what they always do - change the rules to suit their needs - and Frist will push the nuclear button for this nomination. We're fucked.

Prime Time Bigotry

2005-06-30T08:03:00.000-07:00

Today's New York Times reports that ABC has dropped from its schedule a racist, repulsive bit of summer programming in which white Christian families either accept or reject minorities wishing to live in their neighborhood.

Under pressure from civil rights groups, ABC Television yesterday canceled plans to broadcast a reality show that let the white suburban families living on a Texas cul-de-sac decide which of seven families - including one black, one Asian, one Hispanic and one gay couple - would move into their community.

The show, "Welcome to the Neighborhood," was to be a summer replacement for the top-rated "Desperate Housewives," which is set on a fictional cul-de-sac, Wisteria Lane, where no one can keep her nose out of anyone else's business.

The one-hour reality show, developed by MGM and the producers behind such shows as "Extreme Makeover" and "The Road to Stardom With Missy Elliot," was to have begun a six-episode run on July 10 at 9 p.m.

...In the shows - all of them have been completed - seven diverse families seek votes from three white families in a development called Circle C Ranch, outside Austin. The white families, through a series of interviews, competitions and social interactions, award a 3,300-square-foot, four-bedroom, 2½-bathroom home to the winner - a neighbor, the families say, who will fit in with the community's mostly Christian and Republican values.

Critics of "Welcome to the Neighborhood," which ABC had promoted heavily, said it violated the letter and certainly the spirit of fair housing laws by allowing factors like religion to be a consideration in awarding the house

...In the first two episodes, some members of the voting families are seen making disparaging remarks about the gay family (two white men with a black child), questioning whether a Korean family was foreign-born and rejecting a white family who practiced Wicca, a pagan religion. One family was to be rejected each week until the last remaining family won the house.

Are we surprised that a network would actually think that such racist trash would have a wide appeal in this country? After all, it reinforces our current White Man's Burden Crusade in Iraq by empowering white Christians to deem who is "acceptable" and who is to be rejected.

Despite the obvious appeal of this show to our corporate warlords, making minorities beg whites for the dubious privilege of living in their suburban neighborhoods is revolting. It also give a free pass to the bigotry of the Christian right by legitimizing their many hatreds. Hey, if they get to star in an ABC series, gay bashing might just be the ticket out of the trailer park, eh? What's next, the Fred Phelps comedy hour?

This repulsive bit of prime time Plantation Massah programming should never have received consideration from the executives at ABC, much less be filmed and ready in the can for the summer schedule.

This media frenzy to push the Christian Right on the rest of the country is sickening to the core. MSNBC's Hardball this week has been on the "Hardball Church Tour", a frightening trip through extremist America which they present as the norm. ABC News last week broadcast the entire newscast from a Billy Graham revival. The History Channel now turns over huge chunks of their programming to the history of Christianity. Why this sudden influx of religion in network and cable broadcasting? The corporate media knows that the key to their Republican puppets staying in power lies in the Christian Right, so they pander to their hatreds and inflate their numbers hoping to gain more adherents for "the base".

Memo to MSNBC: If I wanted to take a "church tour", I'd fucking GO to one, and not sit on my ass and flip on MSNBC!

The Road to Hell

2005-06-29T06:57:00.000-07:00

I had made a promise to myself not to watch the PR stunt masquerading as a "major address" last evening. Seeing the little coward surrounding himself with troops in another feeble attempt at transference - troops brave, Bush brave - was beyond my limited endurance. I knew the mixture of lies and chimp-like grimaces and leers from this troglodyte would affect me like food poisoning: nausea, a swooning headache, elevated blood pressure. Besides, the Orioles were in a close game with the Yankees and the outcome of that game was far less predictable than the one Bush would play (the Orioles won in the 10th inning).

For some odd reason, despite every fiber of my being telling me not to do it, I flipped to CBS between innings and watched the beginning of the end of the miserable Bush presidency. If the public doesn't support the current policy, a stubborn adherence to it isn't going to fly - but that's exactly what Bush did.

I tried to overlook the broad range of monkey-like expressions, but I was as usual appalled by his strange sociopathic leering grins at completely inappropriate moments in the text, which always makes me think that he has no emotional connection whatsoever to the words he's been given to say. This half-grin, half-sneer generally makes an appearance when he speaks of death and mayhem, so perhaps he does indeed have an emotional connection to the text and his reaction is reflective of some kind of snuff kink. Whatever.

The speech, as expected, was little more than a restating of the Rumsfeld-Cheney policies that have led us to this disaster, coupled with a large dose of the standard lies and more 9/11 grave dancing. The repeated 9/11 references - he cited the attacks five times in a thirty minute speech - instantly made clear why Rove told his Hitler-like Big Lie last week about the liberal response to September 11th: in a desperate "last throes" attempt to rally public support, the administration will again confuse and mislead the public, tie 9/11 and Iraq together in one neat package, and anyone foolish enough to criticize their failed adventure in Iraq will be labeled "soft" on the September 11th terrorists. Rove set the table, and Bush served the shit to the American people. The mendacity is breathtaking.

His latest justification in the revolving door of reasons for this war - "freedom", a word that he used 21 times in the speech - pales next to the slaughter of Iraqi civilians, to our leveling of Fallujah, and to the perverse policies that brought us the national humiliation of Abu Gharib. God forbid Bush brings us this form of "freedom". I wondered what the typical Saudi citizen, one living under the brutality of the Saudi dictatorship that Bush supports, thought about his pathetic bleating about freedom and democracy.

Given that there was not a single new policy in this drivel, one wonders why he put the taxpayers again through enormous expense by taking this crap on the road. Presidents who don't suffer from megalomania have, in the past, delivered an address of this nature from the Oval Office. This isn't good enough for our deranged president, who's addicted to spending our tax dollars for his own self-aggrandizing needs. No, he jets off to North Carolina on his 747, disrupts all of Fayetteville, spends a small fortune on the security necessary for this jaunt so he can have a feel-good moment with an audience guaranteed not to heckle him, since they're under orders not to do so. It's all theatrics, all spin, all lies to try to sell a policy that the American public is no longer buying, tied up in simpering tones that to not support his vicious war policies is to give a free pass to the 9/11 terrorists.

I suppose we should be grateful that he didn't play military dress-up last night and we were spared the stomach-churning atrocity of his mama's-boy Army jacket with "George W. Bush Commander in Chief" embroidered in italics over the breast pocket. Then again, it can be an amusing distraction to watch him talk tough while looking so fey in that fucking jacket, and a distraction last night was sorely needed.

It's unsettling to have the country in the hands of a madman. I should have stayed with the Orioles game.

California National Guard Spying on Mothers of Dead Soldiers

2005-06-28T07:32:00.000-07:00

I thought we were at war with "terrorists", and not with parents who have lost children in Iraq?

A stomach-churning story today from the San Jose Mercury News:

SACRAMENTO - Three decades after aggressive military spying on Americans created a national furor, California's National Guard has quietly set up a special intelligence unit that has been given ''broad authority'' to monitor, analyze and distribute information on potential terrorist threats, the Mercury News has learned.

Known as the Information Synchronization, Knowledge Management and Intelligence Fusion program, the project is part of an expanding nationwide effort to better integrate military intelligence into global anti-terrorism initiatives.

Although Guard officials said the new unit would not collect information on American citizens, top National Guard officials have already been involved in tracking at least one recent Mother's Day anti-war rally organized by families of slain American soldiers, according to e-mails obtained by the Mercury News.

...Creation of California's intelligence unit is already raising concerns for civil libertarians who point to a string of abuses in the 1960s and 1970s when the military collected information on more than 100,000 Americans, infiltrated church youth groups, posed as reporters to interview activists, monitored peaceful protests and even attended an elementary school Halloween party in search of a ''dissident.''

...Last month, a group of anti-war activists, including the parents of American soldiers killed in Iraq, held a small Mother's Day rally at the Vietnam Veteran's Memorial near the California Capitol to call for the return of all National Guard troops by Labor Day.

Three days before the rally, as a courtesy to the military, an aide in Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's press office alerted the Guard to the event, according to e-mails obtained by the Mercury News.

...But he said the military would be ''negligent'' in not tracking such anti-war rallies in the event that they disintegrate into a riot that could prompt the governor to call out troops.

''It's nothing subversive,'' said Zezotarksi. ''Because who knows who could infiltrate that type of group and try to stir something up? After all, we live in the age of terrorism, so who knows?''

Isn't that breezy? Hey, we're in an endless age of terrorism, so "who knows?" what we'll find with our spying. The idea that a group of 36 people would turn into a "riot" that would require quelling by the Guard is beyond ridiculous. The notion that mothers of dead soldiers - and having a child killed in Iraq is a prerequisite for joining their group - would allow without question some terrorist type to infiltrate their group and do all kinds of Dirty Deeds is just fucking bullshit, an utter lie to allow them to harass this group.

The only individuals we need to worry about "infiltrating" anti-war groups are FBI thugs - a common tactic used by the FBI during the Vietnam war. So will the California National Guard now spy on FBI infiltrators?

Why is our government so scared of Cindy Sheehan, a mother from Vacaville whose son was killed in Iraq? Is it because she is openly and courageously speaking out against the lies that preceded this war?

Californians should rise up against this misuse of their National Guard. Perhaps they should contact the governor...oh, wait.

Wars on Many Fronts

2005-06-27T09:11:00.000-07:00

Republicans are continuing the War on the Poor they declared twenty five years ago upon the inauguration of Ronald Reagan, was was humped to electoral victory on the backs of his mythical "welfare queens" by, contrarily, a large block of poor white voters who believe that poverty is only an unacceptable condition for blacks.

Aside from the curious dynamics of the white underclass in this country, one wonders why self-satisfied Republican millionaires spend so much time planning strategies that do so much damage to the least advantaged in our society. I can only conclude that their hostility stems from the consumer society they've created, with its focus on targeted demographics, a debased culture, marketing surveys, saturation advertising and other such methods to convince us that we indeed must have their various knick-knacks and gee-gaws and juicers that sit unused in our kitchens for decades. If we don't buy their crap, our value to our Republican overlords plummets. And that's the key to understanding the latest War on the Poor launched by the Bush administration: the producers feel free to eliminate those who don't consume in our society, and elimination is, indeed, the correct word.

The Washington Post reports the latest attempt to spray Raid on the poor:

PHILADELPHIA -- A Bush administration proposal to eliminate many of the federal rules requiring public housing authorities to serve extremely low-income people has generated widespread concern among housing advocates who say the change could prove ruinous for the nation's poorest families.

The plan, which is pending in Congress, would allow local housing authorities to charge higher rents, provide lower subsidies, and limit the amount of time tenants can remain in federally subsidized housing to as little as five years. Taken together, the changes would amount to one of the most dramatic policy shifts in the 68-year history of public housing.

Bush administration officials say the proposal suits the president's vision of promoting self-sufficiency and encouraging home ownership. But advocates and local housing officials worry that the changes will result in a reduction in an already inadequate supply of housing affordable to people mired in deep poverty.

Encourage home ownership, eh? As you continue to read the story, you discover just who George Bush expects to go out and purchase a home in today's inflated market:

Perhaps the toughest obstacle officials here confront is the stubborn pervasiveness of deep poverty. Nearly half of the families receiving public housing aid in Philadelphia have incomes under $8,000 a year. And only a fifth reported annual incomes above $20,000, according to the authority

So what happens when these families earning under eight grand a year are turned down for a mortgage? We all know the answer:

''The changes would harm households with the most severe affordable-housing needs," said Douglas Rice, director of housing and community development for Catholic Charities USA. ''The shortage of affordable housing is one of the primary causes of homelessness, and extremely low-income households are most at risk of becoming homeless."

Once this severely impoverished population is homeless, the real damage begins. Most studies estimate that the death rate for homeless men is, depending on the city, anywhere from three to six times the death rate for the general population. The Canadian Medical Association Journal recently reported the results of a study which concluded that homeless women in Toronto between the ages of 18-44 have a mortality rate ten times that of women of the same age in the general population.

One might argue that the funding for subsidized housing is being drained, as so many services in this country are, by the needless flow of money going to Halliburton and other war profiteers. The guns instead of butter argument would of course be correct. But what this proposal really represents is a genocidal policy that the Republicans - and Democrats such as Bill Clinton - have been advocating for years, to wit: they push non-consumers to consume (welfare reform), and if that doesn't work, they simply leave them on the streets to die.

And this is what they consider "compassion".

Activist Update

2005-06-26T06:08:00.000-07:00

The Louisiana Activist Network - the same creative folks who organized the Jazz Funeral for Democracy in New Orleans - has put together a Peace Train to take activists from throughout the South to Washington for the September 24th anti-war demo. One-way tickets on Amtrak from NO to DC are a little over a hundred bucks.

Here's the schedule -

Thursday, September 22, 2005

7:20 AM New Orleans, LA

8:16 AM Slidell, LA

8:38 AM Picayune, MS

9:43 AM Hattiesburg, MS

10:17 AM Laurel, MS

11:17 AM Meridian, MS

12:51 PM Tuscaloosa, AL

2:31 PM Birmingham, AL

4:04 PM Anniston, AL

7:40 PM Atlanta, GA

9:03 PM Gainsville, GA

9:44 PM Toccoa, GA

10:20 PM Clemson, SC

10:57 PM Greenville, SC

11:43 PM Spartanburg, SC

Friday, September 23, 2005

12:43 AM Gastonia, NC

1:25 AM Charlotte, NC

2:36 AM Salisbury, NC

3:17 AM High Point, NC

3:35 AM Winston-Salem, NC

3:42 AM Greensboro, NC

4:44 AM Danville, VA

5:54 AM Lynchberg, VA

7:07 AM Charlottesville, VA

7:59 AM Culpeper, VA

8:33 AM Manassas, VA

9:27 AM Alexandria, VA

9:50 AM Washington, DC

To join the Peace Train, you can hook up with LAN here.

Lies, Lies, Lies

2005-06-25T08:47:00.000-07:00

This administration is fundamentally incapable of telling the American people the truth, no matter the subject. Their contempt for the truth always intersects with their contempt for the public.

The latest whopper surrounds the emergency medical treatment Cheney received in Vail, Colorado last evening. The AP reports the White House lie:

VAIL, Colo. (AP) -- Vice President Dick Cheney visited a renowned orthopedist Friday while in town for a forum held by a conservative think tank, his spokeswoman said.

Cheney met with Dr. Richard Steadman to evaluate an old football injury to his knee, Cheney spokeswoman Lea Anne McBride said.

Steadman focuses primarily on sports medicine, and his Steadman Hawkins Clinic has treated a number of famous athletes. In 2003, Los Angeles Lakers player Kobe Bryant was in Vail for knee surgery at the clinic when he was accused of raping a hotel worker.

Cheney was scheduled to attend the American Enterprise Institute World Forum, which was started in 1982 by former President Gerald Ford

Nice story, but it's a lie.

Cheney must be shitting his pants that Arianna Huffington happened to be in Vail last evening as well, and upon hearing that he'd been taken to an area hospital she immediately set to work investigating the circumstances of his illness.

I just landed at Vail airport, right next to the Vice President’s Gulfstream jet (actually, there were two Vice Presidential planes, not one... how much of an entourage does one VP need?). He’s here to speak at the World Forum at Beaver Creek, sponsored by the American Enterprise Institute, and held, of course, behind closed doors. The guy sent to pick me up by the Vail Valley Institute (where I’m speaking) told me that he had seen the VP’s motorcade speed towards the local hospital. Being an intrepid HuffPost reporter, I asked him to take me straight there. Upon our arrival, we encountered a high level of security -- and a lot of zipped lips: “We cannot tell you anything,” “No comment,” “That information is not available...” But one hospital staffer, obviously not schooled in the secretive ways of Cheney, let it slip: “He’s no longer here”. And since you cannot “no longer” be someplace you’ve never been, we can deduce -- though not confirm -- that Cheney did, in fact, pay a visit to the local hospital. The reason? Over to you AP...

UPDATE: Cheney’s Health: What is the White House Hiding?

VAIL -- Why is the White House still insisting that the only health issue Vice President Cheney dealt with today is an old football injury to his knee, visiting renowned orthopedist Dr. Richard Steadman? At the Vail Valley Institute dinner tonight, I kept asking what those in the know here knew. Little by little, here is the story I pieced together: After the Secret Service secured the Vail Valley Medical Center, including the parking lot, the Vice President arrived under his own power and checked in at the orthopedic center under the name “Dr. Hoffman”. He was immediately whisked to the adjacent cardiac unit, suffering from what was described to me as “an angina attack”. The security was so high that a Secret Service agent wouldn’t let an ER nurse out of the bathroom that she had gone into just before the Veep arrived. “Get back in there,” the agent told her. Confounded, she called her husband on her cell phone, telling him “something big” was going on. And indeed it was… but you wouldn’t know it from the White House. It appears that not only doesn’t the public deserve to know what is really going on in Iraq (“last throes”?) we don’t deserve to know what is going on with our Vice President’s health.

When does the lying end with these thugs? Do they even care that there's a growing credibility gap in this administration, and such an obvious lie about Cheney's condition last night is something that the public, perhaps unable to immediately grasp the lies surrounding the war, can easily grasp and be deeply offended by?

Paging "Dr. Hoffman" - tell the fucking truth for a change. Respect the American people.

It's Fuck You Friday

2005-06-24T13:25:00.000-07:00

Susan Estrich: Fuck you.

As Dukakis campaign manager, Estrich was beaten, bullied and left for dead by George H.W. Bush in 1988, running one of the most weak-kneed and incompetent campaigns in modern history. Apparently having an El Camino rammed up your ass once isn't enough; Estrich now pretends to be a token "liberal" on Fox news, and to keep from again being beaten, bullied and left for dead she simply agrees with her conservative taskmasters and spouts their talking points. Hey, it's a paycheck.

She recently published an op-ed piece that lauds Fox news and defends Fox against charges of bias leveled at the network. Media Matters does an excellent job debunking her desperate puff piece.

I am tired to the bone of someone like Estrich claiming to be a liberal in order to earn cash, and who then betrays the very liberalism she claims to espouse by embracing the nightmare that is Fox. Liberals, real liberals, utterly reject state propaganda used to lull the masses into accepting wars of aggression, corporate greed and corruption, and the wholesale rolling back of civil rights, human rights, women's rights, gay rights, and every other bit of progress over the last century that the Neanderthals at Fox are determined to crush with the full assistance of greedy whores like Estrich.

Yet she's able to breezily write, between grunts to pass the El Camino, "I'm the blonde on the left, figuratively and literally - the one who's usually smiling because it's TV..."

Sick. I find her so abhorrent I'll say it again: Fuck you, Estrich.

Bush Forces White House Color Guard to Break the Law

2005-06-23T23:10:00.000-07:00

Bush is intent on forcing new flag desecration laws down the throats of the proles, but it appears he's breaking a law regarding the handling of the American flag that's already on the books.

The White House color guard has a strange new ritual that takes place when Bush receives a foreign visitor, and I first noticed it during Blair's visit last week. It's bizarre and gives off creepy Richard Nixon vibes, and it's also apparently illegal.

During Blair's visit, the White House color guard stood in single file, four on each side, against the walls of a corridor that Bush and Blair passed to reach their podium setups. As they passed by, the military color guard dipped their flags, giving off not only a wave effect but adding an unseemly regal touch, as though bowing down before a monarch. I'd never seen anything like it, but this week it happened again, I believe during the visit of representatives from Portugal and Luxembourg.

The whole thing seems like another method to make Bush appear like a demigod or a king, and I decided to do some checking on this new grand entrance. I know he's violated much weightier laws and this one is but a drop of rain in the ocean, but here it is:

4 U.S. Code Chapter 1, Sec. 8.: Respect for flag - "No disrespect should be shown to the flag of the United States of America; the flag should not be dipped to any person or thing."

It's difficult to find footage online of this illegal ritual, as most of the U.S. media begins their coverage of the Blair visit with Bush and his poodle stepping up to the podiums, but BBC has a brief opening shot that shows the flags returning to their upright position after being dipped. I also wondered who might be brain dead enough to actually be impressed by this pompous, pretentious act and the answer came as if in a dream: Fox News viewers.

A quick check of the FNC site has a nice clip of the tail end of the illegal flag-dipping while EU representatives visited the White House.

Isn't this something? They want to bully us about the proper use of the flag, yet Bush is openly breaking a law designed to protect the flag. The arrogance is deplorable. This dipping of the American flag to a president (and, I might add, to foreign dignitaries - shocking) shows the depth of Bush's megalomania.

When the flag burning debate reaches the United States Senate, remind Harry Reid that Bush needs to follow the current laws regarding handling of the United States flag before new laws should be considered.

Cry Me a River

2005-06-23T07:00:00.000-07:00

I like Richard Durbin. He's a good guy with a progressive record, having voted against the Iraq War Resolution a month before his next election date in Illinois - rare courage for a politician - and he voted against the confirmation of Gonzales and Rice. He's been good on the Judiciary Committee exposing the extremism of Bush's judicial nominees. As minority whip in the Senate, he performed admirably in keeping the Democrats together to stop the Bolton nomination. Yeah, he's a good guy and a good liberal and I hate to join the piling on of him but JESUS FUCKING CHRIST.

His initial remarks in the Senate were, on the whole, true. Durbin had read an excerpt from an FBI report that described prisoners being chained on the ground in extreme temperatures without access to water or food (kind of makes you proud to be an American, doesn't it?) for extended periods of time. After quoting from the report, Durbin said something that created one of the most faux displays of outrage yet among conservatives who continually defend our barbarism in the handling of detainees around the world: "If I read this to you and did not tell you that it was an FBI agent describing what Americans had done to prisoners in their control, you would most certainly believe this must have been done by Nazis, Soviets in their gulags or some mad regime — Pol Pot or others — that had no concern for human beings." Note that Durbin did not claim in these remarks that all atrocities are equal, simply that what he had just read reflected other forms of government-sponsored torture performed by regimes with no regard for human life. Bingo. The entire thrust of this comment had nothing to do with individual soldiers but with our government that set as official policy brutal, inhumane and un-American torture techniques of prisoners who are being held without charges for years, quite possibly for life.

The firestorm that followed was, of course, utterly predictable. Given that Durbin's remarks were made in the same week as the congressional forum on the Downing Street Minutes, the right wing created a false distraction, full of sound and fury and signifying nothing (sort of like their favorite old chestnut, flag burning). In this they were obediently aided the corporate media, who howled for Durbin's head and ran hours and hours of commentary on this nonstory while continuing to ignore the Downing Street Minutes.

Despite the demons from hell grabbing at his coattails, for a while Durbin held firm. The next day, he issued a statement that read, "This administration should apologize to the American people for abandoning the Geneva Conventions and authorizing torture techniques that put our troops at risk and make Americans less secure." Exactly right. Then the bottom dropped out for Durbin.

The Anti-Defamation League, despite being silent on Senator Rick Santorum's recent comparison of Democrats to Adolf Hitler, publicly took Durbin to task and demanded Durbin apologize for "... distorting an important issue, with an inappropriate comparison to Nazi tactics. " The big blow, however, came from Chicago mayor, political boss and all-around jackass Richard Daley, who told the media "I think it's a disgrace to say that any man or woman in the military would act like that," despite the fact that there is not only ample evidence to prove otherwise but multiple court-martials of men and women in our military for acting "like that". Endgame for Durbin. He had to back down, not from right-wing nutjob pressure but from the pressure from within that loves to eat their own. Fine. I get it. Get it over with, Dick, and move on.

I figured Durbin would make a brief mea culpa on the Senate floor, followed perhaps by a clarification of his original point similar to what he had provided in his statement issued the day after his remarks. What I did not expect, as I saw him appear on CSPAN, was his complete and utter self-immolation on live television. Durbin not only apologized but collapsed on the carpet with his legs sprawled to the sky so Bill Frist could take a surgical knife to his genitals and castrate him on-air. Yes, it was that bad.

He cried. His voice broke. He stared pleadingly and imploringly into the CSPAN camera and begged. He looked like a puppy crying not to be kicked. It was mortifying for him personally, but what's more it was mortifying for Democrats who are right on this issue and saw this debacle unfold live and knew, with a sick feeling in the pit of our stomachs, that human rights advocacy would forever be tied in the media with the tearful visage of Dick Durbin begging for forgiveness. And the media, of course, was quick to attach his face to the issue without questioning whether he was, in truth, right on his facts from the beginning. The video clip of Durbin unspooled immediately all over cable and network news, and we should not be surprised that MSNBC aired a shameful promo in which Durbin's tearful apology was placed next to that of Jimmy Swaggert.

So, another huge whipped-up frenzy, all done with a straight face while our government not only condones but orders human rights abuses all over the world. The policy remains unquestioned and unexamined, while Dick Durbin's humiliation is now public fodder and will no doubt remain so for years.

So, to a good and decent man, a true progressive, an outstanding United States Senator, I say...JESUS FUCKING CHRIST. Make a short statement, put this behind you, but to fucking TAKE DOWN THIS ISSUE with your deplorable mewling is FUCKED UP.

On a side note: Yesterday would have been the 100th birthday of French philosopher Jean Paul Sartre. His novel The Age of Reason directly applies to our lives in the current state of Bush oppression in which we find ourselves. It's less than five bucks in paperback. Read it.

Buyer's Remorse in California

2005-06-22T08:13:00.000-07:00

The sorry saga of Arnold Schwarzenegger's reign of stupidity in California will mercifully conclude when he's defeated in his bid for reelection next year, and we can only hope that his departure will signal the end of California's unseemly habit of electing half-wit actors to be the chief executive officer of the state.

Schwarzenegger and his Republican cronies seized on Grey Davis' poor public approval ratings to force an expensive special election to recall Davis, and now the chickens have come home to roost as Schwarzeneggers' own polls are at the same low levels as those of Davis when Republicans were calling for his head. In the most recent Field Research poll, 58% of all Californians now disapprove of Arnold's performance (and it is a "performance" - a bad actor playing governor) with only 31% approving. He does slightly better among registered voters at 53/37, if one can consider a 37% approval rating to be encouraging. Certainly Scwarzenegger himself doesn't, as evidenced by his remarks in Sacramento yesterday.

"All of us in this building can share blame — all of us, including myself," Schwarzenegger said. "People make mistakes sometimes, and I think we learned there was a very clear message that we must work together. I am looking forward to that. The people … feel good when things work well."

Where was the "people make mistakes sometimes" magnanimity when Schwarzenegger and his Pete Wilson sloppy-second rejects were savaging Grey Davis? Where was the "we must work together" bonhomie when Schwarzenegger took the stage at the Republican National Convention in prime time and hurled "girlie men" insults at the Democratic voters in his own state where, he might be reminded, Democrats outnumber registered Republicans by a considerable margin?

There is actually little blame to be "shared". Schwarzenegger himself bears the burden for his own plummeting approval polls thanks to his attacks on the unions that represent nurses, educators, and state employees that took on such a tone of personal hostility it appeared that his grudge wasn't only against their unions but against the members themselves. Attacking nurses and teachers is hardly a formula for success, particularly as these are female-dominated professions and the violence of his rhetoric has reminded voters of his well-publicized disrepect for women. The $45 million dollar special election Schwarzenegger has called for November is wildly unpopular, being seen not only as an abuse of the initiative process but a drain on the state treasury, particularly when services are being cut throughout California.

Yes, the Schwarzenegger comedy routine is drawing to a close, but his rise is something that does involve blame that can be "shared" by Democrats. It's not a surprise that a state that congratulates itself for setting trends in popular culture would elect a pop culture cartoon character such as Schwarzenegger, even one who presented himself during his campaign as a buffoon and a clown. After years of Republican governors so deadly dull that you needed to be tasered to remain awake for their speeches (Deukmejian, Wilson), the Democrats responded by running candidates who equally failed to capture the imagination of the voters, featuring colorless stuffed suit bureaucrats (Feinstein, Davis) or party hacks (Bustamante). Californians, tired of being bored into a stupor by their governor, countered by putting an oaf into office. Democrats should take notice, and respond not with an oaf - that particular act clearly hasn't worked - but by someone who is willing to push the margins a bit, who can appeal to the younger voters of the state - critical if California is to remain Democratic in the next generation - and who isn't afraid to take on conventional wisdom and shake up Sacramento. Someone like a modern-day Jerry Brown, who was not only interesting (well, nutty) enough to engage the public but who was actually competent in his occasional lucid moments.

Does such a cutting edge Democrat exist in California today? Gavin Newsome is one, but the asleep at the switch, complacent and bloated California Democratic party will never have the vision to push for his candidacy. Look for the same ol' shit next year, with Bustamante or his ilk again being trotted out to bore the voters and keep them away from the polls in droves. The state Democratic party desperately needs reform, but I doubt they'll learn from the Schwarzenegger debacle. If they aren't careful, look for the emergence of a strong Green candidate next year, which will create the danger of a split liberal vote and the unthinkable - a full term of Arnold. Time for the Democrats in California to change or be left for dead.

A Real Man of the People

2005-06-21T06:48:00.000-07:00

The Houston Chronicle recently ran a piece about the "rules of decorum" our Chimp expects at the White House.

After describing a scene in which this sociopath got pissy over a reporter's tie, the Chronicle goes on to note a particularly petulant display:

Bush recently hosted South Korean President Roh Moo-hyn in the Oval Office, where he was visibly annoyed by the nonchalance of visiting South Korean newsmen.

Members of the White House press corps understand that, as a rule, touching the furniture in the Oval Office is strictly forbidden. Even when Bush brings a group of journalists in for an informal chat, he does not invite them to sit.

So it was with unconcealed consternation that Bush sat through a brief question and answer session with the South Korean president, while two sound engineers from the South Korean press corps sprawled on a couch to get a good position for the remarks.

The generally loquacious Bush delivered his comments in short, abrupt sentences with a tone of impatience.

So profound was his air of injury that at one point, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, standing against a wall, stepped forward to peer at the offending sound technicians.

It's amazing how the media, particularly the White House press corps - the same ones who aren't allowed to touch the furniture - were able to sell our Mad Emperor as some kind of down home man of the people for two election cycles. What a fraud.

Say It Ain't So, Joe

2005-06-20T07:56:00.000-07:00

I watched Face the Nation yesterday for some odd reason, since I dislike the format of these Sunday news shows and the simplistic flacking that they feature. When Joe Biden's startling visage appeared, complete with gaudy hair plugs and a smile that beams on and off like a lighthouse in the fog, I was tempted to turn it off but doing so would require putting down my coffee cup and Biden isn't worth that much effort.

Biden is considered a "moderate" Democrat, which these days has nothing to do with political ideology. Today's "moderates" are ones who have, DLC-style, sold their souls to the big money of corporate lobbyists (Biden, both Clintons, Lieberman) or who have spouses who are war profiteers (Feinstein). Interestingly enough, our corporate media almost exclusively features either Biden or Feinstein as representatives of the Democratic point of view, trotting these two out to the exclusion of actual Democrats whenever they need an "opposition" voice (insert hysterical laughter here). This is why I wasn't surprised to see Biden and his hair plugs for the millionth time on a Sunday morning carrying water for his corporate benefactors.

Biden, it must be said, voted for the Iraq War Resolution and was one of the biggest hawks in the Senate pushing for this war. Now that the tide is beginning to turn and the majority of the public is rejecting this misadventure, Biden is trying to negotiate the head of the pin he finds himself on. How he did so yesterday morning was, to say the least, interesting. He began by taking Cheney and Rice to task for their recent optimism in assessing the insurgency in Iraq.

Ms. TUMULTY: So, do you think the administration is telling the American people the truth?

Sen. BIDEN: No, they're not telling the truth. Look, I try to put the - let me put the best face on this that I can. Why would the Vice President say what he said? Why would Secretary Rice characterize it the way she says it when I don't know anyone who believes that to be the case? "The last throes'. 'We're almost there'. 'Great progress'. Only thing I can figure out is that they don't trust the American people.

I mean, I've been saying on this program, and God love you, you've had me on a lot over the past two years, that I think the American people know how tough this is going to be. I think the American people if you lay out a plan and tell them the truth about how hard it's going to be and why you think it's important, they'll stick. I think the administration figures they've got to paint a rosy picture in order to keep the American people in the game, and the exact opposite is happening. The exact opposite. Otherwise, with all due respect, they're not fully informed or, well, they won't care.

Granted it's difficult to navigate the head of a pin, but according to Biden, the only difference between him and, say, Dick Cheney is that he'd emphasize that Iraq is a bloodbath, a meat grinder with an active insurgency that will continue to kill Americans and Iraqis alike, and that this refreshing, Biden-style frankness will keep Americans "in the game" because someone is finally doing some nasty truth-telling. And this tripe is presented with a straight face as the "opposition"!

What would Biden do differently in Iraq? Well, let's see...

Sen. BIDEN: The first thing I'd do is, I'd say, 'pick up the phone and call General Jones, our supreme allied commander, and he will tell you I believe that NATO has the capacity to take over that border on Iraq at this late date', that's number one. Number two, I'd say 'Mr. President, please take advantage of what the French, the Germans, and the Egyptians have done to offer to train up Iraqi police and Iraqi military'. Number three, "Change the way you distribute the funds there'.

Sounds like a dandy recipe for sucess, doesn't it? Make a few tweaks, do some random truth telling and keep us in Iraq for years to come. Biden, that rough renegade truth-teller, fails to note that the presence of our troops is the fuel for this insurgency, and as long as Biden and his friends keep our Imperial Army there they'll continue to be slaughtered and Iraq will continue to be in turmoil.

He almost falls off of his pinhead when, after criticizing the administration for painting a rosy picture of the nightmare in Iraq, he tells Karen Tumulty, "But the fact is, I think it still can be won, Karen."

Is it any wonder that Biden is a fixture on these "news" programs? This is the Democrat, after all, who said to torture advocate Alberto Gonzales "I think you're a solid guy" and "I like you, you're the real deal", who voted to confirm Rice, who was bought by MBNA to support the bankruptcy bill. Biden is in a perpetual green room because he's a "safe" Democrat who won't rock the corporate boat or disrupt the administration's plans for Empire. Note how he emphasizes "truth-telling" now, but is silent about the deplorable lack of "truth-telling" during the run-up to this war?

It's little wonder that the American people think the Democrats are indistinguishable from the Republicans when the only Democratic point of view the media will allow is of the simpering Joe Biden variety. The danger now, of course, is that the media will only promote Biden-like candidates for our nomination in 2008, which they've recently done with their constant hyping of Hillary Clinton and their trashing of Howard Dean, who actually is rocking the boat. An excellent, and frightening, example of this came at the conclusion of Face the Nation yesterday.

SCHIEFFER: Senator, let me ask you this. A lot of people are saying that --well, you yourself have said you're thinking about running for president. Since Howard Dean has sort of--so many Democrats seem to be disassociating themselves with remarks that he makes as party chairman, saying 'Well, he doesn't speak to me.' It seems to me more people are turning to you for comment and for the Democratic side of things. Are you--how far along are you on this idea for running for president? Is that a real possibility, or...

To this bullshit Biden nobly replied, "My intention now is to seek the nomination."

The media manipulation has begun early, and there's no doubt that they'll be shilling for the weakest pro-war "Democrats" they can find between now and the next primary season. The fact that they're promoting an execrable piece of shit like Biden should be a huge red flag for Democrats outside the beltway. He'll no doubt get the same "Joementum" that we gave his fellow piece of Joe-shit Lieberman last year, but in the meantime we'll have to suffer through dreck like the above for the next three years. Batten down the hatches.

Ask the A's Guys

2005-06-18T11:10:00.000-07:00

Fox Sports Net Bay Area has a nifty little feature that will allow you to send your questions to the A's broadcast announcers, and they'll read your question on the air for resident baseball expert Ray Fosse to answer.

Not that they'll read it on-air, but it's an excellent vehicle in which to query why Oakland Athletics pitcher Barry Zito supports the war in Iraq but refuses to fight in it. Is he a coward, Mr. Fosse? Isn't it repulsive, Mr. Fosse, for Barry Zito to throw money at the troops who lost limbs because the president he supports sent them into battle in unarmoured vehicles? Mr. Fosse, don't you believe that a self-professed "patriot" should support the troops by joining them on the front lines? What do you think, Mr. Fosse, about wealthy, comfortable young Republicans who support the war but refuse to enlist, given the current enlistment crisis in the Army? Do you believe, Mr. Fosse, that Barry Zito's good friend Oliver North is not only a convicted felon but a traitor to his uniform by his Iran-Contra activities that subverted the will of the United States Congress and the concept of cilivian control of the military?

There are so, so many worthy questions to Ask the A's Guys.

The Most Criminal Administration, Ever.

2005-06-18T07:15:00.000-07:00

The proof of criminality is everywhere, yet the American public seldom hears about it. Our media is too busy covering important matters like runaway brides, missing white girls, Michael Jackson and those pesky shark attacks to actually inform anyone that corporations, free of government checks, are running amok and hell-bent on destroying the planet to further their profits. Our media is controlled by five corporations, so of course they're abusing their public trust of the airwaves and suppressing the truth about rampant corporate corruption. Their bottom line, as always, comes first.

Mussolini once said that "fascism should more appropriately be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power." This is precisely where we are today in the United States, and it's why our media is little more than a Prava-style state run propaganda arm intent on hiding the truth and dulling our senses with endless circuses about brain dead women on feeding tubes and celebrity trials. We're at the apex of a perfect storm of corporate and state power, and nowhere does this become more apparent than in the corrupt events surrounding environmental issues.

If you don't get your news from the internet or from foreign media sources, you likely haven't been told by watching television news of the appalling scandals that have come to light regarding corporate tampering with government reports (proving, once again, Mussolini's theory of the merger between the two entities). The most flagrant example is that of Philip Cooney,

Cooney was an oil industry lobbyist who headed the climate change program for the American Petroleum Institute. Note that Cooney was given this postion, which one would presume would involve at least a smidgen of scientific analysis, in spite of the fact that he was a lawyer with no scientific training whatsoever. After helping to spread the fiction that climate change is an unproven theory, he was appointed Chief of Staff to the White House Council on Environmental Quality despite the fact that he had no scientific training whatsoever. It was now that Mr. Cooney could work from within to advance the cause of the American Petroleum Institute at the expense of the American public. And this he did with a vengeance.

In 2002 and 2003, the government was poised to release scientific climate reports that were at odds with the fictions promoted by Mr. Cooney during his tenure at API. What's a good oil industry lobbyist to do? Simple - from his appointed position at the White House, Cooney made dozens of changes to the reports, doing things such as deleting a sentence which read, " [Global] warming also will cause reductions in mountain glaciers and advance the timing of the melt of mountain snow peaks in polar regions."

When the New York Times was given copies of the doctored reports - complete with Cooney's scribbled edits - by an independent government watchdog group, White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan was ready with one of his patented bald-faced lies.

The reports were "based on the best available science", McClellan told reporters.

Is your head exploding yet?

The "best available science" according to an oil industry lobbyist who has no scientific training whatsoever.

Predictably, once the story was out and after the damage was done, Cooney decided to resign his White House post to "spend more time with his family" - and then promptly accepted a position with Exxon Mobile.

This is only one incident among dozens in which the administration has allowed the corporate fox into the public henhouse. The Los Angeles Times has an explosive article in today's edition that alleges changes were made in an environmental inpact report dealing with cattle grazing on public lands to benefit the cattle industry. The changes would have you hysterical with laughter if the consequences weren't so fucking tragic.

According to the Times:

The original draft of the environmental analysis warned that the new rules would have a "significant adverse impact" on wildlife, but that phrase was removed. The bureau now concludes that the grazing regulations are "beneficial to animals."

Eliminated from the final draft was another conclusion that read: "The Proposed Action will have a slow, long-term adverse impact on wildlife and biological diversity in general."

Also removed was language saying how a number of the rule changes could adversely affect endangered species.

The Times article goes on to note:

"This is a whitewash. They took all of our science and reversed it 180 degrees," said Erick Campbell, a former BLM state biologist in Nevada and a 30-year bureau employee who retired this year. He was the author of sections of the report pertaining to the effect on wildlife and threatened and endangered species.

"They rewrote everything," Campbell said in an interview this week. "It's a crime."

Mussolini's definition of fascism is alive and thriving in Bush's America.

A bright spot on this increasingly grim landscape is Robert Kennedy Jr's organization, The National Resouces Defense Council. He's been a leader in exposing the corrupt role of corporations within the Bush administration and the devastating impact this corruption has had on our environment. The site has terrific resource material, action alerts, and a vibrant Earth Activist Network. It's easy to despair over the terrible forces that have taken over our country, but in some small ways you can fight back. This organization is a good start.

It's Fuck You Friday

2005-06-17T06:39:00.000-07:00

George Bush: Fuck you. After watching the congressional forum yesterday on the Downing Street Minutes, can there be any doubt left that this administration lied to the Congress and the public in order to gain empire and oilfields in our criminal misadventure in Iraq?

The best thing about the forum yesterday: the frequent use of the word impeach. It's time this word become common in our everyday language, and not in context with a blow job but with the murder of 1.724 soldiers and tens of thousands of Iraqi civilians. We should impeach our chimp for draining three hundred billion out of our treasury for his war profiteering friends (and the Republican Congress is about to hand him $45 billion more, to spare him the embarrassment of having to come back again demanding cash for his Iraqi kingdom). We should impeach him for the torture and illegal detainments in his many gulags and for his trashing of the Constitution at home. We should impeach his little chimp ass and then throw him on the first plane to The Hague so he can join his friend Tony Blair on the docket for war crimes.

Bill Clinton: Fuck you. Bill Clinton appeared on Letterman last night, and the first 20 minutes of the interview were as tedious and dull as his memoirs. As we could have predicted, he obligingly put his head up the collective asses of the Bush family, lauding the senior Bush criminal as a "good man" and sharing plans of his upcoming visit to Maine to golf and boat with Poopy. I might add that if he thinks he's helping Hillary in 2008 with this Bush love-fest, he might consider what he's doing to her in New York in 2006 first. This president he's baiting her hook with is falling like Kay Graham on the ice in every published public approval poll, and even Republicans are shearing off from his unpopular policies on Iraq, on stem cell research, and on the Patriot Act in preparation for their own 2006 races. Tying Hillary to this president is politically tone-deaf, and she needs to tell him to just shut the fuck up.

So, for 20 minutes Bill gurgled about his heart surgery, about the Tsunami aid, and about his beloved friends in the Bush crime family. Letterman went to break and I was about to switch it off, nauseated, but before I could do so the commercial break ended and I saw one of the most amazing moments I can remember on television. Letterman himself must have been nauseated by the Bush references because as soon as the show resumed he asked Clinton, "So, what do you think about these Downing Street Minutes?" Clinton looked shocked and the audience was deadly silent. Clinton stuttered something to the effect that he didn't know what it was (fucking liar!) and Dave obligingly explained to him that the British minutes reflected that regime change alone was an illegal cause of war, so the policy for going to war was going to be "fixed" around WMD and terrorism.

Clinton, who clearly knew what the memo entailed but was using the time to figure out his response, then said that he "hadn't read it" and couldn't comment. He did, to his credit, go on to mention the undisputed fact that individuals in the administration wanted to invade Iraq long before they took office - a PNAC reference - and questioned Cheney's multiple visits to the CIA. Then Bill Clinton betrayed his country in front of millions of viewers.

Using the same unwholesome argument Democratic Congressman Harold Ford used earlier in the day, he waved his hands around and said, "Whatever happened, happened. The fact is we're there now and we need to go forward," or words to that effect.This, I might add, is exactly the Republican response to questions about the crimes committed, such as lying to Congress, in the runup to the war. Clinton then made the mistake of pretending that the recent Iraqi elections were the answer to our prayers, and Letterman shot back that the violence has escalated, and not decreased, since the election (why does it take a late night comedian to ask serious follow-up questions these days, and hold people's feet to the fire?). Letterman was deadly serious and going for the kill - it was truly great viewing. What a shame we can't see an interview such as this on, say, the sycophantic CNN.

Memo to Bill Clinton: It does fucking matter what "happened" before the war. It matters to the more than 1,700 families who lost a loved one for a fucking lie, it matters to the taxpayers who will be paying through the ass for this fucking lie for generations, and it matters for the reputation of our country. It's a moral issue, but of course moral issues to Bill Clinton are like garlic to a vampire.

I'm so annoyed I'll say it again: Bill Clinton, fuck you.

My final Friday fuck you is reserved for the ratfucking Dick Cheney, who earlier this week defended our gulag at Guantanamo Bay, saying that the facility will remain open and decrying the "bad people" who are "terrorists, for the most part," (for the most part?) who are detained there "for the most part" illegally without charges.

Hard on the heels of Cheney's assertion that Gitmo will continue to humiliate our country for years to come is the announcement that Cheney's old company Halliburton has been awarded a $30 million dollar contract to build a new jail on Guantanamo. This new facility will house an additional 220 illegally detained prisoners, which means we - the taxpayers - will be handing Halliburton more than $136,000 for each cell. This comes at a time when children are being cut off from Medicaid all over the country and VA funds are being cut by Congressional Republicans. Nice. This frenzy of war profiteering is nothing more than salt on the Gitmo wound and a major fuck you to the public. They don't care. They own the voting machines.

Daddy WARbucks Update

2005-06-16T09:46:00.000-07:00

Barry Zito will be starting tomorrow night's game against Philadelphia at the Oakland Coliseum. Game time is 7:05 pm local.

Right-click on the above graphic and make as many small handbills as you can afford, then spread them liberally around the Coliseum tomorrow night - in restrooms, concession stands, dropped into the A's dugout, etc. We don't condone littering, but letting a few drift with the wind onto the field might be amusing.

This hypocrite is one of the worst of the new breed of chickenhawk. Let Zito know that it's no longer acceptable for him to advocate that OUR sons and daughters fight in HIS war unless he's on the front lines with them. Let's get this coward in the Army.

Enjoy This Beautiful Day

2005-06-16T06:59:00.000-07:00

Today might be the best single day for our our country since the Chimp seized power in a Supreme Court mandated coup d'etat in 2000.

This morning's first bit of good news: the new Pew Research Center poll continues to reflect our dishonest president's plummeting standings with the American people. He's falling fast and down to 42% of the public approving of his job performance. The sizzling sound you're hearing is his "mandate" frying in the depths of hell. Watch for his bootlicking congressional rats to start to desert the sinking ship, leaving his legislative agenda - including draining Social Security into the pockets of Wall Street investment bankers - in tatters. It's delightful to see Bush reduced to lame duck status so early in his second term, but he's still stupid enough to be dangerous and we should remain always on our guard with this madman.

Of course, the big event of the day will be Rep. John Conyers' forum on the Downing Street Minutes. The forum will be carried live at 2:30 pm ET on CSPAN-3 and Pacifica Radio. If your satellite or cable service doesn't carry CSPAN-3, you can stream it live over the internet here. It will also be rebroadcast on CSPAN-2 tomorrow evening at 8:00 pm ET.

After the forum, Rep. Conyers will deliver a letter to the president, signed by 94 House members and over half a million citizens, asking for a response to five key questions:

1) Do you or anyone in your administration dispute the accuracy of the leaked document?
2) Were arrangements being made, including the recruitment of allies, before you sought Congressional authorization to go to war? Did you or anyone in your Administration obtain Britain's commitment to invade prior to this time?
3) Was there an effort to create an ultimatum about weapons inspectors in order to help with the justification for the war as the minutes indicate?
4) At what point in time did you and Prime Minister Blair first agree it was necessary to invade Iraq?
5) Was there a coordinated effort with the U.S. intelligence community and/or British officials to "fix" the intelligence and facts around the policy as the leaked document states?

There will be a large rally in front of the White House in Lafayette Square Park at 5:00 pm ET while Rep. Conyers delivers his letter to the White House door. Should be a fun day for democracy.

More details of today's events can be found at AfterDowningStreet, a great resource site containing the text of the leaked minutes, a schedule of today's speakers, information on local rallies taking place around the country today, and much more.

After years of lies, today will be a rare day of truth. Enjoy.

Hide the Kids - Our Dictator's Not Happy

2005-06-15T07:21:00.000-07:00

The Republicans control everything - the White House (well, that they stole - twice), the Senate, the House, and thanks to our weak-willed Democratic "moderates" they've filled the judiciary with right-wing nutjobs. It's a one-party State run as a ruthless dictatorship, and since the one party is filled with either Christian extremists or bought-and-paid-for corporate toadies it's not surprising that the American public is growing a little restless.

Despite the idiotic yet mercifully brief frenzy of blue finger waving during the last State of the Union, the situation in Iraq continues to deteriorate and the proposed looting of Social Security hasn't fooled even a foolish, American Idol-addled public. Despite these failures Bush has gotten exactly what he's wanted from a rubber stamp Congress - bills that do nothing to serve the public trust but instead pay off campaign contributors, such as tort "reform" and the utterly cruel bankruptcy bill. The Democrats make small peeps here and there about Iraq, but on the whole they've remained silent or, even worse, supportive of his war of aggression. The Democrats are hardly the worst of this incompetent president's worries.

Yet, who does the dictator of our one-party State blame when his poll numbers are in the tank? You've got it - the powerless, timid, meek little Democrats who control not one branch of government. Bush blasted Democrats last evening at one of his fat-cat fundraisers in the kind of carpet-chewing temper tantrum unseen by the planet since the Red Army closed in on the bunker:

President Bush on Tuesday unleashed his harshest criticism yet on Democrats for thwarting his second-term agenda, demanding they put forward ideas of their own or "step aside" and signaling a more aggressive administration strategy of attack.

With approval ratings the lowest of his presidency and critics suggesting he is already losing political clout, Bush blamed "do-nothing" Democrats for holding up an overhaul of Social Security and delaying votes on his nominees to the federal bench and the United Nations.

The assault highlighted administration frustrations over Democratic tactics, and offered a preview of Republican strategy in the run-up to the 2006 mid-term elections.

"On issue after issue, they (the Democrats) stand for nothing except obstruction," Bush said at the annual President's Dinner, a $23 million fund-raiser attended by Republican leaders, party donors, and a blond porn star and former California gubernatorial candidate named Mary Carey.

Bush said the Democrats, in contrast, were employing a "philosophy of the stop sign" and an "agenda of the road block," and warned: "Political parties that choose the path of obstruction will not gain the trust of the American people."

He issued a challenge to the Democrats: "If leaders of the other party have innovative ideas, let's hear them. But if they have no ideas or policies except obstruction, they should step aside and let others lead."

Isn't that swell? The party that represents half of the population should just "step aside" for our little dictator. Apparently, our history books lied to us - the South really did win the Civil War.

As the 2006 midterms approach, we can look to lots of this GOP swill as they scurry desperately to cast blame for the nightmare they've made of the country. The only wild card is the Democratic response. Will they meekly take these ridiculous, delusional scoldings, or will they fight back?

Ask Daddy WARbucks to Enlist

2005-06-14T13:34:00.000-07:00

Another millionaire is cheering on the war in Iraq while refusing to fight in it. Why are we surprised?

This time, the hypocrite is Oakland Athletics pitcher Barry Zito, a perfectly healthy 27 year old male, self-professed conservative Republican and Bush campaign contributor.

In an apparent attempt to out-Republican fellow pitcher Curt Schilling, Zito has created a foundation that donates $100 for each strikeout he throws to wounded soldiers and their visiting family members. His site has a darling little graphic that shows a saluting soldier - one who doesn't appear to be maimed from serving in the war that Zito supports - with the caption, "This site is dedicated to the brave men and women who serve in the Armed Forces around the world". Note that this group of brave individuals does not include Mr. Zito himself, although he'll gladly throw a hundred bucks their way for their blasted limbs, burned bodies, and broken lives. Isn't that dandy? Let me repeat - Zito won't fight in this war, but our modern-day Daddy WARbucks will throw a hundred bucks per strikeout to those who have lost limbs because his favorite president sent them into battle without armoured vehicles.

There's something so patronizing, so repulsive, about this millionaire chickenhawk throwing C notes at the poor slobs whose families are too impoverished to visit them at Walter Reed (which, by the way, his favorite administration is planning to close in wartime) that you're almost at a loss for words. Daddy WARbucks, unfortunately, is seldom at a loss for words as he shamelessly parades himself as a mega-American who's not only richer than anyone else but much, much more patriotic.

Zito, who sounds about as bright as infield dirt, has been promoting himself and his foundation with his right-wing friends, including Sean Hannity, Bill O'Reilly and the felonious Oliver North, and recently babbled the following nonsense to the L.A. Daily News: "With so much negative connotation about the war, people kind of forget we still have guys that are supporting us with their lives on the line. I'm just trying to rally baseball behind the troops, and I think America will eventually start to rally behind the troops a little bit more."

Barry, people who oppose this criminal war haven't "kind of forgotten" about our troops - we're trying to get them home safely. And it's a typical right-wing mindset that Zito thinks the public should rally around the troops "a little bit more", as if only these fake uber-patriots know how to rally around our military members who, I remind him again, are getting limbs blasted off due to the utter incompetence of the president he donated two thousand bucks to last year.

Zito's nauseating self-promotion continued during the Athletics' recent road trip to Washington, DC. The San Francisco Chronicle this morning has a stomach-churning article about Zito's "I'm more American than you are" whirl through Washington, complete with macabre excitement over the sight of military tombstones and more 9/11 grave-dancing:

Last week, while the A's were in Washington, pitcher Barry Zito was thrilled to combine two of his major interests: photography and patriotism.

So when he was offered a private visit of Arlington National Cemetery during the A's series against the Nationals, he grabbed his camera and took a tour with longtime Arlington Cemetery historian Tom Sherlock.

"It's just insane, seeing endless acres of headstones,'' Zito said. "It gave me chills, seeing fields and fields of people who have given their lives for our country.''

His tour of the cemetery began at the caisson stables, where the horses are kept for drawing flag-draped coffins.

"I was a little taken aback that I was at a barn,'' Zito said, "but that's where they first explained how meticulous they are about everything, cleaning everything and taking care of the (saddle) leather. There is such attention to detail.''

Among the many other memorials on the grounds, Zito took special note of the one for the 184 American victims of the Sept. 11, 2001, attack on the Pentagon, which is in the shape of the Pentagon and is in an area of the cemetery overlooking the Pentagon complex.
Zito, who previously has had photos published in Sports Illustrated, found so much to photograph and was so moved by the experience, he plans to return in August, when the team is in Baltimore.

"I'm going to get a hotel room in D.C. and drive back,'' he said. "It would be cool to do this again.''

You know what would be really, really "cool", Barry? If you'd put your big uber-patriotic trap where your wallet is and enlist in the fucking Army (see "Why Don't Young Republicans Enlist?" below). At least you might earn the kind of respect Pat Tillman rightfully earned by walking away from the money and the fame and following his conscience - even though it got him killed, and his death was used as a propaganda tool for your beloved adminstration. Perhaps Daddy WARbucks should give up his millions and actually serve in this war he supports and that he voted for. Perhaps we should encourage him to do so.

You can download DD Form 4/1 , which Mr. Zito can fill out to enlist in the Army, in .pdf format here. Fill in his name - you can either use Barry Zito or Daddy WARbucks - and mail it to Barry at this address:

Barry Zito
c/o Oakland Athletics
Oakland Alameda County Coliseum
7677 Oakport Street
2nd Floor
Oakland, CA 94621

If you're sick of these young Republican hypocrites who let others do the fighting and dying for a war they support and cheerlead for, be sure to let us know that you've sent Barry his DD 4/1. We'll keep a running total of enlistment forms sent to Zito on this site.

Californians have paid the highest price for this war based on lies and deception with the highest mortality rate in the country of sons, daughters, husbands and wives slaughtered needlessly in Iraq. Perhaps Californians should pay Mr. Zito a visit at the Coliseum the next time he pitches at home to remind him of his cowardice in refusing to enlist. We'll post a schedule of Mr. Zito's appearances in Oakland, as well as colorful artwork you can download and take to the game, in the days ahead. Meanwhile, let's get Daddy WARbucks in uniform and get those enlistment papers in the mail.

Note to Country: Are We Awake Yet?

2005-06-14T07:51:00.000-07:00

Despite our president telling any reporter who will listen how much he weeps over the deaths in Iraq, how he goes out of his way to "comfort" the families of the dead, the fact remains that his premise for war was a lie and this fact is becoming known to military families. The American media, however, after cheerleading a war that would bring profits to their corporate ownership and whipping up a false sense of terror to the public continues to remain criminally silent on new reports that demonstrate the administration's lies and deception. (The Canadian press, not having any corporate irons in the fire, show no such restraint).

A mother of one of those dead soldiers George Bush claims to weep over has had enough.

The Lexington, KY Herald-Leader ran the following story today:

The president of Gold Star Families for Peace, a mother who lost a son in Iraq, criticized the United States' "illegal and unjust war" yesterday during an interfaith rally in Lexington.

Cindy Sheehan of Vacaville, Calif., accused President Bush of lying to the nation about a war which has consumed tens of billions of dollars and claimed more than 1,700 American lives -- including the life of Army Specialist Casey Austin Sheehan.
Sheehan was one of more than a dozen activists who were scheduled to speak at yesterday's anti-war rally at the Red Mile, which was organized by the Clergy and Laity Network and co-sponsored by dozens of liberal religious organizations.

Sheehan ridiculed Bush for saying that it's "hard work" comforting the widow of a soldier who's been killed in Iraq.

"Hard work is seeing your son's murder on CNN one Sunday evening while you're enjoying the last supper you'll ever truly enjoy again. Hard work is having three military officers come to your house a few hours later to confirm the aforementioned murder of your son, your first-born, your kind and gentle sweet baby. Hard work is burying your child 46 days before his 25th birthday. Hard work is holding your other three children as they lower the body of their big (brother) into the ground. Hard work is not jumping in the grave with him and having the earth cover you both," she said.

Since her son's death, Sheehan has made opposition to the Bush administration a full-time job.

"We're watching you very carefully and we're going to do everything in our power to have you impeached for misleading the American people," she said, quoting a letter she sent to the White House. "Beating a political stake in your black heart will be the fulfillment of my life ... ," she said, as the audience of 200 people cheered.

New GOP Smear Target: International Committee of the Red Cross

2005-06-13T08:03:00.000-07:00

The Republican thugs currently running our government are so predictable, really.

Faced with plummeting approval numbers for our occupation of Iraq and growing public outrage over government-sanctioned torture of detainees in Gitmo, Abu Gharib and Afghanistan, the administration response has been to attack any organization or publication that dare expose their crimes against humanity. We've seen recent attacks against Amnesty International for correctly comparing our facility at Guantanamo Bay to a Soviet gulag, attacks against Newsweek for truthfully reporting acts of desecration of the Koran, and of course their favorite fat boy on the playground, the United Nations. While it's yesterday's news, the bloody scalp of Dan Rather emboldened the thugs for further attacks, even though Rather's report was essentially true. It's important to remember that when the GOP sharks start bloodying the water, the chum they're always after is the truth, because they know that when the truth starts dripping through to the American public despite the almost criminal refusal of our corporate media to report it the torches and pitchforks aren't far off in the future. These bullies are little more than frightened mice.

Given the above, it isn't surprising that they're now turning their attention to the International Committee of the Red Cross. Just last month, according to CNN International, "The International Committee of the Red Cross on Monday expressed its concern about the 'high numbers of civilian casualties in Iraq.' It noted that scores of Iraqis have died in car bombings in Baghdad and that fighting in western Iraq had forced hundreds, including women, children and the elderly, to flee their homes and seek refuge.

The Red Cross called on all those involved in the fighting to respect international humanitarian law. "

Of course, the phrase "respect international humanitarian law" makes our president shake like the dry drunk he is, so his minions unleash the hounds of hell after the ICRC and quickly smear them for, again, telling the truth.

According the the Financial Times, an "influential" grouping of Senate Republicans are drafting a white paper calling into account the ICRC's impartiality that will "raise concerns about recent ICRC actions and statements that call in to question the organisation's long-standing impartiality and neutrality principles when applied to the US government". Don't you love frightened mice when they begin to scatter? The entire world reviles the criminal actions of the US government, and there aren't enough fingers on those little mice paws to plug the many leaks that are springing from every direction - but still they keep trying.

So desperate are they, in fact, that they now want to dictate the composition of the ICRC's board. The Financial Times story states that "The paper will call for changes at the ICRC, including allowing non-Swiss nationals to become board members. " What a great idea! Stack the board with more convicted felons from the Reagan administration, and watch how quickly the Red Cross changes their focus from our crimes to those of Saddam Hussein, as though they aren't morally equivalent.

The Republicans' foolish, footling ninny-talk in the end won't mean a thing. The world will still be outraged by the civilian casualties in Iraq, as the world was outraged by the above photograph of a young girl drenched in her parents' blood after they were murdered by US troops - a photograph, incidentally, that received almost no coverage in the American media. Why not? Given that the photographs of prisoners being abused at Abu Gharib exposed the lie that we "liberated" Iraq out of a humanitarian White Mans' Burden to civilize heathen tribes, this photograph furthers exposes that lie. Doesn't matter. Despite their best efforts to smear, suppress the truth and outrageously lie their way out of the most well documented misdeeds, the truth is beginning to dawn on the public. Expect a lot of scurrying rats in the days to come.

War: Realities and Myth

2005-06-11T21:17:00.000-07:00

This is a terrific piece written by Chris Hedges, a long-time war reporter and author of What Every Person Should Know About War. A few excerpts:

The vanquished know war. They see through the empty jingoism of those who use the abstract words of glory, honor, and patriotism to mask the cries of the wounded, the senseless killing, war profiteering, and chest-pounding grief. They know the lies the victors often do not acknowledge, the lies covered up in stately war memorials and mythic war narratives, filled with words of courage and comradeship. They know the lies that permeate the thick, self-important memoirs by amoral statesmen who make wars but do not know war.
----
This myth, the lie, about war, about ourselves, is imploding our democracy. We shun introspection and self-criticism. We ignore truth, to embrace the strange, disquieting certitude and hubris offered by the radical Christian Right. These radical Christians draw almost exclusively from the book of Revelations, the only time in the Gospels where Jesus sanctions violence, peddling a vision of Christ as the head of a great and murderous army of heavenly avengers. They rarely speak about Christ's message of love, forgiveness and compassion. They relish the cataclysmic destruction that will befall unbelievers, including those such as myself, who they dismiss as "nominal Christians." They divide the world between good and evil, between those anointed to act as agents of God and those who act as agents of Satan. The cult of masculinity and esthetic of violence pervades their ideology. Feminism and homosexuality are forces, believers are told, that have rendered the American male physically and spiritually impotent. Jesus, for the Christian Right, is a man of action, casting out demons, battling the Anti-Christ, attacking hypocrites and castigating the corrupt. The language is one not only of exclusion, hatred and fear, but a call for apocalyptic violence, in short the language of war.
---
We are losing the war in Iraq. We are an isolated and reviled nation. We are pitiless to others weaker than ourselves. We have lost sight of our democratic ideals. Thucydides wrote of Athens' expanding empire and how this empire led it to become a tyrant abroad and then a tyrant at home. The tyranny Athens imposed on others, it finally imposed on itself. If we do not confront the lies and hubris told to justify the killing and mask the destruction carried out in our name in Iraq, if we do not grasp the moral corrosiveness of empire and occupation, if we continue to allow force and violence to be our primary form of communication, if we do not remove from power our flag-waving, cross-bearing versions of the Taliban, we will not so much defeat dictators such as Saddam Hussein as become them.

Why Don't Young Republicans Enlist?

2005-06-10T07:17:00.000-07:00

One would think that young Republican men and women, filled with chest thumping patriotic fervor and quick to label Democrats as traitors and anti-American, would be flocking to their local recruitment centers to support their president and go overseas, do a little Crusadin', and kick some Ay-rab butt.

So why, then, are we facing a crisis in our all-volunteer Army? The Chicago Sun-Times reports that the Army is likely to fall short of its full-year recruiting goals for the first time since 1999. The numbers are so poor that the Army reduced its recruitment goal for May, explaining that they needed to "adjust for changing market conditions". Yes, indeed, the market for young Republican chickenhawks is dropping like a rock.

Perhaps our Republican friends are simply emulating one of their heroes, Dick Cheney, who received five draft deferments during the Vietnam war and justified his cowardice by saying he had "other priorities in the '60s". They might be following the example of their beloved war president who ran to his daddy to keep him out of Nam and then deserted the cushy assignment he'd been given while the country was at war.

Perhaps our Republican friends have been spooked by the many scandals that have rocked military recruitment centers, where recruiters are so desperate for cannon fodder they've been reduced to intimidating teenagers and even kidnapping potential soldiers for our Imperial Army.

Or perhaps, as we suspected all along, our young Republican friends are simply cowards, ready to talk tough and slap yellow ribbons on the back of their SUV's but, when push comes to shove, they hide like frightened children and expect, as their leaders did three decades ago, poor people to fight their wars.

The Army, realizing that it was a mistake to appeal to the patriotism of young Republicans, is now considering a much more successful strategy - appealing to their greed. Army officials are considering asking Congress to double the bonus given to new recruits to $40,000, as well as providing up to $50,000 in home mortgage assistance for those signing up for an eight-year tour of duty (smart of the Army; they know they won't live that long after a few whirls through our new Empire, so this will be cash they can put in the kitty for our next war of aggression in Iran).

In the end, though, despite the attractive strategy of shoveling money at young Republicans to do what Democrats have always done for free, the "cash for your ass" plan is doomed to fail with this bunch. Reason? It's in the photograph above. They'll cheer for our country, smear political opponents for it, howl about "defending our freedom" for it, but they won't die for it.

Compassionate Conservatives, Part IV

2005-06-09T08:12:00.000-07:00

Compassionate Conservative whackjobs at Perry's witch-burning event, praising Jay-sus, Jeebus, and possibly Beelzebub.

Compassionate Conservatives, Part III

2005-06-09T07:24:00.000-07:00

Rick Perry, the Texas governor with the Really Nice Hair, on Sunday signed in true Compassionate Conservative fashion measures to restrict abortion and same-sex marriage in the gymnasium of a Fort Worth evangelical school. Perry is using these issues to appeal to the white trash voters he'll need for his re-election bid next year.

In an attempt to deflect criticism of this blatant violation of the separation of church and state, Perry's campaign finance director burbled that "people of all faiths are welcome" at the signing, and to prove this fact they trundled out a Jewish rabbi - impressive! - yet the New York Times spoiled this multi-faith funfest by pointing out that the rabbi was a member of the Beth Yeshua Messianic Jewish Congregation in Fort Worth, a Jews for Jesus group. Isn't it somehow un-Christian to tell big ol' lies? Don't you go to hell for shit like that?

The Times also showed uncharacteristic snarkiness with the rank hypocrisy of the event:

Pastor Lawrence White of Our Savior Lutheran Church in Houston said churches had long played major roles in American political life, as meeting houses during the Revolution and sanctuaries during the civil rights era. "Everything of significance in the United States of America began in her churches," he said to ringing cheers and applause.

"This is not about candidates and politics, Republicans and Democrats," he added. "This is about life."

He continued, "When the governor of Texas will stand for life and marriage and family, then we will stand with him."

But nobody mentioned Texas' position as the state with the most executions.

The Times also pointedly mentioned that Perry's plans to make a campaign video of this Jesus Christ, Superstar event had been cancelled when public reaction to the Christian stake-burning wasn't overwhelmingly positive.

But Perry didn't stop there. Apparently thinking that he hadn't gone far enough with the "Jews were to the Vaterland what homosexuals are to the Homeland" word game, he then proceeded to Support the Troops(tm) in true Republican fashion.

During a press conference after signing his silly little shit on Sunday, Perry was asked what he would tell gay veterans returning from Iraq.

"I'm going to say Texas has made a decision on marriage and if there's a state with more lenient views than Texas, then maybe that's where they should live," he replied.

Got that? Hey, gay Texas verterans, it doesn't matter if the job, home and family you're returning to happen to be in Texas. The governor thinks you should just move the fuck out of the state. Ding ding ding! We've got another fine Compassionate Conservative in the house!

Andrew Sullivan had a rare flash of common sense when he commented on Perrys' Git Outta Town, Git remarks. "What do you call a gay man who risks his life to serve his country? A faggot."

Compassionate Conservatives, Part II

2005-06-08T10:36:00.000-07:00

For years, Republicans have preached the mantra of removing the odious federal gu'mit from our lives, unless of course the issue involves homosexual sex or Janet Jackson's boob or Paris Hilton and a garden hose or any one of a million issues that offend our Christian overlords.

What the Republicans have succeeded in doing is removing many federal protections that our government, in saner times, provided to its citizens. They have been blazingly successful in appointing energy industry lobbyists to the EPA to gut the Clean Air Act, the Clean Water Act, and other environmental protections thought inconvenient to industry, and their glaring conflicts of interest in doing so are breathtaking in their corruption even by Republican standards. They've passed a bankruptcy bill that benefits their huge corporate donors like MBNA and have screwed the little guy who's lost his job or is facing staggering medical bills. What we have left, clearly, is government of the donors, by the donors, and for the donors. And still, the little guy keeps voting Republican, unaware that his societal or religious beliefs are being played in one of the most cynical manners possible by the Republicans and their corporate cronies, who no doubt laugh up their sleeves at the little rubes who keep them in power.

Perhaps no other scam on the American public demonstrates the utter filthy lie of Compassionate Conservatism better than the Vioxx scandal.

In September of last year, Merck was forced to pull Vioxx, a widely-used prescription drug, off of the market after a study showed that the drug doubled the risk of heart attack and stroke in patients. This study was hardly news to Merck, as their own 1999 pre-trial study of Vioxx also demonstrated an increased risk of heart attack and strokes. Given that profit always comes before human lives, Merck sought and obtained FDA approval of Vioxx despite the clear warning signs that were apparent from their own study. It's estimated that 50,000 Americans died as a result of the lethal side effects of Vioxx, and far too late it was removed from circulation.

Can we now say lesson learned, and attempt to clean up the FDA and their approval processes that are stacked in favor of Big Pharma? Quick answer from the Compassionate Conservatives: fuck, no.

In February of this year, an FDA advisory committee voted to bring Vioxx back on the market, although the conclusions reached in the previous studies of Vioxx had not changed. So why was this killer being unleashed again on the American consumer? Easy - ten members of the FDA advisory committee had financial ties to Merck, either having worked or consulted for the company. If these ten members had properly recused themselves from voting, the FDA panel would have reulted in a 14-8 decision that Vioxx not be returned to the market. These ten members, stooges for Merck, instead happily participated in the vote and threw the final decision in Mercks' favor. Even the normally compliant New York Times reported that, "The members with financial ties to the companies were 10 times more likely to favor the drugs as those without such ties." Merck stock soared on the news of the panels' decision, proving once again that it's better to be a part of our "ownership society" and its many exciting rewards than a poor sap who believes in the honesty of our drug approval process and fills a prescription for a silent killer.

The hypocritical fibbing of the Compassionate Conservatives does more than make me want to vomit on my sneakers, because they're not only poisoning our air and water, not only looting the treasury to send our taxes directly to garbage like Halliburton, they're murdering American citizens by putting their greed ahead of our lives. I know this first hand. Six weeks ago, my 47 year old sister died in her sleep from heart failure. She'd been taking Vioxx for over three years for a chronic knee injury. I don't know, and never will, if Vioxx contributed to her death, but the anecdotal evidence is clear from the studies. And now the Compassionate Conservatives want to kill a member of your family, too, while they bible-thump and preach morality at the same time that they and their corporate friends bring a known killer back to the market.

When - WHEN - will the American public wake up to the daily raping they're being subjected to by these people? It's a good thing, I suppose, that so many Chimp followers are insanely religious, because only God can help you under the evil regime we're living under. For the rest of us, we'll just have to figure out how to live without a friend of 45 years on our own.

Compassionate Conservatives, Part I

2005-06-08T07:28:00.000-07:00

Ah, those poor New Yorkers. Those multicultural, liberal, Democratic voting New Yorkers thought they were done getting the Big GOP Screw after having to witness the horrific obscenity of the Republican National Convention in New York City last year, complete with elephant-clad assholes from Alabama wandering the area of lower Manhattan that once housed a lot of now-dead multicultural, liberal Democratic voters. I suppose it gave those Dixie residents a bit of a charge, a certain chill to the spine, to think that they, too, could be attacked by swarthy men in their trailer parks and dirt farms and so to prevent such an attack they told us to rally 'round President Primate to keep us safe, especially since God knows when North Dakota will be viciously attacked, taking out all 17 of its citizens. The hysteria and sniveling cowardice of the Red States would, indeed, be laughable if the results of their silly panic attacks were not so devastating to the rest of the country.

In any event, once the GOP circus left town New Yorkers could, one presume, draw an easy breath of the toxic air that George Bush's EPA assured them was safe. But now that the Republicans had finished their grave-robbing tour of Manhattan, it was time for them to put aside the fake sympathy since, after all, the election was now over and it was again Payback Time for the Blue States that Pay the Freight for Those Tax-Hatin' Red States, this time taking a turn breathtaking even for the whacked-out Republican House of Representatives.

The Associated Press reports the following bit of news courtesy of the Republicans who so recently shed crocodile tears for the Trade Center victims:

WASHINGTON - A congressional inquiry has found New York failed to follow instructions from Congress on the spending of $44 million in Sept. 11 aid and should give the money back or get lawmakers to pass a law allowing the expenditure.

A New York official countered Tuesday night that if the federal government persists with the effort, it would have to take the money back directly from Sept. 11 victims.

"The federal government authorized these funds to go to 9/11 victims and their families in the first place, and given that they originally approved it, it would be wrong for them years later to take the money back from victims," said Jon Sullivan, a spokesman for the state workers' compensation board.

The bad news for New York comes just as the House is considering whether to take back another $125 million in Sept. 11 workers' compensation aid because the state has yet to spend it nearly four years after the 2001 terror attack.

One of the niftiest parts of being a Compassionate Conservative is that you don't have to deal with inconvenient things like facts, since facts don't sell to "the base". Simply put, New York State wants to keep the $125 million in worker's compensation aid because this money has been earmarked for the WTC workers - you know, the "heroes" of Republican lore, those loveable hardhats who chanted U-S-A! while George Bush stood on a smoking pile of rubble and dead bodies with his silly little megaphone and vowed to find "the folks" who "knocked down these buildings," although to this day those "folks" are livin' easy thanks to our corrupt Pakistani "allies".

These same loveable props for our Chimp's photo op were, of course, breathing in toxic air and substances that will result - if not immediately, sometime soon - in lung and respiratory conditions the likes of those in I'm Skeered, Georgia can never imagine. Because the expected claims will be staggering, New York would like to keep these funds active - but the Compassionate Conservatives in Congress need the money, no doubt, to fund more of those snappy Faith-Based programs that keep the poor on their toes by singing hymns for their supper.

One might think that House Republicans and the GAO might find their time better spent investigating the $8.8 billion that went "poof" in the night in Iraq rather than taking money out of the pockets of 9/11 victim families and rescue workers. Investigatng their own corruption, however, has very little attraction to the party of Tom DeLay. Better to give a big whack on the snout to another one of those pesky, heathen Blue States - now that has traction with "the base".

Flinging Poo at Latin America

2005-06-07T09:24:00.000-07:00

Yesterday, our Chimperor continued his tedious lecturing of other countries about democracy - you know, the very thing he's intent on destroying here at home - by making unintentionally hilarious comments to the Organization of American States:

In a 15-minute speech, Bush lauded political change that has made democracy "now the rule rather than the exception" in the Western hemisphere but he said countries faced a choice between two visions.

"One offers a vision of hope. It is founded on representative government, integration into the world markets, and a faith in the transformative power of freedom in individual lives," he said.

"The other seeks to roll back the democratic progress of the past two decades by playing to fear, pitting neighbor against neighbor and blaming others for their own failures to provide for their people," he added.

Now, as sane people, can we immediately identify the above trends as they apply to our own sick, divided country and chortle with mocking joy that Bush has just perfectly described, in order, Democrats and Republicans?

Playing to fear? Have we not witnessed the Republicans playing to fear since 2001, dancing on the graves of the 9/11 dead at their appalling convention, dark warnings of "mushroom clouds", fake terror alerts and constant needling reminders that the big, bad, swarthy terrorists are going to "hit" us again? How can this dipshit say this crap with a straight face, when fear has been their ticket to looting the treasury and launching wars of aggression?

This is the stuff that makes you just say, "Jesus Fucking Christ" and overdose on vicodin.

Let's look what he cites next in his thundering condemnation of those who seek to roll back democratic progress - "pitting neighbor against neighbor". Don't you love this one? Don't you find that those who practice shit like this are the first to accuse others of the same habits? Our Chimperial Majesty - the uniter, not divider - has spent the last five years pandering to the Christian persecution complex, grabbed gays and lesbians by the neck and shook these Big Scary Boogymen to the electorate and gasped that these sinners actually want to marry, mocked liberals as traitors and anti-American...oh, shit, I don't need to go on. You know this guy's record as the most divisive "president" in our history.

If you aren't slack-jawed yet at this chucklehead's rank hypocrisy, the next monkey poo he flings will leave you as limp as his dick. Ready? Blaming others for their own failures. Once again - Jesus Fucking Christ! This little monkeyshit flung his poo everywhere for the "failures" of 9/11, for the "failures" of intelligence that led us to invade a country that had nothing more lethal than unsweetened black coffee in their arsenal, for the "failures" of an economic policy that turned the largest surplus in history to the largest deficit.

And he says this garbage with a straight face!

One can imagine Karl Rove and Karen Hughes snorting with laughter while he dribbles this shit out of his asshole, knowing he's doing little more than mocking his own unwashed masses and proving their own ignorance.

Needless to say, the OAS was less than impressed. The article states that "... some countries were wary of U.S. proposals to monitor democracy in the region." One word can explain that wariness: Diebold.

"The most powerful army in human history can't even protect a two-mile stretch of road."

2005-06-06T07:34:00.000-07:00

Newsweek, the much maligned publication that was recently taken to task for -oops! - telling the truth about our gulag in Gitmo, seems to be growing a bit of a spine in the face of Scott McClellen's granny-like lecturing.

Newsweek's Baghdad bureau chief, Rod Norldland, blasts the imcompetence of our post-war occupation (although, sadly, he fails to recognize that the occupation is fueling the insurgency) as he leaves his Baghdad post after a two year assignment. It makes for interesting reading, especially contrasted with the either delusional or simply false assertions of the junta, such as Cheney telling Larry King last week that "I think they're in the last throes, if you will, of the insurgency," a lie that the Boston Globe rightly took him to task for.

Nordland's piece describes the bitterness and resentment in Iraq against our Crusaders and the leadership that brought us to this sorry point:

The four-square-mile Green Zone, the one place in Baghdad where foreigners are reasonably safe, could be a showcase of American values and abilities. Instead the American enclave is a trash-strewn wasteland of Mad Max-style fortifications. The traffic lights don't work because no one has bothered to fix them. The garbage rarely gets collected. Some of the worst ambassadors in U.S. history are the GIs at the Green Zone's checkpoints. They've repeatedly punched Iraqi ministers, accidentally shot at visiting dignitaries and behave (even on good days) with all the courtesy of nightclub bouncers—to Americans and Iraqis alike. Not that U.S. soldiers in Iraq have much to smile about. They're overworked, much ignored on the home front and widely despised in Iraq, with little to look forward to but the distant end of their tours—and in most cases, another tour soon to follow. Many are reservists who, when they get home, often face the wreckage of careers and family.

Chimpeach!

2005-06-04T21:17:00.000-07:00

"Facing clear evidence of peril, we cannot wait for the final proof, the smoking gun that could come in the form of a mushroom cloud." -- President Bush, Cincinnati OH, 10/7/02

The "smoking gun" actually appears not in the fevered imagination of our fearmongering president, but in the Downing Street Minutes of July 23rd, 2002, written at a time when Bush was assuring the American public and the Congress that war would be a "last resort":

"Military action was now seen as inevitable. Bush wanted to remove Saddam, through military action, justified by the conjunction of terrorism and WMD. But the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy. The NSC had no patience with the UN route, and no enthusiasm for publishing material on the Iraqi regime's record. There was little discussion in Washington of the aftermath after military action."

Democrats.com is offering a thousand dollar bounty to anyone who can get Bush to answer yes or no to the following question: "In July 2002, did you and your administration 'fix' the intelligence and facts about non-existent Iraqi WMD's and ties to terrorism - which were disputed by U.S. intelligence officials - to sell your decision to invade Iraq to Congress, the American people, and the world - as quoted in the Downing Street Minutes?".

If you can pass the Republican credentials check to sneak your way into one of Bush's bogus taxpayer funded Social Security Town Hall Meetings, you can earn a little jack by going off-script. There are even second and third prizes, so get in on the action!

By the way, any member of the White House press corps could instantly win the grand by simply doing their job - and notice that it hasn't happened. Don't hold your breath.

The biggest fucking phony, ever

2005-06-04T13:25:00.000-07:00

In anther transparent effort to feign sympathy for the men and women in our military slaughtered for his elective war of imperialism and greed, George Bush told the New York Daily News the following:

Bush also revealed a sensitive side, admitting he's often reduced to tears when he meets families of fallen soldiers.

Bush said "my obligation" to visit family members is the hardest part of his job. "I'm a crier, and I weep a lot," he acknowledged. "On the other hand, when it's all over, I feel incredibly strengthened by the strength of the parents or the wife or the kids."

This photograph was taken on Memorial Day weekend, after Bush was presumably done "weeping" for the almost 1700 American citizens he sent off to die. Looks pretty happy to me, no? Perhaps he had a toast or two (or dozens) in honor of the tens of thousands of Iraqi civilians he's murdered. I'll refrain from commenting on Laura looking frumpy, wrinkled, and big hipped in her usual hideous pantsuit ensemble, as this fact is readily apparent from even a cursory glance at the photograph.

This soulless coward has never wept over anything other than the possiblity of his ass being shipped to Nam or his whiskey glass being empty.

One might hope the media one day will also inquire why Bush doesn't feel a weighty sense of "obligation" to attend even a single funeral of a fallen soldier - even those who were residents of the District of Columbia, a duty traditionally assigned to sitting presidents.

Poo-Flinging from our Chimperial Majesty

2005-06-04T09:17:00.000-07:00

"I think younger workers—first of all, younger workers have been promised benefits the government—promises that have been promised, benefits that we can't keep. That's just the way it is."—Washington, D.C., May 3, 2005

"Listen, I understand people are paying higher prices at the gas pump. I know that you're paying that tax -- it's like a tax that goes -- that money, and it's up because we're dependent." -Hopkinsville, Kentucky, June 2, 2005

"In terms of, umm -- you know, the -- the detainees, we've had thousands of people detained. We've investigated every single complaint against the detainees. It seemed like to me they based some of their decisions on, on the word of, uhh -- and the allegations -- by people who were held in detention, people who hate America, people that had been trained in some instances to disassemble -- that means not tell the truth. And so it was an absurd report. It just is. And, uhh, you know -- yes, sir. " Washington, D.C., May 31, 2005

It's a given that the typical Bush voter finds the above somehow endearing - after all, it proves that someone as appallingly ignorant as they are can indeed aspire to the presidency. For the rest of us, it's further proof that this guy must have - simply must have - cheated his way through Yale and Harvard. This is, after all, the same ninny who asked singer Charlotte Church in 2000 what state Wales was in. Church graciously replied, " It’s its own country next to England, actually Mr Bush," and in recounting the story, branded Bush a "right weirdo", adding that "George Bush just hasn’t got a clue what he’s doing.”

When a 19 year old singer correctly takes the President of the United States to task for his ignorance, you know we're in trouble, kids.

Of course, his poo-flinging takes on many forms, including a recent false display of empathy to the Washington Post that even, apparently, confused him.

"I'd say I'd spend most of my time worrying about right now people losing their life in Iraq. Both Americans and Iraqis. I worry about my girls. " Once he had proven that sociopaths do, indeed, have a conscience, he quickly changed course lest he disappoint his sociopathic supporters. In the very same interview, he babbled this little gem: "You know, I don't worry all that much, other than what I just described to you. I attribute that to . . . I've got peace of mind. A lot of it has to do with my particular faith, and a lot of that has to do with the fact that a lot of people pray for me and Laura. . . . I'm sleeping pretty good. Seriously. I get asked that. There's times when I hadn't been. I've got peace of mind."

First, in order to get in an obligatory swipe at the Bush twins, I suppose he'd "worry" about them more if their drunken, unemployed asses were in Iraq "defending freedom", or whatever the bullshit reason of the day is for our illegal invasion. I might also add that these aren't"girls", they're college graduates and old enough to drink like pigs and butt dance in Manhattan every night. But I digress.

Does our Chimperor worry or not? He assures us of his furrowed brow, his LBJ-like angst, and then breezily tells the sycopantic WaPo - which, like the New York Times, does little more than fling paeans to this administration like so much monkey poo - that "I really don't worry all that much..I'm sleeping pretty good...I've got peace of mind." Actually, you can imagine that the Post cleaned up his incoherent grunting for this piece - it was probably more like, "...sleepin' purty good...got piece a'mind..." followed by the splattering sounds of the poo he's picked out of his ass hitting the walls of the Treaty Room.

And we haven't even touched on his war crimes yet, only his base stupidity and essential crudeness. More to come.

Simply Chimpy

The head ghoul in a ghost town

The strings of the puppet exposed

Building a nation of serfs

Another power grab

Our New FEMA "Expert"

Our big, brave Commander-in-Chief in New Orleans today

President Photo-Op

Now the real looting begins

Recommended Reading

"Oblivious, in denial, dangerous"

From bizarre to insane

Spinning Death

Louisiana Burning

Bush cut New Orleans flood control project 44% to pay for Iraq

a'pickin' and a'grinnin'

Let Them Eat Cake

Chimpeach!

Bring The Troops Home Now tour announced

It's Fuck You Friday

Republican "grassroots" activism

And now, a popcorn break

IraqNam

Truth Be Told

A Ray of Light

Some Weekend Reading

It's Fuck You Friday

While Bush plays, his smear machine leaps into action

Pentagon Propaganda Walk Losing Steam

Bush-style "Christians"

Bush: "All right, let's go have fun."

Vomit Alert

Why Bush is afraid to meet with Cindy Sheehan...

Our "President" is Afraid

It's Fuck You Friday

Expect the Christian Right to Howl...

The Myth of the "War President"

Another Republican Drug Abuser

It's Fuck You Friday

Bringing honor and dignity (and remarkable crudeness) back to the White House

Triangulation is, like, so 1990's

How to be a Democrat (according to Hillary)

Winning Hearts and Minds...

It's Fuck You Friday

Treason in the White House

The Spin Begins

Your Tax Dollars at Work

Bringing "Democracy" to Iraq, Bush-Style

It's Fuck You Friday

To Whom It May Concern

Twisting in the Wind, Part Deux

Convert a Jew, Get a Tax Break

Rove is goin' down

He Just Never Shuts UP

It's Fuck You Friday

What's Next? Beware.

The Empty Shell

When You Lie Down With Dogs...

Independence Day Thoughts (letter from a red state)

It's Fuck You Friday

Prime Time Bigotry

The Road to Hell

California National Guard Spying on Mothers of Dead Soldiers

Wars on Many Fronts

Activist Update

Lies, Lies, Lies

It's Fuck You Friday

Bush Forces White House Color Guard to Break the Law

Cry Me a River

Buyer's Remorse in California

A Real Man of the People

Say It Ain't So, Joe

Ask the A's Guys

The Most Criminal Administration, Ever.

It's Fuck You Friday

Daddy WARbucks Update

Enjoy This Beautiful Day

Hide the Kids - Our Dictator's Not Happy

Ask Daddy WARbucks to Enlist

Note to Country: Are We Awake Yet?