The Daily Curmudgeon

Life Imitating Art

2009-08-29T21:21:00.004-05:00

The only thing better than the invention of television was the television remote control. It's a window on the world, a time machine and a peephole all within a few channels. I like t.v. It asks nothing of me other than a little alternating current and a cult-like devotion to all it has to offer. There isn't a situation I can't relate to something I saw on t.v. I'll even throw out a quote or two from M*A*S*H or The Office to illustrate something going on in my day. My wife is a good audience and we've shared many punch lines together. Saturday Night Live has had many faux-presidential skits that we remember and refer to from time to time. Recently, one skit from the 2000 presidential election came to mind after listening to ever shrinking Republican party ranting (a more gentle way of saying lying) about "death panels" and "death books" in their craven mission to abort health care reform before it comes to life. Whoever said Republicans were against abortion? You could say the Republican party was one big death panel but that would be rhetorically hyperbolic and I wouldn't want to do that.

Moving on. One memorable line from SNL in 2000 came out of a "faux debate between George W. Bush and Al Gore".

Al Gore: ...Jim, let me tell about a friend of mine. [ holds up a picture of an elderly woman ] Her name is Etta Munsen. She's 94, she's a widow living on Social Security in Sparta, Tennessee...Now, under my plan, Etta's prescription drugs would be covered. Under my opponent's plan, her house would be burned to the ground. And that is wrong. That is just wrong!

Sound familiar? Congressman or Senator (Insert Republican): "Under our plan, patients would get the care they need. Under the Democrat's plan they would be dragged in front of a death panel and made to beg for their lives." That's even worse than the fictitious SNL debate since Etta wasn't presumably required to actually be in her house when it was burned to the ground.

You could say the recent health care debate is life imitating art imitating life. That would be the genteel/social commentary way to describe the irresponsible fear-mongering and psychotic hate speech devoid of any moral boundaries engaged in by the Republican party. But latter is so much more satisfying and accurate.

Last Thought of the Night

2009-07-22T22:47:00.004-05:00

Today, the Senate rejected a proposed bill that would have allowed people to carry concealed weapons from state to state. "The measure would have required" states to recognize concealed carry permits issued in other states. I wonder if the same people would vote to allow gay marriages to be recognized in other states if recognized in any other state. Yes, I know. I can stop wondering and go to sleep.

Thought for the Night

2009-07-22T22:43:00.004-05:00

Will any proposed national health insurance program cover treatment for mental illness including those who believe President Obama is not an American citizen?

It is Alive!

2009-07-18T10:04:00.003-05:00

In the words of Tiger Woods - "Hello world." Yes, I am alive. Nearly two years of blog silence. That's trappist monk territory to be sure. Writing a daily blog was fun and I thought I put out some great posts but to keep it up and feeling like a guppy in the ocean took away the drive. I thought I would sit back and watch for a while. When I last left you I was in a pitched battle with chipmunks. They retreated for a time but now they are back (perhaps their descendants coming for revenge) and worse than ever. I've added another tax deduction to the family and I've started a new job. Oh yeah, and I didn't have to move to Sydney, Australia (weak dollar and high home prices) because that loopy quitter Sarah Palin wasn't elected vice-president. I'm rested and ready perhaps not for daily crankiness but periodic crankiness nevertheless. See you soon in Crankyland.

You Won't Believe This

2007-10-07T22:35:00.000-05:00

When I last left you I was in the middle of war. War against chipmunks. After dispatching with Alvin and sending him (or her it's really hard to know) to acorn heaven another furry burrower took up residence under my patio. My guilt of committing animal murder, justifiable in my opinion, was replaced with a single rage of eradicating these patio destroyers from my lands. But when I caught the second chipmunk on a glue trap I showed him some mercy and put him in a cage, my worthless Have-a Heart trap that doesn't work, and drove him a couple of miles away and released him from the glue trap by pouring vegetable oil on him. The oil dissolves the glue. In a few moments Alvin Jr. was running into the forest to terrorize some other chipmunk or person. Job well done. Moby Dick has been slain, or released in some other place far away from Ahab. But alas, it was not to be.

The day or two of bliss was shattered when coming home one day I saw the burrow had been re-excavated. Moby was back and as big a dick as ever. Not to panic. I had a good supply of glue traps. So I calmly set a couple around the hole next to my patio and waited. Not even enough time to watch a rerun of Seinfeld had gone by when I saw I had captured the third chipmunk to test my hunting abilities. Once again I put on my work gloves and placed the chipmunk trapped on the glue board into the cage trap, grabbed the vegetable oil and drove to the release site. Once again I poured oil on the varmit and once again it slide free shortly thereafter and scampered away. This has to be it. Chipmunk free at last.

But it was not to be. Two days later the same burrow was dug up again. Now my mind was playing tricks on me. Could this be the same chipmunk I released twice? Could it possibly be finding its way back to my patio? I've read stories of dog's left hundreds of miles away from home and somehow find their way back but a chipmunk? This time if I caught it I would drive it miles and miles way so that it really couldn't get back. So I put a glue trap down and waited. And waited. And waited. And waited. Usually it took only 15 or 20 minutes for the little rodent to make a misstep onto glue-land. Not this time. Could it really be the same chipmunk that found its way back twice and now it knows not to get close to the glue board? Is that even possible? Before I could answer that question I saw the glue trap jumping around. Alvin IV was caught. Now this was routine. I took the oil, cage and gloves out there and put him in the cage and then into the hatch of the station wagon and drove away. thinking how far should I drive him before I release him? The answer was taken out of my hands.

So I'm doing 60 down the highway around the corner from my house when I hear scurrying and the sound of metal. I look over my shoulder and on the right armrest of my kid's car seat is the chipmunk. Holy shit! I'm doing 60 mph with a pissed off chipmunk loose in my car. As I pull over to the shoulder Alvin leaps into the front passenger area between the door and some bags on the floor. I can't see him but all I can think is there are rabies shots in my future. I lean over and open the door and almost immediately he jumps out into the underbrush on the side of the highway. Holy hell. I knew I should have killed it and just be done with it.

I get back home and open the hatch and there on the glue trap inside the cage is the last inch or two of the tail of Alvin IV. It's gone from Moby Dick to some horror flick. At least now if it comes back I'll know for sure if it's the same chipmunk. I also am leaning towards a quick execution at the scene since this close encounter with a tailless pissed off chipmunk trapped in a passenger compartment has taught me to either be merciless or don't even bother catching them. Anything in between is hazardous to your health.

Revenge of the Chipmunk

2007-08-31T11:37:00.001-05:00

Now I don't feel so guilty for bashing the brains out of Alvin the menace of a chipmunk that eluded my manhunt for a couple of months. He reached number one on my most wanted list just I closed in on him like Dillinger at the Biograph theater. I kept telling people, "I feel a little guilty" but not anymore. From his plastic bag of a grave he is laughing now that one of his kin has decided to test my hunting skills. Yes, another chipmunk has taken up residence under my patio already dislocating a brick, and he too will soon reach chipmunk heaven. And when he does the Earth will be that much lighter.

He brazenly dug a tunnel on the other side of the walkway where Alvin dug his burrow and where he met his end. Since I had an unused shipment of chemical weapons of chipmunk destruction I used it. Intelligence (Cranky's wife) told me the high value target was in his spider hole. I ran into the house and prepared my WMDs. Intelligence (again Cranky's wife) left her post so she was not able to confirm that the target was in its lair. I made a command decision and authorized the use of chemical weapons. I love the smell of sulfur gas in a chipmunk's burrow. Smells like victory. The after action report does not allow me to confirm the death of the high value target but any escape will be shortlived. I will not outsource this problem to Afghani warlords or Orkin. Simon will be brought to justice or justice will brought to Simon, but justice will be done.

Blogging in the dark

2007-08-23T21:30:00.000-05:00

I'm blogging from my iPhone as I am sitting in the dark. No power. At least my battery back-up on my sump pump works. A 47 minute train ride home became a three hour nightmare. First we couldn't leave the station because of the weather and the threat of high winds and then because of a tree on the tracks. And then we thought we were on our way, we got an announcement that the delays had caused the train engineer to reach his limit under federal law for the number of hours he could work and that we all had to get off the train. Of course it was raining sheets of water outside as we were basically thrown off the train. Then when I got home I found out we had no power. The other side of the street had power but not our side. More good news. So here I am in the dark typing on my iPhone by flashlight just like Abraham Lincoln. Can't wait to see what tomorrow brings.

Mano-a-Chipmunk.

2007-08-22T17:57:00.000-05:00

A few months ago I noticed a perfectly round hole tunneled into the dirt at the edge of my patio. I thought it might be a snake hole or something when in fact it was a chipmunk den. What do I know about nature or rather varmints? I'm more comfortable in the Apple store than the woods. I had a brick patio put in to replace the "patio" that was already there. I'm being generous when I say there was a "patio" there since it was really a bunch of loose bricks placed into the ground which became quite the eyesore/trip hazard. After looking at it for too long I paid thousands of dollars to have a real brick patio put in. The guys who did it did a great job. I took pictures (see photos) of before, during and after the construction. They put like nine inches of crushed gravel and base gravel down. A layer of sand went on before the bricks. It turned out solid and level. It was firm enough to park a car on it. I would grill out there and when I had a free moment I would read a paper and drink lemonade. Then it showed up. The chipmunk.

At first I had no idea what I was dealing with since I've never dealt with chipmunks before. Weasels and rats yes but always in human form. I tried pushing dirt back into the hole but I soon found out that was a waste of time. It dug through that like it wasn't there. This is what the chipmunk was designed for and I don't mean intelligently designed for. It is a digging machine that is relentless. If I told you I filled up its tunnel with rocks everyday and it dug it out everyday for a couple of months I'm probably understating it. I tried placing wood sheets down to discourage the pest. It just dug under the wood to get to the tunnel. More wood and bricks placed down on the ground had no affect. Somewhere along the way, it's all a blur to me now like battle, I googled, "How to kill a chipmunk." The first hit I got I read all about chipmunks. The more I read the more I realized how serious this was. This thing lives for years and will never leave on its own. It's tunnel could be 30 feet long with different chambers for storage or for sleep. It will have offspring and they too will be impossible to get rid of. They will burrow under patios until bricks buckle and destroy the patio. That sick feeling in my stomach wasn't the bean burrito I had for lunch. I put myself on a war footing. This was my 9/11.

I failed to follow the Powell Doctrine of using overwhelming force. I followed the Bush Doctrine of using just enough force to lose. I ordered a cage trap with a trigger plate in the center and doors on each end. I waited a couple of days and when I got the trap I put peanut butter on the trigger plate and set the trap. All it did was give the chipmunk a meal since the trap didn't trigger. When it rained hard the rain triggered the trap but not when the chipmunk walked through it. I went back to the website and read more. I ordered the pecan paste and liquid poison. Your days are numbered chipmunk. I hope you like the taste of poison. Tonight you dine in hell.

I waited a few more days and when I got my smart bomb I mixed them together and put them in two snack-sized zip-lock bags. They usually held goldfish crackers but now they hold a trip to chipmunk neverland. I placed the baggies in the now two holes on the edge of my patio and waited. The next day I saw one baggie had a few gnaw marks on it. The next day there was just a pool of goop in the holes like a moat. I thought well he ate through the baggie and got to the poisoned jam and thats that. Wrong. Unless it had a twin brother it was still here. I could almost hear him laughing at me. It's hard to sleep when a malevolent chipmunk is in its tunnel beneath your patio laughing at you.

I went back on the "how to kill a chipmunk" website. I read through again the arsenal available to kill a chipmunk. In my desperation I ordered coyote urine. Yes, you read that right. Coyote urine. Seemed to make sense. It's a predator that eats things like chipmunks and marking the area with its scent through urine might do it. The website said it would work so in the year 2007 I did something I could never dream I would ever do in any year - I had a quart of coyote urine shipped UPS from Georgia. (At least it wasn't a gallon.) When it got here it looked like a jug of apple cider wrapped multiple times in plastic with the cap sealed with lots of shipping tape. You could smell it through all the packaging. If you want to have an immediate gag reflex and come as close to throwing up without actually hurling then get a quart of coyote urine and try to transfer it into a spray bottle. Guaranteed to make you dry heave. Sprayed it like crazy around the chipmunk tunnel opening. I sealed the pee in layers of plastic and went in my house thinking the chipmunk will get one whiff and run for its life. Any guesses if that happened? Didn't do a thing. It probably thought, "oh, another suburbanite buying that coyote urine. What an idiot." My rage increased to stroke levels.

I went to another site and ordered another trap. One that had only one door and a trigger plate. I waited a few days and the minute I got it I put a strawberry in the back of the trap and set it and waited. Within 10 minutes the chipmunk was casing the fruit. It walked all the way around the trap but didn't go in. It started to try to get to the strawberry through the metal cage instead of walking through it over the trigger plate to get o the food. This was incredible. It actually got a bite through the metal bars. I opened a door and it ran. When it came back again it walked all the way around the trap and walked by the open end to try to eat it through the metal cage. These varmints are smart. Back to the website for more weapons.

WMDs. The stuff we couldn't find in Iraq I found. Sulfur sticks. When I know the monster in in its lair I light the gas stick and kill it with sulfur clouds of death that will seek out the rodent even if it's 30 feet in the tunnel. I read that you could also use a road flare and just stick it in the hole but somehow I think with my luck the red flame thing will somehow burn down my house. I place another order. While waiting for my order I get the idea of putting glue traps around the tunnel opening with a dab of peanut butter for bait. My intention was to get the chipmunk stuck and then put him and the glue trap into the cage trap - transport him miles away and then pour vegetable oil on him to release him from the glue. (Yes that works.) I placed by glue traps and within 15 minutes I saw him licking the peanut butter off one of the traps carefully avoiding the glue part. Unreal. Then it seemed to touch the glue and not like it. It wasn't caught but it started to smell and lick its little paws as if to try to clean them. Then it made a mistake. It walked around the trap but got stuck. Then it flayed about getting more caught. I ran outside to put it into the cage trap. When I got there it had gotten tangled up in the lattice work of an overturned table used before and unsuccessfully to block the hole. It looked like it might be able to tear itself away from the glue trap leaving the sticky cardboard behind stuck to the table.

I tried, I really tried to get him into the open cage trap but he was jumping around in terror. I thought it might break free from the trap and fear of losing my Moby Dick made my heart beat fast. Then a murderous rage came over me. It was either him or me. I raised the cage trap over my head and down it came, over and over onto the body of the soon to be dead chipmunk. I later figured out that the red chunks of goo weren't exploded chipmunk organs but the strawberry that was in the trap/blunt murder weapon that had broke apart during the assault. It was a crime of passion and I'm sure no jury would convict me. And then looking at the newly deceased little brown furry gerbil-like creature a bit of guilt hit me. All it wanted to do was eat a berry and a nut and not get killed. I even argued my case with my wife. "I tried to take him alive but he wouldn't cooperate."

I filled up the tunnel I hope for the last time and cleared the battlefield of weapons used and unused. Mission accomplished and I have the body to prove it. Anyone need some sulfur sticks? They're on a UPS truck as we speak. Rest in peace Alvin. You were a worthy opponent but only one of us could live here. Forgive me.

It's been a while

2007-06-21T10:08:00.000-05:00

I was going to blog a bit about a few headlines that make me want to either blog intensely or quit altogether and then I got stuck typing my title. Is it "a while" or "awhile"? It's been a while since I've been in high school and I still need to look up the spelling of words. Spelling isn't my strong suit and forget about gerunds and past participles. (Is that spelled correctly? I don't even care enough to look it up on dictionary.com but you get what I'm saying.) A look on Google led me to this and I still don't know for sure if I did it correctly although I think I did. Take a while to read it for awhile.

On to headlines and thoughts.

Raw Story has one of the best headlines (now an article) I've seen in awhile, "Cheney: My office isn't in executive branch." Uh huh. Can't wait to hear this one.

I read through the letters to the judge in the Scooter Libby case asking for leniency in sentencing. The highlights are that people think he's a great dad, likes to go home to see his kid to bed and is always polite to people. I guess that's enough to keep you out of prison for committing perjury and obstruction of justice. Hilarious to hear that there is no underlying crime since all that says is that if you're really good at lying and obstructing justice then prosecutors can't make the case and thus you shouldn't be charged with obstruction either. Sort of a reward for being so good at committing perjury. The worst part about the pile of letters is that James Carville the Clinton-maker co-signed a "have mercy" plea with his wife Mary Matalin the Cheney aide and former Bush I campaign manager. (He had trick or treat at an undisclosed location for the kids - let my Scooter go! I mean what will we tell the children?) Thanks James for taking the side of the rich and powerful whether they be Democrats or Republicans. Thanks for showing that all you care about are the inside players in the business of politics because that's all it is for you and your wife - a big game, big business. A business the huddling masses aren't in. Next time you want me to contribute to your clients or knock on doors to help get them better jobs I'll tell you to ask Scooter to do it. I stand by my prediction a while ago - Scooter spends 0 days in jail. It's a sure thing. The rule of law is for little people like you and me huddling in lines to get the iPhone. (See below).

Then there's the morons running the campaigns of Hillary and Obama. Hey, Hillary, a video parody of you pretending to be just like a ruthless plotting mob boss might not be the smartest way to put yourself out there. Comedy has to have a kernel of truth for it to be funny but this might be the whole corn of the cob. Nice job. Can't wait for the next video of you pretending to be a power-mad, enabling wife of a politician who could have been one of the greatest presidents in history if it weren't for his inner-fat boy who just wants to be loved. And Obama? Nice memo sent out without campaign attribution. Did that take all of three seconds for it to be published with your name behind it? And here's a thought - leave the political comedy to Jon Stewart. Hillary (D-Punjab) isn't that clever or funny or appropriate for a presidential candidate. Want to presidential? Promote the staff members like W would for such a screw-up.

On a positive note, the iPhone is coming out next friday I'm already in line. I have all my supplies and should get one. There are about 75 crazier people than me in line so I'll keep you up to date on my progess. And if you believe I'm outside an Apple store right now blogging next to my personal port-o-let then you probably also believe that your conversation with Hillary will make a difference or that Scooter is going to jail or that the office of the vice-president isn't in the executive branch.

Have a nice day.

Department of Political Justice

2007-05-23T20:26:00.000-05:00

I watched almost all of the Monica Goodling testimony before the House Judiciary Committee today. With apologies to William Shakespeare I can sum up what I saw: "Congress's but a walking shadow, a poor player that struts and frets his hour upon the stage and then is heard no more: it is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing."

First off Monica Goodling came off very well. She is a polite, soft-spoken, albeit misguided political hack of a young woman who seems genuine in her remorse for as she put it "crossing the line" when she used political litmus tests for career DOJ job hiring, a big no-no under the law. She did have a few interesting comments such as saying Deputy Attorney General Paul McNulty was not completely accurate (translation: he lied) during his congressional testimony and she said Attorney General Fredo Gonzales was also inaccurate in his statements about the firings of U.S. Attorneys. She said on her way out of Justice when she resigned Fredo Gonzales talked to her about what he thought had gone on there as far as his involvement in the firings. This was after it was known a congressional investigation was underway and this smacks more of trying to coach a witness to get their stories straight rather than an innocent "hey remember when..." conversation. It's more like "hey Monica, remember when all those U.S. Attorneys were fired and I had nothing to do with it but I knew it was all for performance rather than political reasons?" In any event, Goodling didn't bury anyone, although she said McNulty and Fredo were inaccurate in their swore testimony and that Kyle Sampson compiled the firing list. To this day there isn't a person or document from the DOJ that answers the question who made the list, when was it made, when names were placed on it and when names were taken off and for what reasons. But did Democrats ask simple and penetrating yes-no questions in their alloted five minutes each? Nope. It was a an embarrassment not only to the art of cross-examination but to basic english speakers everywhere.

John Conyers and Maxine Waters can barely speak. It's like they were drunk or something. I understand the Republicans praising Ms. Goodling (even though she admitted to breaking the law - ah the joys of use immunity) and wasting the time of the hearing - one congressman Chris Cannon used his five minutes to read into the record a newspaper article about John Murtha's earmark threat to another congressman and that relates to the DOJ investigation how? - but the Democrats are fucking useless. You don't have to be Clarence Darrow to get out a decent question. "So you don't know who drafted the list do you Ms. Goodling?" "And you don't know when David Iglesias the US Attorney in New Mexico was placed on the list do you?" "And you don't have any records of who made recommendations or on what grounds those recommendations were made do you?" "So you can't say with any certainty that some or all of the firings were done to obstruct ongoing investigations into republicans such as Congressman Duke Cunningham better known now as inmate #11789 can you?" The number of questions are endless but the Democrats once again sounded like dull knives. As sharp as marbles. I mean come on. You've got five minutes and you ask a four minute question that doesn't even make sense? In the words of Steve Martin, "Here's a good idea - have a POINT. It makes it SO much more interesting for the listener!" It boggles the mind.

So even though Monica Goodling doesn't really understand, along with the apologist Republicans in Congress and the solid 28% loyal Bushies out in the country, how political considerations of career hirings and firings have deeply damaged the Department of Justice, she did well. She probably has a future talk show on FOX News in the works. No there was no bombshell or smoking gun but the fact that Deputy AG McNulty has already said Goodlings testimony today was wrong shows you the vipers are quickly turning on each other. The damage has been done and it will take a new Attorney General and a new staff at main Justice as well as 93 new US Attorneys to start to repair the damage. What Goodling and the rest don't understand or don't seem to care much about is that when you run the Justice Department like the personal chew toy of the White House you run it into the ground.

P.S. I have more respect now for former AG John Ashcroft and Deputy AG James Comey then I would ever have imagined. Watch this and this and tell me if you aren't embarrassed by the Godfather-like thugs running this government. Government by "sign this" in a hospital room. Boggles the mind even more than the Democrats on the House Judiciary Committee.

A Monica by any other name is still a nightmare

2007-05-14T23:19:00.000-05:00

Katrina used to be a popular name in America. That was before Hurricane Katrina tried to turn New Orleans into Atlantis. Brian Williams of NBC Nightly News reported last week that in 2006 only 850 baby girls were named Katrina in the U.S. Makes sense. People don't like to name their kids after something that revives unpleasant memories. After Bill Clinton's "Monica problem" arose (pun intended) I thought well, there goes Monica as a girl's name. Another Monica has been in the news lately, Monica Goodling of the Department of Justice, and I'm hoping that "Monica" drops off the baby name lists completely since I'm unimpressed by their contributions to society so far.

Monica Goodling is the absurdly young and totally unqualified graduate of Pat Robertson's law school (no I'm not kidding) who was the Department of Justice's White House liaison (earning $133,000 a year) who had near total control over the hiring and firing of everyone at DOJ. Apparently going to a fourth-tiered law school (there is no fifth tier) and doing opposition research for the Bush-Cheney campaign is all you need to take control of the Department of Justice. Monica and her Rovian masters decided to put a few thumbs on the scales of justice and set the DOJ back 30 years when then President Nixon got Robert Bork (yes that guy) to fire Archibald Cox the Special Counsel. (Attorney General Elliot Richardson and Deputy AG William Ruckelshaus resigned rather than fire Cox. Bork had no problem just following orders.)

I guess I shouldn't be shocked anymore but I am. I'm not shocked that people motivated by religion, politics and/or self-interest, with a bit of "what's the point of having power if you don't use it?" thrown in do immoral things. It's more that I'm impressed with how many different places they do these things. The Department of Justice is off-limits to politics for the day to day operations and especially for prosecutions. Another myth busted not by Mythbusters but by the usual suspects, W, Rove, Gonzales and his useful idiot Monica Goodling.

Here's how the New York Times reports how Ms. Goodling was using her time at the DOJ roughly six years after graduating from the Lord's Law School: "Two years ago, Robin C. Ashton, a seasoned criminal prosecutor at the Department of Justice, learned from her boss that a promised promotion was no longer hers. “You have a Monica problem,” Ms. Ashton was told, according to several Justice Department officials. Referring to Monica M. Goodling, a 31-year-old, relatively inexperienced lawyer who had only recently arrived in the office, the boss added, “She believes you’re a Democrat and doesn’t feel you can be trusted.” Ms. Ashton’s ouster — she left the Executive Office for United States Attorneys for another Justice Department post two weeks later — was a critical early step in a plan that would later culminate in the ouster of nine United States attorneys last year. Ms. Goodling would soon be quizzing applicants for civil service jobs at Justice Department headquarters with questions that several United States attorneys said were inappropriate, like who was their favorite president and Supreme Court justice. One department official said an applicant was even asked, “Have you ever cheated on your wife?” Ms. Goodling also moved to block the hiring of prosecutors with résumés that suggested they might be Democrats, even though they were seeking posts that were supposed to be nonpartisan, two department officials said." Hiring and firing based on political tests for career posts at Justice is against the law. No matter, laws are for other people not on a divine political mission.

The stories get worse. It seems as if the last few years at Justice has been like "Survivor: D.C." with political apparatchiks making lists of those not from the Church of W all to be sacrificed on the altar of well, Justice. Those Republicans are great at making lists. Ms. Goodling has resigned, taken the fifth (a DOJ first) and has been granted immunity before testifying to Congress. I'm sure she won't recall anything important and her fifteen minutes of infamy will soon pass. My only hope is that this finally puts and end to the name "Monica." So far I'm unimpressed with the progeny.

It's not cutting and running so much as it's running for office

2007-05-10T12:45:00.000-05:00

There was a saying before my time that "what's good for General Motors is good for America." The new philosophy of the Republican party is "what's good for Republicans is good for America." Of course the phrase should have been "what's good for America is good for General Motors" since we're all in this boat together but let's move on. Republicans, having used the September 11 attacks as a partisan club to bludgeon political opponents moved on to start a war with Iraq that was packaged, promoted and sold like Spider-Man 3. For the last four years we've heard all the talking points from Republicans why we had to invade Iraq and why we have to stay there no matter what. The terrorists would win or they'll follow us home or democracy would fail or Iran would become emboldened or chaos would ensue or the region would be threatened or Al Qaeda would have a base of operations to attack America. The list goes on and on. But it really is simpler than that. It was good politics for Republicans. They used the "Commander Guy" to swagger, talk tough and scare the piss out of people that if they voted for Democrats they would die. It worked in 2002 and 2004. Not so much in 2006. So now since it is not good politically to support staying in Iraq Republicans have decided not for the good the nation but for their party's own good it's time for a change.

Here's how the Washington Post reports it, "House Republican moderates, in a remarkably blunt White House meeting, warned President Bush this week that his pursuit of the war in Iraq is risking the future of the Republican Party and that he cannot count on GOP support for many more months." My own Republican congressman - an empty suit apparatchik - Mark Kirk was a "leader" (how are there leaders among blind followers?) of the Republican congressman who went to see the President and told him NOT that the war was a mistake and that we're doing more harm than good there, but that it's hurting the GOP politically. Not that it's hurting America but that it's hurting something more important - their political futures. After four years of mindless flag waving and supporting the worst foreign policy disaster possibly in our nation's history, these Republicans don't want to get out of Iraq because it's what the people want or that staying is further damaging America but rather that it's damaging the Republican party.

This isn't like Barry Goldwater telling Nixon he had lost all his support in Congress and for the good of the nation he should resign. No this is more like a few lackey Republican congressmen who go up to see Bush and tell him for the good of their jobs and their pensions and lobbying futures he needs to change policy in Iraq. It was the central front in the war on terror, a threat to the world and now it's just a threat to their jobs and their perks of elective office.

What's good for America is good for America not just the political prospects of the GOP. Remember that in 2008. Remember that the only thing these guys care about is winning elections and if cutting and running from Iraq helps their electoral chances they'll do it. They're doing it now.

A government as good as its people

2007-05-08T13:37:00.000-05:00

Before the US invaded Iraq, President Bush said he had intelligence evidence that "Saddam Hussein aids and protects terrorists, including members of al Qaeda." Vice President Cheney said Iraq was the heart of "the geographic base of the terrorists who have had us under assault now for many years, but most especially on 9/11." After the invasion (not after the war since it looks like it will last forever) Bush and Cheney continue to conflate and outright lie about the relationship between Iraq and al Qaeda as it existed before the war.

Just last month on April 6, Vice President Cheney continued to claim a link between al Qaeda and Saddam Hussein telling, who else, Rush Limbaugh, "remember Abu Musab al Zarqawi, a Jordanian terrorist, al Qaeda affiliate; ran a training camp in Afghanistan for al Qaeda, then migrated -- after we went into Afghanistan and shut him down there, he went to Baghdad, took up residence there before we ever launched into Iraq; organized the al Qaeda operations inside Iraq before we even arrived on the scene, and then, of course, led the charge for Iraq until we killed him last June.... This is al Qaeda operating in Iraq. And as I say, they were present before we invaded Iraq." Of course this is lie layered on lie as Zarqawi was not even a member of al Qaeda until he pledged his support in 2004 - after the U.S. invasion. Before the 2003 invasion Zarqawi was in the northern Kurdish portion of Iraq, outside of Saddam Hussein's control and in an area hostile to Saddam's regime, not Baghdad and there's no evidence of collusion between Zarqawi and Hussein. But no matter it sounds good doesn't it?

Looking back at polls before and after the 2003 invasion of Iraq as many as 70% of America thought there was a connection between Saddam Hussein/Iraq and the attacks of September 11. Mission accomplished indeed. And the "confusion" or the lie that there was some operational connection between the two (al Qaeda and Iraq that is, not the operational connection between Iraq and the U.S. - that was in the 1980s when Donald Rumsfeld was Saddam's cabana boy) continues to this day. "There are too many ifs, too many things going on - I don't know the whole story." says a potential juror in the Jose Padilla terrorism-support case who isn't sure who directed the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks. "I'm oblivious to that stuff," one prospective juror said. And it wasn't President Bush who said, "I don't watch the news much. I try to avoid it." but he could have. No, it was a juror candidate who is as qualified to be on the Padilla jury as she is to be President of the United States.

A government as good as its people or a people as good as its government? Doesn't matter. If ignorance is bliss then this is the happiest country on Earth.

I don't recall - for now

2007-05-07T08:56:00.003-05:00

I think I wrote about this before but I don't recall. I've searched my recollection but I can't recall. I have a vague memory of doing so but unless I am presented with other evidence I really can't provide any further answer other than what I've already said.

Memories like the corners of my mind are endangered in Washington. Who hasn't testified that they just can't recall anything important. I remember all the way back to Iran-Contra testimony of John Poindexter who was, if I can recall correctly, a National Security Advisor under Ronald Reagan and was called to testify about the arms for hostages with a covert slush fund diverted to the Contras scheme thrown in for good measure. In one memorable, at least for now - I may not recall this in the future, answer Poindexter could recall what he ate for breakfast while having a crucial conversation with one the of Iran-Contra players, Col. Oliver North (if I recall), but he couldn't recall the substance of the conversation. Those must have been some eggs.

So now we have George Tenet and Richard Perle (I'm not going to identify everyone I mention - if you don't know who these guys are go read some blog about the best hair gels out there) disputing what Perle may have said to Tenet after September 11. Tenet acknowledges he got the date wrong but insists he saw Perle leaving the White House in the days after 9/11 and told Tenet Iraq had to pay a price for the attack. Perle denies he said anything of the sort. Add this to the Alberto Gonzales testimony about fired U.S. Attorneys. He can't recall anything he did but he assures you he did nothing improper. To this day there is no answer as to who put together the firing list, or how they got on the list, or when the decision was made to fire them. No one can recall. Mind you these are people who for most part went to top colleges and law schools and have years of relying on their intelligence and powers of memory to recall bits and pieces of the law to do their jobs. All of a sudden they all become Sgt. Schultz knowing nothing and proud of it.

The game here is that saying, "I don't recall" is different than saying, "I don't remember." And now I'm having a bit of deja vu (not the movie by Denzel Washington althought that is on my Netflix queue) about this topic. Legally if you say "I don't remember" it's lost forever in the sands of time - sort of like my hopes and dreams. If you say, "I don't recall" then your memory can be refreshed by any method. Put a plate of scrambled eggs under Poindexter's nose and if his olfactory endings trigger his memory about subverting the Constitution then it's admissable. Show Alberto a memo that he did fire U.S. Attorneys for no real reason other than he can and that's what Karl Rove wanted then - Shazam! - no perjury, no obstruction of justice, no nothing. It's a miracle! But why go through all this? I mean, who has a plate of warm eggs or can piece together shredded memos at the right time?

I have a simpler solution. Since top officials in Washington seem to not recall very much, we invest in memory classes for all political appointees. As a backup we hire thousands of court stenographers and they are assigned, like Secret Service agents, to each high-level member of the government. They will walk next to each government official and take down everything they say for as long as they are in office. If they aren't doing anything improper as Gonzo says they won't mind the minor inconvenience. Under this plan you'd never hear, "I don't recall" anymore but rather "Let's take a look at the transcript."

A secondary benefit would be the job creation aspect. Can you imagine how many stenographers we would need to make sure "I don't recall" becomes a distant memory? Each top government official gets one, in the case of Gonzales maybe two would be in order. I'm sure they'll come up with some other excuse like alien possession at the time the alleged conversations were made but it's a start.

Curious George - Not Bush

2007-05-01T13:57:00.000-05:00

Former CIA director George J. Tenet appeared on “60 Minutes” on Sunday and defiantly whined about being throw overboard by Bush and his capos as a way to blame him and the CIA for everything Iraq. Like an ex-wife Tenet lashed out at the abuse he took from the likes of Cheney, Rice, Rumsfeld and their hatchet men who gave his "slam dunk" line about WMD intelligence to the press openly and as often as they could.

What say you George? "The hardest part of all of this has just been listening to this for almost three years. Listening to the vice president go on 'Meet The Press' on the fifth year of 9/11, and say, 'Well, George Tenet said, slam dunk.' As if he needed me to say slam dunk to go to war with Iraq," Tenet tells Pelley. "And they never let it go. I mean, I became campaign talk. I was a talking point. You know, 'Look at what the idiot told us, and we decided to go to war.' Well, let's not be so disingenuous. Let's stand up. This is why we did it. This is why, this is how we did it. And let's tell, let's everybody tell the truth." The truth being worth $4 million dollars for Tenet which is what he got for writing his book and letting the country know just how the jackels at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue eat one their own. "Men of honor don't do this," Tenet said of him being thrown under the bus. And where did he get the idea these were men of honor? Probably the same place the intelligence about Iraqi WMD came from - the department of let's pretend.

Well boo f-ing hoo George. You spent the second longest time as CIA director, you got your Medal of Freedom (that you could have refused) from the very dishonorable people who threw you over the cliff and then you pocketed $4 million for information that would have been quite valuable to the American public three years ago - you know when a presidential election was going on. Men of honor also resign when their conscience guides them to do the right thing. Guess what you did, or rather didn't do?

Don't worry George. You care more than the American public. According to Nielsen’s television ratings the Tenet interview led the time-slot albeit with a below-average 10.8 million viewers, ranking second in the time period among adults 18 to 49, behind ABC’s “Funniest Home Videos,” which drew 8.4 million total viewers. Got that - behind "Funniest Home Videos." It did beat “Along Came Polly” but that was a god awful movie and I at least could turn it off. Alas, "W: The Sequel" still has 20 months to go.

Republican "Logic"

2007-04-30T00:16:00.000-05:00

Republicans have never been good at logic because logic involves reasoning and sound judgment. Two concepts that are eternally on the Republican endangered ideas list. The famous, or infamous, Reagan supply-side economic theory argues that selective tax cuts raise revenues and are good for the economy. The idea that some tax cuts are good has now, by Republican “logic,” been transformed into the demonstrably false proposition that all tax cuts always increase revenues and are always good for the economy -- in times of peace, war, surplus or deficit. All evidence to the contrary is merely an inconvenient truth for Republican “logic. Tax cuts get votes today while the cost for the tax cuts is paid for by someone else many years later. Fiscal recklessness does have some logic to it even if it’s craven political logic.

In the 1980s Republicans argued huge defense spending increases were needed to defeat the Soviet Union and win the Cold War. The Berlin Wall did fall but not simply because of bigger defense budgets. Hungary decided to remove its border restrictions with Austria, allowing any East German to get to the West through this back door land bridge. Once the flow of people started, East German border guards, faced with thousands of their own protesters wanting the same thing, simply opened the gates of the Berlin Wall and a post-Cold War world. The Republican argument is that the spending increases were justified since we won the Cold War. But if defense spending increases didn’t defeat the enemy then they would also have been justified -- they would have just been “keeping up” with the threat from the other side. Thus Republican “logic” argues for increased defense spending always, in every year, in times of peace and in times of war, hot or cold, because it is a self-fulfilling prophecy. Spend to achieve victory, spend to not fall behind.

Now add to that the new Republican “logic” of war everywhere, all the time, without end. Otherwise the terrorists “win.” Just listen to Vice President Dick Cheney talking to Rush Limbaugh on his radio show: “[The Democrats] seem to think that we can withdraw from Iraq and walk away from it. They ignore the lessons of the past. Remember what happened in Afghanistan. We'd been involved in Afghanistan in the eighties, supporting the Mujahadeen against the Soviets and prevailed. We won. Everybody walked away, and in the nineties, Afghanistan became a safe haven for terrorists, an area for training camps where al-Qaeda trained 20,000 terrorists in the late nineties, and the base from which they launched attacks on the United States on 9/11. So those are very real problems, and to advocate withdrawal from Iraq at this point, it seems to me, simply would play right into the hands of al-Qaeda.” His “logic,” the “logic” of the Republican party is a permanent occupation of countries where we intervene militarily. Withdrawal after invading only emboldens the terrorists even if we “win.” “We won,” Cheney says of Afghanistan but we “walked away.” What Cheney proposes is that after we “win” in Iraq, or anywhere else, we can’t just “walk away” – we have to stay there forever. And since military action and occupation inevitably creates more terrorists, we must stay to fight them as well so they cannot claim victory. Cheney’s “logic” is so exquisitely circular that it makes Catch-22 seem like a reasonable proposition.

Bush and Cheney, backed up by the Republican party, advocate permanent occupation and endless war. Under their logic a “win” only demands you continue your military intervention in that country lest the terrorist claim victory. This isn’t nation building, this is empire building and since they haven’t even done the former I’d bet everything I own they’ll never accomplish the latter even if it were a good idea - which it isn’t.

The Iraq war is Bush’s war. It’s Cheney’s war. America has spoken in every poll and in the 2006 election – this isn’t America’s war anymore and they want out. Bush is opposed to congressional deadlines for withdrawal from Iraq because his intention is to stay there forever. Otherwise the terrorists “win.” With “logic” like that I can’t understand why his approval rating hovers around 30%. It should be much, much lower.

You think you can get rid of me?

2007-04-27T22:17:00.000-05:00

I try to go away quietly but "they" won't let me. "They" are the anonymous posters posting nutball comments on my last post. I saw them and tried to ignore them but it's hard to ignore mental illness when it's in your face. So I'm back, maybe not daily but I'm back for another limited engagement of crankiness. Buckle your seatbelts, it's going to be a bumpy ride.

Friday, 10:00 p.m.

Hard to keep up with all the resignations:

From the family values files: Deputy Secretary of State Randall Tobias resigns after banging (allegedly) a bunch of high-priced call girls from two different brothels and getting caught. He says he only got massages. Uh huh. His wife may believe it but I don't. Tobias was the head of the US Agency for International Development and Director of US Foreign Assistance at the State Department. Sounds like he was in charge of domestic affairs.

Deputy chief of the Department of Justice's criminal division resigns because of links to Abramoff corruption scandal. Republican Congressman John Doolittle (CA) resigns committee seat after FBI raids his house as part of an ongoing corruption probe.

Republican Congressman Rick Renzi (AZ) and his wife up to their eyeballs in hinky land deals and payoffs (allegedly).

Just another day in Bushworld.

Friday, 11:00 p.m.

Good thing Stephen King or Quentin Tarantino isn't in high school creative writing classes these days.

Cut and run as fast as we can

2007-02-26T02:33:00.000-06:00

If you know who Hugh Hewitt is you know he is, in the words of Andrew Sullivan an "empty gas-bag of ideology." Imagine the self-importance and pompousness of William Buckley crossed with the anti-intellectual vaudeville qualities of Sean Hannity and Rush Limbaugh and that's Hewitt. Another thing Hannity, Rush, and Hewitt have in common is that none of then have ever served in the military but lecture people on military affairs. Hewitt has a long resume. Among his positions was executive director from groundbreaking through dedication of the Nixon Library. In 1990 Hewitt proposed ideological screening of researchers wishing to use the library resources; for example, Hewitt said Bob Woodward would not be admitted because he was "not a responsible journalist."

Here, again in the words of Andrew Sullivan, is a "priceless" interview on Hewitt's radio show. He tries to pick apart Lt. General William Odom (ret.) on Iraq and Iran. Let's just say it doesn't go so well for Hewitt. It's hilarious to hear another mighty chickenhawk try to go toe-to-toe with a Lt. Gen. and one who headed the NSA under President Reagan. Take a few minutes and listen to the interview or read the transcript. It's well worth it if you want to hear why we should cut-and-run as fast as we can out of Iraq. And this from a three-star general who is an America first hardliner.

Some of the better parts of the interview:

Lt. Gen. Odom: We have made [Iraq] much worse.

Hewitt:: Much worse than Saddam?

Odom: Yeah.

...

Lt. Gen: Odom: Look, I mean, I…this a kind of a pointless argument. I mean, the issues…all of your things can be true. They don’t make it any better for us. We are on a path to suffer every month we stay. The defeat we face will be larger, and we will put off the time at which…and where we will have even less resources to recover. If you remember the Second World War, Hitler had 600,000 troops thrown into Stalingrad, refused over four, five months to withdraw them, at the plea by, from his generals, and he ends up losing them all. If he had withdrawn them as they said, asked him to do, and let Stalingrad go, he could have shortened his lines by seven or eight hundred kilometers, and had nearly, had over 600,000 troops survive. Now that’s…a military commander that doesn’t know when to retire from one area so he can approach the conflict from another area, is not a smart commander. And it seems to you’re advocating a kind of policy where you have a president who jumps off the Empire State Building, and he goes by the 50th floor, and he says I’m on course. Well, I want a president who knows how to change course.

Hewitt: I’m actually just trying to figure out what you think Iraq would look like if after four months hence, we leave, what it would look like in a year?

Odom: It’s going to look worse if we stay.

Hewitt: I know that, but what do you think it will look like? I know you believe that…

Odom: I don’t know. I don’t know. You don’t know, and it’s just a guess. And I don’t see killing more Americans based on your guess.

...

Lt. Gen Odom: ...I'm saying the big scare in Southeast Asia was that there will be a whole group of countries that became pro-Soviet bloc, and pro-Chinese. Well, two more went communist, but they were not pro-Chinese. We were pursuing a war to contain China, the Soviet policy had become containing China. We were presenting a half a million U.S. troops in pursuit of Soviet foreign policy objectives. Right now, we are pursuing al Qaeda and Iranian foreign policy objectives in Iraq.

...

Hewitt: Would Libya have disarmed its nukes and chemical weaponry, General, if we…

Lt. Gen Odom: It’s not analogous. If you are trying to [apply] a general rule to cause something to happen in all countries, that is…you know, I’d flunk you on a sophomore international relations course.

Hewitt: I’m asking whether or not you thought the Libyan disarmament had anything to do with our invasion of Iraq?

Odom: None.

...

Hewitt: Are you gambling with Israel’s future, then, to allow a radical regime…

Lt. Gen. Odom: No, Israel’s gambling with its future by encouraging us to pursue this policy.

Hewitt: So Israel should not take unilateral action, either?

Odom: That’s up to them, but I think it’ll make it worse for them. Israel’s policies thus far have made its situation much worse. If you read all of the Israel press, you’ll find a lot of them there are firmly in my camp on this issue. And I’ve talked to many Israelis who are very sympathetic with the view I have on it. You’re making it much, much worse for Israel.

Hewitt: Are you familiar…

Odom: If I were an Israeli right now, given Olmert’s policies and Bush’s policies, I would fear for my life.

Hewitt: Are you familiar with…

Odom: So I would say the policy you’re advocating is a very serious threat to Israel.

Take a listen and see if you can hear the difference between the Moe, Larry and Curlys who run this country and pontificate from behind a microphone and a former head of the National Security Agency, a Lt. General with a PhD and a few strategic and historical thoughts in his head. It's like listening to the Daily Curmudgeon and everyone else. Does that make me Curly or the other guy?

Would you like a backrub Mr. bin Laden?

2007-02-22T08:43:00.001-06:00

In an interview with ABC News, Vice President Dick Cheney, with his permanent crooked smirk, said that House Democrats, who recently passed a resolution expressing disapproval of President Bush's plans to send 21,500 more U.S. troops to Iraq, were pursuing a course that will “validate the al Qaeda strategy.” The smarmy leaker of classified information said, "I think if we were to do what Speaker Pelosi and Congressman Murtha are suggesting, all we will do is validate the Al Qaeda strategy," the vice president told ABC News. "The Al Qaeda strategy is to break the will of the American people ... try to persuade us to throw in the towel and come home, and then they win because we quit." Ouch. What the unindicted co-conspirator really was saying was that Democrats have taken al Qaeda and the points and bet against their home team.

The "strategy" Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Jack Murtha are pursuing is trying to pass restrictions on the troops that are to be surged into the jihadist civil war in Iraq that someone said was "in its last throes" not too long ago. The Murtha restrictions are to limit deployments for troops to one-year tours of duty to avoid the type of stop-loss indentured servitude going on in Iraq and Afghanistan; that all troops being sent to Iraq have the equipment they need for their mission and that they are fully trained on that equipment before being sent into battle and that they have one-year between deployments so that they can see their wife and kids for longer than a long weekend before being sent back to defend W's right to never admit a wrong. Short story - properly training our troops and rotating troops after one-year and giving them sometime before re-deployment is an al Qaeda strategy. I think someone's sanity is in its last throes.

Speaker Pelosi, ran like Cindy Brady and "told" on Cheney. "No one likes a tattletale," said a famous sage name Mike Brady. Pelosi phoned President Bush to complain about the Vice President's remarks but couldn't reach him. "Tell her I'm not here," you could almost imagine W saying and then forcing Chief of Staff Josh Bolten to take the call and listen to her whining. "He called us unpatriotic!" sounded more like a baby's plaintive wail to Bolten.

Yes, Cheney is a vicious bully and a plague on this nation but what he said is no better or worse than when Pelosi or Murtha, or anyone else for that matter, argues rightly that Bush and Cheney's policies are an al Qaeda's wet dream. Invading Iraq has only strengthened al Qaeda and jihadists around the world. Iraq is the best recruiting tool for al Qaeda and related Islamic terror organizations. Terrorism has only increased since 2003. The Taliban, al Qaeda's protectors in Afghanistan are packing up the truck and moving back in. Abu Ghraib, Gitmo, extraordinary renditions and torture prisons around the world have only energized the al Qaeda base (the Base's base?) and given them invaluable propaganda tools to use against us.

So I have no problem that Cheney says the Democrats are pursuing a strategy that validates the al Qaeda strategy. They are only only pursuing a strategy. Cheney and Bush have actually implemented a strategy for the last 5 years that has has validated the al Qaeda strategy and made them stronger and more dangerous than they were when we invaded Iraq. So Nancy, stop calling the complaint line at the White House and find a better writer to call these guys what they are - supporters of al Qaeda. I'm available.

Predictions

2007-02-14T13:03:00.000-06:00

It's only 21 months until the next presidential election so I thought I would clear my desk early and tell you what's going to happen. Let's go through our "choices."

Sen. Chris Dodd? Who? I mean to say I know who he is only because I have to know who the self-important loudmouths are on Capitol Hill. His daddy, Thomas Dodd, was also a senator from Connecticut. Daddy Dodd lost his 1956 senate run to Prescott Bush, W's granddaddy and H.W.'s daddy but won in 1958. Another hereditary office passed down to Son Dodd. President, Senator - whatever. Junior wants something to do? Let's put him in charge of running the state or the country. On paper Dodd has a decent resume but let's be real - he has no chance and will never get out of single digits. Waste of time for everyone except Son Dodd who might get a few more name recognition points in national polls. Since he was re-elected in 2004 a presidential run, more like walk, is a freebie. File some papers, make an announcement, raise some money, get more television face-time and when you quit after the first few primaries you've lost nothing and your senate seat still has two years left. I actually can't believe I've spent this much time explaining how this guy should do something to help the country instead of himself.

Joe Biden? Oy vey. He's like a more talkative John Kerry. How many ways can this guy open his mouth and insert his feet? Long-winded and cracking racially stereotype "jokes" that can't be funny to even himself isn't what is going to drive voters to the polls. The fact that he comes from one of the smallest states in the country means that there is a chance he'd get even less electoral votes than Walter Mondale got in 1984. Mondale got 13 which is only 13 more than I got and I didn't even run. I'm not wasting anymore time on Biden running for president even if that's what he wants to do. Good luck with that three electoral vote head start.

John Edwards? Sure. He ran such a great campaign last time. (Read last sentence with dripping sarcasm.) He sat across from Darth Cheney in a debate and when Darth attacked him for not showing up in the senate and that he'd never met Edwards before, Edwards couldn't even remember that he had meet Cheney (it's on videotape) and if he did remember it he should have shoved it up Darth's ass and told America that, "See he lies about small things and he lies about big things. He just lies because that's who he is." No. Edwards sat there and smiled and got his ass kicked. The only way I could dislike Edwards more is if he pulled a Lieberman and betrayed the Democratic party as fully and as disgracefully as Joe Lieberman has.

Barack Obama? Okay. He's not horrible. In fact he's very smart and very likeable. I'd say he's "clean and articulate" but Joe Biden already covered that. I don't mind his so-called lack of experience. True, George Bush had the least experience of any modern president and look how that turned out. The difference is Obama got to Harvard without daddy's help and he earned his way onto the law review and then president of the review. He has also taught constitutional law at University of Chicago so I'm going to bet he has a bit more respect for the entire document rather than just the "commander in chief" line that Bush and his pack of authoritarian handmaidens love so much. But let's be honest. Obama has no chance. I voted for him in 2004 and I'd vote for him over the others but this country is not going to elect an African-American in 2008 and I want to win the White House. It's a shame but it's the truth. This country has a deep streak of bigotry and whether it's religion or race a lot of people are irrationally suspicious and will never vote for him. Democrats can't get enough people to vote for two white guys to win and I think there are a lot of places in America that won't vote for him simply based on race. It's wrong but it's a reality in America today. Maybe Obama can lay the groundwork to change that for a future run because he is very smart and people really like him and the country will see that clearly. And by the way, forget about Obama being a vice-presidential pick under Hillary. He's much more likeable and warm than she is and she would never let anyone take a flicker of candlelight away from her spotlight. He also adds nothing to her vote count so that's that. She would win Illinois anyway and I doubt people who would vote for Obama would vote for some GOP candidate. Look for Jim Webb for VP. If he loses he still stays in Senate and if he wins he's vice-president. Not a bad choice.

Hillary. Unfortunately she will win the Democratic nomination. She has the money, the fundraising organization, the network, Bill and the experience to measure every word she says carefully so as not to say anything that will kill her chances. After eight years of W people will long for the Clinton years and if it takes electing her to get him again they'll do it. Bill will end up as Secretary of State and she'll be Madam President. It will also drive every Republican insane and that galactic irritant to the evil empire, otherwise known as the GOP, seems to makes sense in a sick sort of way. It's like the ultimate payback. I say she'll unfortunately be the party's pick because I'm just sick of both the Clintons and the Bushes. This nation is becoming a big House of Lords where your family's last name is all you need to get your federal office. Three-hundred million people in the pool and we always go to the very, very shallow end? When does the Chelsea for President campaign begin? Right around the time Jenna for President campaign kicks off? There has to be better people than these in the nation to run things. There just has to be. Come out come out wherever you are. I feel like clicking my heels together chanting, "there's no place like home, there's no place like home."

So there you have it. Hillary will win the democratic nomination and will just win the presidency. Unless of course she calls Obama "clean and articulate." Then I'd put some money down on President Gore.

Astronut

2007-02-07T23:07:00.000-06:00

We've all heard and seen the story about NASA astronut Lisa Nowak who donned space diapers and drove 900 miles to pepper spray her alleged rival to a love interest with another astronaut. I've now heard some "expert" professor on Nightline talking about how intelligent she was and how only an astronaut would have the ability to plan ahead that much to wear diapers so as not to waste time stopping on the way to her crime scene in Florida. Come again? She drove 900 miles from Texas to Florida so unless she was driving a gas truck I believe she would have had to stop for gas at least once probably twice. I'm more impressed that she drove that far and was able to find her victim at a busy airport. Apparently she tracked her down and followed her onto the rental car shuttle bus and accosted her, allegedly, in the parking lot when she got off. Now that's some airport meet-up. I can't find my ride when I'm trying to look for it. After she gets out of prison Nowak has a future as an airport taxi driver.

This story is on par with the Nancy Kerrigan-Tonya Harding train wreck. They probably didn't think to try to do a pay-per-view boxing event back then but I'm more hopeful today that the Navy Captain Nowak and the Air Force Captain victim will be ready to rumble soon. At a minimum a Playboy spread. At worst an endorsement deal with Depends?

It's obviously a tragedy for everyone. This nut has twin 5 year-old daughters and a teenage son. Mommy was in outer space last July and now she's out of her mind. Her marriage of 19 years went into a black hole not too long ago and she is going to prison before the year is out. If I was her defense lawyer I'd try some new defense theory like maybe she got infected by an alien virus up on the International Space Station and that took over her mind. That happened on every other episode of Star Trek and while that was fiction this story proves that truth is really stranger than fiction.

The only thing we have is fear itself

2007-02-02T22:52:00.000-06:00

So let me get this straight, a few Lite Brites were left around Boston and the city paralyzed itself with fear and brought the town to a complete halt? This is how we are fighting the war on terror? (Don't even get me started on that phrase. Before we fight a war against a feeling or a tactic we should be fighting a war on illiteracy.) Oh but it had lights and wires and it was electronic and funny looking you say. Can't wait until a lost Speak and Spell shuts down New York City. Run for your lives, it's talking! If this is how we are reacting to this stuff we are all doomed.

I remember the terror alerts pumped into the nation's veins every time the President needed a bump in the polls. Watch out for the malls and the banks and apartment buildings and trains and buses and railways and planes and basically everywhere. And after my ducking and covering, in the words of Gomer Pyle, surprise, surprise, surprise it's all a hoax or false alarm. Some waitress hears some lunchgoers talking about "bringing down the building" and of course it's not construction crews talking it's Osama bin Laden's henchmen meeting at the local Denny's to plot their next move. Shut I-95 down for eight hours? Go ahead it makes for great programming. With 24 hours to fill you got to point a camera somewhere. White powder on the sidewalk? Can't be a spilled packet of Nutrasweet. No it must be Anthrax. Do you hear hoofbeats? Are they horses or zebras? Go with zebras that's a better story.

In Israel when security officials know a bomber is on his way to a certain town or area of town they, A: put out a public APB on every radio station and cable news show live and plead with the public to report anything suspicious or, B: release no information to give you a chance to intercept the bomber before he attacks and thus avoiding tipping him off that you are looking for him and then he just picks a place at random to blow up. Um, I'd recommend you go with "A." If you want to really worry about fighting terror plots in your backyard you can do it the Israeli way, no terror alerts, no garbage cans in public places to allow concealment of bombs, searches and pat downs before you enter malls and the shooting of purses and briefcases, to explode any bomb, left by accident by a forgetful person. Oh I forgot my backpack in the park! Blamo! No, let's go with the unserious American way of fighting a feeling called terror: first soil yourself then duck and cover and then arrest some grungy guerrilla marketers who got exactly what they wanted. The next step is to ask for and receive additional federal funds to fight the war or terror or Lite Brites, whatever the case may be.

Ten other cities had these crappy marketing pieces of junk and no one cared. No calls to 911. No bridges and tunnels closed. No city brought to a complete halt. Only Boston. There was a time when Boston was fearless. Stood up the the British Empire. The Battle of Bunker Hill, part of the Siege of Boston, is considered by some to be the bloodiest battle in the American Revolutionary War. Today a Lite Brite has them wetting themselves. We may win the war but we lost this battle.

A horse is a horse is a horse of course

2007-02-01T13:17:00.000-06:00

I'm cranky and heartless. I didn't care about Barbaro before or after he broke his leg. I certainly don't wish an animal to suffer so I would have rather seen Barbaro recover from his injury than be put down but let's get real - it's just a horse. The public sympathy and attention to this story is really mindblowing. Today's New York Times has a long article about Barbaro's brother (to be named later) who may race in the future. Great. Maybe after all the training he'll be able to run at 30 miles per hour around an oval track and if he takes one wrong step they'll blow his brains out too.

On the op-ed page, "Why We Mourn Barbaro" took up space that could have been used to inform people about things they need informing about. Pardon me that I'm not mourning Barbaro. I'm not happy he got injured or happy he was put to sleep but I'm not sad about it either. Sorry, but I'm not mourning Barbaro. He got better medical care than 90% of the people in this nation. Maybe we should be talking about that. Millionaires breeding animals to end up with pencil-thin legs and racecar bodies and then running them at full speed in circles, risking theirs lives to do so, isn't something I'm going to invest my time, money or emotions. Maybe Barbaro should have been giving horsey rides to the kids then we wouldn't have to "mourn" him. At least there haven't been teddy bears and flowers left for him in some makeshift memorial.

So let's review. I'm not happy or sad Barbaro died. I just don't care. He was the toy of bored millionaires who knew the risks to the horse that Barbaro didn't - that one twisted ankle at top speed means you're dead. And now we're already scoping out his brother and soon to be arriving second brother. Maybe they can entertain the horse owners and gamblers and if they're lucky they might not get injured and die. Sounds like something that deserves this outporing of grief and plantiff wails of "Why Barbaro? Why?"

So go ahead mourn for Barbaro. We care so much about celebrity people I guess celebrity horses isn't so much of a stretch. If only Robert Kennedy were around today to give the eulogy for Barbaro. It might have sounded something like this, "Some men see things as they are and ask why? I dream thing that never were and ask why not? Why didn't Barbaro live so that he could have had his own reality show. Think of all the endorsements he could have had. And a Barbaro-Jennifer Aniston match-up? Barn-ifer would have given people hope that dreams really can come true for people and equines alike. Alas. It was not to be. Come, gentle night, come, loving, black-brow'd night, Give me my Barbaro; and, when he shall die, take him and cut him out in little stars, And he will make the face of heaven so fine that all the world will be in love with night and pay no worship to the garish sun. Sleep well Barbaro."

Lunchtime

2007-01-26T11:22:00.000-06:00

I was going to write about the "bizarre secrecy" surrounding the government's defense of its wiretapping program. Reading about a federal judge asking a Department of Justice lawyer what his security clearance is only to be told that his level of security clearance is itself classified and the government filing papers with themselves seemed like a good Kafkaesque place to end the week. But alas, rawstory.com already had it on their site and I looked for something else to coment on. It's worth a read if you don't have time to plow through "The Trial."

I didn't get much farther since I saw this story posted on rawstory.com as well. If you can't beat them, join them. In Rhode Island a Roman Catholic elementary school has banned talking during lunchtime after three recent choking incidents in the cafeteria. No one was hurt but that didn't stop the principal from turning the place into a monastic lunchroom. Would calling for "help" if your lunch buddy is choking be considered "talking?" Would actual choking sounds constitute "talking" or just "gurgling?"

Maybe God was trying to choke those students to death. You ever think of that? Maybe it was all a part of his divine plan which most of us can't figure out unless you're asking for money on your religious superstation. Maybe you're actually interfering with God's will. See that's the problem with trying to divine what the Divine has in mind. It's just a guess. Isn't it?

Now the next question is what happens if some student chokes on his blessed turkey sandwich? Should the principal ban lunch at lunch or just turkey? I know what I would do now. I'd ban the principal.

Hopeless with Hope

2007-01-22T11:28:00.000-06:00

George: "I don't want hope. Hope is killing me. My dream is to become hopeless. When you're hopeless you don't care. And when you don't care, that indifference makes you attractive."
Jerry: "So, hopelessness is the key?"
George: "It's my only hope."

- Seinfeld, "The Fix-Up"

I think we have to have hope now that it's hopeless. We have a president whose approval rating is neck and neck with Nixon at the height of Watergate and insists on sending additional troops into a religious civil war even though everyone except William Kristol and the voices in Bush's head think it's a huge mistake. Even the top Republican on the Senate Armed Services Committee, John Warner, thinks it's a mistake and will go so far as introduce a resolution saying just that. "You fell victim to one of the classic blunders!" Vizzini tells the man in black in the film "The Princess Bride" after he drinks from a cup possibly filed with poison. Vizzini then lectures, "The most famous is never get involved in a land war in Asia, but only slightly less well-known is this: never go in against a Sicilian when death is on the line!" Vizzini laughs loudly and then falls dead over. Add this to the list of famous blunders: Never send more troops into a religious civil war in the Middle East.

And if that isn't enough to eradicate whatever hope you had left how about this example. Dan Tilli, age 81, wrote a letter to the editor of The Express-Times of Easton, Pennsylvania. Tilli wrote about Saddam Hussein's execution and remarked "I still believe they hanged the wrong man." That got him a visit from Secret Service agents concerned he was threatening President Bush. "I didn't say who -- I could've meant (Osama) bin Laden," Tilli said Friday. No matter, he still was questioned, his apartment searched and his picture taken by the agents. Last year, after writing another letter to the editor advocating a civil war to unseat Bush, Tilli got a visit from the FBI. Reminds me of another writer penning the most famous letter to the editor who said, "when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security." Knock-knock, Mr. Jefferson, FBI open your door please we have some questions for you.

Jefferson also had some pearls of wisdom like: "He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good," and "He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone for the tenure of their offices," and "He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass our people and eat out their substance," and here's one that might sound familiar today, "He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil Power." Of course this is all from the Declaration of Independence but we all know that such declarations are overrated as means of political communication. I know Iraq will never be a Jeffersonian democracy but who would have thought it gets you a visit from the FBI here?

So I am hoping I lose all hope about what's going on in the world. It's my only hope.

"Cut and Blame"

2007-01-16T21:41:00.000-06:00

Since my last post I got a year older and a bit more cranky. My birthday began with cranky jr. jr. needing a diaper change. Nothing like waking up on your birthday and within five minutes you're up to your elbows in poop. And this wasn't run of the mill baby pooh this was like hardened road tar. Moving on.

I watched our bloodless national security advisor Stephen Hadley on Meet The Press explain how even though they have been wrong about everything from WMDs to war costs to being greeted as liberators they are right about the "surge." The surge is also a joke since the 21,500 additional troops going to Iraq are really only 7,000 combat troops - the rests are support. So the best and brightest running the country think 7,000 additional combat troops into Baghdad and Anbar province is the missing piece to the victory jigsaw puzzle. It's also worth noting that the number or troops in Iraq, currently 132,000, is really only 70,000 combat troops. The rest are support staff. So even the claims of 132,000 troops is misleading. But back to our "strategy" mavens.

The Republicans, who were thrown out of Congress on their collective asses, have called anyone who oppose the Bush administration's Iraq policy as friends of the enemy and terrorist sympathizers. "Cut and run" was the nicest thing they called the notion that maybe we should stay out of a religious civil war. That "cut and run" crowd that oppose this "surge" includes Oliver North, William Buckley, George Will, Sen. Chuck Hagel, Sen. Sam Brownback, Sen. Norm Coleman, Sen. George Voinovich and the list of Republicans who are cutting and running from Bush and his dead-ender sycophants whispering in his ear increases daily. President Bush has indeed come up with a new Iraq policy. It's not a "surge" it's called "cut and blame." That's the new policy. Send just enough troops to say "we gave it a try" then cut and run from every speech and defiant stance on Iraq over the last four years when it turns out, surprise, surprise, 7,000 additional combat troops isn't just a drop in the bucket it's a drop in the ocean. Then, in Olympic spirit, "let the blames begin!" It will of course be the Democrats' fault for opposing a losing strategy when it became clear it was a losing strategy. It will be the Iraqi people's fault for not thanking us for "liberating" their country and unleashing a religious civil war. It will be the New York Times' fault and the ACLU's fault and Michael Moore's fault and Al Gore's fault and John Kerry's fault and of course Bill Clinton's fault. Because if there is one thing Bush and the Republicans are good at it's fixing blame rather than the problem. An additional 1,000 combat troops for each 1,000,000 people in Baghdad won't do anything but delay our inevitable withdrawal from Iraq until it becomes some other president's problem in 2009. And when that happens the policy of "cut and blame" will have succeeded. At least they'll get one thing right.

Human sacrifice

2007-01-11T23:26:00.000-06:00

Today, the House voted to reverse President Bush's ban on government-financed embryonic stem cell research but Democrats were unable to muster enough votes to overcome a promised presidential veto. Embryonic stem cells hold the promise of medical breakthroughs because they have the ability to become any tissue in the body. But the research typically involves the destruction of frozen embryos created for in vitro fertilization, a step that stirs passions over the beginning of life. The argument Bush and the rest of his moral minority use to stand George Wallace-like in the doorway of scientific progess is that an embryo is human life and it's immoral to sacrifice human life to save human life.

In other news, President Bush is sending 20,000 additional troops to Iraq to try a military Hail Mary pass. I don't think the Iraqis are going to catch it. I would call it an "escalation" but Secretary of State Condi Rice disagrees. It's not an "escalation" she tells a Senate panel in testimony today. Republican Senator Chuck Hagel asks her sarcastically if it's a "decrease." The ever unflappable Rice says it's not an escalation or a decrease but rather it's an "augmentation." In any event, this is all being done we are told to protect Iraqis and ourselves from terrorists. In his address to the nation, Presisdent Bush said the year ahead will demand sacrifice and that "[t]he terrorists and insurgents in Iraq are without conscience, and they will make the year ahead bloody and violent. Even if our new strategy works exactly as planned, deadly acts of violence will continue -- and we must expect more Iraqi and American casualties."

So we have to sacrifice human life to protect human life. Unless of course you have a fatal illness and stem-cell research could potentially help you. Then you're an immoral executioner of human life even though the life they're talking about is an embryo smaller than the period at the end of this sentence and will be discarded down a fertility clinic drain anyway. What the President is doing in Iraq and stem-cell research is more like sacrificing reason to protect his political life. It's too late for for the latter. Let's hope it's not too late for the former.

There is a God

2007-01-09T22:55:00.000-06:00

Any evidence of God on this planet? My angel of a wife, Cranky's Wife, is always "Exhibit A" in this search. I'd also make a case for Cap'n Crunch with Crunchberries as indicative of a divine being with an intelligent design in mind. After today's MacWorld keynote speech by CEO Steve Jobs introducing the new Apple iPhone, I'm fairly sure there is a God or that Jobs is in fact God. But there is also additional evidence that God exists and is working among us.

Control of the U.S. Senate rests with a Democratic senator now resting at a hospital after having emergency surgery to repair a brain hemorrhage. If his brain explodes or implodes or plodes sideways we are all going to wish we were in a coma in ICU because we would rather sleep through Republican control of the Senate than see what more they could do to wreck this country. I wrote about this recently but to summarize: The Senate is controlled by Democrats 51-49. If Sen. Johnson slips the surly bonds of this Earth then the Republican governor of South Dakota would appoint his replacement and I'm taking a wild guess it would be a Republican. Do the math now. 51-49 Dems becomes a 50-50 tie. Vice-President Dick Cheney would vote on all ties and last I checked he's a Republican so every vote would likely go 51-50 Republican. Not a good outcome if you love life, freedom, justice, civil liberties, hope, fairness and constitutional democracy. So this story entitled, "Senator's condition upgraded after brain surgery" may have given me another bit of evidence in favor of the Almighty.

Jesus is said to have risen from the dead and proved to all in the Lord. If Sen. Johnson rises from his hospital bed and keeps the Senate in Democratic hands I'll be largely convinced there is a God. But it still might be Steve Jobs.

I have a plan

2007-01-08T10:18:00.000-06:00

1997:

DR. EVIL: Gentlemen, I have a plan. It's called blackmail. The Royal Family of Britain are the wealthest landowners in the world. Either the Royal Family pays us an exorbitant amount of money, or we make it look like Prince Charles, the heir to the throne, has had an affair outside of marriage and, therefore, they would have to divorce.

(There is an uncomfortable silence.)

NUMBER TWO: Um, Dr. Evil, Prince Charles did have an affair. He admitted it and they are now divorced.

DR. EVIL: People have to tell me these things. I've been frozen for thirty years, throw me a bone here. OK, no problem. Here's my second plan. Back in the Sixties I had a weather changing machine that was in essence a sophisticated heat beam which we called a "laser." Using this laser, we punch a hole in the protective layer around the Earth, which we scientists call the "Ozone Layer." Slowly but surely, ultraviolet rays would pour in, increasing the risk of skin cancer. That is, unless the world pays us a hefty ransom.

(There is another uncomfortable silence.)

NUMBER TWO: Umm, that also has already happened.

DR. EVIL: Right. (pause) Oh, hell, let's just do what we always do. Let's hijack some nuclear weapons and hold the world hostage.

2007:

President Bush: Gentlemen, I have a plan. It's called the "Surge." I propose we send some troops into Iraq to defeat evil and win the war on terror.

(An uncomfortable silence)

Number Two: Um, sir, we already tried that. It didn't work.

President Bush: Well, promote whoever was in charge of that plan that didn't work.

Number Two: That would be you sir.

President Bush: Then I'll promote myself to president for life.

Number Two: I don't think you can do that. It's not constitutional.

President Bush: What's that?

Number Two: Never mind.

President Bush: I'll just do it by a signing statement. No worries.

Number Two: Getting back to your plan, don't you think a few more troops now is too little too late? Shouldn't you have sent a larger force four years ago?

President Bush: Four years ago I was young and irresponsible. Now I'm older and irresponsible. Besides, all I'm doing is keeping this thing going for "two or three years" so I can blame the Democrats or the next President for pulling the plug. I have an eye towards history. Not that history will look back and say we turned Iraq into a Jeffersonian democracy but that it will say I didn't lose the war - somebody else did. That's the best outcome now and so I need to send more brave soldiers to the front.

Number Two: What about what the American people think? Didn't the 2006 elections send you a message?

President Bush: I don't read messages. They get in the way of the voices in my head. And those voices are telling me I'm the decider and so messages from the American people only confuse my already confusing decision making process. Is that confusing?

Number Two: Well how are we going to explain this "surge?"

President Bush: We'll do what we always do. We'll scare the crap out of people that if we don't do this they be eaten by wolves. Islamofascist wolves. Yeah that sounds better. I mean take a look at today's headline - "Gas-like odor permeates Manhattan." Could be terrorism, right?

Number Two: Yeah, but New York always smells that way.

President Bush: Good, then we'll always have a terror alert ready to go. Now let the word go forth from this place that I feel the urge to "surge."

Eight is not enough

2007-01-03T22:54:00.000-06:00

This may state the obvious but I think we've reached a tipping point where now there are more people in the world who are insane than sane. I'm watching Nightline and the story about the Quiverfull movement made me realize there are more of "them" than us. The "them" are nuts, not Christians although the Quiverfull people are Christians. This group believes that all forms of contraception, birth control and any family planning goes against God's plan. They believe you should have as many children as the Lord gives you. The Carpenter family from Nashville has eight kids ages one to 15, Nightline tells us. The mother, looking a bit shell-shocked, thinks this is normal and how God intended it to be. When asked if having so many kids is hard on her body and is she concerned about her health, the human baby factory said, "God designed us to have chidren and thankfully we do have good doctors out there for things that come up."

Grandma publishes some magazine and has been advocating this perpetual reproduction theory for years. When asked, "What's wrong with family planning, birth control, natural birth control?" she smiles and answers, "When you stop and think about it it's not natural because we have to go against the way that God designed our bodies. He designed them to be fruitful. So if a couple don't want to have [children] they have to do something, they've got to do something to their body so it doesn't work the way God planned it." Didn't God create man and didn't man create condoms and Planned Parenthood?

How are you going to send 8 or 10 kids to college daddy quiver? What a surprise, he's pursuing and considering an alternative sending them off to college at age 18. And what if one of his kids at age 18 wants to go to college? If God calls them into a profession that requires a degree he'll support it. I wonder what phone company God uses to call people. Daddy quiver would rather his sons wake up at age 21 or 22 with money in their pocket ready to buy a home and take on a family." Translation: he wants the human rabbit breeding to get going for his sons as soon as they can. And what about his daughters? Daddy quiver says, "In no way will we hastely and readily and quickly send our daughters off to State U. college campus." And what about a profession for the daughters, you know like becoming a doctor or lawyer which requires a college degree, a degree you'ld support for your sons? "I don't have all the answers on that John, but I do know this - I think there is incredible noblity, you know, I think a woman's highest calling is motherhood...we want to do everything we can in our home to ready our daughters to be moms." I'm sure they're doing a great job at that. At least they don't wear burhkas, at least not yet.

Part two of the Nightline report was about the role of fathers in the family. "I think a dad ought to be the primary instiller of wisdom and ought to be teaching his sons leadership," says daddy quiver. Translation: I guess someone has to be in charge and it might as well be me. Mommy quiver was asked, "What's your role in this family?" Quivering, mommy quiver said, "Hopefully to be nurturing and loving and submissive to my husband." Hey wait, maybe this movement isn't all that bad after all. Translation: When I want your opinion I'll give it to you my wife.

It's a small story but God called me to blog about it. Something about Nightline's segment just hit me that somewhere along the way we passed some point and now more than 50% of the people on the planet are truly insane. It's going to get harder and harder to avoid these people and in fact they are becoming more and more in charge of things. I'm pretty sure I'm in the non-insane group and I can prove it - I only have two kids.

Meet the new loon, same as the old loon

2007-01-02T21:49:00.000-06:00

Goodbye 2006, hello 2007. The more things change the more things remain the same. Of course I'm talking about the escaped mental patient Pat Robertson. He's provided more than a few blog entries for me as his verbal diarrhea is divinely delusional. Take a look here, here, here, here, here and here for a sample of Robertson's contribution to the world of psychosis. So what a surprise to find that my first post of 2007 is about Pat Robertson's latest conversation with God who loves us all but seems to like a good disaster.

Today Robertson said that God has told him that a terrorist attack on the United States would cause a "mass killing" in late 2007. "I'm not necessarily saying it's going to be nuclear," he told his audience on the "The 700 Club" broadcasted on the Christian Broadcasting Network. "The Lord didn't say nuclear. But I do believe it will be something like that." Robertson said God told him about the impending tragedy during a recent prayer retreat. God also said, he claims, that major cities and possibly millions of people will be affected by the attack. In 2005, Robertson predicted that Bush would have victory after victory in his second term and said Social Security reform proposals would be approved. We all know how that ended up. In May, Robertson said God told him that storms and possibly a tsunami were to crash into America's coastline in 2006. Even though the U.S. was not hit with a tsunami, Robertson on Tuesday cited last spring's heavy rains and flooding in New England as partly fulfilling the prediction. "I have a relatively good track record," he said. "Sometimes I miss."

"Sometimes I miss?" I thought these predictions comes from the head honcho, the big cheese, the king of kings not Robertson. So when he says, "Sometimes I miss," what he's really saying is it's the voices in his head that give him these visions of death and destruction, not a voice from the sky. And why is it that the voices, whether divine or deraigned, never predict peace on earth or mass happiness rather than "mass killings?' Probably because there's more money in fear than hope.

Once again I submit that if Robertson were in dirty clothes and saying this nonsense while wandering the streets he would be involuntarily locked-up in a mental ward. As it is, he is a super-rich leader of millions of Evangelical Christians and has real political influence. I don't know which is scarier - the fact that Robertson says the stuff he says or that millions of people believe it. Either way I'm sure I have a quarter of my blog posts for 2007 already written. Their just rattling around Robertson's skull waiting to escape. You know, like a mental patient.

An uncivil civil war

2006-12-28T22:58:00.000-06:00

From today's New York Times: "The car parked outside was almost certainly a tool of the Sunni insurgency. It was pocked with bullet holes and bore fake license plates. The trunk had cases of unused sniper bullets and a notice to a Shiite family telling them to abandon their home. “Otherwise, your rotten heads will be cut off,” the note read.

The soldiers who came upon the car in a Sunni neighborhood in Baghdad were part of a joint American and Iraqi patrol, and the Americans were ready to take action. The Iraqi commander, however, taking orders by cellphone from the office of a top Sunni politician, said to back off: the car’s owner was known and protected at a high level.

For Maj. William Voorhies, the American commander of the military training unit at the scene, the moment encapsulated his increasingly frustrating task — trying to build up Iraqi security forces who themselves are being used as proxies in a spreading sectarian war. This time, it was a Sunni politician — Vice Prime Minister Salam al-Zubaie — but the more powerful Shiites interfered even more often.

“I have come to the conclusion that this is no longer America’s war in Iraq, but the Iraqi civil war where America is fighting,” Major Voorhies said."

I'd promote Major Voorhies to Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff or maybe Secretary of Defense. For telling it like it is, for dealing in the world of reality he'll probably be sent to the front. But wait, he's already at the front. Maybe they'll send him to the front of the front. (paraphrasing M*A*S*H) Maybe they'll send out one of the infamous Republican chickenhawks to call him a "Liberal" or a voter for Kerry or Gore. The sad truth is our troops are in the crossfire of a civil war. An uncivil civil war to be honest. Sending more troops into Baghdad won't prevent what is happening in Iraq. We are all watching a country tear itself apart from the inside out and with a committment that only religious fundamentalism can create. And while Maj. Voorhies has to worry about whether the Iraqi security forces he works with are really militias, President Bush worries about how it will look to the enemy if we get out of the way of the civil war that's anything but civil. How do you think it looks to the enemy if we don't get out of the way? Like target practice.

Sometimes you have to let people look into the abyss before they help themselves. The faster we start to leave Iraq the more they'll look into the abyss. Right now 140,000 American troops are standing at the bottom of that abyss. That's a bad place to stand without a way out and with more troops on the way it's going to get really crowded down there.

It's still a nightmare

2006-12-27T22:27:00.000-06:00

Former President Gerald Ford died yesterday at the age of 93. After taking over as president in 1974 he told the nation that "our long national nightmare" was over. He was wrong. Our long national nightmare is not over. The nightmare is the Bush family. The nightmare is that there are more Bush sons and cousins and brothers and the like that are intent on public service. Hey, do us a favor - please no more public service. Rest on a beach on one of your private islands. Sit around your ranch and BBQ a steak or two. Watch a baseball game or two or heck just buy the team. Anything except public service. Do you really believe we would think less of you? I know I wouldn't.

The most dangerous mindset is one that says, "The government, the nation, the world can't survive without me." The Bushies have that mindset. They also have the thought that they can't help their family and friends as much as they can if they weren't in government controlling who gets what. That's really the definition of politics - who gets what. And who has gotten what doesn't include you. Taxes and working yourself into an early grave are for little people. It's the little people who blog and read them.

In 1980, Ronald Reagan offered the vice-presidency to Gerald Ford. He turned it down. Had he taken it, George H.W. Bush doesn't become VP or president and I guarantee that George W. Bush only sees the Oval Office on White House tours. Thinking about alternative history is only useful if you're writing science fiction or a blog where you are trying to dream that the long national nightmare was really over.

Back to Reality

2006-12-26T22:32:00.000-06:00

Back from "vacation" and back to reality. I say "vacation" instead of vacation because when your three-year-old and your five-month-old get colds the minute you land you would rather be in hell. Florida is pretty close though even without sick kids. Case in point, the county I was in had just voted to NOT fluoridate their water because of health concerns and they trumpeted that as a victory. To be fair I was shocked to read only Illinois and California mandate it throughout their states and only 65% of the other water drinking areas in America require it. Eighty-five percent of America believes in Angels but only 65% believe in fluoridation. I wonder what percentage think we're all nuts.

So the kiddies are up all night and the water has no fluoride and the mosquitoes are eating away at my arms and legs but it's still better than reality back home. Back home I have to read news headlines and see "U.S. Iraq war toll passes 9/11." On 9/11 2,973 people died and as of Christmas day 2,978 U.S. servicemen and women have lost their lives in Iraq. Next may will mark four years after President Decider decided "mission accomplished." And now it appears that despite the November election "thumping" the president and his Iraq policy got he is not just staying the course but it's, "Damn the torpedoes! Full speed ahead!" The "surge" is coming. That's the brilliant new strategy the worst and the dimmest have come up with. Perhaps tens of thousands of troops will be sent to Baghdad to fight the insurgents which is just another name for the people of Iraq. And here's the best part. We have to send more troops rather than withdraw troops because to do otherwise would send the wrong message to insurgents and al Qaeda. At least that's the rationale given from people who haven't been rational in years. So we have to send more troops and, here it comes again, we can't just send them in there temporarily because again, any timetable would signal to the enemy how long they had to holdout. to we can't leave and have to send more troops and we can't set a timetable. Okay, I'm with you so far. So what happens if the "surge" fails to to achieve any measurable reduction in violence or attacks or casualities are the like? Well, then surely we would say, "we gave it one last best effort and it didn't work so now we can pullout, right?" Guess again. If that happens, now I'm reading the mind of the Decider, then of course we can't leave because then we would be admitting defeat and we can't do that so we'll have to stay and maybe even increase troop levels. See how the circular reasoning goes from people who have block heads?

So forgive me if I'd rather be in Florida even if it's sleep-deprived and I'm a buffet for mosquitoes while letting my teeth fall out of my head from lack of flouride. It's better than reading about how we have to keep increasing our troop levels and casualities in Iraq just so the Decider doesn't have to decide that he made a mistake. Jesus, it is said, died for the sins of the people. Now people have to die for Bush's sins.

Unplugged

2006-12-20T07:42:00.000-06:00

When you're on vacation you get unplugged from the Matrix. The kiddies want to watch Dora the Explorer and you fetch their breakfast and clothes like you're Jeeves the butler. Then it's off to the beach of golf course or lunch or visiting relatives. When you realize you haven't read a paper or watched CNN in hours you get this weird feeling like the world could be blowing up and you wouldn't know. Then you realize that anything short of the world blowing up doesn't really mean much when you are trying to make that birdie put on the par three 7th. (Missed on the amateur side.) Playing on an empty course with a caddie at a club where Dan Marino won the club championship two years in a row makes you forget about, not care is the better phrase, what's going on in the real world. When you're slowly playing 17 and your caddie says, "Oh look, there's Jesper Parnevik teeing off on 16" well then even if the world is blowing up you don't care in the least.

So it's easy to go through the day without seeing any news, unless you call Miss USA going in to rehab after begging The Donald (on her knees? Won't even go there - oops, I just did) to not take away her tiara. CNN spelling it "tiera" made me realize that if they can't even spell why should I listen to anything they say? So I watched Mike Rowe of "Dirty Jobs" climb through sewers and chip cement from the inside of a cement truck and spraying bug poison all over a church and some in his mouth and eyes and thought, "it's not so bad being unplugged from reality." News and reality are no match for Jesper Parnevik and war against termites. It's easier on the brain and won't raise your blood pressure. Let me know what's going on in the real world. At this point I don't care much.

Behind Enemy Lines

2006-12-18T17:12:00.000-06:00

I'm behind enemy lines now. Florida. Although JEB Bush is on his way out as governor it's still Bush-Cheney country. I spent the day driving around in a large SUV blending in quite nicely. If I had a Bush-Cheney bumper sticker on my car you wouldn't be able to tell the difference between me and the locals. Maybe my lack of a Confederate flag where the front license plate should be would give me away. In the local CVS there was more shelf space to adult diapers than baby diapers. Without satellite radio I am subjected to Rush Limbaugh on four separate AM stations. Listening to him for more than five minutes is like staring directly into the sun - it will burn your brain. I caught some listener asking if on 9/11 had the U.S. Capitol been hit would we the country be subjected to "Nancy Pelosi and her ilk" today. "Great question," the drug addict, three-time divorced, viagra-toting vacationer to the Dominican Republic answered. El Drug-bo went on to say that the Democrats want 9/11 to vanish from the nation's memory and work to wipe away 9/11 from politics. Had the U.S. Capitol been hit, says the little fat man, the Democrats couldn't possibly erase 9/11 from the nation's discourse like Pelosi and the others try to do. So yes he muses, if the White House or U.S. Capitol had been hit The Democrats and Pelosi probably wouldn't be in power now. Hmmmmm. Does that mean Rush "to get Oxycontin" Limbaugh is really saying he wishes the White House or U.S. Capitol had been hit in 9/11 so that the Republicans could have used the attacks (even more cravenly than they have) to stay in power? Yes and yes it's all insane but that's what he and his listeners are. Thank god I had to duck into a Super Wal-Mart and turn off the radio.

More reports from "real America' as they happen.

Timmy Johnson and The Holy Grail

2006-12-14T22:47:00.000-06:00

I became a deeply religious man last night. I prayed and prayed for Democratic Senator Tim Johnson to survive his brain hemorrhage and emergency brain surgery. Guess it worked. If Johnson dies or resigns the Senate goes back to Republican control even before the Democrats have a chance to warm the seats. Since Johnson is still kicking, as long as he doesn't kick a bucket, his beating heart will guarantee Democratic control of the U.S. Senate at least for the next two years. Now that's a Holy Grail. There is a God.

Debating political fallout and power-shifts over a guy's surgery table is a bit inelegant but that's the reality. After the charges Republicans spewed (vomited is more like it) at Democrats, like wanting the terrorists to win and wanting America to suffer another 9/11 and hoping for the U.S. to lose in Iraq and gleefully assisting in treason, I have no hesitation saying I know Republicans are praying for Johnson to die as much as Democrats are praying for him to live. There are no atheists in intensive care units. Reminds me of a scene from Monty Python and The Holy Grail. The guy on the shoulder is Johnson, the guy carrying him are the Republicans and the guy who finishes him off is probably Karl Rove.

I'm off to bed and once again I'll be kneeling with my head bowed and hands clasped together seeking out the Almighty and praying as if Tim Johnson's life depended on it and I think it does. I'll be whispering, "please keep Tim Johnson's heart beating" while I have a feeling Karl Rove will be practicing "bring out your dead!" Sweet dreams.

More than one way to skin an election

2006-12-13T23:00:00.000-06:00

Just when I thought there was hope for America, Democratic Senator Tim Johnson from South Dakota was rushed to the hospital reportedly suffering from a stroke. First it was a mild stroke then a severe stroke. Then it wasn't a stroke or a heart attack but he was in surgery. Then CBS News reported it's "not good." I'm waiting for the "it was a minor circulatory problem of the head" diagnosis ala the movie "Dave." Not to joke here because this is no laughing matter, unless you're a Republican. You see class if Sen. Johnson dies or has to be replaced it will be the REPUBLICAN governor of South Dakota to select his replacement. And since the Senate stands at 51 Democrats and 49 Republicans, a loss of a Democrat and a gain of a Republican would make it 50-50. If you remember your civics then you'd know the Republican Vice-President would break the ties in voting. Short story is if Johnson goes then the Senate goes Repubican.

All that "we took back America" would be gone. What a scam. It may be state law that the governor selects replacements but it's not what's illegal that bothers me it's what's legal. So a guy has a grabber, an "Elizabeth, this is the big one!" or some type of brain malfunction and the entire nation is plunged back into darkness? I watched Republicans on t.v. talking about how they are praying for Tim Johnson and his family. Yes, they're praying for Johnson to die so they can steal back power. That's what they're good at.

I don't know what's going to happen with Sen. Johnson. He may be fine. He may not die or resign or be replaced. But the fact is if not don't worry. Down the road the Republicans will find another way to steal back what they can't win at the ballot box. In the last election I thought we proved they couldn't rig the elections or the judicial anointers. They didn't but they may use another way to get back into power. The game of politics is truly a game. The only losers are the voters.

Knives don't kill people, neocons do

2006-12-12T22:45:00.000-06:00

I worked for a guy once who was a bit nuts. I remember one day he asked me what I had done on some bit of work and I told him. "You did what?!" he bellowed apparently upset at my answer. I then told him no I did the opposite just to see how he would react. "You did what?! That's even worse!" was his response proving that no matter what I had said he would have been hysterically angry. I'm reminded of that everytime the Iraq disaster is talked about.

President George Bush has now received the Iraq Study Group report and is on a "listening" tour to listen to things that he should have heard four years ago. No matter. The Decider will decide what to decide and when to decide it. In the meantime I have to listen to every Tom, Dick and Moron on television tell us that even though they got every prediction wrong over the last four years they should still be listened to. Their latest idea? Send more troops. They tell us that leaving would be a disaster. They say it would be seen as "cutting and and running" emboldening our enemies. So adding troops is now the best last ditch effort to turn things around. So staying in Iraq is a bad idea but leaving could be worse. Thank you Mr. President for spending our nation's blood, treasure and prestige to get us to this point. You should wear a t-shirt that says, "I invaded Iraq and all I got was this stupid t-shirt."

The question of whether to remove the knife from a wounded victim or leave it in is a lot like what's going on in Iraq. Pulling out is bad but leaving it in is only marginally better. I guess the answer to all this is not to stab in the first place. The neocons are great at stabbing, they just don't know what to do after that.

Robert "no-facts" Novak saves the day

2006-12-11T23:21:00.000-06:00

With just a few minutes before Monday becomes Tuesday, Robert "no-facts" Novak saves the day for me. Novak is the Simon Bar Sinister look-a-like "glad to do it" outer of CIA undercover operative Valerie Plame. (In fact, Plame was a NOC or non-official cover agent which means she traveled on a citizen's blue U.S. passport and had no diplomatic immunity if caught spying. Novak of course could care less.) Novak is the lifelong curmudgeon who makes me look like the Good Humor Man by comparison. In any event, the Dark Prince has once again written a slimy pack of lies and gets paid handsomely for it.

Under the column title, "Democrats can smell the Pork" Novak describes greedy, big-spending, pork-loving Republicans who can't resist trying to spend your money on pet projects called "earmarks." The column goes into great detail about Republican Sen. Ted Stevens having another hissy fit about two freshmen senators trying to block earmarks and thus stop the pork spending. Republican Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison also has an insatiable taste for all things swine and fights attempts to stop the spending. Why not? There are four ways to spend money Nobel Prize winning economist Milton Freidman said - you can spend your money on yourself; your money on someone else; someone else's money on yourself; or someone else's money on someone else. Gee, guess which one these "fiscally responsible" conservative Republicans like to do? They love to spend someone else's money on someone else. The first "someone else" is of course foreigner's money, like the Chinese. We borrow over a billion dollars a day from overseas to buy things we don't need like bridges to nowhere or toilet museums to bribe voters (the latter "someone else") with these pork projects. So how does this add up to Democrats smelling the pork as Novak claims? If you can figure it out let me know.

Maybe Novak should take a few moments away from cranking out another rag of a column to read a real reporter's story about all this entitled, "Dems to Wipe Out Pet Projects in Bill." It's a simple story based on facts and on the record quotes but those are as alien to Novak as a hairbrush and a kind word. My favorite quote in the story is, "There will be no congressional earmarks." That came from Rep. David Obey, D-Wis., and Sen. Robert Byrd, D-W.Va., from a statement Moonday, "announcing their plans, which were quickly endorsed by incoming Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., and soon-to-be Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D- Nev." The earmarks the Democrats are talking about getting rid of have exploded under the Republicans who say they are for smaller government and lower spending - they are lying. "There were more earmarks in 2005 than from 1991 to 1999 combined. Although the number of earmarks went down in 2006, their cost increased $6 billion in one year - from $23 billion in 2005 to $29 billion in 2006." Don't take my word for it, that's from the Heritage Foundation a unimpeachable conservative organization. In Novak's world Democrats announcing they intend to end earmarks turns into they can't wait to pass earmarks. Go figure.

So the moral of the story is Novak lies about Democrats and outs CIA operatives and I do not. Read me and not him.

Another Genius

2006-12-10T18:57:00.000-06:00

I missed Friday so here is a Sunday nugget to make up for it. Last Monday I wrote that I didn't care who got appointed to head the House Intelligence Committee as long as it wasn't Rep. Alcee Hastings since he was a former federal judge - former because he got impeached by Congress. Rep. Silvestre Reyes was mentioned as a potential chair although he was not the ranking member as far as seniority. I said I didn't care if Silvestre Reyes or Sylvester the cat took over as long as it wasn't Hastings. Be careful what you wish for. I think right now I'd go for Sylvester the cat. A few more interviews like this with Reyes and I might lament my opposition to Hastings. From Talkingpointsmemo.com:

"Al Qaeda is what, I asked, Sunni or Shia?

“Al Qaeda, they have both,” Reyes said. “You’re talking about predominately?”

“Sure,” I said, not knowing what else to say.

“Predominantly — probably Shiite,” he ventured.

He couldn’t have been more wrong.

Al Qaeda is profoundly Sunni. If a Shiite showed up at an al Qaeda club house, they’d slice off his head and use it for a soccer ball."

Doesn't know who runs al Qaeda. You say Shiites, I say Sunnis, let's call the whole thing off. Yes, let's call the whole thing off. If I'm going to try can't the head of the House Intelligence Committee try a bit? Just a little? Ladies and gentlemen, may I present to you your new Chairman of the Permanent House Select Committe of Intelligence Rep. Silvestre Reyes. Now is he a Democrat or Republican?

A vast wasteland, except for Wife Swap on ABC

2006-12-07T22:08:00.000-06:00

I don't watch the ranting talking heads on cable anymore. I haven't for long time and I don't miss them. Ninety-nine percent of the political screaming matches you watch on The O'Reilly Factor or Hannity & Colmes or Tucker or whatever is just a vaudeville act. It's not intellectual debate, it's argument for the sake of argument. Nothing is solved, nothing is learned. Certainly not in the three to six minutes given for the segments. It's just yell out your talking points as fast and as loud as you can. Like I said i don't miss it. It's like missing punches to the head.

The latest example of public discourse descending into the gutter is the New York Post's front page today. Rupert Murdoch, the media/propaganda barron put the faces of James A. Baker III and Lee hamilton, the co-chairs of the Iraq Study Group, on monkeys and screamed the headline, "Surrender Monkeys." It's really impressive in it's childish viciousness and total lack of substance. But what do you expect from Murdoch or the right? They can't defend against the recommendations of the Iraq Study Group so they call the co-chairs surrender monkeys. Listen to Tom Friedman and then decide whether getting out of Iraq is a bad idea. Listen what an intelligent assessment sounds like and compare that against questions from O'Reilly like, "Do you want America to win in Iraq?" (Unfortunately it's not the complete interview - I caught it his morning and it was refreshing.) The death of substantive debate is complete. No longer do we use history or facts or political assessments to frame a debate - it has arrived at the destination where a former Secretary of State, who also served as a White House Chief of Staff is called a "surrender monkey" by a major newspaper whose publisher controls Fox News.

So do yourself a favor. Turn off the television. Pick up a book, magazine or a newspaper. Hey here's a crazy idea - why not actually read the Iraq Study Group report instead of having some right-wing nutjob newspaper like the New York Post distill it down into a two-word slur? Learn something. Learn how you are treated like fools by the smirking cable hosts. Learn how you've been lied to and fed a steady diet of propaganda. If you don't you'll be using examples of Jack Bauer in "24" (a Fox show) to justify torture. Too late, already done. In the meantime I'm going to tune out, turn away and drop out of wasting brain cells on people who have none.

The VP's grandchild has two mommies

2006-12-06T22:13:00.000-06:00

Another story from the "truth is stranger than fiction" files - Vice President Dick Cheney's openly gay daughter Mary is pregnant and she and her partner, Heather Poe, are excited. So are the right-wing hate jobs who claim to cherish life unless it springs forth from the loins of lesbians. "Janice Crouse, an official with the conservative advocacy group Concerned Women for America, called Cheney's pregnancy 'wrong.' "They're deliberately bringing a child into the world without a father, leaving a great gaping hole," Crouse said. Father absence is the biggest problem we're facing in this country," she said, and "the root cause of all sorts of negative outcomes — drug use, juvenile delinquency. You name it." Robert Knight, director of the Culture and Media Institute of the Media Research Center says of the pregnancy, "I think it's tragic that a child has been conceived with the express purpose of denying it a father," Knight said. Fatherhood is important and always will be, so if Mary and her partner indicate that that is a trivial matter, they're shortchanging this child from the start. Mary and Heather can believe what they want," Knight said, "but what they're seeking is to force others to bless their nonmarital relationship as marriage" and to "create a culture that is based on sexual anarchy instead of marriage and family values." "Sexual anarchy." Sounds like a new reality show on FOX.

Mary Cheney has said publicly that "Heather and I already are married." She also said, "We have built a home and a life together. I hope I get to spend the rest of my life with her. The way I look at it is, we're just waiting for state and federal law to catch up with us." She's going to have to wait a long time. She may think she's married but her home state of Virginia says she and her partner have no more rights or protections than two roommates. Daddy's boss, President George W. Bush recently said, "I believe that marriage is a union between a man and a woman." As Texas governor, Bush opposed gay couples being able to legally adopt. "I believe children ought to be adopted in families with a woman and a man who are married," Bush said. Wonder if he's going to send a baby gift.

I know that the most important thing is that the Mary Cheney's baby is healthy and loved. The President and his moral minority supporters think the most important thing is demonizing people so as to win elections and control the teeming masses of "sexual anarchists." They will eventually end up on the trash heap of history along with their divine inspired hate of unborn children of parents who were created by their Creator as gay or lesbian. In the meantime we all have to suffer their slings and arrows of homophobia. "It's not normal!" said Maj. Frank Burns in a classic episode of M*A*S*H. "What's normal Frank?" he is asked. "Normal is everyone doing the same thing." answers Frank. "What about individuality?" to which Frank replies, "Individuality is fine as long as we all do it together."

I guess hating couples, straight or gay, who want to have children brought into a loving home whether through adoption or pregnancy, is fine as long as we all do it together. Count me out. Count the Christian right in.

Too tired to blog

2006-12-05T23:07:00.000-06:00

I'm too tired to blog. The updates are I can walk now and I sold my car. Didn't get much response from the Chicago Tribune but I put up an ad on Craig's List and it was sold in less than seven hours. Craig's list is amazing and the guy who started it, Craig, is some pure genius who won't be corrupted. He was offered $100 million for his site and said no. I guess genius and insanity really do intersect. As of today I haven't even been offered half that much for the rights to my blog. Nothing happened in the world today worth talking about. Hopefully that changes tomorrow otherwise the New York Times will just be a bunch of blank pages.

Can I go now?

2006-12-04T22:39:00.000-06:00

"Just when I thought that I was out they pull me back in. " Michael Corleone said that in Godfather III and it's how I feel. I first threatened to quit paying attnetion to politics and leave the country if the Republicans kept control of the House of Representatives. They lost the House and incredibly the Senate and the Democrats and America won. Whether I won is another story. It put off my inevitable shunning of all things political for another day. So I waited for another chance to pack it in. The Democrats gave me that chance almost immediately.

Even before she took over in January as Speaker of the House, Rep. Nancy Pelosi presented me with a way out. Rumor had it that she had this cat-fight thing with Rep. Jane Harman who was in line to take over as the chairperson of the House Intelligence Committee and was going to appoint the no. 2 person on the panel, Rep. Alcee Hastings. Hastings was the first black federal judge appointed in Florida and he was also one of the very, very few federal judges ever removed from office through congressional impeachment. It was all about bribes and perjury and although a Miami criminal jury found Hastings not guilty the Congress wasn't so blind. The Washington Post writes, "When the Hastings case reached the House, Rep. John Conyers Jr. (D-Mich.), skeptical about the evidence, investigated further. In time, Conyers, an African American, became so certain of Hastings's guilt that he delivered an impassioned speech about race and justice -- and made an opening statement during the Senate proceedings, which ended with Hastings's conviction on 11 counts, including seven counts of making false statements." The voted was 413 to 3 to impeach Hastings. That's the guy who was in line and considered for the head of the Intelligence committee. So I sent a couple of emails out warning some Democratically connected people that if Hastings was appointed to lead the panel I was done. Gone. Never to be heard from again. There may be no real cause and effect like praying for rain and then it happens but it looks like Hastings won't get the job.

Rep. Silvestre Reyes of Texas might get the job but I wouldn't care if Sylvester the cat got the chairmanship. Rep. Norman Dicks, fondly known as the Congressman from Boeing (formally headquartered in his district, now located in Chicago) is also a name being mentioned. I'm available since it looks like I'm going to be around watching the mental patients run the asylum for a just a bit more. I'm sure more opportunities to get out will come up but I'm also sure they'll pull me right back in.

My kingdom for a snowblower

2006-12-02T16:24:00.000-06:00

I am blogging from the floor of my bedroom. I don't mean I'm sitting on my floor typing away I mean I'm in the least painful position of what seems to be an infinite amount of painful positions.

If you read my post on thursday you know I was preparing for the foot of snow coming to my driveway. I checked out my hand me down snowblower that I got five years ago and saw I needed gas and oil. I went to Ace Hardware to get a gas can and of course they're sold out since everyone else is doing the same thing. I head off to Home Depot and find the last gas can and grab it. I also pick up an 8 ounce can of oil to mix with the gas. One gallon for every eight ounces it says for lawn mowers and snowblowers. I get gas at the station and go home. I proceed to pour the eight ounces into the gas can and then pour the mixture into the snowblower. As I screw the gas cap back on the blower I realized I screwed myself. On the side of the blower it says to mix four ounces of oil to every gallon of gas. Fabulous.

I try to start the snowblower. Nothing. I try again and again and again. Nothing, nothing, nothing. A few more violent yanks on the blower and I'm ready for rotator cuff surgery. I give up. I take out a shovel and start to remove heavy wet snow that is covers the long driveway to a uniform depth of twelve inches. After a bit of shoveling and closing in on a heart attack I try the blower again. Holy moly it starts! It is billowing out oily black smoke since it is drowning in oil but it works. I'm able to get two passes out of it before it stops working again. More yanks and more nothing. I'm on my own.

Somewhere during the shoveling to clear the driveway something in my back goes on strike. By the time I'm finished I smell like gas and oil and my weak back feels like it's been hurt for about a week back. By the time I go to bed I can't really walk and the next morning it's worse. It's 6 a.m. and I'm on the floor next to my bed. Cranky's Wife is calling the doctor and within an hour I'm holding a bottle of Vicodin and muscle relaxants.

It's now 6 p.m. and I feel paralyzed. Let me re-phrase that. It's 6 p.m. and I am paralyzed. Temporarily I hope. I won't go into all the gory details of life on the floor but it's not pretty. But for my devoted fans I had to blog. Even if it's using one finger on a wireless laptop. I missed posting Friday and for me to miss a post you know I have to be in jail, in the hospital or in a jail hospital. Add paralyzed on the floor after shoveling more snow than my back could carry to the list. Pray for me and my back. And for all those people who get addicted to Vicodin - I don't get it. I'm downing them like Chicklets and I can still feel the pain. Go figure. I can't even get addicted right.

Brrrrrrrrr

2006-11-30T22:22:00.000-06:00

The temperature dropped nearly thirty degrees from one day to next here but that's Chicago weather for you. The news is that when I wake up on Friday morning there will be around ten inches of snow on the ground. Maybe more. I don't know if there is gas and oil in the snowblower or whether it will even start. The shovel always works but my wife, Cranky's Wife, who recently brought her blog back to life ala Frankenstein gets cranky when I shove her out the door to shovel. A friend of mine wanted to go to the grocery store to get milk and he couldn't get into the parking lot. Apparently there was a convergence of Hurricane Katrina-like fear and suburbanites who obviously have no food in their house. He went home sans milk.

Why do I live here again? I have to worry about getting my car out of the driveway in the a.m. and then have to plow through mountains of snow when I come home if I'm lucky enough to get a start out of the blower. I have to wear smartwool socks to bed and buy rock salt. I have to scrap frozen ice off my car at the train station lot and I'm sure my furnace will fail to work around bedtime on the coldest night of the year. The people who settled Chicago back in the good old days must have done so in springtime.

So now I lay me down to sleep. A pair of smartwool socks on my feet. If I die before I wake. At least Hell will be warmer than Chicago for goodness sake.

Move along please

2006-11-29T23:14:00.000-06:00

It's time to move on. So says Sen. John Kerry about his "botched joke" before the 2006 mid-term elections. Kerry, while trying to make some lame joke about President Bush, said young people would end up "stuck in Iraq" if they didn't study hard in school. Yes, I know. Hilarious. Bush and the other phony outraged followers claimed this Silver Star, Bronze Star and three-time Purple Heart recipient was actually maligning the troops. He wasn't but it didn't matter. Turns out it also didn't matter to the outcome of the elections. What it did do is put the last nail in the coffin of one of the worst politicians in Washington.

"This is getting silly," Kerry said on CNN's "Larry King Live." "The country needs to think about a policy that has young men and women at risk on a daily basis that is not working." It is silly to still be talking about his "botched joke" but it isn't silly to keep reminding everyone why Kerry shouldn't even be considered as a presidential candidate in 2008. It needs to be said again and again and again - Kerry is one of the worst politicians I've seen. His campaign in 2004 was a joke. A mess run by lame managers who fought more amongst themselves than against Bush. Kerry must have been high to take the high road with the Swift Boaters. "I was for it before I was against it?" That's a wet-dream for Karl Rove. Wind surfing? Can't you wait until you've either won or lost to do that? Wearing a NASA white lab bhurka? Didn't Dukakis in his Snoopy helmet riding around in a tank teach you anything? Then after the election it turns out you had $15 million in unspent funds? Was that to buy every one of your 50 million supporters a White Castle hamburger? I know I'm forgetting much more but what I'd like to forget is Kerry's entire campaign. Maybe it should just be a federal law. No more liberal Democratics from Massachusetts can run for president. Is that so hard?

So yes, it is silly to keep talking about Kerry's non-joke joke that he couldn't even tell right. And even if Kerry did tell his "joke" it makes as much sense as, well, Kerry running for president again. But it isn't silly to remind the country of what a terrible politician Kerry is and why we should all move along not only from the "botched joke" discussion but also from Kerry.

Stop the presses!!!

2006-11-28T10:20:00.000-06:00

There was a time when we took our freedoms for granted in America. Those days are long gone. It's now a daily battle to save this country from the forces of evil, the Republican Iron Curtain that is descending across our nation. We used to think our government shouldn't be allowed to spy on us unless a court warrant was issued upon probable cause. Now it's done if a guy at the White House or the NSA wants to do it. We used to think flying was as seamless as driving but now we have to carry our three ounces of baby formula in a clear ziploc bag, take our shoes off and still maybe get barred because you're one of the many John Smiths on the no-fly list. Habeas Corpus? Fugettaboutit. The U.S. government can pluck you off the street and disappear you into a secret prison forever if they want. And now? It was just a matter of time since Ari Fleischer the former White House press secretary warned people to "watch what they say" that our freedom of speech was formerly challenged.

Former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich, that tubby lifelong government employee who criticizes lifelong government teat-sucklers, who when he's not lecturing people about the sanctity of marriage is having an affair with a subordinate employee (while impeaching Bill over Monica) and moving on to his third wife, thinks our freedom of speech is just a bit too loose. It needs to be tightened. You know, like a noose.

Gingrich said "the country will be forced to reexamine freedom of speech to meet the threat of terrorism." Tubby went on to say, "We need to get ahead of the curve before we actually lose a city, which I think could happen in the next decade." Why don't we just start up those internment camps form the 1940s? Oh we already did that with the CIA secret prisons.

"They hate us for our freedoms," we are constantly told by people who also hate us for our freedoms. They all must hate us a little less today since our freedom of speech will no doubt be joining some others in the America that we used to know and love.

P.S. "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances." Does that sound better than, "the country will be forced to reexamine freedom of speech to meet the threat of terrorism"?

I got car-ied away

2006-11-27T00:01:00.000-06:00

I have been driving the same car for about eight or nine years and after 109,000 miles it was time. I reluctantly cracked open the piggy bank because we have two cranky juniors and my two-door coupe couldn't handle a car seat. That's a problem. If I take cranky jr. out then cranky's wife and cranky jr. jr. would be trapped at home. I had done my research and done the test drives over the past couple of months and decided today's the day.

I rarely buy cars but every experience I've had or my friends have had have been more like a assault than a pleasant transaction. This time I brought a friend of mine who used to be in the car business and by the end of the day even he was impressed with where we ended up.

I first called a dealership one town over to get a price on the car I wanted. They gave me a price that seemed about right according to Kelley's Blue Book website. I had a trade-in but I knew enough to get the car price first then tell them you have a trade-in to appraise. The next day with the phone price in hand I went to my local dealership with my friend, the car insider. I told them I could do something today if the price was right. The front line sales lackey gave me a price that was higher than the over the phone price at the other dealership - only $750 off the sticker price. He said these cars are really selling as fast as they get them so they don't really discount them very much. I said, "Well, I'm a little disappointed since my family has bought a few cars from here and I got a better price over the phone from some dealer I had never met." He asked me what price they gave me. I told him I wasn't going to bid against myself and tell him the price that he only had to beat by a dollar to get the sale. I said they gave me a better price without ever meeting me so I was inclined to deal with them since they were willing to be more up front about this. Then the words, "Let me talk to my sales manager" made their appearance. He left and my buddy told me the sales guy has zero authority. It was a total waste of time talking to him but they force you to. Enter the sales manager. He said that he could call it a "fleet" sale and give me another $1000 off. So in one second we go from $750 off to $1,750 off. Not bad. That's the best they could do. Lowest, best price. O.k. give me a trade-in price on my car. Comes to $4,000 and I say, "O.k. well I'm going to go to the other dealership and get their trade-in price and I'm going to buy today before 5 p.m. so here's my cell number if you want to adjust your price before then."

I get to the other dealership and re-establish the price and then get a $5,000 trade-in appraisal. Now this offer became $1000 better than the first deal. I say, "I'm going to go get lunch. here's my cell number if you want to improve your price because I'm going to buy that day." Before we head into lunch I call the other dealer and say, "I got a better deal and they beat you by $1,100. (I'm as honest to them as they were with me.) I'm going to buy today, I've got my title and check with me. I'm giving you a last courtesy call to see if you're interested." He says, "Let me call you back in 20 minutes." In twenty minutes I get a call from him saying they will take another $1,300 off the price of the car. So for a quick recap they went from $750 off and that's our final offer to $3,050 and that's our final offer. And the best part of the deal is that the sales tax in my county if a half percent lower than the other dealership so it's another savings.

I get the car in two weeks and in the meantime I get to try and sell my car. It gets detailed on Monday on all I have to do is sell it for more than $4,000 to squeeze even more money out of this deal since the extra $1,300 off came off the new car price and not added to the trade-in value. It could go for roughly $7,500 so I'll get more than $4,000.

The review from my car friend was that I played it perfectly and that he couldn't believe where we started and where we ended up. On a scale of 1 to 10, 1 being the idiot who pays sticker price and 10 being turning the tables on the car people he said it was all of ten.

So now I have the experience of feeling like I was in control of the car people and actually smiling after signing the buyer's order to lock it in. It could be another 109,000 miles before I shop again for a car so the feeling will have to last. If you were there with me the whole day you would know it will.

Thanks

2006-11-22T22:45:00.000-06:00

Thanksgiving is tomorrow so I thought I would list a few things I'm thankful for:

1. My DVR. I don't know how people survived before TIVO.
2. The fact that I'm not traveling through an airport or two to get a turkey dinner.
3. That my new cranky jr. sleeps through the night.
4. That the friend I though was mad at a blog post isn't mad and is still my friend.
5. That the Democrats took over the House of Representatives.
6. That the Democrats took over the U.S. Senate.
7. That I won the Powerball Mega-Jackpot and no one knows it.
8. That I don't live in a country that is on the brink of civil war (Iraq, Lebanon, etc.).
9. That my wife can handle my crankiness.
10. That I have at least a few readers who seem interested in my blog posts. It's cheaper than therapy so I say thanks for saving me money.

There are at lot more things to be thankful for but I don't want to get sentimental. It might make me cranky.

Gobble, Gobble.

Can you hear me now? Boom!

2006-11-21T23:37:00.000-06:00

It's late and I'm too tired to really crank out some cranky column and this story from a couple of days ago has been in my mind. The story begins, "Israel called off an airstrike against the house of a suspected Palestinian militant in Gaza late Saturday, after the inhabitants ignored a telephoned warning and neighbors flocked to the house to prevent the bombing, the military said." The Palestinians declared victory for their latest "popular resistence." The Israelis criticized the cynical use of civilians as human shields. "The Israeli military spokesman said the attack on the house had been called off after a routine telephone warning from the military urging inhabitants to evacuate the house was ignored. “We didn’t want to harm civilians,” he said."

Read it again if you didn't catch the remarkable words in the story. The Israelis actually pick up the phone and call targets of airstrikes and tell them a bomb or two will be landing on their homes in about thirty minutes and that they might want to leave. These calls are "routine." So I ask again as I have in the past - name me a single country that has ever existed or that currently exists, other than Israel, that would give a courtesy call to strike targets. Just one. Israel measures success by how FEW civilians are killed in a military action. Its enemies measure success by how MANY civilians they kill.

And by they way. I have some advice for Israel on to counter this latest "weapon" of human shields protecting targets tipped off by the Israeli army - don't call first. Can you hear me now? You can? Boom!

This circus really is a circus

2006-11-20T13:23:00.000-06:00

I haven't been to the circus in over 30 years. The real circus that is, Ringling Bros. & Barnum and Bailey, not the circus that is planet Earth. I've been to that circus everyday since I knew there wasn't a tooth fairy. (Apologies to my small but devoted five-year-old fan base that just found out there is no such thing as a tooth fairy.) I took Cranky's Wife, (who used to have a blog until I killed it because of editorial misconduct), Cranky Jr. and Cranky Jr. Jr. Big mistake. Note to self: Don't bring a four-month old to Ozzy Osbourne concerts or the twice as loud Ringling Bros. circus - you'll end up in the hallway with a napping child. I saw the first act and Cranky's Wife saw the second act.

Also, bring lots of money. My older (but not necessarily wiser) brother used to say about traveling overseas that you should put the pile of clothes and the pile of money you intend to bring and then take away half the clothes and double the money. Same thing for the circus. First of all I thought the $24.00 tickets for row 5 of section 201 would be fine. The other choice was the $50.00 tickets and some on the floor for $80.00. Eighty-dollars a ticket for a circus? That's nuts. I figured level 2 is better than level 1 and level 3 had to be nosebleed seats. So level 2 in a low number row should be fine, right? Wrong. They're are fine if you want to watch it on the Jumbo-tron screen. The tickets to get were the $50.00 ones but that seems high to see some juggling and birds riding horseback on cats.

So we're in our seats and Cranky Jr. wants cotten candy. No problem. Ten dollars. Pardon me? How much? It did come with a cloth circus hat that must have cost a good fifty-cents so all in all...it's still armed robbery. Oh, you want a Sno-Cone in a plastic elephant cup? Twelve dollars. A circus program? Fifteen dollars. A box of popcorn is six dollars. Some plastic motorcycle with spinning lights? Seventeen dollars. Slice of pizza and a small bottle of water sets you back $8.50. Did I mention parking was $20.00? Don't even ask how much they charged for toilet paper. Let's just say I may the four-ply go four times as far as it should. Needless to say the line at the ATM was looooooooong.

I didn't even keep track of how much the day cost. I'm learning that with these kid-oriented things, you are just a hostage. Just brace yourself and pray that it ends quickly. Pay the money and don't think about it. Now I've been through it I know better how to see the circus. Pay for the more expensive seats and buy everything. It's only once a year for a few years while your kids still think the circus is as wonderous as the tooth fairy.

They hate us for our video games

2006-11-17T23:35:00.000-06:00

The end of the world is at hand. It's called the Sony PlayStation 3. I've watched with a bit of head shaking the news stories of people waiting in freezing cold lines for three days to buy one of the new game consoles. I read about some woman here in Chicago who is like eight months pregnant sleeping in the cold for a couple of days to get one. (I'm sure that kid is going to be a model citizen.) I saw some story about a guy getting shot while waiting in line for a PS3 by someone trying to rob the line. I saw the stampede of people trampling men, women, children, cats, dogs and parakeets to get into a Best Buy to pay $500.00 so they could play their little video games this weekend. I heard about the Ebay sale of a PlayStation 3 for $4,400.00 and have seen sales go off at $3,000.00. The market has adjusted to the supply and demand but as of 11:30 p.m. tonight Ebay auctions are going off every minute or so for around $2,000.00. Keep in mind in a few weeks or so they'll have so many PS3 game consoles you'll have to step over them just to get inside a Best Buy. But no matter, it's just the latest immediate gratification item that shows the festering underbelly of society in all its fetid glory. But affecting presidential politics? Say that again.

Turns out this nutty story will no doubt find its way into an attack ad real soon. Apparently, ex-Senator John Edwards, who will be running for president in 2008 is now caught up in PlayStationGate. The story goes like this: Elizabeth Edwards, John's wife, mentioned to some of his staff that their kids wanted a PS3 game console. The staff members mentioned it to some Edwards volunteers and one of the volonteers, who no doubt has already learned the first lession of politics - do favors for more powerful people so as to get ahead - went down to a local Wal-Mart and tried to get one for the ex-Senator. I'm sure he threw around Senator Edwards' name as in "Do you know who I work for?" and "The Senator would be extremely grateful to get a PlayStation 3." If that last phrase isn't embarrassing enough, Sen. Edwards is a huge critic of Wal-Mart. Oops. This one is ready made for a political ad. Ominous voice-over: "John Edwards says Wal-Mart is unfair to its employees but when the senator wanted to play Talladega Nights: The Ballad of Ricky Bobby on Sony's new PlayStation 3 he sent one of his lackeys to do his dirty work. Did we mention the game is the unrated version?"

Wal-Mart has already tried to turn this into some presidential invalidating event by issuing a news release Thursday saying "that on the same day Edwards was criticizing the company in a conference call with union-backed activists, the volunteer staff member had asked a Raleigh, North Carolina, electronics department manager to obtain a PS3 for the ex-senator's family. From Wal-Mart headquarters in Bentonville, Arkansas, company spokesman David Tovar said the person who called left a voicemail at the Raleigh store and identified himself as an Edwards staff member. When the manager returned the call, the staff member again identified himself as working for Edwards, and Wal-Mart said it confirmed that with Edwards' office. The retailer's news release accused Edwards of not wanting to wait his turn. While the rest of America's working families are waiting patiently in line, Senator Edwards wants to cut to the front," the Wal-Mart statement said."

The only line I want to cut in front of is the line getting off the planet. Between the pregnant lunatics who either wait in the freezing cold for three days to get a PS3 or the nuts who somehow have $4,400.00 to buy one on Ebay or Wal-Mart issuing a press release about a volunteer who name-dropped to get a video game console I want out. The patients are running the asylum and I just want to get out of the way. At least there isn't any stories about the violent nature of the games and how it's going to corrupt the youths of America because of course that's what does it. Rumor has it Hitler played a lot of Grand Theft Auto while listening to Eminem. But the Sony PlayStation 3 has only been out for 24 hours. Give it another day or two.

Iranian "Chutzpah"

2006-11-16T13:59:00.000-06:00

From the "you just can't make this up file":

"Iran, whose president has vowed to wipe Israel off the map, complained to the United Nations on Wednesday that the Jewish state was repeatedly threatening to bomb it. The threats were "matters of extreme gravity" and the U.N. Security Council should condemn them and demand that Israel "cease and desist immediately from the threat of the use of force against members of the United Nations," Iranian U.N. Ambassador Javad Zarif said." To be fair, although Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has threatened to "wipe Israel off the map," a statement Iranian officials have argued was not a threat.

Am I crazy are or they? Or both? The reality of this unreality is that news from mainstream sources reads more and more like bits for The Daily Show with Jon Stewart or The Onion. To come up with a foreign policy strategy with hostile nations you have to know their intentions and capabilities. With North Korea we have a good idea of their capabilities now but we don't truly know what their intentions are because they are, well, insane. It's hard to negotiate with an insane person and so misunderstandings can occur. That's o.k. if you're trying to get out of talking to the guy in the street who thinks you're the voices in his head. But what if it's with a sovereign nation that has nuclear weapons? A misunderstanding can lead to hundreds of thousands of deaths. With Iran we don't know their capabilities and we don't know their intentions. This is how wars start. Now I'm not against war, in the words of Col. Flagg from M*A*S*H, "If it wasn't for war you wouldn't know what peace was." But the bottom line is what do you do with Iran?

I wouldn't be against setting their nuclear weapons program back by years through military force but with 140,000 of troops in Iraq, Iran would likely strike at them as payback and a wider war in the Middle East would likely be triggered. On the other hand, if you do nothing but talk to Iran (which we aren't doing) then prepare yourself for a nuclear Iran. When that happens the situation will be worse then trying to stop them. Once they go nuclear they'll never go back.

So the lesson for the day is: Iran is insane and trying to stop them from going nuclear is a bad option but letting them go nuclear is worse.

Better late than never

2006-11-15T23:14:00.000-06:00

Looks like I missed some good news late last night. Apparently a recount for a congressional seat has knocked off another Republican incumbent. "Democrat Joe Courtney's victory over Rep. Rob Simmons in their U.S. House contest was confirmed Tuesday by a recount that stretched nearly a week and uncovered significant vote-counting flaws. Both parties monitored the recount and confirmed that Courtney had the final edge, although their figures differed. Republicans said their count showed Courtney winning by 96 votes, while Democrats had the margin at 93. Nearly 250,000 votes were cast." So while a few more races are contested here is another Democratic pick-up. Not a single Democratic incumbent lost in the House or Senate on November 7.

The other thing that comes to mind is that in nearly a quarter million votes to decide a congressional race it came down to less than 100 votes. The course of history was changed because of 537 votes in Florida in 2000. Your vote matters. It does. Just vote. The second thing that comes to mind is that our voting system is an embarrassment. In the not so distant past Olympic races were decided by eye-balling it. Judges would stand on the edge of the pool and when a racer touched the wall the judge would try to quickly see if anyone else was doing the same thing. So the guy who came in second could easily have been first. Of course it happened and happened a lot. That's how we do it today. We eyeball it. Wal-Mart can keep track of every Pop-Tart in their chain of distribution but we can't (won't) track every vote. You get a receipt when you buy a pack of gum but not when you vote. If your bank lost money you had deposited you wouldn't do business with them and that probably wouldn't be a problem since they would probably be out of business. Votes? We have no choice. We have to do business with every mope running an election using machines that inspired as much confidence as an airline pilot who crosses himself and rubs a rabbit's foot before takeoff. Spend the money and track the votes as well as we track Pop-Tarts. Otherwise we'll be just another banana republic. If we aren't that already.

Christmas. Bah. Humbug.

2006-11-14T22:35:00.000-06:00

Not even Thanksgiving yet and it's beginning to look a lot like Christmas. Getting off the train, the station looked like Santa's elves had been working overtime all weekend. I guess we're just going to skip over Thanksgiving this year. All we need now is Fox News complaining about a "War on Christmas" for it to really feel like the most wonderful time of the year. Of course the Fox News memo telling its employees of its "holiday" party, not a "Christmas" party reminds me that they know what they peddle to their near dead audience is just an act. In any event, it's that time of year again.

It's the time of year again when a few family year in review letters will find their way into my mailbox. I hope they don't. Here's a news flash - I don't care. And I don't mean that in a routine I don't care kind of way. I mean I really, really don't care. Why do people think that anyone cares about whether little Betsy got that third understudy role in the school play? Sparky Jr. hit a triple in game 5 of the Pee Wee Little League World Series? Who cares. Your cat had kittens? Your house got a new kitchen? Next time send a gun and bullet with your brag letter so I can end it all before I get to the thrilling tale of your trip to the largest ball of string. Bang.

I can take a photo or two every now and then. That's what email is for. But a lengthy letter by snail mail, perhaps with a personalized stamp of your prized pooch, is just too much. You got a promotion, you went to Euro Disney and your kid was voted soccer player of the year for six-years-olds. If we weren't close enough for me to know that before you sent the letter then don't. Sometimes the letters aren't even brag letters. They're more like "here is my medical records for the last twelve months." You got sick and felt dizzy over the last year? Well I'm getting that way right now reading your God-damn letter.

So Please. I beg of you. No letters. If your life is so interesting as to be worthy of being memorialized in print - I'll wait for the book to come out.

I have a right...to no rights!

2006-11-13T23:05:00.000-06:00

At least this is one less right to have to worry about or study in law school:

"Immigrants arrested in the United States may be held indefinitely on suspicion of terrorism and may not challenge their imprisonment in civilian courts, the Bush administration said Monday, opening a new legal front in the fight over the rights of detainees. In court documents filed with the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Richmond, Va., the Justice Department said a new anti-terrorism law being used to hold detainees in Guantanamo Bay also applies to foreigners captured and held in the United States. Ali Saleh Kahlah Al-Marri, a citizen of Qatar, was arrested in 2001 while studying in the United States. He has been labeled an "enemy combatant," a designation that, under a law signed last month, strips foreigners of the right to challenge their detention in federal courts. That law is being used to argue the Guantanamo Bay cases, but Al-Marri represents the first detainee inside the United States to come under the new law. Aliens normally have the right to contest their imprisonment, such as when they are arrested on immigration violations or for other crimes. "It's pretty stunning that any alien living in the United States can be denied this right," said Jonathan Hafetz, an attorney for Al-Marri. "It means any non-citizen, and there are millions of them, can be whisked off at night and be put in detention."

So Hafetz is just now figuring out that basic rights of not being disappeared in the middle of the night without a phone call, a lawyer or the right to challenge the imprisonment don't exist anymore in America? There is a legal phrase a lot of people use but don't understand, it's called "due process." When you are arrested, for example, you are entitled to "due process." What does that mean? Well, it doesn't mean perfect process or endless process. It means what process you are due. According to the Bush administration an "unlawful enemy combatant" is due no process. That should speed things up and reduce paperwork. And how is it that one is designated an "unlawful enemy combatant?" Well, President Bush decides you are and that's that. Oh, and before you think this only applies to "fer-ners" you'd better mute Deal or No Deal and read the law. If you can't find two brain cells to rub together to generate a spark of intelligence, take my word for it - U.S. citizens can be thrown into a black hole of a cell in a black site and become a fading memory to those that knew him. American citizens can be designated an "unlawful enemy combatant."

So meet the new boss, same as the old boss. Bush decides if you are an unlawful enemy combatant. You have no right to challenge your indefinite imprisonment - especially if you are completely innocent since finding that out might embarrass the government. And the government says this is all constitutional no matter if you are held in a prison on American soil. So the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution that guarantees that no person shall be deprived "of their liberty, that is imprisoned, without "due process" has been turned into "any person shall be imprisoned if The Decider decides so and shall be deprived of their liberty so the terrorists don't win." I think they already have.

O.K. I'm back - But don't get used to it

2006-11-10T16:45:00.000-06:00

I guess I couldn't stay away long. I was not going to post anything for a bit but then I read this article while having lunch. It's a heartwarming story about how Karl Rove at the request of soon to be indicted and imprisoned then-Governor George Ryan tried to get Ryan's own defense lawyer appointed as the U.S. Attorney who would try to prosecute Ryan. At has a nice Ripley's Believe It or Not feel to it.

The Chicago Tribune explains it this way, that former Republican U.S. Sen. Peter Fitzgerald wanted to really have a fair and non-political U.S. Attorney to go after elected officials, Republicans and Democrats, in Illinois. Small problem though. Fitzgerald, like Diogenes searching with a lantern for an honest man in the streets of Athens, couldn't find a lawyer in the entire state of Illinois to do a fair and impartial job. Apparently, then-Gov. Ryan tried to influence the selection of the U.S attorney going so far as trying to get one of his defense attorneys selected as top federal prosecutor in northern Illinois. Ryan was later indicted and comvicted on corruption charges and was sentenced to 6 1/2 years in prison.

"There was an effort that I perceived [that] they were trying to influence the selection actually with one of George Ryan's legal defense team members," Fitzgerald said in remarks to the Illinois Campaign for Political Reform. "But I worked very hard to make sure that wouldn't happen." Ryan's lawyer, Edward McNally, later served as interim U.S. attorney for southern Illinois, and tried to protect Ryan when questioned by federal prosecutors.

"[Sen.] Fitzgerald said he picked New Yorker Patrick Fitzgerald (no relation) as U.S. attorney for Chicago in 2001 despite a warning by Karl Rove, President George Bush's top political strategist, not to go outside Illinois for a candidate. Fitzgerald said that prior to that warning, he had expressed concern to Rove that House Speaker Dennis Hastert and Ryan might try to undercut what he considered to be among his most important responsibilities. Despite the warning by Rove, Fitzgerald said he chose from outside Illinois because he contended at the time that he couldn't find any qualified Chicago attorneys without political connections. " Apparently, "Karl Rove called back and said if you will not appoint anyone [from] out of state, we'll let you pick anybody you want, as long as that person is from Chicago," he said, as laughter broke out at the lunch for the Illinois Campaign for Political Reform. Yes, hilarious. I guess if you can't laugh at overt threats being made from the White House to U.S. Senators you would cry. To his credit, Republican Sen. Fitzgerald didn't cave in to the threats and went out and got an Untouchable who has done an amazing job here tossing corrupt politicians and their staffs in prison. (In his spare time he tried to indict Rove and did indict Cheney's chief of staff Scooter Libby over the CIA outing case.) And what did Sen. Fitzgerald get for his effort? Zero support from his party and he didn't run for re-election.

So I tried to to not blog anymore but it reminds me of a fable. A scorpion asked a frog at a river's edge to carry him across. The frog said "no, you'll sting me on the river and I'll die." The scorpion said, "No I won't. I can't swim and if I did that we would both drown." That made sense to the frog and agreed and the scorpion climbed on the frog's back. Halfway across the river the scorpion stung the frog and they started to sink into the water. The frog asked the scorpion, "Why did you do that? Now we'll both die. " The scorpion answered, "It's just my nature."

It's Rove's nature to be evil and it's my nature to blog.

I bid you all adieu

2006-11-09T22:36:00.000-06:00

I started this blog about a year and a half ago as an outlet. A way to rant and rave. It was cheaper than therapy. Clinton famously said, "I feel your pain." I said to you all, "Please, feel my pain." Sharing it with you diluted the crankiness in me. But now it's a new day. The Democrats control the House and the Senate. The pessimist in me still thinks Lieberman or some other death or resignation will screw it up in the Senate but each day I get a bit more confident. I won't even rant and rave about 2008 and Hillary and Obama or whomever. Don't get me started. I can say if there was a way to not have a president for four years I'd start with 2008. But I am happy that at least for the next two years the right wing loons won't be able to get a kook (like Rick Santorum) on the Supreme Court. I'm happy that a lot of clowns in the Republican party have lost their jobs. Yes, I feel good about their public crash and burn. Payback's a bitch isn't it? I'm happy that the election results gave me a glimmer of hope that the election system actually works and that after being abused for so long the American people decided to get out of the relationship. Speaking of which. My brain is tired. I have devoted years and years of reading and writing about the clowns and mopes who run this country. It's physically draining. Going to the movies doesn't mean you're in the movie business and writing a political blog doesn't mean you're in politics. I'm going to take a break from the daily grind of trying to point out the insanity of the people running the world. I'll be back sooner rather than later but I have to re-charge my cranky batteries before I can start up again. Thanks for all the hits and comments. On the above average number of hits days it made it worthwhile. On the low visits days I thought, "It's like pearls before swine." Either way, thanks for listening. In the words of Gen. Douglas MacArthur, "I shall return." Ciao.

Election Day +1 (updated)(updated again)

2006-11-08T00:09:00.000-06:00

Looks like I'm not leaving the country. Looks like I don't get to rant and rave about conspiracies. Some big House names just lost their jobs and it couldn't happen to nicer people. Some escaped getting squashed. Unfortunately invisible congressman Mark Kirk (IL-10) fooled his constituents again and won. He'll be shaking hands at the main train station in Chicago Wednesday morning and then flee to Washington where he'll hide for the next two years. If you thought he was irrelevant in a Republican Congress just wait to never hear from him again in a Democratic Congress. Looks like Mean Jean Schmidt will keep her job. Same with Tom Reynolds. Oh well. Can't win them all. But the night isn't over and Jim Webb is ahead in Virginia and George Allen's future is as dim as he is. Jon Tester is going to win Montana and Claire McCaskill could take Missouri which means a Democratic Senate. Maybe. Here's hoping.

Here is the list of people who just got booted out of their arrogant thrones. This is why I am smiling and will start unpacking my things tomorrow.

Sen. Rick Santorum (PA)
Sen. Mike DeWine (OH)
Sen. Conrad Burns (MT) - hopefully, looks likely
Rep. John Sweeney (NY)
Rep. Sue Kelly (NY)
Rep. John Hostettler (IN)
Rep. Charles Bass (NH)
Rep. Anne Northup (KY)
Rep. Clay Shaw (FL)
Rep. Chris Chocola (IN)
Rep. Nancy Johnson (CT)
Rep. Jim Ryun (KS)
Rep. Charles Taylor (NC)
Rep. Curt Weldon (PA)
Rep. Don Sherwood (PA)
Rep. J.D. Hayworth (AZ)
Rep. Heather Wilson (NM) - hopefully
Rep. Richard Pombo (CA) - hopefully, looks likely

Time to sleep and dream of a Democratic Senate that would protect us from more Alitos and Roberts and Janice Rodgers Brown. Time to pray that when I wake up this nation has awoken from the national nightmare that is Republican one-party rule.

Update: Wow. Missouri looks to go Democratic. McCaskill leading by over 25,000 votes and precincts are running out for Sen. Jim Talent. So much for the Republican firewall of Virginia and Missouri. Virginia - check. Missouri - check. Montana - check? Senate goes Democratic? I can't wait to see how Rove and his gang spin this as a win.

Update II: Wow. Wow. Wow. I mean wow. I go to sleep for a few hours and once again all hell breaks loose. Tester up in Montana by nearly 2,000 votes. Webb up in Virginia by over 12,000 votes? It's not over but I'd rather be in our position than theirs. Still, In the words of now ex-Rep. John Sweeney, they might "shut it down" and bring in the mobs to intimidate the election officials and recounters. I think Florida isn't Virginia so I'm ready to say "Democratic Senate!" Although Heather Wilson looks like she will keep her job the House looks like 200 for Republicans and 235 for Democrats. Huge ass kicking. I'm ready to say Republicans got their clocks cleaned. I'm ready to say Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid. I'm ready to say The Curmudgeon is happy -- but don't get used to it.

D-Day

2006-11-07T12:19:00.000-06:00

This is it. D-Day. We hit the beaches early to affect regime change in America. The resistance has been ferocious but ultimately it will fail. The forces of good will defeat the forces of evil. We will not go quietly into that goodnight. You can have my freedoms when you pry them from my cold dead hands. Viva La Resisrance.

Turnout has been huge locally in Illinois' 10th Congressional District. Like a presidential election turnout but greater. The fun begins after the polls close on the East coast. If key congressional districts go Democratic it will be a great night for Democrats nationwide. Here's hoping. Here's praying that the will of the people will actually be heard.

I'll be back later when pollsstart closing to report on my level of crankiness.

D-Day minus 1

2006-11-06T17:24:00.000-06:00

I veer between giddiness and despair. Let me rephrase that. Most days I veer between giddiness and despair today amplify that by a 100 times. Election eve or as I like to refer to it as D-Day minus 1. Alternatively, America Held Hostage, Day 2125. So I've been watching all the polls and it is very good news for the Democrats. So here is where I swerve into despair territory. The polls were in our favor in 2000 and 2004 at least in the presidential elections. My thoughts are that I am increasingly worried that our election system is not broken, it's fixed. And when I say "fixed" I don't mean that in a good way. We'll know tomorrow starting when the east coast polls are closed. If all of a sudden the races fall the Republican way, especially in Maryland and Virginia, let alone Pennsylvania then you will have to beat me to Travelocity for a one-way ticket out of the Banana Republic of America.

In my college days I used to dismiss the conspiracy nuts and the wild-eyed types arguing that this country is really controlled by a small group of people. If Rick Santorum wins in Pennsylvania you can call me a nut too. If Mike DeWine wins in Ohio call me a conspiracy theorist too. That's my greatest fear. If any of that happens I won't just pack up the blog and go home, I'll pack up my home and go blog - from the Cayman Islands. In the words of Rhoda Morgenstern, "America, this is your last chance."

So I invite everyone over to my election command central tomorrow night. If things go well for the Democrats we can celebrate by popping the cork on a whole bunch of Mums. (Meet the Parents lovers you know what I mean.) If Santorum and/or DeWine win you all can help me pack up my things for shipping.

Oh, more good news

2006-11-03T23:05:00.000-06:00

From the Times of London: Six Arab states join rush to go nuclear. Algeria, Egypt, Morocco, Tunisia, UAE and Saudi Arabia seek atom technology.

Yes, just what we need, more good news. And I didn't think I could feel any worse than I did a few minutes ago. I don't think we need a National Intelligence Estimate to estimate how deep in the doo-doo we really are now. Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld put us there and they insist, all doo-doo to the contrary, that it doesn't stink. In fact it smells like everything's coming up roses. Those guys sure know how to self-fertilize.

So now we have a nuclear arms race by countries that harbor the same Islamic fundamentalists who want to get ahold of nuclear arms. If you believe in the End of Times and the Rapture this is all good news. For everyone else Left Behind it means the hell on Earth we currently have to endure under this administration will continue before, during and after that mushroom cloud Condi longs for. If you are looking for any spiritual guidance on this issue don't bother Rev. Ted Haggard. He's busy collecting an award for the worst explanation since "I didn't inhale." Tell your wife that you got a naked massage by a guy in a hotel room and bought meth from him but you didn't engage in gay sex and threw the meth away and see what she says. Haggard's wife justs sits there like this happens to her everyday. I guess I'll have to look for comfort somewhere else.

At least before the Earth is turned into a charcoal briquette there may be a small window of opportunity where the Democrats take over Congress and try to drag the White House into a neat place called reality. As Andrew Sullivan righty argues, this isn't an election this is an intervention. But back to the Islamic nuclear arms race.

Feel safer now than you did five years ago? Feel Iraq has made you safer? Believe Rumsfeld is doing "a fantastic job?" Think a vote for Democrats mean the terrorists win? Surprised to know the 9-11 commission recommendations have not been enacted by the Republican president and Republican Congress? (Since Bush was against the 9-11 commission being against its recommendations is at least consistent in a cravenly political way.) Think we're ready for the next Katrina or the bird flu? Think we could invade another country right now if it needed invading? Think Afghanistan is going well? Think we're winning? If so then you should vote Republican and hang around for the intervention coming to a voting booth near you November 7.

Winning isn't everything, it's the way to lose your job

2006-11-02T22:57:00.000-06:00

In the Bush administration if you do your job well you get fired.First there was Lt. Commander Charles Swift. He's the lawyer who represented Salim Hamdan, a Gitmo enemy combatant before the Supreme Court. Swift argued that the military commissions were unconstitutional and won. The National Law Journal ranked Swift as one of the top 100 lawyers in the country. Swift's reward for standing against the Bush administration's kangaroo courts and winning the case in the Supreme Court? He got kicked out of the military. Swift was passed over for promotion and in the up and out world of the military that means you need to pack your things and move on. The denial of promotion to Navy commander happened about two weeks after the Supreme Court ruled the White House.

Now there is the case of another lawyer, Stuart W. Bowen Jr. Bowen, a Republican who worked for George W. Bush in Texas and the White House, heads the Office od Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction. His investigations "in Iraq have sent American occupation officials to jail on bribery and conspiracy charges, exposed disastrously poor construction work by well-connected companies like Halliburton and Parsons, and discovered that the military did not properly track hundreds of thousands of weapons it shipped to Iraqi security forces." Bowen's reward for his good work? A Medal of Freedom? No. A promotion to a job that doesn't require wearing bullet-proof vests? No. A simple thank you? Nope. Bowen got a pink slip. And not just him but the entire office. They were legislatively deleted.

The New York Times reports that, "tucked away in a huge military authorization bill that President Bush signed two weeks ago" Bowen and his office were de-funded. "The order comes in the form of an obscure provision that terminates his federal oversight agency, the Office of the Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction, on Oct. 1, 2007. The clause was inserted by the Republican side of the House Armed Services Committee over the objections of Democratic counterparts during a closed-door conference, and it has generated surprise and some outrage among lawmakers who say they had no idea it was in the final legislation. Susan Collins, a Maine Republican who followed the bill closely as chairwoman of the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Government Affairs, says that she still does not know how the provision made its way into what is called the conference report, which reconciles differences between House and Senate versions of a bill." Shocked. Shocked I tell you!

"Neither the House nor the Senate version contained such a termination clause before the conference, all involved agree. "It’s truly a mystery to me,” Ms. Collins said. “I looked at what I thought was the final version of the conference report and that provision was not in at that time. The one thing I can confirm is that this was a last-minute insertion,” she said." Maybe it wrote itself in the bill. Maybe what we need is a Office of Legislative Oversight to do oversight on the legislature that doesn't do any oversight.

So the moral of the story is do your job as incompetently as possible and the world is your oyster. Do your job well and your job security in government will shrink to the size of an oyster.

Hypocrite sundae with a cherry on top

2006-11-01T22:35:00.000-06:00

The hypocrites in the Republican party are working overtime today. Republicans, who like to call themselves "tough on crime," all become civil liberty lovers when a prosecutor is on their case. Take Ann Coulter. And when I say "take her" I mean please, take her. Anybody take her somewhere, drop her off and leave her there. Coulter the boney, hate monger and political vaudeville act is refusing to cooperate in an investigation into whether she committed a felony by voting in the wrong precinct. I seem to remember her and the entire Republican party argue that the warrantless wiretapping of Americans in America to find al Qaeda phone calls was no big deal since, "if you're not making calls to al Qaeda you have nothing to worry about." Hey Ann, if you didn't intentionally vote in the wrong place and didn't commit a felony in Florida punishable up ro five years in prison then you have nothing to worry about so cooperate. That's the argument that would allow you and your house and your car and anything else to be searched whenever the police wanted to since, "if you have nothing to hide you have nothing to worry about." Get used to that phrase because if the Republicans keep control of the government that's where we are headed.

A complaint was made against Coulter alleging that she voted in the wrong precinct during a Feb. 7 Palm Beach town council election. Since then, the Elections Supervisor has made repeated attempts to resolve the matter with Coulter and her attorney but has been rebuffed. An initial letter was sent to Coulter requesting that she clarify her address for the voting records ``or face the possibility of her voter registration being rescinded.'' Three more letters were sent to Coulter and her attorney over the next several months, but she has yet to respond with the information requested. Knowingly voting in a wrong precinct is a third-degree felony punishable by up to five years in prison. I guess all that Republican talk about submitting to the authority of government for the good of society only goes so far.

Then there is Republican Majority leader John Boehner who just blamed the military for the mess in Iraq. On CNN Boehner had the following exchange with Wolf Blitzer:

Boehner: ...[L]et's not blame what's happening in Iraq on Rumsfeld.

Blitzer: But he's in charge of the military.

Boehner: But the fact is the generals on the ground are in charge and he works closely with them and the president.

Republican Majority leader blaming the troops and not a peep from the "oh my lord did you hear what John Kerry said" crowd. That's because hypocrisy has no internal logic. Sort of like our local congressman Republican Mark Kirk (IL-10), who is going to lose next tuesday, arguing the Democratic challenger, Dan Seals doesn't live in the congressional district when Kirk didn't live in the district before he got elected in 2000. The "party of personal responsibility" blaming the generals for Iraq. Marvelous.

And for the cherry on top? President Bush said Wednesday he wants Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and Vice President Dick Cheney to remain with him until the end of his presidency, extending a job guarantee to two of the most-vilified members of his administration. "Both those men are doing fantastic jobs and I strongly support them," Bush said in an interview with The Associated Press and others. A "fantastic job?" I don't even think they would say that about themselves. My favorite quotable blogger Andrew Sullivan put it this way in a blog post entitled, "Unhinged":

"George W. Bush just gave the most powerful reason for voting Democratic next Tuesday. He has reiterated unconditional support for the two architects of the chaos in Iraq, Cheney and Rumsfeld. He intends to keep Rumsfeld in his job until 2008! Why not a medal of freedom while he's at it?

Let me put this kindly: anyone who believes that Donald Rumsfeld has done a "fantastic job" in Iraq is out of his mind. The fact that such a person is president of the United States is beyond disturbing. But then this is the man who told Michael Brown he was doing a "heckuva job." And, yes, our Iraq policy begins to look uncannily like the Katrina response.

The president, in other words, has just proved that he is utterly unhinged from reality, in a state of denial truly dangerous for the world. He needs an intervention. Think of this election as an intervention against a government in complete denial and capable of driving the West off a cliff. You can't merely abstain now. Bush just raised the stakes. And he must be stopped."

That's a big cherry on top.

A Declaration of Independence...from Republican tyranny

2006-10-31T22:37:00.000-06:00

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

Declaration of Independence, July 4, 1776

"It’s an entire culture that focus on immediate gratification and the pursuit of happiness and personal pleasure and it is, it is harming America."

Republican Senator Rick Santorum, television interview, July 25, 2006.

The Declaration of Independence is one of the most remarkable documents ever written. The writing is simple and accessible and yet poetic and revolutionary. "We hold these truths to be self-evident...". Anyone can understand this phrase but almost no one conceived of the idea, let alone thought to write it down on a "subversive" document 230 years ago. It was revolutionary - all men were endowed with certain unalienable rights, that among them are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Andrew Sullivan's brilliant new book, The Conservative Soul: How we lost it, How to get it back, talks about this idea. I'm paraphrasing but basically it goes something like this. It wasn't life, liberty and the pursuit of morals or the pursuit of virtue or the pursuit of religion. It was the pursuit of happiness. Not even happiness but simply its pursuit. Your idea of happiness might be boating, mine may be (is) golfing. It may be that your idea of happiness is painting, hiking, traveling, mountain climbing, skydiving, watching movies, playing the harmonica or yes, even internet gambling while, horrors, having a martini. That was the unalienable right. The simple pursuit of happiness. To play. To enjoy oneself. To be left alone from the awesome power of government to pursue your pleasure. The pursuit of pleasure, of happiness was a goal or a right as important as life. As important as freedom. It is life, it is freedom. But it's the pursuit of happiness, that is, the pursuit of pleasure that Republicans hate. They want to tell you how to live and they want to pass laws to make sure you don't pursue your happiness.

Take a look at this video (hat tip: Andrew Sullivan) where Republican Senator Rick Santorum says, "It’s an entire culture that focus on immediate gratification and the pursuit of happiness and personal pleasure and it is, it is harming America." No Senator, you're harming America. When the Taliban came to power they banned music and dance and kite flying. They banned movies and alcohol (banning alcohol, hmmm, that sounds familiar) and anything else they deemed as harming Islam and Afghanistan. Rick Santorum bans internet gambling (but not online horserace betting or online state lotteries) because he wants to tell you how you spend your money and free time. As Sullivan writes about Santorum, "he tries to portray such a pursuit as somehow an enemy of personal responsibility. But why not both? Isn't that what true conservatism means? And since when was it the role of government to be the means of imposing values and responsibility? In Santorum, you see how the big government left met the moralizing right and became Bush-Rove conservatism. It's a vision of America suited for October 31. And it's time to fight back against it."

George Will, another obvious "liberal, just do it" kind of guy says, yes, "some people gamble too much. And some people eat too many cheeseburgers. But who wants to live in a society that protects the weak-willed by criminalizing cheeseburgers? " He adds, "But governments and sundry busybodies seem affronted by the Internet, as they are by any unregulated sphere of life. The speech police are itching to bring bloggers under campaign-finance laws that control the quantity, content and timing of political discourse. And now, by banning a particular behavior—the entertainment some people choose, using their own money—government has advanced its mother-hen agenda of putting a saddle and bridle on the Internet." He's right. Or "left" if you believe Santorum.

Sullivan says it's time to fight back. I voted early today and it felt so good. Better than ever before. The referees will call the fight next tuesday night. Let's hope it's a knockout and not a split decision on points because frankly I don't trust the refs anymore and I sure don't trust people like soon-to-be former Senator Rick Santorum who think they know better than Thomas Jefferson about the meaning of the Declaration of Independence or you or me if we want to have a drink, place a bet or fly a kite. Who knows, his head might explode if you wanted to do all of that at the same time. As President Bush likes to say, "the terrorists hate us for our freedoms." No, Republicans like Rick Santorum hate us for our freedoms.

I'm a Charlie Brown Democrat

2006-10-30T23:09:00.000-06:00

Be still my still beating heart. Wait. Let me rephrase that. Beat my still beating heart. I know polls are like oh so many women who promised so much and then never delivered but this time I have to have hope. Without hope I'd have to look for a nice spot to sit down in front of a train right after election day should things go badly for the Democrats. New polls came out and while I may be setting myself up, like Charlie Brown running to kick the football from Lucy, I am getting a bit uncurmudgeonish. Take a look at the new polls. How could you not be a bit optimistic? Sen. Macacawitz, a.k.a George Allen, looks to be falling behind Jim Webb. Sen. Rick "man on dog sex" Santorum is headed for a huge defeat. Jon Tester is going to send Republican Senator Conrad Burns into a much needed retirement. In Maryland, Ben Cardin is going to end Republican Michael Steele's political career. I think Harold Ford is going to pull out one of the greatest uphill battles in American history. In Missouri, Republican Jim Talent, looking too much like ferret-face Maj. Frank Burns may beat Claire McCaskill, although he shouldn't, but only because Missouri is as politically odd as Minnesota. Heath Schuler and Ken Lucas look to beat incumbent Republican congressmen. In Illinois Rep. Melissa Bean is ahead of her Republican challenger and former Iraq helicopter veteran and double-amputee Tammy Duckworth is slightly ahead of a Tom Delay protegee. Here's the big news though - in my district the 10th congressional district the challenger, Dan Seals is ahead of the empty suit and invisible congressman Republican Mark Kirk. Wow.

I know these polls aren't entirely reliable but they are something. They are at least a snapshot of what is going on in the various races. All I know is this election night I am going to be stocked up on chips, dip and cold drinks. Here are my predictions for next Tuesday. Let's see how my cranky crystal ball does.

Pennsylvania: Casey beats Santorum
New Jersey: Menendez beats Kean
Virginia: Webb beats Allen
Montana: Tester beats Burns
Missouri: Talent beats McCaskill (edge to Talent but McCaskill could win no question)
Tennessee: Ford beats Corker
Maryland: Cardin beats Steele

Senate goes Democratic with Democrats winning 6 or 7 of the seven races that will decide control. A six seat pick up would be like pulling an inside straight to win. Seven for 7 would be like pulling inside Royal Flush to win and it could easily happen.

As for the House, the Democrats take over gaining 25-30 seats. The other prediction, lesser for some but huge for me, is that Dan Seals beats Republican incumbent (a.k.a. Bush's shoe shine boy) Mark Kirk here in my home district. Taking over the House would be satifying. Taking over the Senate would be satisfying. Having Republican Mark Kirk lose his seat would be satisfying. When all three happen next tuesday I'm going to be so satisfied I may even change the name of my blog to "The Temporarily Happy Curmudgeon." So feel free to stop by and watch the Republicans get hit with Hurricane Cranky. Here's hoping Lucy doesn't pull the football away again.

Memories, like the corners of my mind...

2006-10-27T23:31:00.000-05:00

Lynne Cheney appeared on CNN's The Situation Room with Wolf Blitzer and denied that the book she wrote and published entitled "Sisters," had sexually explicit passages in it. This only came up because Sen. George Allen's campaign has quoted from books challenger Jim Webb wrote and cites sexually charged language in the books to argue Webb is some sort of sexual deviant like, for example, Republican Mark Foley. Cheney of course lied and was evasive when pressed to answer questions about her book in light of the fact that she was critical of Webb for writings in his book. Follow me? The video is another classic that should be immediately sent over to the broadcastng hall of fame. Blitzer tried to get an answer out of Cheney when he asked her about passages in her own book that "featured a lesbian love affair, brothels and attempted rapes." Here's how the Associated Press described the book in 2004: "a historical romance published in 1981 that includes brothels, attempted rapes and a lesbian love affair." Brothels, attempted rapes and lesbian love affairs written about in bad novels. By all means let's talk about the important things this election cycle rather than how are we going to help protect 147,000 troops in Iraq and remove them from the middle of a nascent civil war that will make the past three years of bloodletting look like a picnic.

Maybe Cheney needs a memory expert to help her out. Here's one that probably need a new gig. Elizabeth F. Loftus, a professor of criminology and psychology at the University of California at Irvine, was hired as an expert memory witness for Vice President Dick Cheney's indicted chief of staff Lewis I. "Scooter" Libby. Libby has been indicted for lying to F.B.I. investigators and obstruction of justice. His defense seems to be that he was so inundated with secret memos and national security papers and briefings that he just didn't remember leaking the name of an undercover C.I.A. agent to Judith Miller. So he and his team hired Prof. Loftus to explain how he wouldn't remember gossiping about classified non-official cover agents of the C.I.A. to the big, bad New York Times. Only one problem - the "memory expert" Prof. Loftus doesn't have a good memory herself. Loftus insisted that she had never met Fitzgerald but he reminded her that he had cross-examined her before, when she was an expert defense witness and he was a prosecutor in the U.S. attorney's office in New York. It has been reported that Loftus was reduced to "stuttering" and "backpedaling" on the stand. It's just too funny. As a former trial lawyer you fantasize about this kind of cross-examination. It will be one of the top war stories Patrick Fitzgerald will be telling the rest of his life, believe me.

I'm thinking there is a future for anyone interested in becoming a memory expert. Maybe the Cheney family can get a group discount. Since President Bush has now claimed he never said "stay the course" in Iraq, maybe the administration can get a governmental discount. But since this Republican congress and Reoublican president enjoy spending money at a faster rate than any Democratic congress since FDR I think they probably would pay full price.

I won't have what he's having

2006-10-26T14:13:00.000-05:00

Every day I ride the commuter train between Chicago and the suburbs. I asked my fellow train rider who he was voting for in our congressional district. While he didn't say he definitely was going to vote for the Republican incumbent, Mark Kirk (IL-10), he probably will. I asked, "why?" "Because he's good for Israel," was the answer. The challenger, Dan Seals, has made his support for Israel crystal clear. And anyone who has read my blog knows that I am a rabid supporter of Israel. I have relatives there who have and do serve in the army. So I wouldn't support a candidate that wasn't, shall we say, "kosher" on the issue of Israel. That being said it struck me another way. I offered a few reasons why he might want to reconsider his vote but I don't think I got very far. I have eight or nine train rides to persuade him though. Anyone who wants to read about Kirk calling himself independent and then voting 91% of the time with President Bush you can read through this blog or take a look at this one. In short, the guy is an empty suit who hides from his constituents and his opponents. He doesn't say anything obviously stupid and talks like, "I'm for strengthening Social Security," and "I'm for supporting seniors and veterans." If you can tell me what that really means please email me.

The point is that if you like a restaurant because you like one dish and the rest of the menu is warmed over rat vomit, pardon me if I don't want to eat there. Even if you say the Republicans in general and specifically Republican Rep. Kirk is "good for Israel" what would it take for you to not vote for them? This is assuming, as is the case in our district, that the challenger, Dan Seals, is also "good for Israel" which he is. My relatives' lives depend on it and I'm voting for Seals. So getting back to the menu. The Republicans have exploded the debt and deficit. They have taken us from $250 billion yearly surpluses to over $400 billion dollar deficits. The national debt has gone from around $5.5 trillion to nearly $9 trillion in under six years. Unfunded liabilities, the promises government has made for the future, was $20 trillion in 2000 it's now $43 trillion. Ronald Reagan once vetoed a transportation bill with around 150 earmarks for pork projects. Bush signed one with over 6,000 earmarks. On Iraq and Katrina it's been a disaster. Limited government? They dictate that California can't pass medical marajuana laws; same-sex couples can't have equal rights, not even marriage mind you just hospital visitation or pension rights; that you must say the pledge of allegience with "under God" in it; that stem-cell research should be banned; that end of life decisions, like in the Schiavo case, should be made in Washington D.C. in the Oval Office rather than say, I don't know maybe by a husband or a family at the hospice and don't forget it's now illegal to engage in internet gambling. Unless it's online state lotteries or betting on the horses online. And we decry when the Taliban banned kite flying or the Suadis ban alcohol. (We tried banning alcohol by Consitutional amendment no less and all it did was create the mafia.) Balanced budgets? Limited government? Competent and wise foreign policy? Smaller government? How about even competent government. The Republicans want to visit Mars but they won't visit New Orleans. It's farce at this point.

So again. What would it take to vote against a Republican? If after Iraq, Katrina, the spending, the indictments, the guilty pleas, the resignations, the elevation of governmental power over individual rights, the lies, the state of denial, the subsitution of faith for science, the support for creationism and a whole lot of other things - if after all that you still proudly want to vote for Republicans then there is nothing I can say to change your mind. Hope you enjoy the warmed over rat vomit too.

Divide and Conquer

2006-10-25T11:27:00.000-05:00

"Reconciliation is difficult in a country that has been tortured and divided by a tyrant."

--President George W. Bush, press conference, October 25, 2006

My first question after reading this was he talking about Iraq or the United States? I mean how do you divide a nation? Well first off you take over control of the presidency with more than 500,000 votes LESS than your opponent then you govern as a hard-right religious fundamentalist. Then after September 11, 2001 you ask for unity from Democrats and you get it followed by kicking them in the teeth. You accuse them of wanting to practically fellate Osama bin Laden. You put pictures of war heroes next to pictures of bin laden and Saddam and tell people Democrats want the terrorists to win. You swift boat a war hero who volunteered for Vietnam and was awarded a Bronze Star a Silver Star and three Purple Hearts. You tell people vote for Democrats and you'll die. You call half the country "defeatocrats" and claim critics of the Iraq war are Nazi appeasers. You call critics of the USA Patriot act as giving "ammunition to America's enemies" and "aid [to] terrorists." You say the words of the Democratic Senate Minority Leader "embolden the enemy." And the kicking in the teeth and the balls of half the country has gone on non-stop since September 12, 2001. The message is clear - if you are a Democrat or opposed to the Republican fundamentalists in complete control of the government you are un-American, you are unpatriotic, you are a security threat. You are to be hunted down and caged like the godless, treasonous, terrorist loving person you have been made out to be by this president and the plague of Republican supporters.

As for tyranny the Republican Congress just gave the President what he wanted - the ability to label anyone, including any American citizen in America, as an "enemy combatant" and to be arrested (disappeared) without any ability to challenge the claim or the imprisonment and to be held forever without any charges being filed or any court to review the arrest or any lawyer to assist in proving that a mistake has been made. I'm talking about the end of habeas corpus. Constitutional law professor Jonathan Turley of George Washington University put it this way, "People have no idea how significant this is. Really a time of shame this is for the American system.—The strange thing is that we have become sort of constitutional couch potatoes. The Congress just gave the President despotic powers and you could hear the yawn across the country as people turned to Dancing With the Stars. It's otherworldly..People clearly don't realize what a fundamental change it is about who we are as a country. What happened today changed us. And I'm not too sure we're gonna change back anytime soon." These are despotic powers gleefully given to The Decider and it's just the beginning.

How do you reconcile a nation that has been divided and tortured? You get rid of those doing the dividing and torturing. And speaking of torture it looks like the "20th hijacker" of Sept. 11 may avoid prosecution because of our "aggressive interrogation" of him at Gitmo. Republicans torturing and dividing. So I ask again, how do you reconcile a nation that has been divided and tortured? You vote Democratic.

Celebrity Monday

2006-10-24T14:09:00.000-05:00

Last night I went to see an intellectual rock star. Andrew Sullivan the uber-blogger and author of a really great book, "The Conservative Soul: How we lost it, how we get it back." It's been clear that the current occupant at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue and his Republican towel boys in Congress are not conservative. They hardly believe in balanced budgets or small or limited government. They have exploded spending, balloned the debt and deficit and want to act as the nanny and secret police for everyone in the country. Increasing spending 37%, taking the national debt from $5.5 trillion to nearly $9 trillion, never vetoing a spending bill, expanding entitlements, going from budget surpluses to deficits, taking unfunded government mandates from $20 trillion to $43 trillion in six years, banning internet gambling, trying to amend the constitution to ban flag burning and gay marriage, trying to pass a pledge of allegience, under god of course, law, taking jurisdiction away from courts whose decisions you disagree with, getting involved in one family's end of life decision (Schiavo), wiretapping without warrants, passing a law to end habeas corpus so that despotic powers are now in the hands of one man are many things but it is not conservative. That's the nutshell of Sullivan's new book. It is a convincing case that these "theocons" divinely believe they are right and in possession of the "truth." Once you have no doubt about what you are doing whether it be spending unprecendented amounts of money or wiretapping your own citizens or ending habeas corpus or invading countries that never attacked you then the rest is easy. God told you to do it. Hard to argue or reason with faith. Faith cannot be reasoned or argued with it can only be asserted, Sullivan says and he's right.

The book is easy to read and follow and I recommend it highly for anyone who wants to understand the religious fundamentalists who have hijacked the Republican party and how they are no different in their belief of divine truth and divine purpose than Iran's President or other religious fanatics. The end of the path of "my truth is the one truth" is a bloody one. Just take a look at the Sunni and Shiites who are ready to tear Iraq apart.

I didn't have chance to buy his book at a discount so I paid full price and had him sign my book, "Thanks for paying full price! Andrew Sullivan." He came early and spoke at length with everyone. He is one of only a few writers I would go and buy their book, read it and then show up at a discussion/book signing. It was worth it. Rather than spew talking points this Oxford educated, Harvard Ph.d. actually is able to talk at length about history, religion and politics and make a coherent and persuasive argument. I did challenge his assertion that conservatives balance budgets and are for smaller, limited government, freer trade and restrained foreign policy. Not even under Ronald Reagan did that happen. Democrats have smaller increases in spending, smaller deficits and over all better economic record - growth, inflation, recession, etc. It was President Bill Clinton who ended welfare as we know it. It was Clinton who gave us surpluses rather than the deficits of Reagan, Bush and Bush Jr. It was Clinton that shrank the size (employees) of the federal government. In short, all the talk of Republicans, whether they are Reagan or Bush Jr. conservatives, is simply nonsense. They have never delivered on any of the pie in the sky free lunches they peddle. It's just a matter of who is worse for the nation fiscally, domestically and foreign policy-wise. Without question it's the religious fundamentalists who now run things.

I disagree with Sullivan but not on his critique of the radical theocons controlling our government. When he talked about the recent end of habeas corpus he choked up. He was born in Britain but is now an American citizen. His reaction is one I haven't seen from anyone here. Maybe if we did that rather than yawn as our rights and freedoms are banned and taken away by the religious fundamentalists running the nation we wouldn't have to take our country back. It would still be the a nation committed to "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness."

Another prediction

2006-10-23T15:20:00.000-05:00

Let's look at the ledger and see how the Republicans are at predicting things. They said there were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. They said the war would last, "six days, six weeks, certainly not six months." They said we would be greeted as liberators. They said the oil revenues would pay for the war. They said it wouldn't take hundreds of thousands of troops to secure the country. They said there is almost no historical evidence of Sunni and Shiites having animosity towards each other. They said the mission was accomplished. They said the insurgency was in its last throes. They said after Saddam was captured it was a turning point. They said when Uday and Qusay were killed it was a turning point. They said when Abu Musab al-Zarqawi was killed it was a turning point. They said after elections and forming a government and writing a constitution it was a turning point. I'm sure I've forgotten (repressed is more like it) other similar and objectively incorrect predictions by the delusionally self-confident Republicans but you get the point.

Why do I bring this up? Because another prediction has been handed down by the predictor-in-chief. "President Bush gently admonished his father for saying he hates to think what life would be like for his son if the Democrats win control of Congress in the November 7 election. It was the latest sign of possible strain in the relationship between the two men. "He shouldn't be speculating like this, because -- he should have called me ahead of time and I'd tell him they're not going to (win)," a smiling Bush told ABC "This Week" in an interview broadcast on Sunday. "They're not going to win." Marvelous. And smiling when saying it. Either he knows something that we don't - like the election results are already in the electronic voting machines or Bob Woodward's book, "State of Denial" understands the case. Neither is very comforting but given their track record at predicting I think this one will be added to the pile of demonstrably wrong and delusionally optimistic predictions despite empirical evidence to the contrary. Here's hoping.

Hearts and Minds

2006-10-20T23:54:00.000-05:00

It's confirmed - I do have a heart. And I have the emergency room EKG to prove it. Nothing to worry about. The doctor did say I will die -- in about 50 years. Must be all the stress trying to meet the demands of my insatiable readers.

P.S. A major political celebrity book signing and cocktail party will be attended by yours truly and an intellectual and blogger rock star on Monday. Don't forget to check back here on Tuesday for the scoop. This will be bigger than Sen. Bill Nelson, Sen. Joe Lieberman, Al Franken or any of the other "B" list political types I've met and blogged about in the last year. I even paid full price for his book because I had no time before Monday to get it through Amazon. That either makes me a big spending Democrat or just another member of the even bigger spending Republicans who have increased unfunded liabilities for this country from 20 trillion in 2000 to over 43 trillion now. And don't even get me started on the $29 billion a year in pork projects through earmarks. Have to go and try and read at least some of this high brow's book. One hint - he's bald and it's not Dr. Evil.

"Senator, let me quote from Star Wars"

2006-10-19T21:47:00.000-05:00

What is it about Republicans and fiction? I'm talking about novels. Their speeches about how Iraq is going "remarkably well," how they are fiscal conservatives and the party of "family values" is all fiction but they seem to like to drag best sellers in when they argue policy. The latest "open mouth, insert foot" moment was when Republican Senator Rick Santorum compared Iraq to J.R.R. Tolkien's Lord of the Rings. As reported recently, Sen. Santorum "said America has avoided a second terrorist attack for five years because the “Eye of Mordor” has been drawn to Iraq instead. As the hobbits are going up Mount Doom, the Eye of Mordor is being drawn somewhere else. It's being drawn to Iraq and it's not being drawn to the U.S.,” Santorum continued. “You know what? I want to keep it on Iraq. I don't want the Eye to come back here to the United States.” Reminds me of former Vice President Dan Quayle who argued on the Senate floor for funding of antisatellite weapons because they had been so effective in the Tom Clancy novel "Red Storm Rising." I wish I were joking about any of this but unfortunately I'm not. Quayle argued for funding the ASAT antisatellite weapon on the grounds that it was what won the war in Clancy's book. That would be Clancy's book of fiction. I believe the exact quote was, "We should develop anti-satellite weapons because we could not have prevailed without them in 'Red Storm Rising'." "They're not just novels," Quayle explained. "They're read as the real thing."

Note to Ricky -- um, in Lord of the Ring the Eye of Sauron was indeed drawn away from Mordor as you say the "eye" is drawn towards Iraq. But in Tolkien's tale the distraction of the Sauron's eye was precisely how a couple of hobbits were able to sneak attack up Mount Doom and destroy the One Ring. Hello? Get it? It's not the jihadists who are distracted in Iraq. They are gaining in size, strength and experience. It's the U.S. being distracted in Iraq and we are the ones who aren't watching the ports or the borders or the chemical plants or the airports or the nuclear reactors. And another small note, yes we haven't been attacked on U.S. soil for five years but we weren't attacked on U.S. soil for eight years after the 1993 World Trade Center car bombing and we all know how that turned out on September 11th. So stop making 5th grade analogies about complex foreign policy issues. Stop reading fiction and try a bit of fact. The only bright spot in this story is that the latest poll shows Rick-baby losing his Senate seat 52% to 44%. Hopefully that poll is fact and not fiction.

Magna Carta? Is that Jimmy's brother?

2006-10-18T11:32:00.000-05:00

The only good thing about the end of habeas corpus is that there are two less Latin words to remember. Everything else about the death of habeas isn't just bad it will rightly seen as a stain upon this nation rivaling the internment of Americans of Japanese descent during World War II or the racist horrors of the South before, during and more than 100 years after the Civil War. King George smirked and smiled and told you he was making you safer when he lifted his pen and took a line-item veto to the U.S. Constitution. If you have nine minutes watch this with a box of tissues.

In 1215 on a field in the United Kingdom, King John was forced to sign the Magna Carta. It established the beginnings of modern ideas of civil and human rights, including the writ of habeas corpus - literally "produce the body." What it really means is you can't imprison someone forever you need to either give them a trial or let them go free. In 1627 King Charles I threw five knights in jail over a tax dispute and they asserted their habeas corpus rights. King Charles I argued that he had the right to simply imprison anyone he wanted at anytime for any reason. Sound familiar? King George Bush perhaps? King Charles' 17th century Gitmo decree led to the "Petition of Right" law, the basis for our Fourth and Eight Amendments to the Bill of Rights, that prevented a King from suspending habeas.

Oh but that was long ago when they didn't even have cell phones or cheddar dogs. How barbaric. Didn't they leech people with fevers? What do they know about human rights? Human rights for terrorists (or innocent cab drivers from Kabul) when they're human!

Reminds me of a "Liberal" who, when writing about the establishment of the writ of habeas corpus said, "...the practice of arbitrary imprisonments have been, in all ages, the favorite and most formidable instruments of tyranny." This "Liberal" went on to write, quoting Blackstone, "To bereave a man of life, [says he] or by violence to confiscate his estate, without accusation or trial, would be so gross and notorious an act of despotism, as must at once convey the alarm of tyranny throughout the whole nation; but confinement of the person, by secretly hurrying him to jail, where his sufferings are unknown or forgotten, is a less public, a less striking, and therefore a more dangerous engine of arbitrary government." That "Liberal" was Alexander Hamilton, one of the most conservative of the Founder writing in Federalist 84. Ah, what does he know anyway? He's dead. So is habeas. At least it doesn't have to be around to see the other rights we take for granted die one by one by our own King George.

It's definitely not what you know

2006-10-17T22:02:00.000-05:00

From the "why am I not surprised" files...

Today's op-ed pages of the New York Times was replete with examples why this country is off its rocker. First there was the editorial explaining how Ohio looks more and more like a banana republic. The Republican nominee for governor there is Kenneth Blackwell. He is also the secretary of state. If the name sounds familiar it's probably because Blackwell was the c-chairman of President Bush's Ohio campaign in 2004. Remember all the trouble with voting machings, the number of machines in Democratic areas, the disqualifying of voters, the eight hour waits in line to vote? All courtesy of Ken Blackwell. Well here we go again. There is phony claim that the Democratic nominee for Governor has a residency problem, not that he doesn't live in Ohio rather that he has more than one home and it's about where he is registered to vote. Experts who aren't running for governor as the Republican nominee say it's not an issue but guess who could "rule his opponent is ineligible to run"? If you guessed Ken Blackwell you'd be right. The county board has ruled 2 to 2 on party lines (what a surprise) to hold a hearing. The matter is now before Mr. Blackwell who claims he won't rule on the matter to avoid any conflict but his assistant will. Any bets on what happens? It's just over folks. The integrity of elections are gone. Secretaries of state like Ken Blackwell or Kathrine Harris who co-chair election campaigns but who also run the elections makes as much sense as appointing Mel Gibson our ambassador to Israel. We had a good run for 230 years but all good things must come to an end.

The I turn the page and there is an opinion piece written by Jeff Stein the national security editor at Congressional Quarterly. During his interviews with people in Congress or say the F.B.I. he asks them a simple question, "Do you know the difference between a Sunni and a Shiite?" He explains it's not a "gotcha" question, "[a]fter all, wouldn't British counterterrorism officials responsible for Northern Ireland know the difference between Catholics and Protestants?" His conclusion after doing this for a while -- "most American officials...don't have a clue." In 2005 during a deposition brought by an Arab-American FBI whistleblower the bureau's counterterrorism chief, Gary Bald, was asked whether he knew the difference between Sunni and Shia. Bald answered, "You don't need subject matter expertise...The subject matter expertise is helpful, but it isn't a prerequisite. It is certainly not what I look for in selecting an official for a position in the counterterrorism [program].” A few weeks ago Stein asked the FBI's new chief of its national security branch, Willie Hulon, who runs Iran, Sunnis or Shiites? Hulon knew Iran and Hezollah were together but when pressed, "He took a stab: Sunni. Wrong. Al Qaeda? Sunni. Right." Yes, I'll sleep soundly tonight knowing the top counterterror guys in the U.S. have a 50-50 chance of getting it right.

Then there are the members of congress. From Stein's opinion piece, "Take Representative Terry Everett, a seven-term Alabama Republican who is vice chairman of the House intelligence subcommittee on technical and tactical intelligence. 'Do you know the difference between a Sunni and a Shiite?'" Everett answered, "One's in one location, another's in another location. No, to be honest with you, I don't know. I thought it was differences in their religion, different families or something." Hold on a moment folks while I pick my jaw off the floor. Another "tough on terror" Republican, Representative Jo Ann Davis from Virginia who "heads a House intelligence subcommittee charged with overseeing the C.I.A.'s performance in recruiting Islamic spies and analyzing information, was similarly dumbfounded when [Stein] asked her if she knew the difference between Sunnis and Shiites." Answering, and reminding me of the saying," it's better to be thought of as a fool than to open your mouth and remove all doubt," Davis opened her mouth and removed the doubt. "You know I should. It's the difference in their fundamental religious beliefs. The Sunnis are more radical than the Shia. Or vice versa. But I think it's the Sunnis who're more radical than the Shia." Gee I wonder who she beat to get elected? Has to be someone born without a brain.

So there you have it. Corruption and incompetence in two pages of the Times. I think rather than trying to think how to fix the problem or waste my time worrying about it, I think I'll take the path of least resistence and just not read the New York Times anymore. As soon as I have no idea who is who or what is what in the world I'll be ready to chair an intelligence subcommittee in the House or apply to become chief of the F.B.I.'s counterterrorism division. Sleep tight.

War versus war games

2006-10-16T20:47:00.000-05:00

I heard a fact today which once again tells you all you need to know about the current Republican controlled Congress. "Back in the mid-1990s, the Republican-controlled House of Representatives, aggressively delving into alleged misconduct by the Clinton administration, logged 140 hours of sworn testimony into whether former president Bill Clinton had used the White House Christmas card list to identify potential Democratic donors. " However when it came to investigating the abuses at Abu Ghraib prison the Republicans have only had 12 hours of sworn testimony. 140 hours for Christmas cards and 12 for prisoner abuse.

I recall the hearings about steroids in baseball but none for how pre-Iraq war intelligence was used. I've seen hearings about violence in video games but none on why we pulled our troops and special forces out of Afghanistan before the country was secured so that we could invade a country that hadn't attacked us. With Republicans in Congress voting over 96% of the time with President Bush it's no wonder we have less ovesight and more earmarks for bridges to nowhere. My local Congressman Mark Kirk is a typical Republican. He has voted over 91% of the time with Bush but claims he is "independent." If you stand with the President over 9 out of ten votes, I'd hate to see what "dependent" looks like. There was more turnover in the old Soviet Union's Politburo than there is in the the House of Representatives. But I think the over 98% re-election rate for incumbents is going to be knocked down a bit this time. Looking at individual districts there are some really good numbers trending for Democrats. Some with big leads and some gaining. The point is this year I can't wait for election night (pizza and Cheetos standing by) to see if there is hope that the Congress might spend more time on hearings for things like war rather than for things like war games on the Xbox.

Imagine

2006-10-13T20:34:00.000-05:00

This may be a bit off-topic these days but there was a sentence in a story about the ongoing back and forth violence between the Israelis and Hamas in Gaza. It's a sentence that I can't imagine being written about any other country except Israael. The sentence sums up why Israel and its supporters, (yours truly for one) always say Israel is different. That they conduct their warfare with morality and a code of ethics that no other military follows. In Israel it is referred to as Tohar HaNeshek or roughly, purity of arms. So what's the sentence?

"In another incident in Gaza, the Israeli Air Force bombed the house of a Palestinian legislator, Mariam Farhat, shortly after calling the home and telling the occupants to leave." The story went on to explain, "No one was injured. The military said the house was being used to manufacture and store weapons." Can you imagine any other military, any other air force ringing up the occupants of a house being used to manufacture and store weapons to warn them to get out before we bomb you? Would the U.S. do it? Would Russia? Pakistan? Forget the Syrians, Iranians or any of the many terror groups like Hamas and Hezbollah. They measure success by leveling homes with as many people in them.

And by the way, the poor, "innocent" homeowner was not so innocent. From The New York Times, "Ms. Farhat, who is a member of the militant faction Hamas, gained notoriety in 2002 when she made a video with her 17-year-old son, Muhammad, and encouraged him to attack Israel. A short time later, he took part in a shooting that left five Israelis and himself dead. The video was released after the shooting. Since then, two more of Ms. Farhat’s six sons have been killed in clashes with Israel. Ms. Farhat, who is known as “mother of the martyrs,” was elected to the Palestinian parliament in the January elections that brought Hamas to power." And the Israeli Air Force actually picked up the phone and called this "mother of the martyrs" and said, "Hi. Is this a bad time? Listen we've got a couple of F-16s with laser-guided smart bombs ready to destroy your home/weapons factory and storage building. Could you grab your address book and your cat and leave so that we can level the place? We'd really appreciate it. Thanks."

Like I said, I can't imagine any other military doing anything like that. They would level the building and hold a press conference about another victory in the war on terror. They would give the news media copies of the black and white gun-sight video of the building going poof. They would give themselves a medal for taking out a member of Hamas. The Israelis give a "heads up" to the "mother of the martyrs" so she can pack a bag while the IAF circles in strike fighters waiting for the go ahead to destroy a weapons factory making weapons that kill Israelis. I can't imagine any other army conducting themselves like that. I also can't imagine a day when nicknames in Gaza are things like "mother of a cure for cancer" rather than "mother of the "martyrs." Probably because there are mothers in Gaza longing for their sons and daughters to grow up and die for a cause rather than live for one.

Manna from Heaven

2006-10-12T20:10:00.000-05:00

I was going to blog about the Iraq Study Group, a group led by James A. Baker III that is going to release a report about what to do in Iraq. It will give the president political cover for what he accuses Democrats of wanting to do , "cut and run." Incurious George now blames that phrase on his own lack of a large vocabulary and no, I'm not making this up. As predicted the real reason Republicans have repeated the lie about Democrats wanting to cut and run from Iraq was so that when they do it people will think it's something other than cutting and running like the chickenhawk cowards they are. Turns out, are you ready for the market tested phrase, that Baker is going to advise "withdraw and contain." Not as catchy as "cut and run" but it's the same thing. Sort of like how the jungle and rain forest are the same thing. Or swamps and wetlands. (hat tip to Geogre Carlin). So brace yourselves for "withdraw and contain" which you will be told 24/7 on cable by the Republicans and their lackeys that it is not, I repeat not anything even remotely like "cutting and running." Got that straight?

As I said I was going to blog about that but I decided not to. (I think I just did.) What I am going to highlight today is good news. Check out this interactive map of some competitive races. It's kind of inside baseball and all but for those of us who know who Heather Wilson or Curt Weldon are it's sweet, sweet manna from heaven. (Not to be confused with fruit of the gods - Cap'n Crunch with crunchberries or nectar of the gods - the pink milk left behind in the bowl.) Take a look at the map. I can't wait for election night to fire up the plasma screen and pop some popcorn. If these polls hold Heather Wilson is gone along with Curt Weldon and, be still my beating heart, Mean Jean Schmidt. Bye-bye Rick Renzi. Ta-ta Chris Chocola. And what can you add to the fact that the head of the NRCC, Tom Reynolds whose job it is to get Republicans elected and re-elected to the House won't get himself re-elected. That's like Democrat Rahm Emanuel not getting re-elected. I haven't fully explained why these people should be swept into the dustbin of history but just trust me. When the Democrats take over the House and these Republican Representatives get a "former" put in front of their title, it will feel so very satisfying. Sort of like getting my daily post up just in time.

At least nobody died

2006-10-11T20:29:00.000-05:00

After Republicans treid to blame Democrats, the media and even a secret gay society on Capitol Hill the latest defense of the indefensible conduct of Mark Foley and the cover-up by Republican House leadership is that at least nobody died. "Republican Rep. Christopher Shays defended the House speaker's handling of a congressional page scandal, saying no one died like during the 1969 Chappaquiddick incident involving Democratic Sen. Ted Kennedy." That's the standard folks. I though "it wasn't illegal" was the lowest we could go but just when you think the Republicans can't go any lower they somehow limbo under the bar of ethics and decency with room to spare.

"Dennis Hastert didn't kill anybody," Shays said. Well actually how do we know? I mean another Republican doing the ethical limbo when asked if he had any evidence to back up his charge that Democrats were behind the disclosure of the Foley man-boy love thing (as if making it public were a bad thing) Republican Rep. Patrick McHenry answered, "Do you have any evidence that they weren’t involved?" So I ask Rep. Shays, "Do you have any evidence Speaker Hastert hasn't killed anyone?" He could be strangling someone right now. Have you checked?" No? Oh, then on top of protecting a pedophile Hastert could also be a murdered. We just don't know.

We do know that the Republicans are out of touch with what people expect them to be doing in Washington while Foley was trying to touch boys he shouldn't have been in touch with. Whether it's Iraq, Schiavo, flag burning and gay marriage constitutional amendments, stem cell research or pedophiles in the halls of Congress, the Republicans just have no idea what matters to people in their daily lives. Most of us haven't killed anyone either Congressman Shays. So when Speaker Hastert resigns or is thrown out when the Democrats take over, should the most important qualification for the next speaker be that they didn't killed anyone or that they tried to do the right thing for our soldiers in Iraq, or a patient in a hospice, or some little girl in need of a cure for a fatal disease, or for people trapped in a hurricane and flood or simply a 16 year-old-boy who was working for free grabbing your coffee while trying not to be grabbed by a 52 year-old Republican Congressman who's a pedophile?

No Hastert hasn't killed anyone. He's just killed decency and honesty and hope that this country will one day side with the gropee and not the groper.

Can't we all just get along?

2006-10-10T18:31:00.000-05:00

There has been a diplomatic breakthrough between two sworn enemies. After not speaking for a very long time and wishing horrible things happened to each other the two sides have finally agreed to talk. There is hope in the world tonight that the two sides have put their claws away and instead of trying to publicly humiliate each other they are working together for the good of the planet. Israel and Hezbollah? America and North Korea? Wile E. Coyote and the Road Runner? Nope. Paris and Nicole.

Yes Paris Hilton, who swallows anything and Nicole Richie who doesn't, have put aside their infantile feud to reunite. Hilton and Richie have agreed to join together for a new season of "The Simple Life." "The thing the viewers love is the two girls together. America, Paris and Nicole are going to camp." Wish they were going to Camp Gitmo. The 25-year-old do nothings famous for being famous will be camp counselors in the newest "Simple Life." "They reached out to each other...and rekindled their friendship. The two went public with their seemingly reconciled relationship Sunday, arriving together at Dan Tana's Steakhouse in Los Angeles. After dinner, they text-messaged while waiting for their car on a bench in front of the restaurant."

So what do you say Kim jung-Il and Georgie-boy? If they can do it how about you two? Say 7:00 p.m. Saturday night at Dan Tana's? Ill bring the wine you bring the Blackberries?

I will do the opposite

2006-10-09T11:17:00.000-05:00

If countries were people North Korea would be considered psychotic. With their nuclear bomb test yesterday they have taken a big step towards wrecking the planet for everyone whereas before they were content to do that to their own people. Its just more proof that it doesn't take very many people to wreck the planet. On the other hand, at least they've been honest with their public statements something our own government could learn from.

North Korea told everyone that they were breaking the U.N. monitoring seals on their nuclear fuel rods. They told everyone they were enriching nuclear fuel for a bomb. They told everyone they had a number of nuclear bombs and they told the world they were going to test a nuclear weapon. At least they were up front about it.

Back in this country our government refuses to level with the American public on the situation in Iraq. Bob Woodward's book, State of Denial, included a number of classified documents that showed when U.S. casualties were increasing, when our troops were being attacked over a 100 times a day or an average of every 15 minutes, Bush and his lackeys were telling the nation that the terrorists were on the run, that we've turned a corner in Iraq, that we were winning. None of it was true.

For months the Republicans have parroted the talking points of Karl Rove claiming the Democrats want to "cut and run" in Iraq. The Republicans have cut and run from reality and want you to join them there. The point behind charging over and over that the Democrats want to "cut and run" from Iraq was to lay the groundwork so that when the administration cuts and runs from Iraq it won't be called that - something like declare victory and get out - but not "cut and run." Quietly, James Baker III has been leading what is called the Iraq Study Group and their solution is to carve Iraq into three sub-countries with a loose central government. Talk about cut and run - their plan is to literally cut Iraq in three and run. The group also recommends talking to Iran and Syria something many people have suggested only to be called "appeasers of terror." It's political cover for the administration to cut and run from Iraq without it being called that by the know-nothings in the media. It's another phony report to have it both ways and be able to say you are for everything and nothing. It's a way to continue to be dishonest about your policies and intentions.

That's the difference between the maniacs in charge in North Korea and the maniacs in charge in Washington, D.C. The nuts in North Korea tell you what they are going to do and then do it. The ones here tell you what they're not going to do and then do it. The loons in North Korea stay in power by starving their people of food. The loons here stay in power by starving our people of truthful information. So when Bush tells you "the terrorists in Iraq are on the run" think the opposite. When he tells you we're not going to cut and run from Iraq think the opposite. When Bush tells you the Republicans are going to win in November because of their strong record, well, you know the rest.

Hurricane Foley and more bad news

2006-10-06T13:50:00.000-05:00

I thought I might be able to get paroled from having to post nearly everyday about the end of truth, science, decency, justice, freedom and democracy in this country. Before Hurricane (His-icane?) Foley grew from a 3 to a 5, not inches but category strengths, I thought the Democrats might, just might take back the House of Representatives but not the Senate. If that happened at least I would be able to convince myself that my little blog, my small voice in the woods, had at least a drop in the ocean impact on the Democrats winning. If the Democrats did not take back the House I would have gone happily into that goodnight. It looks like my worst fears will come true and I'll be forced to waste more time and energy ranting and raving into the vast internet and believe me it's vast.

Looks like unless Hillary and Bill Clinton, along with Nancy Pelosi, John Kerry and Al Gore open up a gay abortion clinic, before November 7, that caters to nuns and underage girls, I think the Democrats can't lose this one. The Senate might even fall the Democrats way. How is that possible? Because the American people might not understand things about National Intelligence Estimates or PDBs or what general asked for more troops and was fired or may buy that Condi Rice doesn't recall a briefing by CIA Director George Tenet on July 10, 2001 when he warned her that an al Qaeda attack was imminent. (Attorney General Ashcroft started flying charter jets after that briefing.) But they do understand a sex scandal involving predatory behavior, 16 year-old boys and cover-ups. That they get.

The Republican House leadership should get gold medals for the scandal decathlon. Sort of a variation on the five stages of grief. First there is the ignore the information event followed by the pretend it never happened and cover-up events. Then when the news breaks it's the I don't recall event followed by the throw everyone under the bus finale. I'd say a world-record for speed, execution and presentation by Republican leaders. People may not understand about how intelligence briefings work but they do have a strong visceral reaction when the Speaker of the House, the guy behind the vice-president in presidential succession, stands before cameras and gives excuses that sound more like Jake Blues than the guy two heartbeats away from the Oval Office.

Question: Mr. Speaker what did you know and when did you know it about COngressman Mark Foley?

Speaker Dennis Haster: "Honest... I ran out of gas. I, I had a flat tire. I didn't have enough money for cab fare. My tux didn't come back from the cleaners. An old friend came in from out of town. Someone stole my car. There was an earthquake. A terrible flood. Locusts. IT WASN'T MY FAULT, I SWEAR TO GOD"

So the good news is that the Democrats will take over the House. We know this because Vice-President Dick Cheney has recently said the Republicans will retain control of Congress and since his track record of correct predictions were "in their last throes" from the moment he started uttering them it just stands to reason. The bad news is I'm condemned to blog purgatory for a while longer. What a pity.

Not gay bashing - child molester bashing

2006-10-05T13:01:00.000-05:00

I wish I could come up with a great title for this post (pun intended) about Congressman Mark Foley (R-Pedophileville). As always The Daily Show with Jon Stewart gives penetrating (pun intended) insight in to the scandal. For a number of laughs watch the video here. Titles like, "Foley Erect" and "Paged Heat" are priceless. Must be a former headline writer for the New York Post working over there.

The tale about tail grows by the minute. It's impossible to keep up with the changing stories of Speaker Dennis Hastert, Majority Leader John Boehner, NRCC chair Rep. Tom Reynolds, Rep. John Shimkus, Rep. Rodney Alexander, etc, etc, etc. There's also the chief of staff for Hastert denying what Kirk Fordham the recently fired, or more accurately thrown under the bus, chief of staff and former chief of staff for Tom Reynolds had to say. Short story: Hastert and his staff are lying about not knowing what Foley was up to. It should have raised eyebrows that Foley could type 85 words-a-minute only using one hand. (Think about it.) In any event, the electoral situation for the Republicans just changed. Before it was a catagory 3 hurricane and the Republicans were Florida. Now it's a catagory 5 hurricane and the Republicans are New Orleans.

After watching the "values" party who believe in "personal responsibility" blame alcohol, Bill Clinton, priest molestation from 30 years ago and even the Wicca religion it was Robert Novak who wins the award for the most absurd statement of the Foley scandal. In today' Chicago Sun-Times Novak writes, "Dealing with Foley was complicated because he was a known, though never a self-proclaimed, homosexual. A desire not to be accused of gay-bashing may have influenced party leaders to set aside the e-mail that the former page described as "sick, sick, sick." Novak already explained that after it was learned that Foley had sent inappropriate e-mails to a 16-year-old male former page the House leadership urged him to seek re-election. This wasn't because they were afraid of being called "gay-bashers" this was about retaining power and if that means protecting a likely child-molester, a certain sexual predator of young boys, well then so be it.

The Republican party not "gay bashers?" Isn't that called solidifying the base? Andrew Sullivan puts it this way, the GOP is a "party that has built its electoral machine on systematic intolerance and the fueling of populist fear of homosexuals." So yes in the future don't be "gay bashers" just being "child-molester bashers" homosexual or heterosexual bashers will be enough.

November 7, 2006: D-Day

2006-10-04T11:02:00.000-05:00

On the eve of D-Day June 6, 1944, the Allied Supreme Commander, General Dwight D. Eisenhower, the Supreme Allied Commander, wrote a short statement to be released to the press. He hoped that wouldn't be necessary. Eisenhower wrote, "Our landings in the Cherbourg-Havre area have failed to gain a satisfactory foothold, and I have withdrawn the troops. My decision to attack [at Normandy] at this time and place was based upon the best information available. The troops, the air and Navy did all that Bravery and devotion to duty could do. If any blame or fault attaches to the attempt, it is mine alone." As it turned out the Normandy landing and D-Day was a success and the contingency statement written by Eisenhower was tucked away and discovered years later.

I too am writing a contingency statement. This one regarding the potential failure of the Democrats to win enough seats to take over the House and/or the Senate. Thomas Friedman of the New York Times thinks about this and writes today, "It is so important that the Republicans lose, because if the Bush-Cheney-Rumsfeld-Rice team can get away with the grotesque incompetence they have exhibited in Iraq...it makes this country look like a banana republic. If on the morning after the election these people come out smirking that their efforts to scare the public into voting again for their candidates worked, and therefore they can just stay the present course in Iraq - which is not working - it will send a terrible message about our democracy. It will tell us that the country is so divided, and so many districts gerrymandered in favor of Republicans, that performance does not matter any longer. Unless you are caught sending e-mail to a Congressional page soliciting sex, your seat is safe."

I'll put it a different way. Here's my rough draft of the day after if Republicans are still in control of the House and Senate. "Despite all efforts to help the Democrats take back the House and/or Senate, we have failed. The people of this country motivated by fear and faith have willingly tightened the Republicans' stranglehold on America. Our nation may one day emerge from this political darkness but not anytime soon. I wish you all well. And when your children can't get Pell grants or Stafford loans to go to college, I'll just smile and say I told you so. When gas is $5.00 a gallon because this country has no energy policy, I'll just smile and say I told you so. When your taxes go up and your government services go down to pay for tax cuts for the richest 1% in this country, I'll just smile and say I told you so. When you can't afford health insurance, I'll just smile and say I told you so. When you're stopped and strip searched in your car, your home, a mall, a train station, all in the name of national security, I'll just smile and say I told you so. When big brother knows what you read, watch, where you go, what you buy, what your HIV status is all in the name of protecting the homeland, I'll just smile and say I told you so. But hey, at least some gay couples, who you've never met in some state you've never been to and whose relationship to each other has zero affect on your life, can't get married right? Good choice. Bravo. I wish you all the best in your new world. I bid you all adieu"

I could have said you won't have The Daily Curmudgeon to kick around anymore but that's so Nixonian.

Guess Who?

2006-10-03T10:42:00.000-05:00

Who said Monday that the Afghan war against Taliban guerrillas can never be won militarily and that efforts should be made to bring them and their supporters into the Afghan government? Same guy who said that Taliban fighters were too numerous and had too much popular support to be defeated on the battlefield. So who wants to negotiate with terrorists? Who wants to bring al Qaeda's protectors into the Afghan government? Republican Majority Leader Bill Frist. Oh, wait. Frist now says the "Taliban is a murderous band of terrorists" and that "America will never negotiate with terrorists or support their entry into Afghanistan's government" but that "national reconciliation" is needed. Translation: We won't negotiate with Taliban terrorists but they should be persuaded to join the government.

Who said this about President Bill Clinton -- "It's vile. It's more sad than anything else, to see someone with such potential throw it all down the drain because of a sexual addiction." Republican Mark Foley in 1998, eight years before Foley resigns after being confronted with emails and instant message transcripts showing beyond a reasonable doubt that he is a sexual predator and possible pedophile of young boys.

Who said, "What I am quite certain of, however, is that I would remember if I was told--as this account apparently says--that there was about to be an attack in the United States. The idea that I would somehow have ignored that I find incomprehensible." The context of this "I don't recall unless you can prove it to me" is about a July 10, 2001 briefing by CIA Director George Tenet and top counter-terrorism official Cofer Black. The briefing was set-up by telephone on the drive over to the White House to give it a sense of urgency. At the briefing the two officials practically begged that the U.S. "needed to take action that moment - covert, military, whatever - to thwart bin Laden." The result? "Tenet and Black felt they were not getting through." They "felt the brush-off. Tenet left the meeting feeling frustrated. Though [they were given] a fair hearing, no immediate action meant great risk. Black felt the decision to just keep planning was a sustained policy failure. Afterward, Tenet looked back on the meeting ... as a lost opportunity to prevent or disrupt the 9/11 attacks. Black later said, 'The only thing we didn't do was pull the trigger to the gun we were holding to her head.'"

Who gave the brush off to impeding attacks on the U.S. by bin Laden? Who took no immediate action? Who said they couldn't remember even having the briefing until records were found proving the meeting took place? Who was right when she said it would be "incomprehensible" to ignore the warning? Condi Rice, then the National Security Advisor. Add to that her explanation that the imfamous August 6, 2001 Presidential Daily Brief entitled: "Bin Laden Determined to Strike in U.S." was just "a historical document" and it's incomprehensible why she still has a job or any credibility left.

Is incompetence worse than lying or the other way around?

2006-09-29T09:40:00.000-05:00

Margaret "Hot Lips" Houlahan: You lied to me, Frank! That's
worse than stealing!
Frank Burns: Well, I happen to think that stealing is worse than lying!
Margaret: And you did both!
Frank: So I oughta know!

--M*A*S*H, episode 85, aired December 2, 1975

I don't know which is worse - the incompetence of this administration or the lying. You tell me. Bob Woodward's new book, "State of Denial," by way of The New York Times who got a copy before it's release, describes galactic dysfunction, division and plain old incompetence in the Bush administration on Iraq. "The White House ignored an urgent warning in September 2003 from a top Iraq adviser who said that thousands of additional American troops were desperately needed to quell the insurgency there," the book tells us. In late November 2003, Mr. Bush is quoted as saying of the situation in Iraq: “I don’t want anyone in the cabinet to say it is an insurgency. I don’t think we are there yet.” Secretary of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld is portrayed as detached from the nuts-and-bolts of occupying and reconstructing Iraq and was so hostile toward Condoleezza Rice, then the national security adviser, that President Bush had to tell him to return her phone calls. The American commander for the Middle East, Gen. John P. Abizaid, is reported to have told visitors to his headquarters in Qatar in the fall of 2005 that “Rumsfeld doesn’t have any credibility anymore” to make a public case for the American strategy for victory in Iraq. And yet Rumsfeld did just that and continues to do so.

Robert D. Blackwill, the top Iraq adviser on the National Security Council issued his warning about the desperate need for as many as 40,000 more ground troops in a lengthy memorandum sent to Ms. Rice. She was later briefed by Mr. Blackwill and L. Paul Bremer III, then the top American official in Iraq, about the urgent need for more troops during a secure teleconference from Iraq. The White House took no action. Well it did take action. It told the American public that the commanders haven't asked for more troops and were comfortable with the troops levels.

Even before September 11, 2001, the members of this administration earned their incompetence medals. "Mr. Woodward writes that in the weeks before the Sept. 11 attacks, Mr. Tenet believed that Mr. Rumsfeld was impeding the effort to develop a coherent strategy to capture or kill Osama bin Laden. Mr. Rumsfeld questioned the electronic signals from terrorism suspects that the National Security Agency had been intercepting, wondering whether they might be part of an elaborate deception plan by Al Qaeda. On July 10, 2001, the book says, Mr. Tenet and his counterterrorism chief, J. Cofer Black, met with Ms. Rice at the White House to impress upon her the seriousness of the intelligence the agency was collecting about an impending attack. But both men came away from the meeting feeling that Ms. Rice had not taken the warnings seriously."

"The book describes an exchange in early 2003 between Lt. Gen. Jay Garner, the retired officer Mr. Bush appointed to administer postwar Iraq, and President Bush and others in the White House situation room. It describes senior war planners as having been thoroughly uninterested in the details of the postwar mission. After General Garner finished his PowerPoint presentation — which included his plan to use up to 300,000 troops of the Iraqi Army to help secure postwar Iraq, the book says — there were no questions from anyone in the situation room, and the president gave him a rousing sendoff. But it was General Garner who was soon removed, in favor of Mr. Bremer, whose actions in dismantling the Iraqi army and removing Baathists from office were eventually disparaged within the government."

At one point, when David Kay, the top U.S. weapons inspector, warned that it was possible the Iraqis might have had the capability to make such weapons but did not actually produce them, waiting instead until they were needed, the book says he was told by John McLaughlin, the C.I.A.’s deputy director: “Don’t tell anyone this. This could be upsetting. Be very careful. We can’t let this out until we’re sure.” Translation: we need to cover up and lie about not finding weapons of mass destruction.

This Sunday on CBS's 60 Minutes, Woodward will say that insurgent attacks against coalition troops in Iraq occur, on average, every 15 minutes, a shocking fact the administration has kept secret. “It’s getting to the point now where there are eight, 900 attacks a week. That’s more than a hundred a day. That is four an hour attacking our forces,” says Woodward.

The situation is getting much worse, says Woodward, despite what the White House and the Pentagon are saying in public. “The truth is that the assessment by intelligence experts is that next year, 2007, is going to get worse and, in public, you have the president and you have the Pentagon [saying], ‘Oh, no, things are going to get better,’” he tells Wallace. “Now there’s public, and then there’s private. But what did they do with the private? They stamp it secret. No one is supposed to know,” says Woodward.

So the incompetence is followed by the lying. Stay the course, We're winning the war on terror, Mission Accomplished, no one could have predicted the insurgency, the commanders on the ground have told us they have all the troops the need, to name a few. So which is worse - the incompetence or the lying? The administration did both so they ought to know.

BONUS POSTING: If Iraq really is the central front in the war on terror and that this is not a war of civilizations but for civilization and if you think, as the Bushies do, that al Qaeda is an existential threat to our country, then why do we only have 140,000 troops in Iraq and only 20,000 in Afghanistan? We had 500,000 to merely kick Iraq out of Kuwait in 1991. Shouldn't we have at least that there now? If society could unravel after a nuclear terrorist strike here wouldn't it be wise to send 1,000,000 to area like it's really the World War they claim it is? Just wondering.

The law that makes us a nation of men - or one man

2006-09-28T13:07:00.000-05:00

In 1898, Congress imposed what was billed as a temporary luxury tax on phone calls. One cent per telephone call was collected from the wealthy, as on the wealthiest Americans had phones back then. By 1990, the federal excise tax had grown to 3% of the total phone bill. This year Congress did something that it almost never does - it killed a tax. It only took 108 years after the war ended to get around to killing the tax. Oh Great Curmudgeon, why do you tell us this? What could this Charles Osgood-like look back on history have to do with the problems ("challenges" in today's political lexicon) we face today? Because once a law gets on the books it's just about impossible to get rid of them. And why is that important? In a word: torture.

"What this bill would do is take our civilization back 900 years," to before the adoption of the writ of habeas corpus in medieval England, Senator Arlen Specter (R-PA) said. Senator Patrick Leahy (D-VT), said the bill as written would allow the executive branch to hold any lawful immigrant in the United States indefinitely without charge. "We are about to put the darkest blot on the conscience of the nation," he said, charging that the push for quick passage was purely for political gain. "There is no new national security crisis," he said. "There’s only a Republican political crisis." The New York Times sums up the new law -- it gives, "Mr. Bush the power to jail pretty much anyone he wants for as long as he wants without charging them, to unilaterally reinterpret the Geneva Conventions, to authorize what normal people consider torture, and to deny justice to hundreds of men captured in error."
Andrew Sullivan begs his readers to vote for Democrats to stop, "this [Republican] juggernaut against individual libery and constitutional rights." The Times further added, "Americans of the future won't remember the pragmatic arguments for caving in to the administration. They'll know that in 2006, Congress passed a tyrannical law that will be ranked with the low points in American democracy, our generation's version of the Alien and Sedition Acts."

Just like the Spanish-American War telephone excise tax, these "temporary" measures in place only as long as he endless war on terror continues will not be excised off the books in our or our children's or their children's lifetimes. And by the way - callers will still pay a 3% excise tax on local phone calls so the tax really is still there. Just like The Decider's (Bush's) new unchecked power to label whomever he wants an "enemy combatant," disappear them into a black hole of a prison gulag system forever without the right to know the charges or evidence against them, contact a lawyer or relative and in theory could be put to death without knowing why. I'd rather have the excise tax but it looks like we'll have both. There was a time when I would dismiss people who said democracy was dying in this country. Guess I was wrong to doubt them. On the other hand, there will be less consitutional rights to learn about in social studies, history or constitution law classes.

Boobs in Art and in Charge

2006-09-27T14:45:00.000-05:00

Another simple example why this country has no real future as a united, confident, flourishing liberal democracy. In short, we're doomed.

"In Fresno, Texas, an award-winning Texas art teacher who was reprimanded after one of her fifth-grade students saw a nude sculpture during a trip to a museum has lost her job. The school board in Frisco has voted not to renew Sydney McGee's contract after 28 years. She has been on administrative leave. The teacher took her students on an approved field trip to a Dallas museum, and now some parents are upset. The Fisher Elementary School art teacher came under fire last April when she took 89 fifth-graders on a field trip to the Dallas Museum of Art. Parents raised concerns over the field trip after their children reported seeing a nude sculpture at the art museum. The parents had signed permission slips allowing their children to take part in the field trip. McGee's lawyer said the principal at Fisher Elementary School admonished her after a parent complained that a student had seen nude art. McGee said the principal had urged her to take the students to the museum. Now, McGee, who was honored with a Star Teacher Award two years ago, is on paid administrative leave until her contract with the school district expires in March."

Where to begin? So an award-winning art teacher is "urged" by her principal to take the kiddies to the Dallas Museum of Art and after the parents sign perimission slips some nine-year olds saw a boob or two on a sculpture and the teacher, after 28 years of service is going to get fired. If she had taken the kids to a red light district or a XXX movie by the airport without the written permission of the parents I can understand giving her the boot. Didn't the parents give express permission for their kids to go to the museum? Whatever happened to personal responsibility? Does that really mean the teacher is personally responsible for anything the kids see on a field trip? If they little cherubs saw a violent crime being committed outside the museum would the McGee have been fired for exposing them to violence? Probably not since these parents strike me as the type who love violence - probably gun owners who support torture of detainees at secret U.S. prisons and don't mind when abortion clinics are bombed or abortion doctors gunned down - but catch a glimpse of a boob, and not even a real one at that, and well, someone has to get fired.

"Other parents are worried about the future of the art program at the school, which they cite as a reason for moving into the neighborhood. "Our main concern right now is what's going to happen to the children and what's going to happen to the art program at Fisher Elementary. It is the best art program. That's the reason we moved to this neighborhood. It's because of the teachers," said Shannon Allen, a parent. "It was a principal-approved trip. What's the big deal?"

The real big deal is that the Puritans have power and just like the Muslim fanactics who intimidate Western governments, newspaper cartoonists, Dutch filmmakers and the Pope with violent protests protesting people claiming they are violent, they too will make life unlivable for all of us unfortunate enough to want to see art, watch a movie, buy contraceptives, have a beer, go to a casino or any other activity that isn't approved by their God who whispers the "banned" list directly into their small brains. And forget about riding on a bus, train or plane to go do those "scandalous" activites. The Puritans who follow Allah have made that a gamble too.

BONUS POST: "In a sign of regional concern over terrorism, Saudi Arabia is pushing ahead with plans to build a fence along its entire 560-mile (900-kilometer) border with Iraq to prevent terrorists from entering the kingdom from the chaotic north." Gee. I wonder if the world will criticize this as much as they did the Israelis for building a wall for the same reason - to keep bloodthirsty murderers who want to blow themselves and innocent civilians up, out of the country. I'm going to bet no.

Plagarism and Torture Tuesday

2006-09-26T13:19:00.000-05:00

My brain is too full to be completely original today. Here are two stories that echo Capt. Fogg why the great experiment of democracy in America is ending. An iron curtain is descending here with Republicans saluting and cheering and Democrats pleading with the people to save their country before it's too late. It might be too late already. Only history, if that's allowed in the future to be written without government approval, will tell.

From Andrew Sullivan blog (a multiple daily must read):

"Those of us trying to resist the Bush administration's seizure of permanent emergency powers have so far failed to alert the American public of the immense danger to their basic liberties that this administration represents. Maybe this story in the Washington Post today will help wake America up."

"How do I put this in words as clearly as possible. If the U.S. government decides, for reasons of its own, that you are an "illegal enemy combatant," i.e. that you are someone who "has engaged in hostilities or who has purposefully and materially supported hostilities against the United States,"

"They can detain you without charges indefinitely, granting you no legal recourse except to a military tribunal, and, under the proposed bill, "disappear" and torture you. This is not just restricted to aliens or foreigners, but applies to U.S. citizens as well. It can happen anywhere in the U.S. at any time. We are all at potential risk."

"Whatever else this is, it is not a constitutional democracy. It is a thinly-veiled military dictatorship, subject to only one control: the will of the Great Decider. And the war that justifies this astonishing attack on American liberty is permanent, without end. And check the vagueness of the language: "purposefully supported" hostilities. Could that mean mere expression of support for terror? Remember that many completely innocent people have already been incarcerated for years without trial or any chance for a fair hearing on the basis of false rumors or smears or even bounty hunters. Or could it be construed, in the rhetoric of Hannity and O'Reilly, as merely criticizing the Great Decider and thereby being on the side of the terrorists?"

"All I know is that al Qaeda is winning battles every week now. And they are winning them because their aim of gutting Western liberty is shared by the president of the United States. The fact that we are finding this latest, chilling stuff out now - while this horrifying bill is being rushed into law to help rescue some midterms - is beyond belief. It must be stopped, filibustered, prevented. And anyone who cares about basic constitutional freedom - conservatives above all - should be in the forefront of stopping it."

Knowing that read this:

"Sen. Trent Lott (R-Miss.) is threatening to punish Democrats for using an Appropriations Committee room for an unofficial hearing on Iraq oversight if it happens again. "They better stop this," the Mississippi Republican said. "This will be the last one or there will be retribution." Lott suggested that Republicans could hold GOP-only hearings or seek other forms of payback." Could the payback be waterboarding at Gitmo? I'm prepared for the sleep deprivation and cold cells as I have an eight-week old baby and a furnace that doesn't always work. Stress positions? I'm married with two kids, a mortgage and college to pay for. Piece of cake. I'll let you know if I see anyone I know at Gitmo other than Capt. Fogg .

That darn "Liberal" media

2006-09-25T09:46:00.000-05:00

On Fox News Sunday, Chris Wallace asked President Bill Clinton, "Why didn't you do more to put bin Laden and Al Qaeda out of business when you were president?" The fiery answer is worth watching. Clinton goes through point by point and lays out the timeline for what he did and didn't do during his presidency. Wallace suggested that leaving Somalia after Black Hawk Down only emboldened al Qaeda and showed them the West was "weak." Clinton lectured Wallace that bin Laden and al Qaeda were not only NOT involved in Black Hawk Down but that no one even knew al Qaeda existed in 1993. Moreover, Clinton explained that right after the U.S. suffered those loses in Somalia the right-wingers who now say he didn't do enough wanted to cut and run the next day - he stayed for 6 months and had an orderly transfer to the U.N. The only thing Clinton forgot to add was that it was W's daddy President George H.W. Bush who committed U.S. troops and sent the Marines into Somalia in December, 1992. This was after Daddy Bush lost the election to Clinton thus saddling the new administion with a purely humanitarian mission in Somali warlord territory that Clinton was forced to deal with.

Clinton also explained to Fox News that when he did try to kill bin Laden, the closest anyone has got to killing him since then too, when he launched cruise missiles into Afghanistan it was labeled "wag the dog" by Republicans who claimed it was done to distract for his "Monica" problem. Clinton also explained in detail to Wallace, Fox News and their ill-informed audience that after the bombing of the U.S.S. Cole on October 12, 2000 the CIA and FBI would not certify, while Clinton was in office, that bin Laden and al Qaeda were responsible for the attack. He told Wallace that he had full invasion plans drawn up to go into Afghanistan but they had no CIA or FBI certification and couldn't get basing rights in Uzbekistan. Watch the video. Clinton explains it better but the point is that Clinton didn't have the intelligence community's finding that al Qaeda was responsible and he didn't want to do what Daddy Bush did to him with Somalia, that is, start some foreign military intervention, or in this case the overthrow of the Taliban, in the last two months of being in office. And what did W do form January, 2001 until Sept. 11, 2001 about responding to the Cole bombing? ZERO. Condolezza Rice has explained that a delayed response was worse than no response. Sort of like punishing a dog for a poop accident way after the fact teaches the dog nothing. Well, it might teach the dog to be afraid of you since you could out of the blue whack it on the nose a rolled-up newspaper or a few cruise missiles. Clinton kept asking Wallace did he ask the current administration what they did to put bin Laden out of business since they had ZERO meetings on bin Laden after the Cole and before 9/11?

Katie Couric could have asked some hard questions to Secretary of State Rice on 60 Minutes which aired not even twelve hours after Fox News basically asked Clinton, "How do you sleep at night knowing you were responsible for 9/11?" Couric, part of that big, bad, mean, nasty, "Liberal" media took a different tact with Rice. "How does one go about asking the Secretary of State out on a date?" Couric asked like it was the E! Channel's coverage of the Oscars. Katie, America's sweetheart, earned her $15 million a year paycheck when she asked Rice would she ever like to get married. The hardest hitting questions were something like, "Do you honestly believe that the world is safer now?" and did she agree with Dick Cheney, who said if he went back in time he would do Iraq exactly the same way. Rice agreed. I did find out that Rice works out six days a week, starting at 5 a.m., often to the music of Led Zeppelin or Cream but it's classical music that "moves her." Fascinating. I wish it were results borne from sound policy that moved her. I wish she would listen to dissenting opinions rather than "Whole Lotta Love." I wish she would read PDBs and intelligence reports rather than liner notes.

After watching both interviews I know I was moved. Into the bathroom that is.

Crazy is as crazy does

2006-09-22T10:53:00.000-05:00

On friday in Beirut, Hezbollah held what was termed a "victory rally" for thousands of its supporters. This was to celebrate its "victor" after 34-day Israeli-Hezbollah battle that ended last month. Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah told the crowd, "Lebanon has been victorious, Palestine has been victorious, Arab nations have been victorious." He also told the masses they should celebrate the "divine and strategic victory."

"Peace be with you and with your martyrs and with your families. I feel your pain, and I salute your tears and your blood and your destroyed homes, and I salute your will and your determination," he said. While the U.N. Resolution that ended the fighting called for Hezbollah to disarm Nasrallah said that Hezbollah militants will never obey that section of the resolution. "No army in the world will force us to drop our weapons, force us to surrender our arms, as long as people believe in this resistance," he said. "We do not wish to keep our weapons forever," because they should not be part of domestic life. Just almost all of forever. That's what passes for hopeful talk in the Middle East.

Although Nasrallah has declared victory in the war he has said that if Hezbollah could have predicted Israel's response, it would not have abducted the Israeli soldiers and sparked the fighting. Nasrallah said if he had thought there had been "a 1 percent possibility" that Israel's military response would have been as extensive as it turned out to be, "I would say no, I would not have entered this for many reasons -- military, social, political, economic." He added, "If there was a 1 percent possibility, we would not have done that. We would not have done any capturing."

So Nasrallah declares victory but if he had the chance to do it all over again he wouldn't have done it. Iraq is a failure but back in our country, Vice-President Cheney says that even if we knew in 2003 that Saddam Hussein did not have weapons of mass desctruction, "The U.S. invasion “was the right thing to do, and if we had to do it again, we would do exactly the same thing.” What's that saying about the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over expecting different results? I think the definition needs to be updated to include saying you wouldn't do the same thing over again but still expect the same result. If governments are only as good as their people then we are all insane. Except me of course.

Hollywood goes Washington (subtitled: WWJT? -- Who Would Jesus Torture?)

2006-09-20T19:55:00.000-05:00

First there was "The Path to 9/11" ABC's $40 million wet kiss to revisionist Republicans who see our Dear Leader as a superhero wearing a cape and holding a Bible. The King George edition. Typical dialogue on ABC mini-series: CIA agent: "I have Osama bin Laden in my gunsights and I wish I could kill him but President Clinton has insisted we read him his Miranda rights, call Alan Dershowitz and provide him with Halal food and a copy of the Koran." Now we see how Hollywood is really going Republican.

From the New York Times today, "Hollywood took another step toward America's vast and apparently growing Christian audience on Tuesday, as 20th Century (shouldn't it be 21st Century?) Fox unveiled a new division, FoxFaith, that will release up to a dozen religious-oriented films each year." In one of the first new releases, "Jesus: The Resurrection and Payback," the Messiah, having been tortured and placed into "stress positions" turns the tables on his Roman torturers and murderers by employing the Christian-based "alternative interrogation techniques," advocated by President Bush, on his former jailers. "It's all in compliance with the Geneva Convention," says the future King of Kings. He then explains the convention he attended was actually in Geneva with the Shriners. And that the loud music, sleep deprivation and cold temperatures they experienced was about the same as they would employ on the Romans. They decided to the new rules over a Sabbath dinner. It's all legal now so get out the water and boards and hoods and have at it the most famous son of Nazareth.

In the U.S. or should I say in the formally secret gulags run by the U.S., Donald Rumsfeld wonders if he "stand(s) for 8-10 hours a day. Why is standing limited to 4 hours (for the detainees)?" That and waterboarding. Christians supporters of Bush support torture. Or maybe how they rationalize it is that with Christ it was torture and with Mohammed the cab driver turned in by the Hatfields or the McCoys or the Husseins it's "alternative interrogation methods" because we're doing it not those savage Romans 2000 years ago. Remember, there is no "Thou Shalt not employ alternative interrogation methods" in the Ten Commandments so it's all kosher so to speak.

Add to that the altering of history that Hollywood is obviously copying from the Bush administration. "CBS Paramount Domestic Television, a unit of CBS, is digitally remastering all 79 episodes of the original [Star Trek] series to enhance the show's 1960s-era visual effects with 21st-century computer-generated graphics. Digitally created images will replace the miniature-scale models used for exterior shots of the various spacecraft on the show, including Kirk's Starship Enterprise and the enemy war vessels of the alien Klingons and Romulans. Shots of distant galaxies and planets also will be touched up with computer graphics to give them greater depth. The flat matte paintings used as backdrops on the surface of the strange new worlds visited by the Enterprise crew will be digitally enhanced to add texture, atmosphere and lighting."

"Nothing really has changed except for the fact that it's just prettier to look at," John Nogawski, president of CBS Paramount Domestic Television, said in a recent conference call with reporters." Yes, prettier to look at just like when we don't include car bomb deaths and executions to the body counts in Iraq to make the level of violence seem "prettier."

So history will now be revised to be propaganda of the ruling Repubicans, Evangelical Christians will get their own production studios and everything else will be "enhanced" and "digitally altered" like airbrushing "enemies of the state" out of "Enemy of the State." They used to say Washington D.C. was just like Hollywood oly with higher ceilings. Now Hollywood is just like Washington only with lower standards.

Sen. George Allen - A Jew? Oy Vey.

2006-09-19T10:13:00.000-05:00

Just when things can't get any weirder they do. Sen. George Allen (R-VA) has what can only be described as a suspicious history of supporting, either in coded terms or clear as day photos, discrimination at best or unrepentant racism at worst. His tropism to the Confederate Flag is well-known, had a noose hung from a tree in his law office (he claims it was "Western stuff...more of a lasso..[having] nothing to do with lynching.") and as governor of Virginia signed a "Confederate Heritage Month" proclamation while calling the NAACP an "extremist group." The proclamation called the Civil War "a four-year struggle for independence and sovereign rights." It was observed during April, the month in which the Civil War essentially began with the Confederates' attack on Fort Sumter, S.C. The declaration made no mention of slavery.

Allen also opposed the 1991 Civil Rights Act in Congress, not the the 1964 Civil Rights Act mind you the 1991 Act, and as a state delegate he opposed creating a holiday for Martin Luther King. And then there is the "macaca" incident that basically exposed Allen's, just below the surface, racism to everyone. His explanation for calling an American citizen of Indian descent "macaca" changed as many times as Bush's reason for invading Iraq. There's more and more but you get the point if you didn't know it already.

So how can it get wierder? Someone found a way. At a debate yesterday between Republican Allen and Democrat Webb, WUSA-TV's Peggy Fox asked Allen, if his French Tunisian-born mother has Jewish blood. "It has been reported," said Fox, that "your grandfather Felix, whom you were given your middle name for, was Jewish. Could you please tell us whether your forebears include Jews and, if so, at which point Jewish identity might have ended?" Allen recoiled as if he had been struck. "To be getting into what religion my mother is, I don't think is relevant," Allen said, furiously. "Why is that relevant -- my religion, Jim's religion or the religious beliefs of anyone out there?" "Honesty, that's all," questioner Fox answered, looking a bit frightened. "Oh, that's just all? That's just all," the senator mocked.

Dana Milbank of the Washington Post writes, "Turns out the Forward, a Jewish newspaper, reported that the senator's mother, Etty, "comes from the august Sephardic Jewish Lumbroso family" and continued: "If both of Etty's parents were born Jewish -- which, given her age and background, is likely -- Senator Allen would be considered Jewish in the eyes of traditional rabbinic law, which traces Judaism through the mother."

Oy Vey. George Allen a member of the tribe? What's interesting is that Allen was furious during and after the debate because of the Jewish question - no pun intended. Allen lectured Fox about the importance of "freedom of religion and not making aspersions about people because of their religious beliefs." Just to be sure Allen made the point that religion didn't matter he pointed out that he's a Christian. Allen said, "my mother is French-Italian with a little bit of Spanish blood in her, and I've been raised, and she was, as far as I know, raised as a Christian." Milbank reports, "Allen, surrounded by cameras and microphones after the event, hadn't cooled down. "What do you mean, 'make me so angry'?" he demanded angrily when asked why Fox's query had made him so angry. "To make whatever sort of comment that was, you just don't judge people by their ethnicity or their religion," Allen said, fuming that Fox would "drag my mother into this.""

The real question to be answered -- is Allen angry because the "is your mom Jewish" question was impolite or because he doesn't want even the hint of suggestion that he may have Jewish roots through his mother. "Me? A Jew? Absolutely not! Why would you even suggest such an awful thing? I'm not Jewish but some of my best friends know some Jews." I have this feeling in my stomach that this story gets even weirder. Then again it could simply be a craving for a bagel with lox and cream cheese.

The Grand Unification Theory of Republicanism

2006-09-18T00:18:00.000-05:00

Reprinted without much editing since it is unable to be improved upon:

"After the fall of Saddam Hussein's government in April 2003, the opportunity to participate in the U.S.-led effort to reconstruct Iraq attracted all manner of Americans -- restless professionals, Arabic-speaking academics, development specialists and war-zone adventurers. But before they could go to Baghdad, they had to get past Jim O'Beirne's office in the Pentagon. To pass muster with O'Beirne, a political appointee who screens prospective political appointees for Defense Department posts, applicants didn't need to be experts in the Middle East or in post-conflict reconstruction. What seemed most important was loyalty to the Bush administration.

O'Beirne's staff posed blunt questions to some candidates about domestic politics: Did you vote for George W. Bush in 2000? Do you support the way the president is fighting the war on terror? Two people who sought jobs with the U.S. occupation authority said they were even asked their views on Roe v. Wade.

Many of those chosen by O'Beirne's office to work for the Coalition Provisional Authority, which ran Iraq's government from April 2003 to June 2004, lacked vital skills and experience. A 24-year-old who had never worked in finance -- but had applied for a White House job -- was sent to reopen Baghdad's stock exchange. The daughter of a prominent neoconservative commentator and a recent graduate from an evangelical university for home-schooled children were tapped to manage Iraq's $13 billion budget, even though they didn't have a background in accounting.

The decision to send the loyal and the willing instead of the best and the brightest is now regarded by many people involved in the 3 1/2 -year effort to stabilize and rebuild Iraq as one of the Bush administration's gravest errors. Many of those selected because of their political fidelity spent their time trying to impose a conservative agenda on the postwar occupation that sidetracked more important reconstruction efforts and squandered goodwill among the Iraqi people, according to many people who participated in the reconstruction effort.

The CPA had the power to enact laws, print currency, collect taxes, deploy police and spend Iraq's oil revenue. It had more than 1,500 employees in Baghdad at its height, working under America's viceroy in Iraq, L. Paul Bremer, but never released a public roster of its entire staff.

‘Political leanings’

Interviews with scores of former CPA personnel over the past two years depict an organization that was dominated -- and ultimately hobbled -- by administration ideologues.

"We didn't tap -- and it should have started from the White House on down -- just didn't tap the right people to do this job," said Frederick Smith, who served as the deputy director of the CPA's Washington office. "It was a tough, tough job. Instead we got people who went out there because of their political leanings."

Endowed with $18 billion in U.S. reconstruction funds and a comparatively quiescent environment in the immediate aftermath of the U.S. invasion, the CPA was the U.S. government's first and best hope to resuscitate Iraq -- to establish order, promote rebuilding and assemble a viable government, all of which, experts believe, would have constricted the insurgency and mitigated the chances of civil war. Many of the basic tasks Americans struggle to accomplish today in Iraq -- training the army, vetting the police, increasing electricity generation -- could have been performed far more effectively in 2003 by the CPA.

But many CPA staff members were more interested in other things: in instituting a flat tax, in selling off government assets, in ending food rations and otherwise fashioning a new nation that looked a lot like the United States. Many of them spent their days cloistered in the Green Zone, a walled-off enclave in central Baghdad with towering palms, posh villas, well-stocked bars and resort-size swimming pools.

By the time Bremer departed in June 2004, Iraq was in a precarious state. The Iraqi army, which had been dissolved and refashioned by the CPA, was one-third the size he had pledged it would be. Seventy percent of police officers had not been screened or trained. Electricity generation was far below what Bremer had promised to achieve. And Iraq's interim government had been selected not by elections but by Americans. Divisive issues were to be resolved later on, increasing the chances that tension over those matters would fuel civil strife.

To recruit the people he wanted, O'Beirne sought résumés from the offices of Republican congressmen, conservative think tanks and GOP activists. He discarded applications from those his staff deemed ideologically suspect, even if the applicants possessed Arabic language skills or postwar rebuilding experience.

Smith said O'Beirne once pointed to a young man's résumé and pronounced him "an ideal candidate." His chief qualification was that he had worked for the Republican Party in Florida during the presidential election recount in 2000.

O'Beirne, a former Army officer who is married to prominent conservative commentator Kate O'Beirne, did not respond to requests for comment.

One former CPA employee who had an office near O'Beirne's wrote an e-mail to a friend describing the recruitment process: "I watched résumés of immensely talented individuals who had sought out CPA to help the country thrown in the trash because their adherence to 'the President's vision for Iraq' (a frequently heard phrase at CPA) was 'uncertain.' I saw senior civil servants from agencies like Treasury, Energy . . . and Commerce denied advisory positions in Baghdad that were instead handed to prominent RNC [Republican National Committee] contributors."

As more and more of O'Beirne's hires arrived in the Green Zone, the CPA's headquarters in Hussein's marble-walled former Republican Palace felt like a campaign war room. Bumper stickers and mouse pads praising President Bush were standard desk decorations. Other than military uniforms and "Operation Iraqi Freedom" garb, "Bush-Cheney 2004" T-shirts were among the most common pieces of clothing.

"I'm not here for the Iraqis," one staffer noted to a reporter over lunch. "I'm here for George Bush."

And you wonder why Bush and the Republicans lost the war in Iraq? No need to wonder anymore. This is the Grand Unification Theory of Republicanism. This is the Holy Grail, the Unicorn the one all-encompassing Grand Unification Theory of how Republicans work and why how they work is an existential threat to truth, reality and basically the future of this country. The words in this article are strung together like acid pearls. A lethal gift given to Iraq, the U.S. and the rest of the world.

The word torture has been tortured and other fractured fairy tales

2006-09-15T14:14:00.000-05:00

Within 24 hours of Friday morning, police in Iraq retrieved 50 bound bodies, most shot in the head after being trussed and tortured, a senior Interior Ministry official told Reuters. That took the body count in the city for three days to at least 130. Other corpses have been pulled from rivers downstream of the city, among them a headless, legless corpse found at Mussayab. Officials said 20 bodies were found in Baghdad on Thursday after 60 on Wednesday -- the latter a figure that made headlines and drew renewed international attention to violence the United Nations has estimated may be killing 100 Iraqis a day. "It's barbaric but sadly we've become used to it," the Interior Ministry official said. "Forty bodies, 60 bodies -- it's become a daily routine."

Insurgents and militia death squads have issued statements claiming that, "We do not torture. We want to be absolutely clear with our people, and the world: The death squads do not torture. We behead but not torture. It's against our rules to torture, and it's against our values. We have not authorized it - and we will not authorize it. What we have done is employ 'alternative interrogation methods.' We will not disclose our interrogation methods so as not to allow our detainees to know what to expect before they are beheaded. This is consistent with our rules. We voted on it over a plate of rice and chicken and Arabic coffee. We wanted to comply with our rules so we changed the rules. We have allowed 'acts inflicting, and that are specifically intended to inflict, severe pain or suffering, whether mental or physical. Certain acts may be cruel, inhuman or degrading, but still not produce pain and suffering of the requisite intensity to [be considered torture.] Torture is defined as being, it must inflict pain that is difficult to endure. Physical pain amounting to torture must be equivalent in intensity to the pain accompanying serious physical injury, such as organ failure, impairment of bodily function, or even death. For purely mental pain or suffering to amount torture...it must result in significant psychological harm of significant duration, e.g., lasting for months or even years.' Where did we get this definition of what isn't torture? We plagarized it from the U.S. Justice Department."

There where no protests or violent demonstrations denouncing the kidnapping, torture and killings of Muslims by Muslims. There were protests and violent demostrations against the Pope who made what are being called "derogatory remarks" about the idea of "jihad." The violent protests against cartoons were re-scheduled for the next time hope rears it's bound, tortured and beheaded head.

Judge Orwell meet President Orwell

2006-09-14T13:10:00.000-05:00

The chief judge in Saddam Hussein's genocide trial said Thursday that he does not believe Hussein was a dictator. Judge Abdullah al-Amiri made the remark in a friendly exchange with the deposed leader, a day after the prosecution said the judge should step down because he is biased toward the defense. Hussein and his co-defendants are being tried on charges of committing atrocities against Kurds in northern Iraq nearly two decades ago. Questioning a Kurdish witness Thursday, Hussein said, "I wonder why this man wanted to meet with me, if I am a dictator?" The judge interrupted: "You were not a dictator. People around you made you (look like) a dictator." "Thank you," Hussein responded, bowing his head in respect.

President Bush, last week:

"I want to be absolutely clear with our people, and the world: The United States does not torture. It's against our laws, and it's against our values. I have not authorized it - and I will not authorize it."

President Bush, four years ago:

On August 1, 2002 a Justice Department memorandum, "Re: Standards of Conduct for Interrogation under 18 U.S.C. 2340-2340A," the so-called "Torture Memo" written by John Yoo and signed by Jay Bybee, now a federal appeals court judge, became U.S. policy. The new United States policy, notwithstanding President Bush's claim that "We do not torture," from that day forward we that the U.S. could proscribe "acts inflicting, and that are specifically intended to inflict, severe pain or suffering, whether mental or physical...certain acts may be cruel, inhuman or degrading, but still not produce pain and suffering of the requisite intensity to [be considered torture.]" Torture is defined as being, "it must inflict pain that is difficult to endure. Physical pain amounting to torture must be equivalent in intensity to the pain accompanying serious physical injury, such as organ failure, impairment of bodily function, or even death. For purely mental pain or suffering to amount torture...it must result in significant psychological harm of significant duration, e.g., lasting for months or even years."

So short of organ failure, impairment of bodily function or death you can have at it. Seems clear that hammering nails under the nails of detainees is clear. Same with pulling their nails out with pliers. What about pulling the nails out of their children while they watch and your co-interrogators eat popcorn? It's not death. It's not organ failure. It doesn't impair a bodily function. How about "waterboarding" where you strap people down to simulate drowning. Seems "legal" under the new legalisms. How about forcing a detainee to eat dog poop? How about torturing an already mentally ill person who spews out imaginary plots and plans? Allowed. How about battery cables clipped to testicles? It's not death or organ failure and I'm sure there's a team of government lawyers just waiting to argue it doesn't impair a bodily function since the prisoners could still urinate -- look they just did so involuntarily all over themselves! So the so-called "torture memo" approves "alternative interrogation methods" but not torture. Wink, wink. So when President Bush tells Matt Lauer that if he had the mastermind of 9/11 in custody, the American people would say "Why don’t you see if you can’t get information out of him without torturing him, which is what we did." So don't torture Khalid Sheik Mohammed just get information out of him by using alternative interrogation techniques. And before you have him executed without letting him see the evidence against him or be able to challenge the charges give him a nice doggie bag for his fingernails and testicles. And if you happen to do this to some innocent cabdriver who got picked up in Afghanistan by accident, well hey, war is hell.

And before you think I'm some leftist, terrorist-loving type of guy, here's a quote for another, as Andrew Sullivan says, "leftist, terrorist-loving, draft-dodging guy who "doesn't get" the threat from terrorism -- it's from Colin Powell in a letter dated Sept. 13, 2006: "The world is beginning to doubt the moral basis of our fight against terrorism. To redefine Common Article 3 would add to those doubts. Furthermore, it would put our own troops at risk." Who else is against this? "liberals" such as Republican Senators John Warner, John McCain and Lindsey Graham.

In Iraq, a war crimes judge says to Saddam, "You were not a dictator. People around you made you (look like) a dictator." In the U.S. President Bush says we do not torture and that he hasn't authorized torture. It's just that the people around him made him look like he did.

Dropping the ball and not a bomb

2006-09-13T22:28:00.000-05:00

Back in January of this year, Karl Rove the Dark Prince of American politics (a.k.a. Bush's brain) set out the Republican campaign theme for the 2006 mid-term elections. He said, "At the core, we are dealing with two parties that have fundamentally different views on national security," Rove said. "Republicans have a post-9/11 worldview and many Democrats have a pre-9/11 worldview. That doesn't make them unpatriotic -- not at all. But it does make them wrong -- deeply and profoundly and consistently wrong."

President Bush, Vice-president Cheney, Defense Secretary Rumsfeld and just about everyone else in the Bush White House and the Republican Congress have parroted this mantra. Pre-9/11 versus post-9/11 thinking. I guess the idea is that the pre-9/11 worldview is a lot of subpoenas and judges and due process and indictments and handcuffs and defense lawyers and legal memos and meetings and risk avoidance and cultural sensitivity and maybe even group hugs and singing Kumbaya my Lord by the fire while roasting marshmellows. That would be how the tough guys like Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rove, oh the list goes on and on, of chickenhawk Republicans who have never served in combat describe Democrats. Democrats, they would argue wouldn't "take the shot" when the have the chance. They would freeze up, send the decision through layers of lawyers and rule to avoid risk of harming poor street waifs who happen to be in the area or maybe fear damaging not just a mosque but maybe a single page from a single Koran. After failing to "take out the enemy" those pre-9/11 Democrats would likely go back to sipping lattes and reading Le Monde. Ah, but there is one problem with this. It's the Republicans who have the pre-9/11 mindset.

Exhibit A:

U.S. military officials confirmed to NBC News they had “high-level” Taliban fighters in their gunsights during a July reconnaissance flight but decided not to fire. The decision to pass on the target angered some in the military. Army intelligence officers say the grainy black-and-white aerial photo (seen at right) taken by an armed Predator drone shows 190 suspected Taliban militants standing in several rows near a vehicle in an open field in Afghanistan. The military said Wednesday that the group seen in the Predator image was likely gathered for a religious ceremony. Intelligence officers monitoring the footage captured by the armed, unmanned aircraft told NBC News they were prepared to fire but were prevented from doing so by military rules of engagement that prohibit waging war in a cemetery. Such rules are in place in an effort to minimize collateral damage, the killing of innocent civilians or destruction of sensitive targets, such as religious sites. “During the observation of the group over a significant period of time, it was determined that the group was located on the grounds of a cemetery and were likely conducting a funeral for Taliban insurgents killed in a coalition operation nearby earlier in the day,” a coalition spokesperson said. “A decision was made not to strike this group of insurgents at that specific location and time.” U.S. military officials in Afghanistan had positively identified those gathered as Taliban fighters, including some “high-level Taliban leaders.

The decision not to fire angered some military officials who said the U.S. passed up an opportunity to strike a valuable target. "That was frustrating, those individuals lived to fight another day,” Lt. Col. David Morrison of U.S. Army Intelligence told NBC News. They “potentially could cause harm to our soldiers, civilians, the population and the government of Afghanistan.” Defense Department officials have said repeatedly that while they try to be mindful of religious and cultural sensitivities.

So after all the speeches and spin and propaganda it's the Republicans who had their finger on the trigger to take out 190 Taliban fighters including high-value targets and kicked the decision up to a bunch of lawyers who dropped the ball and not a bomb. And why wasn't the green light given to kill men with black hearts? So as not to disturb a funeral for a terrorist. Good thing the Democrats weren't in charge. Maybe those vicious Taliban terrorists who protected al Qaeda and Osama bin Laden before and after 9/11 might have gotten away to fight another day and kill American troops and Afghan civilians. Good thing the guys with the "post-9/11" mindset are behind the wheel. I feel so much safer.

P.S. On Tuesday, a Taliban suicide bomber attacked the funeral of provincial Gov. Abdul Hakim Taniwal, killing six and wounding 25. Most of the victims were civilians, according to the U.S. military.

Why I should be senate minority leader

2006-09-12T20:28:00.000-05:00

I was going to entitle this post, "Why Democrats Lose Elections," or "The Opposition Party Means Just That" but you get the point. On a night where primary votes are being tallied around the country, places like Rhode Island may lock in a U.S. Senate for the Democrats if the sitting Republican senator loses his primary run. That's good news if it happens but then I see a story that makes me wonder if Democrats know how to be an opposition party especially in an election year.

Representative John Boehner of Ohio, the Republican majority leader, wondered aloud at a news conference “whether Democrats are more interested in protecting the terrorists than protecting the American people.” This wasn't some nutjob backbencher who forgot to take their antipsychotic medication this was the U.S. Senate's Majority Leader. The majority being Republicans. I won't even waste time arguing about Boehner's statement because no one is really interested in my opinion and almost no one will hear it and I was always told not to argue with crazy people. It makes them look sane and you insane. But the Senate minority leader, that would be Democrat Harry Reid, is someone who's opinion is asked for and people will hear him and he said the following about Boehner's claim that Democrats want to pamper Osama bin laden with hot stone massages and manicures:

Mr. Reid said he had “great respect for Leader Boehner... He’s a good guy...I like him. But haven’t we moved beyond that? Haven’t we moved beyond, the Republicans are more religious than Democrats? Haven’t we moved beyond the fact that Republicans are trying to save us from the terrorists and Democrats aren’t? I think we’ve moved beyond that.”

Not what I'd call a full-throated response. And since Boehner basically said Democrats were interested in full-throating bin Laden I thought something more than "[Boehner's] a good guy," was in order. Guess I'm wrong. The Republicans are going to spend $50 million in the next 60 days in the nastiest campaign you've ever seen. There are already ads coming out claiming that you will die if you don't vote Republican. Until the Democrats stop calling the guy who just kicked them in the nuts a "good guy" they won't convince people they can be as tough and dirty and vicious as they need to be to defeat the likes of John Boehner and Osama bin Laden. Who wants to be my campaign manager?