If you don't leave Shakes and Amanda alone I'm gonna sodimize you with a crucifix. Is that anti-Catholic enough for ya, you hypocritical old jackhole?
Fixer
Wednesday, February 7, 2007
Hey, Sis - it's workin'!
I must admit to being somewhat delinquent in my reading of Shakespeare's Sister lately, but she must me doing something right.
The Carpetbagger Report
Bill Donohue is about as much of a right-wing throwback as a Catholic can get, Mel Gibson notwithstanding.
If a person is known by who their enemies are, Sis is my buddy.
I have no idea what she said to piss this clown off, but I do know that Sis is a graduate of Loyola University and you know how Liberal those Jesuits are!
She does cuss and mention private parts and bodily fluids & functions once in a while...
I'm a fallen-away Catholic ever since I figured out what an oppressive scam the Church is. Its wealth and opulence were derived, more properly stolen, by manufactured fear of eternal damnation, kinda like Bush uses on the rest of us, from their - Baa-aa-aa-aah - flock, amongst whom are some of the poorest people on Earth.
Luther and Cromwell may have been right, if guys like Donohue are any indication.
The Carpetbagger Report
The Catholic League, a conservative religious group, is demanding that Mr. Edwards dismiss the two, Amanda Marcotte of the Pandagon blog site and Melissa McEwan, who writes on her blog, Shakespeare's Sister, for expressing anti-Catholic opinions...
Bill Donohue, president of the Catholic League, said in a statement on Tuesday, "John Edwards is a decent man who has had his campaign tarnished by two anti-Catholic vulgar trash-talking bigots."
Bill Donohue is about as much of a right-wing throwback as a Catholic can get, Mel Gibson notwithstanding.
If a person is known by who their enemies are, Sis is my buddy.
I have no idea what she said to piss this clown off, but I do know that Sis is a graduate of Loyola University and you know how Liberal those Jesuits are!
She does cuss and mention private parts and bodily fluids & functions once in a while...
I'm a fallen-away Catholic ever since I figured out what an oppressive scam the Church is. Its wealth and opulence were derived, more properly stolen, by manufactured fear of eternal damnation, kinda like Bush uses on the rest of us, from their - Baa-aa-aa-aah - flock, amongst whom are some of the poorest people on Earth.
Luther and Cromwell may have been right, if guys like Donohue are any indication.
I put this post in draft form to go do something else for a minute, and when I went to complete it I noticed Fixer posted on the same subject. This has only happened twice in two and a half years. Great minds.
Not defeat. Just failure.
Josh Marshall on Bush's foreign "policy" or "lack thereof":
Bush's interests are diametrically opposed to the interests of the United States, and his legacy, such as it will be, is gonna be right up there with Benedict Arnold's, except that Arnold actually had some earlier successes as a military man. The British made him a General. I wonder if al-Quaida will do the same for Bush? They should - he's their secret weapon.
But getting our policy in order is also being stymied because the political opponents of the war aren't willing to say that, yes, the policy has failed. Not 'defeated'. To be 'defeated' you need to have some other party 'defeat' you. This is just a failure. But whichever it is, that bogey is being used by the White House to scare off the opposition. It's a failure. There's no recovering it. And the unspeakable reality -- truly unspeakable, apparently -- is that it's not that bad. Horrible for the Iraqis. Horrible for the American dead. Terrible for American prestige, power and honor. All that. But not the end of the world. The future of our civilization isn't at stake. And our physical safety isn't at stake. We'll go on. We are not the brave British standing behind Winston Churchill bucking us up with the confidence that "We shall defend our island whatever the cost may be; we shall fight on beaches, landing grounds, in fields, in streets and on the hills. We shall never surrender ..." Those aren't the stakes here. Put it in those words and it's almost comical. President Bush wants us to believe that it is because it serves his grandiosity and direct political interests to believe that, to believe that his political interests -- where everything, history, legacy, etc. is on the line -- are the same as ours as a country. They're not.
Bush's interests are diametrically opposed to the interests of the United States, and his legacy, such as it will be, is gonna be right up there with Benedict Arnold's, except that Arnold actually had some earlier successes as a military man. The British made him a General. I wonder if al-Quaida will do the same for Bush? They should - he's their secret weapon.
Surging Right Into Bin Laden's Hands
Counterpunch
Al-Quaida calls, Bush answers. Thanks a pile, Chimp-o.
Lost in the "surge" debate is the unfortunate reality that escalation in Iraq, just like the invasion itself, plays into al-Qaida's ultimate strategy to eliminate America. As revealed in a 2005 strategy document, al-Qaida hopes to repeat Osama bin Laden's victory over the Soviet empire in Afghanistan by eliminating the chief obstacle in the way of establishing an Islamic caliphate in the Middle East. The goal is not, as Bush administration and right-wing pundits proclaim, to conquer or directly destroy America. Osama bin Laden wants to provoke the United States into destroying itself.
[...] "Power can be maintained only by a prudent balance between the creation of wealth and military expenditure, and great powers in decline almost always hasten their demise by shifting expenditure from the former to the latter. (my em)"
All of this time, al-Qaida's master strategists have manipulated Bush like a marionette. Instead of cutting his losses and withdrawing from Iraq or critically re-examining the failures of the American intervention in Afghanistan -- Bush continues blindly to throw more resources into battle, believing that the United States simply lacks "a will to win." Ironically, he may be partially correct. An Iraqi fighting for his country or an Arab fighting for his umma against foreign occupiers will likely show a good deal more resolve than American soldiers fighting a guerilla conflict thousands of miles away from home.
Americans have little knowledge about Mideast culture or international politics but feel strongly that they have been misled and betrayed by their superiors. This was true as well in Vietnam. Yet the horrors of both wars will be paltry in comparison to the horrors unleashed if we escalate in Iraq and attack Iran. The only voices aside from Bush's calling to "bring it on" are those from al-Qaida itself.
Al-Quaida calls, Bush answers. Thanks a pile, Chimp-o.
Is this news?
Who gives a fuck about the crazy astronaut lady? I certainly don't need to see hour after hour of her. She's nuts, I hope she gets help, end of story. STFU already.
Falling ...
Athenae has a good post up about the downfall of the newspaper industry and this line struck me:
Have you noticed this in other industries? I have. Every day in my business, I watch Ford and General Motors zip by my window. We see it in government too, as we watch the debacle in Iraq go from bad to worse, as we watched them drop the ball in New Orleans. Know what? The people of Ancient Greece saw the same things. So did the people of Ancient Rome, of the Ottoman Empire, of the Supreme Soviet. They would recognize present day America immediately as an empire in decline.
Empires have the curious affliction of being succeptible to stagnation. It's because Empire is an endgame. Once Empire is achieved, the impetus to innovate and explore is gone. It's evident in our infrastructure, in our political discourse, and in our lives.
Look at our infrastructure, our bridges, roads, and services. How many of you have said, 'they can't run a railroad like they used to' or something to that effect? How many have said, 'they don't make things like they used to'? These aren't just things people bitch about. They are indicators of an empire reaching its zenith and is now on the path to decline.
I remember growing up in the 60s. My parents spoke with optimism about the future, a time when the 'American Dream' could still be achieved. They were successful and assumed I would do even better. I have been successful, but that optimism for the future is gone.
Our manufacturing jobs have gone away, to people who's 'imperial star' is rising. The Indians, the Chinese, they are two of the societies who will surpass us in the next 20 - 50 years because they are on the other side. They aren't comfortable and still see the brass ring ahead instead of behind.
I remember how proud I was of my dad when he won the contract from Grumman to do testing on the Lunar Module parts before it was assembled. When Neil Armstrong took his first step onto the Moon, a part of our family went with him and the sky was the limit. It was the era of the "by the year 2000".
Remember when everybody would say 'by the year 2000' we'd have a man on Mars? Or 'by the year 2000' we will have cured cancer, or we'd fly around in our personal aircraft, or we would end pollution? The sky was the limit in 1969 and almost 40 years later, we haven't moved much farther forward.
Ironically, the 'year 2000' will be a marker as the beginning of the end of the American Empire. We have lost our abilty to remain an Empire. We are in hock up to our eyeballs, stuck in a quagmire of an imperial war for resources, and have no reason to look to the future in a hopeful manner. This nation is ruled by a handful of oligarchs who just want to grab their share before they expire or this whole thing crumbles around them.
The long-term future is not a concern anymore. The future is only as far out as the next quarterly report. Ask any CEO if he has a plan for his corporation 50 years out. He'll look at you with a blank stare. Ask him if he has any responsibility to anyone or anything except the shareholders and he'll laugh at you. And our political leaders are of the same mind. We're running the Iraq occupation with a six-month future, praying our feeble attempts will make a difference in six months. No one looks farther ahead because there's no point. The bottom could fall out by then.
... We're the optimist who jumped off a building, and every floor down, yelled, "So far, so good!" Things just keep getting worse, and we just keep acting like we're lucky to have the scraps we've got. When did we all get so helpless? ...
Have you noticed this in other industries? I have. Every day in my business, I watch Ford and General Motors zip by my window. We see it in government too, as we watch the debacle in Iraq go from bad to worse, as we watched them drop the ball in New Orleans. Know what? The people of Ancient Greece saw the same things. So did the people of Ancient Rome, of the Ottoman Empire, of the Supreme Soviet. They would recognize present day America immediately as an empire in decline.
Empires have the curious affliction of being succeptible to stagnation. It's because Empire is an endgame. Once Empire is achieved, the impetus to innovate and explore is gone. It's evident in our infrastructure, in our political discourse, and in our lives.
Look at our infrastructure, our bridges, roads, and services. How many of you have said, 'they can't run a railroad like they used to' or something to that effect? How many have said, 'they don't make things like they used to'? These aren't just things people bitch about. They are indicators of an empire reaching its zenith and is now on the path to decline.
I remember growing up in the 60s. My parents spoke with optimism about the future, a time when the 'American Dream' could still be achieved. They were successful and assumed I would do even better. I have been successful, but that optimism for the future is gone.
Our manufacturing jobs have gone away, to people who's 'imperial star' is rising. The Indians, the Chinese, they are two of the societies who will surpass us in the next 20 - 50 years because they are on the other side. They aren't comfortable and still see the brass ring ahead instead of behind.
I remember how proud I was of my dad when he won the contract from Grumman to do testing on the Lunar Module parts before it was assembled. When Neil Armstrong took his first step onto the Moon, a part of our family went with him and the sky was the limit. It was the era of the "by the year 2000".
Remember when everybody would say 'by the year 2000' we'd have a man on Mars? Or 'by the year 2000' we will have cured cancer, or we'd fly around in our personal aircraft, or we would end pollution? The sky was the limit in 1969 and almost 40 years later, we haven't moved much farther forward.
Ironically, the 'year 2000' will be a marker as the beginning of the end of the American Empire. We have lost our abilty to remain an Empire. We are in hock up to our eyeballs, stuck in a quagmire of an imperial war for resources, and have no reason to look to the future in a hopeful manner. This nation is ruled by a handful of oligarchs who just want to grab their share before they expire or this whole thing crumbles around them.
The long-term future is not a concern anymore. The future is only as far out as the next quarterly report. Ask any CEO if he has a plan for his corporation 50 years out. He'll look at you with a blank stare. Ask him if he has any responsibility to anyone or anything except the shareholders and he'll laugh at you. And our political leaders are of the same mind. We're running the Iraq occupation with a six-month future, praying our feeble attempts will make a difference in six months. No one looks farther ahead because there's no point. The bottom could fall out by then.
Tuesday, February 6, 2007
Heartwarming Image
A bit of Photoshop work that warms the cockles of my heart. ;) Accompanies a fascinating article about the case for impeachment. At Progressive Daily Beacon.
R.
"If the President of the United States knew that his or the government's failure to act could reasonably be expected to lead to the misery, impoverishment, or death of scores of Americans and/or other innocent people all around the world and he did nothing to prevent it - wouldn't that be an impeachable offense? How would that not be an impeachable offense? And, what does this President and administration's tendency to ignore, bury, censor, and cover up realities it doesn't want to acknowledge say about the way in which terrorists were able to be so successful in their attacks on September 11, 2001?"
R.
Inspiration Lacking
I'm uninspired today, but the world seems to tick on anyway, so I'll just ramble a bit. Bush lied in his budget, but what are a couple of lies about money after you've lied and caused the death of thousands. The Libby trial goes on and Jane and the gang at Firedoglake are doing a bang-up job of keeping us informed, maybe the smoking gun that will trigger impeachment proceeding will finally pop up. The Republicans voted against debating the way the war is being conducted, if you follow their logic, a war can be a complete disaster but you don't challenge the President because that encourages the enemy. It seems to me that the total incompetence of the Bush team is providing more aid and comfort to the enemy than any opponent of the war. All this going on and the lead story at cnn.com is about an astronaut that allegedly attempted to kidnap and murder a rival for the affections of another astronaut. Our priorities have really gotten screwed up. I, for one, won't be satisfied until Bush and Cheney are lead from the White House in shackles on their way to be tried for crimes against humanity. Impeachment is too good for them.
R.
R.
It's the OIL. Never forget that.
There's a really good summary of just exactly why Bush felt the need to fuck up the Middle East, and the political machinations involved, at AlterNet. It's quite long, but very good. What I find most interesting is the oil connection to Afghanistan. Today's 'must read'.
Like a desert bike at speed, I just hit the high spots with those quotes. You owe it to yourself to not miss this one.
Immediately upon taking office, the new Bush Administration actively took up negotiating with the Taliban once more, seeking still to have the Bridas contract vacated, in exchange for a tidy package of foreign aid. The parties met three times, in Washington, Berlin, and Islamablad, but the Taliban wouldn't budge.
Behind the negotiations, however, planning was underway to take military action if necessary. In the spring of 2001 the State Department sought and gained concurrence from both India and Pakistan to do so, and in July of 2001, American officials met with Pakistani and Russian intelligence agents to inform them of planned military strikes against Afghanistan the following October. A British newspaper told of the U.S. threatening both the Taliban and Osama bin Laden -- two months before 9/11 -- with military strikes.
According to an article in the UK Guardian, State Department official Christina Rocca told the Taliban at their last pipeline negotiation in August of 2001, just five weeks before 9/11, "Accept our offer of a carpet of gold, or we bury you under a carpet of bombs."
President Bush formally established the PNAC's prescription for pre-emptive, premeditated war as U.S. policy when he signed a document entitled "The National Security Strategy of the United States of America" early in his first term.
Still nothing illegal or unconstitutional had been done.
But the rationale and the planning for attacking both Afghanistan and Iraq were in place. The preparations had all been done secretly, wholly within the executive branch. The Congress was not informed until the endgame, when President Bush, making his dishonest case for the "war on terror" asked for and was granted the discretion to use military force. The American people were equally uninformed and misled. Probably never before in our history was such a drastic and momentous action undertaken with so little public knowledge or Congressional oversight: the dispatch of America's armed forces into four years of violence, at horrendous costs in life and treasure.
9/11 was a shocking event of unprecedented scale, but it was simply not an invasion of national security. It was a localized criminal act of terrorism, and to compare it, as the Bush Administration immediately did, to Pearl Harbor was ludicrous: The hijacked airliners were not the vanguard of a formidable naval armada, an air force, and a standing army ready to engage in all out war, as the Japanese were prepared to do and did in 1941.
By equating a criminal act of terrorism with a military threat of invasion, the Bush Administration consciously adopted fear mongering as a mode of governance. It was an extreme violation of the public trust, but it served perfectly their need to justify warfare.
Why, then, was a "war" declared on "terrorists and states that harbor terrorists?"
The pre-planned attack on Afghanistan, as we have seen, was meant to nullify the contract between the Taliban and the Bridas Corporation. It was a matter of international energy policy. It had nothing to do, as designed, with apprehending Osama bin Laden -- a matter of security policy.
The objective of the first premeditated war was now achieved. The Bush Administration stood ready with financing to build the pipeline across Afghanistan, and with a permanent military presence to protect it.
Within two months President Bush sent the armed might of America sweeping into Iraq.
The oil wars are abject failures. The Project for a New American Century wanted, in a fantasy of retrograde imperialism, to remove Saddam Hussein from power. President George Bush launched an overt act of military aggression to do so, at a cost of more than 3,000 American lives, hundreds of thousands of Iraqi lives, and half a trillion dollars. In the process he has exacerbated the threats from international terrorism, ravaged the Iraqi culture, ruined their economy and their public services, sent thousands of Iraqis fleeing their country as refugees, created a maelstrom of sectarian violence, dangerously destabilized the Middle East, demolished the global prestige of the United States, and defamed the American people.
Like a desert bike at speed, I just hit the high spots with those quotes. You owe it to yourself to not miss this one.
Shhh ... you're emboldening the enemy
What's going on in the Senate is pure and utter horseshit and if the American people can't see it for what it is at this point, they don't deserve to live in a free and democratic republic. Ladies and germs, when debate is squelched, the prime tenets of our society are being ignored.
This nation was founded on debate. The Continental Congress is known for nothing if not argument and discourse. There were well known arguments over the issues as this nation was founded, John Adams and Stephen Rutlege having some of the best. The Bostonian, Adams, denouncing the institution of slavery with South Carolina's Rutlege fighting back to save the economy of his people and the American South. They would go round for hours, days, parrying, thrusting, each defending his position. Adams lost that fight and we are paying the price to this day, but it was debated.
Today, many are of the opinion that debate is somehow unAmerican. That talking about something, namely stopping the bloodshed being wrought in our name, will somehow hurt the troops, undermine them in some way. Ladies and gentlemen, the right of free debate is the reason they are supposedly 'fighting to preserve our freedoms'. As for undermining our troops, please pardon me but it doesn't matter what the troops think. It's their responsibility to follow their orders, regardless of the debate taking place in Washington. The only thing that undermines the troops is turning our backs on them when they return injured and maimed, and we've done a hell of a lot of that since this disaster began.
When I see guys like McConnell, McCain, and Lieberman stand up there and say debate will ruin the troops' morale, I laugh. Being stuck on your third or fourth tour in the meatgrinder is demoralizing. Seeing your buddies being blown away, wholly or in part, from an IED that you have no defense for is demoralizing. Insurgents impersonating your people and walking onto your base, capturing four of your mates, and walking out again is demoralizing. Listening to the justification for this war change more often than they can get a shower, that's demoralizing. I don't think they can be any more demoralized short of us just giving up on them altogether and leaving them there. Go ask the troops since you're so concerned about what they think, Messrs McConnell, McCain, and Lieberman, and they'll tell you, to a man, what they want most is to go home.
This is America, ladies and gentlemen, and America is tough stuff. It is about preserving the rights of people you strongly disagree with. It is about being able to say what you want and respect the right of your opponent to do the same. Stifling debate is as American as borscht; if you want easy, go live in some dictatorship. They'll tell you what to eat, what to think, and who to fight without requiring any thought on your part. Of course, thinking for yourself could be deadly. That's why America is difficult, because you are allowed to think for yourself, to voice your opinion, and elect people to represent your views.
Ladies and gentlemen, the enemy is emboldened when we don't debate. If we are now fighting the 'War on Terror', Osama bin Laden won the first battle because he has caused us to stray from the principles this mighty nation was founded on. If we stifle debate, usurping more of the 'inalienable rights' we (well, most of us, thank you Mr. Rutlege) have taken for granted for two centuries, he will have won another.
This nation was founded on debate. The Continental Congress is known for nothing if not argument and discourse. There were well known arguments over the issues as this nation was founded, John Adams and Stephen Rutlege having some of the best. The Bostonian, Adams, denouncing the institution of slavery with South Carolina's Rutlege fighting back to save the economy of his people and the American South. They would go round for hours, days, parrying, thrusting, each defending his position. Adams lost that fight and we are paying the price to this day, but it was debated.
Today, many are of the opinion that debate is somehow unAmerican. That talking about something, namely stopping the bloodshed being wrought in our name, will somehow hurt the troops, undermine them in some way. Ladies and gentlemen, the right of free debate is the reason they are supposedly 'fighting to preserve our freedoms'. As for undermining our troops, please pardon me but it doesn't matter what the troops think. It's their responsibility to follow their orders, regardless of the debate taking place in Washington. The only thing that undermines the troops is turning our backs on them when they return injured and maimed, and we've done a hell of a lot of that since this disaster began.
When I see guys like McConnell, McCain, and Lieberman stand up there and say debate will ruin the troops' morale, I laugh. Being stuck on your third or fourth tour in the meatgrinder is demoralizing. Seeing your buddies being blown away, wholly or in part, from an IED that you have no defense for is demoralizing. Insurgents impersonating your people and walking onto your base, capturing four of your mates, and walking out again is demoralizing. Listening to the justification for this war change more often than they can get a shower, that's demoralizing. I don't think they can be any more demoralized short of us just giving up on them altogether and leaving them there. Go ask the troops since you're so concerned about what they think, Messrs McConnell, McCain, and Lieberman, and they'll tell you, to a man, what they want most is to go home.
This is America, ladies and gentlemen, and America is tough stuff. It is about preserving the rights of people you strongly disagree with. It is about being able to say what you want and respect the right of your opponent to do the same. Stifling debate is as American as borscht; if you want easy, go live in some dictatorship. They'll tell you what to eat, what to think, and who to fight without requiring any thought on your part. Of course, thinking for yourself could be deadly. That's why America is difficult, because you are allowed to think for yourself, to voice your opinion, and elect people to represent your views.
Ladies and gentlemen, the enemy is emboldened when we don't debate. If we are now fighting the 'War on Terror', Osama bin Laden won the first battle because he has caused us to stray from the principles this mighty nation was founded on. If we stifle debate, usurping more of the 'inalienable rights' we (well, most of us, thank you Mr. Rutlege) have taken for granted for two centuries, he will have won another.
Monday, February 5, 2007
"'Dad's Gonna Kill Me"
I'm a huge Richard Thompson fan. Here's one of his songs at Fixer & Gordon.
Raw Story
Protest songs are good. The more the merrier. Forty years ago there were a lot of 'em, rightly so, and it's good to see more and more of them coming out now from modern artists.
Different century, different war, different artists, different audience. Same sensibilities - when something's wrong, it's wrong, and needs to be protested. Bush's War was wrong out of the gate.
*Also at YouTube, amateur concert video from the cheap seats with a fine view of the porta-johns. From the "Hardly Strictly Bluegrass Festival" at Golden Gate Park in EssEff aka "Baghdad By The Bay".
Raw Story
Legendary folk guitarist Richard Thompson recorded an anti-war song which is told from the viewpoint of a US soldier who fears being killed in Iraq.
"Lately at concerts he's been singing a song in protest against the Iraq war titled 'Dad's Gonna Kill Me,'" Goldstein writes. "'Dad,' Thompson explains to audiences, is grunt-speak for 'Baghdad,' much as ''Nam' once meant 'Vietnam.'"
In the song, Thompson sings, "'Dad's in a bad mood, 'Dad's got the blues; It's someone else's mess that I didn't choose; At least we're winning on the Fox evening news; 'Dad's Gonna Kill Me."
An mp3 of "Dad's Gonna Kill Me" can be heard at Thompson's website*, and it will be on his next CD, "Sweet Warrior," slated for release in May.
Protest songs are good. The more the merrier. Forty years ago there were a lot of 'em, rightly so, and it's good to see more and more of them coming out now from modern artists.
Different century, different war, different artists, different audience. Same sensibilities - when something's wrong, it's wrong, and needs to be protested. Bush's War was wrong out of the gate.
*Also at YouTube, amateur concert video from the cheap seats with a fine view of the porta-johns. From the "Hardly Strictly Bluegrass Festival" at Golden Gate Park in EssEff aka "Baghdad By The Bay".
We should get out as rapidly . . . as possible
"I can tell you what will erode our prestige. I can tell you what will hurt our viability as the world's superpower, and that is if we enmesh ourselves in a drawn-out situation which entails the loss of American lives, more debacles like the one we saw with the failed mission to capture Aideed's lieutenants, using American forces, and that then will be what hurts our prestige.I couldn't agree more. As fast as possible to get the troops out safely. Alas, that was then and the President was a Democrat. Amazing how the rules have changed with a Republican in the White House and McCain thinking he might be the next President. The guy is nothing if not a hypocrite.
We suffered a terrible tragedy in Beirut, Mr. President; 240 young marines lost their lives, but we got out. Now is the time for us to get out of Somalia as rapidly and as promptly and as safely as possible.
I, along with many others, will have an amendment that says exactly that. It does not give any date certain. It does not say anything about any other missions that the United States may need or feels it needs to carry out. It will say that we should get out as rapidly and orderly as possible." - John McCain, Oct 19, 1993.
R.
Hat-tip to Glenn Greenwald
400,000 PTSD cases backlogged
Common Dreams
Maybe the military needs a new slogan: "Join the __________! Go fight Bush's War. If you make it back, you'll get kicked to the curb by the very people who profited by your sacrifice, sucker!"
This treatment of Veterans is not only unacceptable and reprehensible, it's also unconscionable, appalling and immoral. It's positively Republican.
The California Nurses Association reported that in the first quarter of 2006, the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs "treated 20,638 Iraq veterans for post-traumatic stress disorder, and they have a backlog of 400,000 cases." A returning soldier has to wait an average of 165 days for a VA decision on initial disability benefits, and an appeal can take up to three years.
This is unacceptable and reprehensible.
Veterans coming home stated that their superiors have harassed and punished them for seeking help for psychological problems triggered by their service in Iraq. Several of the soldiers' supervisors acknowledged the callous treatment.
A recent national study by the Government Accountability Office found that most of the troops who show signs of PTSD were not referred to mental health professionals, despite Pentagon claims, in NPR's report, "that providing support to soldiers with emotional problems is a top priority" and "that resources are being made available to returning veterans."
If the same disastrous pattern unfolds that affected Vietnam-era veterans, and these PTSD sufferers do not obtain appropriate and timely assistance, tens of thousands will become unnecessarily and tragically addicted to drugs or alcohol, and many may commit suicide. Besides the 58,000 lost in combat, we lost tens of thousands of Vietnam-era military personnel to suicide and drugs.
The American people must actively advocate and demand appropriate treatment for veterans who have been psychologically wounded by war.
Maybe the military needs a new slogan: "Join the __________! Go fight Bush's War. If you make it back, you'll get kicked to the curb by the very people who profited by your sacrifice, sucker!"
This treatment of Veterans is not only unacceptable and reprehensible, it's also unconscionable, appalling and immoral. It's positively Republican.
"De Shadow Know..."
David Kurtz
Interesting. Go read.
Outwardly, Bush projects machismo (macho, by the way, is Spanish slang for "mule") but inwardly he's a coward. I'm sure he's scared of Cheney, though I don't know why, and offered no resistance when Cheney usurped power. Maybe Cheney's got compromising pictures of Bush, or has some police records or something. Maybe it's a deal Bush made in order to get installed in the White House. Maybe Cheney just took over and told Bush to STFU. If we knew, we could deal with it. Maybe someday. Sigh.
The important thing is to get them out.
In a piece headlined "Vice President's Shadow Hangs Over Trial," the WaPo has a nice synopsis of Cheney's involvement in the Plame matter.
Actually, you could headline just about every story that way these days: "Vice President's Shadow Hangs Over _________."
Fill in the blank: Iraq. Iran. Global warming. Renditions. Domestic surveillance.
I will confess to having been extremely skeptical in the early years of the Bush Presidency that Cheney was really running the show. It seemed too facile an explanation for what I was convinced was a far more complicated situation. Until the 9/11 Commission report came out.
Since then, I've gone from being open to the idea of an Imperial Vice Presidency to being convinced that historians will debate whether something approaching a Cheney-led coup d'etat has occurred, in which some of the powers of the Executive were extra-constitutionally usurped by the Office of the Vice President.
Still, I can't help but be fascinated by the more pedestrian issue of how Cheney continues to assert himself so vigorously without running up against the ego of a cocksure President. How is it that Bush, who is so caught up in macho public demonstrations of his own personal strength and courage, can tolerate a shadow presidency within his own White House? What kind of spell has Cheney cast that allows Bush to continue to believe he is the decider? You can imagine all sorts of dysfunctional psychological dramas playing out behind the scenes.
But whether it's the legal or political aspect of Cheney's role, it all comes down to the same thing: we just don't know.
It's about time we find out.
Interesting. Go read.
Outwardly, Bush projects machismo (macho, by the way, is Spanish slang for "mule") but inwardly he's a coward. I'm sure he's scared of Cheney, though I don't know why, and offered no resistance when Cheney usurped power. Maybe Cheney's got compromising pictures of Bush, or has some police records or something. Maybe it's a deal Bush made in order to get installed in the White House. Maybe Cheney just took over and told Bush to STFU. If we knew, we could deal with it. Maybe someday. Sigh.
The important thing is to get them out.
Sunday, February 4, 2007
Impeachment. Now. Stop war with Iran from ever happening.
From Digby:
"As Bush and Cheney get more and more unpopular, their legacy becomes more and more predicated on the fact that they did the unpopular thing for the greater good. The more unpopular they get the more they have to prove."
I couldn't say it any better myself, but the statement, as it stands is incomplete, it doesn't call for their removal from office. The only way we are going to stop them, the only way we are not going to get involved in a tragic war in Iran. The only way we are going to regain respect in the world. The only way is to put both of them on the express route to impeachment. Now, not later, and as fast as possible. Building the case should be a no brainer.
R.
Saturday, February 3, 2007
Thought for the day
Learning how to become a politician in the Republican party is like your daughter learning how to play the piano in a whorehouse. She might succeed, but...
The Terrorists and Big Corpora Have Won
South Florida Sun-Sentinel
All of which will no doubt be available inside the stadium at exorbitant prices.
Rich folks who can afford those prices have the help do that, Mr. Bridges, no doubt at minimum wage, and are served in their sky boxes.
Big Corpora has used 'security' as an excuse, to their great profit, to deny the game to the average person. Reg'lar folks will have to have their I.Q. lowered at home.
I haven't watched a football game in fifty years. I see no reason to start now.
Tailgating is banned at the Super Bowl
"The parking lot and traffic flow will look a lot different than it will during normal season games," McCarthy said. "We're going to have a security perimeter so we can screen people coming in." Among the items banned: containers of any type, coolers of any size, backpacks, bottles, banners, noisemakers and horns.
All of which will no doubt be available inside the stadium at exorbitant prices.
If they want to park near the stadium, ticket holders should buy special permits in advance. They range in price from $60 to $325 per vehicle. [...]
Much of the stadium's usual parking area will be used to host the 1-million-square foot "NFL Experience," billed as an interactive football theme park and party. On Super Sunday, it will only be open to ticket holders. It costs $15 for adults and $10 for children younger than 12.
"That's not tailgating; that's corporate sales," said Ray Bridges, a Colts fan with tickets to the game.
Considering what he's already spent, Bridges said, it's a bit much to be told that he won't be allowed to barbecue his own bratwurst before kickoff.
"I understand they want to get their concession sales, but...when you are paying two, three, $4,000 for a ticket, for them to say you can't bring in a grill, I just don't understand the thinking," he said.
Rich folks who can afford those prices have the help do that, Mr. Bridges, no doubt at minimum wage, and are served in their sky boxes.
Big Corpora has used 'security' as an excuse, to their great profit, to deny the game to the average person. Reg'lar folks will have to have their I.Q. lowered at home.
I haven't watched a football game in fifty years. I see no reason to start now.
Whoring the blog ...
Or blogging the whore. It's Saturday and that means I'm blogwhoring the next chapter of my novel The Captains at The Practical Press.
Update:
Kenneth Quinnell, the most excellent owner of The Practical Press, is doing his second annual awards show, the Practical Press Awards 2006. A few regular readers here at the Brain are up for awards and it's a good chance for you to sample some of the original fiction, poetry, short stories, and music from the many talented contributors. Vote for your favorites if you so desire.
Update:
Kenneth Quinnell, the most excellent owner of The Practical Press, is doing his second annual awards show, the Practical Press Awards 2006. A few regular readers here at the Brain are up for awards and it's a good chance for you to sample some of the original fiction, poetry, short stories, and music from the many talented contributors. Vote for your favorites if you so desire.
Where's the outrage?
I mean, really. Hillary and Edwards speak of invading Iran as a possible option and everybody else I know thinks it's a foregone conclusion. Nobody seems too pissed off about it. Let me rephrase. Nobody in a position to do anything about it seems too pissed off.
Nobody seems pissed off about the fact we're seeing and hearing the same things we did in '02, when the Chimp and his gargoyles began priming the pump for the Iraq War. The Mighty Wurlitzer is cranking again, inflating the gasbags for a full-court propaganda dirge to get the American people thinking Iranian Marines are just about ready for an amphibious assault on both coasts, simultaneously, with nuclear bullets, Kamikaze squads, and HERF guns. Oh my!
I mean, look at the crap coming out of Iraq. That 'false flag' operation in Karbala was traced to Iraqi generals (lord knows who was pulling the strings there), and the massacre this week outside Najaf (which looks more and more like retribution in a tribal squabble), were both attributed to the Iranians initially. Does anybody not believe this was thrown out there to see if it will stick?
Another indicator of what's coming down the pike is all the wingnuts I know are already worked into a froth not seen since the Chimp began rattling his sabre towards Iraq. I asked one guy, "what if we attack and Iran closes down the Straits of Hormuz? What are we gonna do for oil?" He said "fuck them, it's our oil." They're ready to go ... well ... they're ready for your kid to go.
McCain is ready. Lieberman is ready. McConnell is ready too. They don't want discussion of the Iraq War or the consequences to America. And they will go along with whatever the Chimp says and does.
Listen to me. Invading Iran will damage our nation beyond repair, maybe even destroy it. Do you think we will survive $10/gal gasoline and home heating oil? Do you think, if things got that bad, your neighbor would hesitate killing you for yours if it came to a choice of his children freezing or not? Are you ready for Mad Max come to America? You think it could never happen here?
Why? You think Americans are above that? I've got news for you. If things get bad here, we'll be killing each other in the streets they way they do in Baghdad. If we don't get these idiots out of the White House soon, the transition from the American Century to the American Interregnum will be short and horrible.
Nobody seems pissed off about the fact we're seeing and hearing the same things we did in '02, when the Chimp and his gargoyles began priming the pump for the Iraq War. The Mighty Wurlitzer is cranking again, inflating the gasbags for a full-court propaganda dirge to get the American people thinking Iranian Marines are just about ready for an amphibious assault on both coasts, simultaneously, with nuclear bullets, Kamikaze squads, and HERF guns. Oh my!
I mean, look at the crap coming out of Iraq. That 'false flag' operation in Karbala was traced to Iraqi generals (lord knows who was pulling the strings there), and the massacre this week outside Najaf (which looks more and more like retribution in a tribal squabble), were both attributed to the Iranians initially. Does anybody not believe this was thrown out there to see if it will stick?
Another indicator of what's coming down the pike is all the wingnuts I know are already worked into a froth not seen since the Chimp began rattling his sabre towards Iraq. I asked one guy, "what if we attack and Iran closes down the Straits of Hormuz? What are we gonna do for oil?" He said "fuck them, it's our oil." They're ready to go ... well ... they're ready for your kid to go.
McCain is ready. Lieberman is ready. McConnell is ready too. They don't want discussion of the Iraq War or the consequences to America. And they will go along with whatever the Chimp says and does.
Listen to me. Invading Iran will damage our nation beyond repair, maybe even destroy it. Do you think we will survive $10/gal gasoline and home heating oil? Do you think, if things got that bad, your neighbor would hesitate killing you for yours if it came to a choice of his children freezing or not? Are you ready for Mad Max come to America? You think it could never happen here?
Why? You think Americans are above that? I've got news for you. If things get bad here, we'll be killing each other in the streets they way they do in Baghdad. If we don't get these idiots out of the White House soon, the transition from the American Century to the American Interregnum will be short and horrible.
Friday, February 2, 2007
No shit ...
The National Intelligence Estimate on Iraq is out. Guess what it says about the 'surge', among other things?
The Scum Also Rises
Matt Taibbi does a good piece in the wake of the Obama/Madrassa/Clinton bullshit on how the 'media' liars' crap sticks long after it's been debunked. Today's 'must read'.
All those assholes need to be sued until all their millions are in the bank accounts of the trial lawyers they despise, and they're livin' under bridges like the loathesome trolls they are.
Now we're seeing the same thing with the Obama story; it is lingering, even after it has been totally discredited. Emboldened by a generation that has refused to punish their libelous behavior, these guys now just take whatever "facts" they like and run with them. Hannity is one culprit. Michael Savage, a spineless little fuckhead who should be torn apart by hyenas, responded to the debunking of the Obama story by telling his listeners that Obama "will not reply" to the original Insight report, a blatant lie. He added, for good measure, that "assuming the world is still here" after a Clinton-Obama administration, Obama would then run for president with "Saddam Hussein's younger grandson" as his running mate.
The very fact that the liars are allowed to continue their trade unpunished is a sort of endorsement of their original versions of the "truth." I have absolutely no doubt that many Americans believe deep down in their gullible hearts that if people like Hannity and Limbaugh were really liars, they would be pulled off the air, or punished for some reason. They see that a Michael Savage can be yanked from a lucrative job for gay-bashing, but there appears to be no punishment at all for unchecked, intentional lying, which is at least as serious an offense for a journalist.
If the press is serious about saving itself as a social institution, it has to start policing its own business. We all have to encourage the likes of Barack Obama to hire the meanest lawyers on the planet and to file the hairiest lawsuits imaginable against the Hannitys, Gibsons, and Savages of the world. We have to impress upon the victims of these broadsides that choosing to ignore that style of libel is a betrayal of the public trust and an act of political cowardice that the rest of us end up paying for in spades. That's the ugly truth: Until one of those monsters goes down in a fireball of punitive litigation, we are all fucked. And it's not going to happen anytime soon.
All those assholes need to be sued until all their millions are in the bank accounts of the trial lawyers they despise, and they're livin' under bridges like the loathesome trolls they are.
"Please, Mr. Petraeus, I don' wanna go..."*
Kevin Drum
George Armstrong Custer was a "terrific" officer too. If "Moqtada al-Sadr" translates into English as "Crazy Horse", I wouldn't be a bit surprised.
THE BATTLE OF BAGHDAD....If Tom Lasseter is to be believed -- and I think he is -- the junior officers leading our troops are not sanguine about our prospects in Baghdad. They think that Muqtada al-Sadr's militia has so thoroughly infiltrated the Iraqi army and police force that they're the ones who mostly benefit from our training:
"Half of them are JAM. They'll wave at us during the day and shoot at us during the night," said 1st Lt. Dan Quinn, a platoon leader in the Army's 1st Infantry Division, using the initials of the militia's Arabic name, Jaish al Mahdi. "People (in America) think it's bad, but that we control the city. That's not the way it is. They control it, and they let us drive around. It's hostile territory."
...."All the Shiites have to do is tell everyone to lay low, wait for the Americans to leave, then when they leave you have a target list and within a day they'll kill every Sunni leader in the country. It'll be called the 'Day of Death' or something like that," said 1st Lt. Alain Etienne, 34, of Brooklyn, N.Y. "They say, 'Wait, and we will be victorious.' That's what they preach. And it will be their victory."
.... After U.S. units pounded al-Sadr's men in August 2004, the cleric apparently decided that instead of facing American tanks, he'd use the Americans' plans to build Iraqi security forces to rebuild his own militia.
....His recruits began flooding into the Iraqi army and police, receiving training, uniforms and equipment either directly from the U.S. military or from the American-backed Iraqi Defense Ministry.
You know, everything I've heard suggests that Gen. David Petraeus is a terrific officer in all respects. And yet, there's something that's been niggling in the back of my mind for a while: namely that in August 2004, when al-Sadr was hatching this plan, Petraeus was the guy in charge of creating and overseeing the training program for the Iraqi army and police. In other words, he was the guy who was being suckered. Now he's in charge of the whole operation. Is anybody else bothered by this?
George Armstrong Custer was a "terrific" officer too. If "Moqtada al-Sadr" translates into English as "Crazy Horse", I wouldn't be a bit surprised.
*See Lyrics.
Official Lies Over Najaf Battle Exposed
Following up on Fixer's post about the recent "battle" at Najaf, IPS reports:
True? Who knows? Disturbing? Yes.
Read the rest. It paints the terrible picture that our air assets are being used to commit political murder.
Iraqi government lies over the killing of hundreds of Shias in an attack on Sunday stand exposed by independent investigations carried out by IPS in Iraq.
Conflicting reports had arisen earlier on how and why a huge battle broke out around the small village Zarqa, located just a few kilometres northeast of the Shia holy city Najaf, which is 90 km south of Baghdad.
Tribal members from both believe the attack was launched by the central government of Baghdad to stifle growing Shia-Sunni unity in the area.
Ahmed, a member of the al-Khazali tribe said "our two tribes have a strong belief that Iranians are provoking sectarian war in Iraq which is against the belief of all Muslims, and so we announced an alliance with Sunni brothers against any sectarian violence in the country. That did not make our Iranian dominated government happy."
Iraq's national security advisor Muaffaq al-Rubaii said just 15 minutes after the MNS announcement that hundreds of Arab fighters had been killed, and that many had been arrested. Rubaii claimed there were Saudis, Yemenis, Egyptians and Afghans.
But Governor Khalil's office backed away from its initial claims after the dead turned out to be local Shia Iraqis. Iraqi security officials continue to contradict their own statements. Most officials now say that the dead were Shia extremists supported by foreign powers.
The government of Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki has a pattern of announcing it is fighting terrorists, like its backers in Washington. Many Iraqis in the south now accuse Baghdad of calling them terrorists simply because they refuse to collaborate with the Iranian dominated government.
True? Who knows? Disturbing? Yes.
Read the rest. It paints the terrible picture that our air assets are being used to commit political murder.
Fraud, Waste, and Abuse
I managed to get myself a commendation from the Strategic Air Command while holding one of the 3 desk jobs I've ever had. I had injured my back on the flightline and was on restricted duty, attached to the supply squadron, checking out tools and supplies to the maintenenance folks and making sure they brought them back in one piece (I was stark raving nuts after a month, homicidal after 6 weeks, and returned to duty).
My commendation was for noticing and documenting serious overcharging of the Air Force for basic supplies, rivets, tools, ass wipes; back in the day of the $700 toilet seats. I was bored and started digging through files to pass the time, go figure. The contractors who were ripping us off were declared 'off-limits' (their military contracts were revoked and forbidden from doing business with the military or military personnel in the future) and I was given a thousand dollar bonus (to an E-4 in 1985, that was a nice chunk o' change) for saving Uncle Sam millions. Had I found this, they'd have made me Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, or at least Chief of Supply. Could you imagine me as a two or three star? Ha! I shudder at the thought. But do you think Blackwater, Dyncorp, Halliburton, or KBR will ever be declared 'off-limits'?
My commendation was for noticing and documenting serious overcharging of the Air Force for basic supplies, rivets, tools, ass wipes; back in the day of the $700 toilet seats. I was bored and started digging through files to pass the time, go figure. The contractors who were ripping us off were declared 'off-limits' (their military contracts were revoked and forbidden from doing business with the military or military personnel in the future) and I was given a thousand dollar bonus (to an E-4 in 1985, that was a nice chunk o' change) for saving Uncle Sam millions. Had I found this, they'd have made me Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, or at least Chief of Supply. Could you imagine me as a two or three star? Ha! I shudder at the thought. But do you think Blackwater, Dyncorp, Halliburton, or KBR will ever be declared 'off-limits'?
...
I suppose it comes as no surprise to learn that funds distributed by the anti-Democratic Party to its largest campaign donors were abused and mismanaged, but the expanse of waste and fraud is truly amazing.
...
Good Golly, How We'll Miss Molly
Arianna on Molly Ivins
"Molly had the most amazing sense of humor. Let's face, the girl was laugh out loud funny. But funny with a purpose. She really understood how to use satire as a political weapon in the tradition of Mark Twain and Jonathan Swift.And on top of that, unlike so many of the smart-assed satirists of our day, she was a woman. A classy lady with a pair of brass cojones. For any fan of nerve, humor, and spunk, it was impossible not to adore her."
Impeachment - Observation and Prediction
Reading the blogs, and I read waaay too many, and following the main-stream and not so main-stream press, it has become apparent that the drumbeat for impeachment, actually for a double impeachment is growing louder on a daily basis. I predict that over the next 4 to 6 weeks the drumbeat will become so loud that it will no longer be able to be ignored and 2 impeachments will be very much "on the table". May it be done swiftly.
R.
R.
Thursday, February 1, 2007
Boom!
Pic thanks to Atrios.
Let those two twits go and chalk it up to a good exercise for your emergency response people. Good lord.
Young Marine Dies Of PTSD - And Neglect
Bob Geiger. This one'll piss ya off even worse than you are right now.
Go read the rest.
When this kid told the VA that he was feeling suicidal, they shoulda grabbed his young ass and put him in a facility on a 3-day mental hold and gotten him counseling, drugs, whatever, RIGHT FUCKIN' NOW. If he'da been in jail, say for drunk driving, and said that, the jail would've done something like that. At minimum, they'd have put him where he couldn't hurt himself and kept watch until a pro could talk to him.
Cases like Jon Schulze go to the head of the line. Period.
The VA? Apparently not. Absolutely unconscionable and unacceptable. They are complicit in his demise.
This will not be the only time we hear something like this. I fear many more like it are on the way.
Jonathan Schulze was a United States Marine.
He died earlier this month at the age of 25 -- not in Iraq, but back home, in Minnesota.
He died of wounds received during his seven-month tour of duty in Iraq, wounds different from the ones that earned Schulze two purple hearts. This young man died of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder, of wounds to the soul and not the flesh. He died because the government that was there to send him far away to fight in 2004 wasn't there for him when he got home.
The young Marine was wounded twice in battle but returned home to rebuild his life and to cope with the things he had seen, things he had done and friends he had lost. But, by the time he was discharged from the Marines in late 2005, he was deeply troubled with images of combat and violence that he could not get out of his mind.
According to Minnesota press reports, Schulze went to the Veterans Administration (VA) center in Minneapolis on December 14, 2006, met with a psychiatrist and was told that he could only be admitted for treatment four months later, in March.
On January 11, 2007, accompanied by his parents, he went to the VA hospital in St. Cloud, Minnesota and told people at that VA facility that he was thinking of killing himself. They told Schulze that they could not admit him as a patient and sent him on his way.
The next day, January 12, Schulze called the VA, reiterating that he was feeling suicidal. He was told that he was number 26 on the waiting list.
A man who had risked his life in Iraq and done everything that was asked of him by the United States government, was told by that same government that his sacrifice would be repaid by being 26th on a list of Veterans similarly crying out for help.
On January 16, Schulze called his family and told them that he was going to do it -- he was going to kill himself. His family called the local police, who raced to his house, kicked in his door and found him hanging from an electrical cord.
Attempts to resuscitate him were unsuccessful.
"He was a delayed casualty of the Iraq war," his father, Jim Schulze, a Vietnam Veteran, said of Jonathan.
Go read the rest.
When this kid told the VA that he was feeling suicidal, they shoulda grabbed his young ass and put him in a facility on a 3-day mental hold and gotten him counseling, drugs, whatever, RIGHT FUCKIN' NOW. If he'da been in jail, say for drunk driving, and said that, the jail would've done something like that. At minimum, they'd have put him where he couldn't hurt himself and kept watch until a pro could talk to him.
Cases like Jon Schulze go to the head of the line. Period.
The VA? Apparently not. Absolutely unconscionable and unacceptable. They are complicit in his demise.
This will not be the only time we hear something like this. I fear many more like it are on the way.
Moral Obligation to the World to Impeach
Progressive Daily Beacon
Whatever the means, peacefully like impeachment, or whatever, they need to be removed from office and hidden under a prison NOW. While we've still got a world.
With each ticking of the clock, every beating of the heart, and the passing of one day into the next; the reality grows clearer, into a focus so sharp that staring directly into its truth threatens to burn the eyes. The reality is that George W. Bush and Dick Cheney are a clear and present danger not only to global stability, but to the very survival of humanity.
Dangerous as the new Mid-East reality is now, the administration's desire to attack Iran is nothing less than sheer insanity. And yet, with each passing hour Mister Bush and Cheney are building a falsified Iraq-like intelligence dossier on Iran. When they're ready - whether the American people want to or not; regardless of the madness to ensue; only because they want to and can; and no matter the danger posed to the people of the region and the world, George W. Bush and Dick Cheney will attack Iran.
In normal times and under normal circumstances the Democratic Party's "go slow" and "feed the administration and Republicans enough rope to hang themselves" political approach would be acceptable, if not quite commendable. However, these are not normal times. Mister Bush and Mister Cheney pose a clear and present danger not only to the United States, but, too, the entire world. America's Congress has an obligation, a moral duty to the world to act now and to impeach George W. Bush and Dick Cheney.
Anything less would make them an accomplice to the madness.
With each ticking of the clock, every beating of the heart, and the passing of one day to the next - the reality grows clearer...the President and Vice-President must be impeached.
Whatever the means, peacefully like impeachment, or whatever, they need to be removed from office and hidden under a prison NOW. While we've still got a world.
Iran Clock Is Ticking
Robert Parry. Today's 'must read'.
The propaganda blitz is well under way. Hope and pray it doesn't work. Iraq was wrong, but this is far worse.
To Congress, the American people, military commanders, God (a regular reader of the Brain, according to his IP), and to anybody and everybody anywhere: STOP THIS MADMAN SONOFABITCH, WHATEVER IT TAKES.
While congressional Democrats test how far they should go in challenging George W. Bush's war powers, the time may be running out to stop Bush from ordering a major escalation of the Middle East conflict by attacking Iran.
Military and intelligence sources continue to tell me that preparations are advancing for a war with Iran starting possibly as early as mid-to-late February. The sources offer some differences of opinion over whether Bush might cite a provocation from Iran or whether Israel will take the lead in launching air strikes against Iran's nuclear facilities.
But there is growing alarm among military and intelligence experts that Bush already has decided to attack and simply is waiting for a second aircraft carrier strike force to arrive in the region - and for a propaganda blitz to stir up some pro-war sentiment at home.
The propaganda blitz is well under way. Hope and pray it doesn't work. Iraq was wrong, but this is far worse.
The immediate question, however, is what, if anything, can Congress and the American people do to head off Bush's expanded war strategy.
But Bush and his neoconservative legal advisers have made clear that they see virtually no limits to Bush's "plenary" powers as Commander in Chief at a time of war. In their view, Bush is free to take military actions abroad and to waive legal and constitutional constraints at home because the United States has been deemed part of the "battlefield."
Nothing short of a direct congressional prohibition on war with Iran and a serious threat of impeachment would seem likely to give Bush more than a moment's pause. But congressional Republicans would surely obstruct such measures and Bush might well veto any law that was passed.
Still, unless Congress escalates the confrontation with the President - and does so quickly - it may be too late to stop what could become a very dangerous escalation.
To Congress, the American people, military commanders, God (a regular reader of the Brain, according to his IP), and to anybody and everybody anywhere: STOP THIS MADMAN SONOFABITCH, WHATEVER IT TAKES.
Remembering Molly Ivins
John Nichols at The Nation. Also in toto and without comment Below the Fold.
Update:
Also please see The Texas Observer.
The warmest-hearted populist ever to pick up a pen with the purpose of calling the rabble to the battlements, Ivins understood that change came only when some citizen in some off-the-map town passed a petition, called a Congressman or cast an angry vote to throw the bums out. The nation's mostly widely syndicated progressive columnist, who died January 31 at age 62 after a long battle with what she referred to as a "scorching case of cancer," adored the activists she celebrated from the time in the late 1960s when she created her own "Movements for Social Change" beat at the old Minneapolis Tribune and started making heroes of "militant blacks, angry Indians, radical students, uppity women and a motley assortment of other misfits and troublemakers."
It mattered, a lot, that Molly was writing for papers around the country during the Bush interregnum. She explained to disbelieving Minnesotans and Mainers that, yes, these men really were as mean, as self-serving and as delusional as they seemed. The book that Molly and her pal Lou Dubose wrote about their homeboy-in-chief, Shrub: The Short But Happy Political Life of George W. Bush (Random House, 2000), was the essential exposé of the man the Supreme Court elected President. And Ivins's columns tore away any pretense of civility or citizenship erected by the likes of Karl Rove.
She also told them, even when she was battling cancer and Karl Rove, that they should relish the lucky break of their consciences and their conflicts. Speaking truth to power is the best job in any democracy, she explained. It took her to towns across this great yet battered land to say: "So keep fightin' for freedom and justice, beloveds, but don't you forget to have fun doin' it. Lord, let your laughter ring forth. Be outrageous, ridicule the fraidy-cats, rejoice in all the oddities that freedom can produce. And when you get through kickin' ass and celebratin' the sheer joy of a good fight, be sure to tell those who come after how much fun it was."
Update:
Also please see The Texas Observer.
Airpower in NYC
Mrs. F emailed me (she's in PA on business and I'm home sick) some great pics from this year's air show on Long Island and in NYC and I put some up here. If you want copies of the whole set (13 pix), email me and I'll forward 'em to ya.
And is it me, or is the 'New' Blogger the same shit sandwich the 'Old' Blogger was, only with a different wrapper? New and improved, mah ais!
And is it me, or is the 'New' Blogger the same shit sandwich the 'Old' Blogger was, only with a different wrapper? New and improved, mah ais!
Mazeltov!
John Edwards couldn't have made a better choice. Since Blogger (which sucks wet monkey ass) wouldn't let me go to Shakes' place this morning, I stole this from Pam en toto:
You've made us proud*, darlin'.
It's like a big Edwards 2008 locomotive is going through the bloggrrlsphere, and it has now picked up Melissa McEwan, well-known to most of you as Shakespeare's Sister.Go bloggrrrl!
She's on board as Netroots Coordinator, so she'll be working with Pandagon's Amanda Marcotte (my earlier post here).
You can't say that they aren't a savvy crew over there at Team Edwards, because they are scooping up the big guns on the almost-A list. Both Melissa and Amanda bring large, politically engaged and active readers that will be receptive with the Edwards message. A lot of that is due to Elizabeth Edwards, who is well-versed and ever-present in the blogosphere.
It will be interesting to see what kind of pressure this puts on the other candidates to recruit well-known voices from the netroots, and what editorial effect that will have on blogs (Amanda and Melissa will continue to write on their respective outposts while working on the campaign). This is certainly generating more buzz on the blogs than developments at Hillaryland.
2008 is certainly going to be more interesting -- and more confusing -- than 2004, as these worlds collide.
You've made us proud*, darlin'.
*Shakes began her blogging life as a regular commenter here and it's like watching your little sister find success. She deserves it and much more.
Take a pill ...
The big freak out in Boston yesterday? Well those guys put a buncha those things in NYC too. You folks up there might wanna lay off the coffee. Just sayin'.
Well Worth Repeating
From Molly Ivins on 11. Jan. 2007:
R.
"We are the people who run this country. We are the deciders. And every single day, every single one of us needs to step outside and take some action to help stop this war. Raise hell. Think of something to make the ridiculous look ridiculous. Make our troops know we're for them and trying to get them out of there. Hit the streets to protest Bush's proposed surge. If you can, go to the peace march in Washington on Jan. 27. We need people in the streets, banging pots and pans and demanding, "Stop it, now!""Nothing that needs to be added. Nothing that can be added. As she did so many times, she summed it all up in a paragraph. Damn! I'll miss her.
R.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)