V for Vendetta

I rented this yesterday,and wow.If you haven't seen it,you oughta.There's some very striking points in the movie that relate to what's happening now(one party rule anyone?).I liked the ending,but I won't spoil it for you.

Also on my movie menu for this week are:

All the President's Men(read the book years ago,never saw the movie)

The People Vs Larry Flynt(saw it when it first came out,decided to watch it again)

The Big Buy:How Tom Delay Stole Congress

Seen any good movies lately?

And just a note

For all you people still pissed at me [and have stopped linking to us] for crawling up Israel's ass over this whole Lebanon thing. Look, what's that going in the mail today? Could it be my yearly donation to the Israeli Ambulance Service? Why, yes it is. Now shut the fuck up.

Ned!

It's Primary Day in Connecticut. If you're a registered Dem in CT, it's time to step up and send Holy Joe on vacation. This is the beginning of a change that will hopefully carry through to November, but it won't happen if Lieberman stands for another term. Ned Lamont needs every vote and if you really do want change you'll have to get out and cast your ballot.

Ned on Ned.

Ned on the Issues.

Ned's blog.

Polls open in an hour [0600]. Get off your ass and get to it, dammit.

Repub "Legalize Weed" scam to register voters

Here's a scam that may be coming to a venue near you. From the Central Valley page of the S.F.Bay Area IMC.

The attractive young woman says to me, "would you sign our petition to legalize marijuana?" I don't have to think twice and say "sure, where do I sign?" That is when it got interesting. She says, "Do you have your ID with you?" "Well, yes I do, but what does that have to do with..." I say as she responds with "oh, we just have to verify your ID." Thinking that this has something to do with making sure they have valid names for a ballot initiative I comply.

As I'm filling out my name and address on the petition I notice that the young lady is filling out a very official looking form. Probably just the ballot initiative form, I think to myself. Then, she says "is it OK if I register you as a Republican?" "What?!?" I say "yes, I do mind! What are you doing?" She says that if I register Republican she will get an extra 10 cents. But, I complain, "I don't want to re-register." She explains that this is just to update the records for the County Clerks office. I repeat that "I do not want or need to update my records." I am repeatedly told that it is OK and that they just want to update my voter registration records. She also tells me that she is working for the Republican party, being paid hourly, and that the ploy about the "10 cent bonus" was not accurate.

This Republican party employee goes on to tell me that she is there to attract people to the table that is set up in Fresno's Courthouse Park, and that the legalize marijuana petition is just a prop. She confirmed that there is no ballot initiative to legalize marijuana. She said that the petition will be given to an elected official in Sacramento. I have my doubts about that.

No doubt in my mind. The "elected official" is probably the Sheriff of Sacramento County or the District Attorney.

At this point in the conversation, she called over her "boss" who was talking with someone a short distance away. I introduced myself as the editor of the Community Alliance newspaper and said I was interested in writing a story about the petition campaign and their registering people with the Republican party. I guess that wasn't the right approach to get him to open up to me. The "boss" gave me no information. He even refused to give me a copy of the marijuana legalization petition I had just signed.

Later that day I called Victor Salazar, the Fresno County Clerk. Salazar said that the process sounded deceptive and that I might want to call the Secretary of State fraud investigation unit. I called the number for the fraud investigation unit repeatedly today. Apparently, nobody was in the office today and all I got was an answering machine. I will continue to call.

I also went back to Courthouse Park today to see the Republican Party project was again in full operation. They seemed to have different approaches to different groups. To white men that looked like they might be attorneys, they asked if they were registered to vote. When Latinos walked by they would throw out the legalize marijuana angle.

A copy of a really lame - even for a phony - petition follows, along with a photo and some comments.

They're trying all kinds of tricks like this. Signing petitions for ballot initiatives is a good thing, but make damn sure what you sign.

Curmudgeons, Unite!

Give Jack Cafferty a Show by signing the petition.

Why neocons loves them some Lieberman

Today's 'must read'. Glenn Greenwald

But the most noteworthy aspect of Kristol's column is what comes next, when Kristol plans Lieberman's post-Senate career:


There is a political opportunity for the Bush administration if the Democrats reject Lieberman. If he's then unable to win as an independent in November, he would make a fine secretary of defense for the remainder of the Bush years. . . . Is it too fanciful to speculate about a 2008 GOP ticket of McCain-Lieberman, or Giuliani Lieberman, or Romney-Lieberman, or Allen-Lieberman, or Gingrich-Lieberman? Perhaps. But a reinvigorated governing and war-fighting Republican party is surely an achievable goal. And a necessary one.


So, one of the most extreme neoconservative ideologues in the country not only supports Lieberman's candidacy, but appears to have Lieberman as his first choice for Defense Secretary -- the holy grail for war-loving neoconservatives -- and even for Vice President (alongside the likes of Newt Gingrich, George Allen or Mitt Romney).

The love which right-wing extremists have for Joe Lieberman isn't based on the fact that he's a "centrist." If Lieberman were a "centrist," extremists would not care about him. They would not be vigorously urging his re-election, or praising his potential appointment as Bush Defense Secretary, or touting him as a Vice-Presidential running mate for George Allen. They do that because he is one of them -- a neoconservative extremist who is with them on virtually every major issue of the day.

The United States is on the brink of extreme disaster in the Middle East, both in Iraq (where we have no viable exit strategy despite the rapid collapse of that country) and elsewhere (where we are poised to repeat the same mistakes on a much greater scale). And all of that has been used to justify unprecedented abridgments of basic liberties at home. The policies which brought us to this point were championed -- and still are championed -- by the Joe Liebermans and Bill Kristols and their neoconservative comrades. Where one stands on those issues is, far and away, the most important determinant of one's political character, and any residual doubts about where Lieberman fits on the political spectrum are fully resolved by reading Bill Kristol's full-scale defense and embrace of his candidacy.

Based on the discussion in comments, and even Gingrich's comments, there is another notable aspect to this race which is accounting for so much of the intensity on both sides -- the complete failure to demonize Ned Lamont as some sort of radical, subversive, Vietnam-era pacifist.

A Lamont victory -- indeed, Lamont himself -- provides a very visceral illustration of just how mainstream anti-war (and anti-neoconservative) sentiments are, which is a significant factor as to why a Lieberman victory has become so important for neoconservatives.

Lieberman - and anyone associated with the neocons - must go. Now. The future of the world, not just our country, is at stake.

The beginning of a return to near-sanity must begin tomorrow in Connecticut.

One Ring To Rule Them

Juan Cole has some disturbing thoughts on the "Peak Oil Theory" of why we're promoting the Israel-Lebanon war.

It doesn't make any sense.

Moreover, the Lebanese government elected last year was pro-American! Why risk causing it to fall by hitting the whole country so hard?

I've had a message from a European reader that leads me to consider a Peak Oil Theory of the US-Israeli war on Lebanon (and by proxy on Iran). I say, "consider" the "theory" because this is a thought experiment. I put it on the table to see if it can be knocked down, the way you would preliminary hypotheses in a science experiment.

The presentation got kind of freaky then. He said the US government wanted to stop state-controlled Iranian or Chinese (or Indian) companies from controlling the oil. JFR says the US Government is convinced that this battle will decide the future of the world. It sounded like he was talking about 'the one ring' in lord of the rings. he who controls Iran controls them all.'

China and India could get Iran, and Iran could get Lebanon, and as non-OPEC energy production decreases, the US and Israel could find themselves out in the cold on the energy front.

It may be that that hawks are thinking this way: Destroy Lebanon, and destroy Hizbullah, and you reduce Iran's strategic depth. Destroy the Iranian nuclear program and you leave it helpless and vulnerable to having done to it what the Israelis did to Lebanon. You leave it vulnerable to regime change, and a dragooning of Iran back into the US sphere of influence, denying it to China and assuring its 500 tcf of natural gas to US corporations. You also politically reorient the entire Gulf, with both Saddam and Khamenei gone, toward the United States. Voila, you avoid peak oil problems in the US until a technological fix can be found, and you avoid a situation where China and India have special access to Iran and the Gulf.

The second American Century ensues. The "New Middle East" means the "American Middle East."

And it all starts with the destruction of Lebanon.

More wars to come, in this scenario, since hitting Lebanon was like hitting a politician's bodyguard. You don't kill a bodyguard just to kill the bodyguard. It is phase I of a bigger operation.

If the theory is even remotely correct, then global warming is not the only danger in continuing to rely so heavily on hydrocarbons for energy. Green energy--wind, sun, geothermal-- is all around us and does not require any wars to obtain it. Indeed, if we had spent as much on alternative energy research as we have already spent on the Iraq War, we'd be much closer to affordable solar. A choice lies ahead: hydrocarbons, a 20 foot rise in sea level, and a praetorian state. Or we could go green and maybe keep our republic and tame militarism.

"Taming militarism" is the key. As long as there is megabucksandpower in oil, it will be very, very difficult. The above is today's recommended read.

Update:

The Last Chance Democracy Cafe

Could Bush and the neoconservatives really be that cruel - destroying an entire country as nothing more than a chess move in the Great Game? Real men and women and, of course, real children too - lots of them - their lives spent as part of a Machiavellian scheme that is sure in the end to blow up in our faces anyway, just like everything else these would-be Churchills touch.

This would be so much crueler than even Iraq; the same pattern of lies, to be sure, but at least in Iraq they could claim to be trying to bring a better life to the Iraqis, even if that was never the actual goal. But how is Lebanon supposed to benefit from this? Where’s its supposed payoff for having its infrastructure (and citizens) blown to hell?

Could the neocons really be that cruel?

And if they are, when does bad policy at last become something more than bad policy? When does it become a crime? (my em)

It has already become a crime. The question is, when do they get held accountable for it? It better be soon.

A tip o' the Brain to Lurch for making me aware of this.

The Spy Who Shagged Us

Go see this video: The Story Of How The Neocons Were Duped By An Iranian Spy That Led Our Country Into The Iraq War And A Warning That The Same Fanatics Are Aiming For Additional Targets.

When you get done watching that, here's a link to Seeds of Doubt referred to at the end. A little lighter fare, like the pickle in a sandwich.

Also see Iran: The Next War by James Bamford at Rolling Stone.

The shift in official policy has thrilled former members of the cabal. To them, the war in Lebanon represents the final step in their plan to turn Iran into the next Iraq. Ledeen, writing in the National Review on July 13th, could hardly restrain himself. "Faster, please," he urged the White House, arguing that the war should now be taken over by the U.S. military and expanded across the entire region. "The only way we are going to win this war is to bring down those regimes in Tehran and Damascus, and they are not going to fall as a result of fighting between their terrorist proxies in Gaza and Lebanon on the one hand, and Israel on the other. Only the United States can accomplish it," he conclude

The neocons allowed themselves to be cornholed to get what they wanted. They passed it along and the United States is the one with the sore asshole. Watch out. They're fixin' to do it again. It'll be almost as easy this time if our heads are still in the sand.

November. Impeachment. Hangings. Many, many hangings. Send Bush and his neocons to Hell where they belong.

"The country's great debate is in their hands. "

Taylor Marsh on tomorrow's Connecticut senatorial primary:

It's really simple. The people of Connecticut, through the candidacy and voice of Ned Lamont, have found a way to stand up and push back. They're doing it with their voices, their blogs and on Tuesday they will be doing it with their votes. But they're not simply doing it for themselves. It's for all of us, every American who has had it with George W. Bush, the rubber stamping Republican incompetence, the Democrats who still can't say this war was wrong, and everyone in between who refuses to change course and do it now. Mind you, it's heartbreaking to think of withdrawal and the aftermath of this defeat. But the time has come for this great nation to admit her mistakes, make amends and begin repairing the incomprehensible losses this war of choice has cost. Unfortunately for Joe Lieberman, he is one of the mistakes we are attempting to make right, because he didn't have the courage to do it for himself.

Many of us have been behind the people of Connecticut and Ned Lamont, with blogs like DailyKos, MyDD and Firedoglake, as well as many local Connecticut blogs, leading the way, but we've all been behind this anti Iraq war whoop meant to get the job done because the politicians refused to correct the course themselves. We've tried to give the people of Connecticut whatever national megaphone we can to raise the entire country's collective voice about the Iraq war, so the voters and Ned Lamont would know they were not alone. That even though it was their state and their Senate seat we all had a stake in this shot. A shot to stop this war of choice in its tracks; a war that has plunged this country and the people of the Middle East into a political hurricane of uncertainty and carnage that has worldwide implications that could last for decades.

There are many issues, but life and death comes first. It's represented in the Iraq war. Connecticut is America this week. The country's great debate is in their hands.

Amen.

This day in history

Geov Parrish at Working For Change

8/7/1960: Fidel Castro announces plans to nationalize all U.S. holdings in Cuba. U.S. takes the moral high ground, begins its non-stop campaign to assassinate him.

1964: After a reported U.S. confrontation with North Vietnamese forces that, it was later discovered, never occurred, Congress nearly unanimously passes the Gulf of Tonkin resolution, authorizing the President to use "all necessary steps" to "win" the war in Vietnam.

1990: President George H.W. Bush (and former CIA head) orders deployment of U.S. troops to Saudi Arabia and the Gulf region.

How to Hack a Diebold Voting Machine

Video at HuffPo. Easier than changing a vacuum cleaner belt or clearing a jammed shredder. And, oh yeah, if these machines can't print a paper copy, what are the 'printer power' pins for?

Oh I know precisely how to fix this problem,really fast.

Before you come back to comment,please read all the links in Amanda's post. There's alot to go through there,and there's some good stuff in the comments(I have a feeling this one is going to generate alot of discussion on feminist blogs,rightly so,so the comments may go nuts )

I'm no prude,but I do have boundries that are comfortable for me.That comfort zone has changed many times over the years.When I was young,I was alot wilder than I am now. I believe it's perfectly normal and ok to be sexual and have some fun with that,but be careful and be smart,it's a zoo out there,in more ways than one.

Girls Gone Wild is different,it's not fun,and I spotted it early in,just from the commercials. Maybe it's because I have a daughter close to the age of the young women who have made this douchebag wealthy(along with a little group of his pals) and my Mom Radar went off like a motherfucker seeing these commercials. Then I started hearing little stories about general assholery among the men present at these filmings and frankly it makes me fucking sick.

As Amanda points out,there are plenty of young women who enjoy being exhibitionists,and if that's their thing,I say go girl,but remember,it really is a zoo out there.Be smart,be safe,and have a blast.Just know that you cannot control every situation you'll run into,don't ever think you do,because that will get you hurt or dead eventually.

What I am about to say will initially seem to run counter to any notion of me being a feminist. And Women,especially Mothers of young women of the GGW age also need to be confronting this issue.However,because this particular enterprise has at it's very heart a deep hatred of women,any female resistance or confrontation to these fucking creepy scumbags won't be taken seriously and won't put the fear of god into the men responsible for this shit.We need men to step up with us. This needs to be shut down. (and note,I do not feel this way about porn in general,there's an element to GGW that differs from what someone like Larry Flynt does.Larry doesn't hate women.)

I just get the feeling that a few dozen really pissed off fathers,older brothers,uncles and boyfriends showing up at Spring Breaks,various resorts and bars on the beach,confronting these assholes and putting a barrier between them and their prey(and make no mistake,there's a HUGE preditory element to this,and it's open,blatant and cheered on.That's very scary to me as a female person)would put a stop to it.Stalk the bastards and have a group show up every place they show their faces.Kind of a Patriot Guard type thing.Run the fuckers out of town and let the kids party without this crap in their midst.

You know,it also does our young men no good at all to allow this kind of shit to go unchecked.Yes,I know these are young adults,and they're gonna screw like bunnies,and that's pretty much none of Mom and Dad's beeswax.Throw in alcohol(and other stuff that shows up at parties),large groups and all those dynamics and people will get hurt.It's pretty inevitable.Teaching guys that this is ok,and seeing guys get away with it and get rich off it is not really going to serve these young men well in the event that they actually do want to have healthy relationships with women at some point.Being an asshole shouldn't be a quality to earn admiration,or a free pass.GGW is abusive,and really,this is something tangible that could be confronted and stopped. Not just out of a protective instinct towards the young women involved,but the young men too. The business communuity should not be allowing these people into their venues either.If I owned a bar or resort,the second I saw these assholes show up they'd be gone.

Does this make me a meddling old biddy? I just know that if this phenomenon had been around when I was that age,all my male relatives and family friends wouldn't have put up with it(and the women I grew up around would have made damn sure the men knew about it if they didn't).There would have been a line of formidable men wielding ax handles to deal with these guys.Most of the men I grew up around would have been appalled that these guys were showing up where young people gather to party and preying on females and they wouldn't have been scared to confront it.

Besides,there's enough GGW footage to splice and re-splice together"collections"to create more weatlth than most people dare to see in a lifetime.If the now rich owners of this franchise went totally out of bidness tommorrow,no one's gonna suffer much.Where's the backlash?

Did ya miss me?

First of all,Bellsouth blows giant iguana weenies(little iguana weenies too).Our DSL connection went down Saturday,and just try to talk to a live human being at that company,jeebus.I spent many hours of my life I'll never get back waiting on hold(92 minutes the last time),or talking to a guy who I simply could not communicate with effectively(when I did talk to a live human,it was the same guy every time,what are the odds?).That part's probably my fault mostly,because I'm sitting here staring at this electrical box thingy in the garage trying to explain to him how all this crap is hooked up.Turns out the problem wasn't in our house,but at some main box/connection/cable down the street.

It's amazing what you can accomplish when you're not on the internets,lol. Yesterday me and the kiddo went through his room and cleared out a massive amount of old books,toys and clothes.Then we prepped the room to be painted.When he was little,I painted the room to look like he was sitting in the middle of the solar system,surrounded by planets and stars on a midnight blue backround.But(as he reminds me all the time)he's about to become a teenager(cue scary music now),so it's time for some updating.We're going with a skateboard dude/graffiti theme this time around.Or chinese dragons,he's still deciding.

Anyhoo,if I happen to disappear for a day or two again,blame Bellsouth.I really need to find another internet provider.

Ned!

A reminder to our Connecticut Democratic friends and neighbors. Tomorrow is Primary Day. It's time to stop talking about how great Ned Lamont will be for Connecticut and the nation and step up to the voting booth. For all your CT primary news, go see the great bloggers at My Left Nutmeg.

Joe must go!

From the man himself:

I am running for the US Senate because we deserve a Senator who will stand up for Connecticut and stand up for our progressive democratic values. Rather than spending hundreds of millions of dollars a day in Iraq, it is time for America to refocus on issues back home: fixing our health care system, upgrading our schools, and rebuilding our aging infrastructure. We will start winning in Iraq as the Iraqis take control of their own destiny, just as America has to start investing again in our own future.

I would have led the opposition to Judge Samuel Alito's nomination to the Supreme Court, which may soon be considering the South Dakota law which outlaws a woman's right to choose even in the case of rape and incest. I will push for energy conservation and efficiency standards as the best means to energy independence and a cleaner environment.

In other words, I am running to be your Democratic Senator.

'Insurgency' in CT

Think Progress. Warning: Neut alert! Video if you can stand watching him.

This morning on Fox News, Newt Gingrich claimed there is a "legitimate insurgency in Connecticut, which needs to be met head on," made up of people who say Iraq "is so hard, it is so frightening, it's so painful, can't we come home and hide?" Gingrich said that if the "insurgency" wins, "it will be the beginning of extraordinarily important period in American politics, and in American history."

No, Neutie boy, it's not because it's hard, or frightening, or painful, although it is certainly all of those. It's because it's imperialistic, illegal, an expensive waste of blood and treasure, wrong-headed, futile, and un-American.

Run home and hide? Not from the likes of you and your neocon wingnut coward friends, motherfucker. You gotta bring some to get some, so bring it on! All most of you people have to bring is your big fat mouth. Frankly, I don't much care whether I take you on in the voting booth with a #2 pencil or the parking lot of Wal-Mart with a fuckin' jack handle. I'm sick of you bastards. We'll see who runs and hides.

To this 'insurgent', the "important period in American politics and history" will be the one where we get rid of this criminal fascist imperialist insane administration and start the hard, frightening, and painful resuscitation and rehabilitation of democracy in our nation.

At the time I saw this, there were 246 comments. Here's the first one:

No longer "traitors" for asking legitimate questions, we are now describing Americans as insurgents? That seems to move beyond shrill name calling to a more serious accusation. Is this "insurgency" to be crushed by tanks as well...? A frightening prospect in a country that is led by a group whose only response to an enemy is brute, physical violence.

One more 'reason why' to add to Fixer's "States' Rights" post.

Stick it

Check out these bumper stickers 'n stuff. I like the 'Coexist' one. Enter code ALT for 5% off.

Assault on the Head

I was reading an interesting post about Soldier's videos from Iraq at MediaShift when I ran across this one. Don't miss it!

I changed the title of this post from 'Snuffy Films' cuz I figured folks might not know what a 'Snuffy' is and think I had linked to a video depicting murder.

Don't despair, Joe - Help is on the way!

According to this article at The Nation, Lieberman has the crooked politician/evil crazy bitch/neocon warmonger vote sewed up. It must be a great comfort to him. Heh.

He's also got Republicans calling for him to switch sides if he loses the primary. I think that would be a mere formality.

"States' Rights"

It's a term the Rethugs like to bandy about when they are advocating teaching creationism in the schools, or denying a woman's right to choose, or denying civil rights to a portion of the population. Seems they don't give a shit about states' rights when it's inconvenient for them.

CHARLESTON, S.C. -- The nation's governors are closing ranks in opposition to a proposal in Congress that would let the president take control of the National Guard in emergencies without consent of governors.

...

The measure would remove the currently required consent of governors for the federalization of the Guard, which is shared between the individual states and the federal government.

...

I don't have to explain why they want to do this, do I?

Huge tip o' the Brain to Peter of Lone Tree.

Mercenaries ... revisited

As regular readers know, I have zero respect for 'private' soldiers. I don't care whether they live or die. When you sell your allegiances to the highest bidder, you relinquish any honor you might have had to begin with. Matt, blogging at FDL, has a great post up about what really goes on over there. 'Private' security companies are nothing more than havens for psychopaths who enjoy killing.