"The fix is in."

I don't share Fixer's views on the third Bush term of McCain as any kind of certainty, just as an awful possibility, but our old pal R.J.Eskow does. And guess who's helping the old geezer...

It's unclear whether ideology, friendship, or other motives underlie deceptions like Blitzer's. It probably varies by reporter. What's important is that only reporters who practice these deceptions get the job. Here's a glimpse into the reasons why, as deftly summarized by Dana Milbank:

"John McCain and Barack Obama both appeared before the nation's newspaper editors yesterday. The putative Republican presidential nominee was given a box of doughnuts and a standing ovation. The likely Democratic nominee was likened to a terrorist."

It doesn't matter whether a reporter distorts the facts in favor of McCain out of ideological preference, or just because they like the guy. What matters is that only those reporters will get to cover the campaign - because the publishers making those decisions want the Republican to win.

There is a clique of media execs, journalists, politicians, and co-opted "independent" experts. They sold America the war in Iraq, and now they're trying to sell it John McCain. And guess what? They'll probably succeed.

Those Democrats who think they're going to when (sic) in November should take fair warning: The fix is in. The Conspiracy of Shared Values has chosen McCain, and they don't usually lose. [...]

Fixer, I love ya brother, but I hope you and R.J. are dead wrong on this one.

Benny the Teener's Demands

23/6

...we here at 23/6 have uncovered Benedict's papal hospitality rider.

It didn't reproduce very readably so you have to go see. Worth it. Liquid alert.

The Playbook ...

How it should be done:

...

As Greenwald notes, the GOP and its propagandists in the press frequently “personify the sexual sleaze and amoral hedonism against which they endlessly sermonize.” Examples include Newt Gingrich, a serial adulterer who ditched his first wife while she was recovering from cancer surgery; Rush Limbaugh, with his drug addiction and “Viagra-fueled jaunts to the Dominican Republic”; David Vitter, the “Values Voter” champion who frequented Madame Deborah Palfrey’s high-class prostitution service; Mark Foley and his lewd emails to congressional pages; Larry “Wide Stance” Craig, Bill “Falafel King” O’Reilly, etc., etc. In each case, Greenwald shows that all of these men have a long record of statements supporting “family values” issues such as the Federal Marriage Amendment and the Defense of Marriage Act, and that none of them personally adhere to the lofty standards that they espouse for others.

In addition to Republicans’ proclivity for personal vice, Greenwald also documents their shameless chickenhawkery and how their alleged love for small government disappears the minute they gain political power. They are, in short, completely full of shit about everything they claim to stand for and deserve to be hammered for it repeatedly. Greenwald’s tone throughout the book is not gentle, which is one of the reasons why fed-up lefties such as myself enjoy reading him so much. His polemical prose has all the tact and subtlety of a chainsaw, and given the subject he’s discussing, this is entirely appropriate. After all, it’s difficult to point out that vast swathes of our political elites are full of shit by being polite and restrained. [my em]

...

Will a Dem ever grow a scrotum, that actually has balls in it, to say what needs to be said? Sadly, no.

We've been screaming for 4 years (here anyway) about how 'full of shit' the Republicans are and it hasn't really done any good. Yes, I know turnout has been high in the primaries and more people seem interested in the process, but the thing troubling me most is that McCain is still so close in the polls against either Dem candidate. By rights, he should have the same approval ratings as the Chimp.

I think the media's fawning over McCain will ultimately prove to be the undoing of the Dems, regardless of who gets the nom. There will be no equal treatment, the Dem dissected and inspected and McCain given a wink and a nod. Thanks to the media's treatment of him, a good portion of the nation still sees him as the maverick, straight-shooter, war hero, though he is neither. When Obama's relationship with Rev. Wright underwent the equivalent of a cavity search and McCain's endorsement by Rev. Hagee was hailed as a diplomatic coup, you know it's gonna be a long summer.

Off to work ...

Quote of the Day

Athenae on CNN's hiring of former WH spokesliar Tony Snow:

... I'm so glad we have Fox as the conservative answer to CNN's liberal agenda ..

.

Oh, the irony...

Ironic Times

New Book: Gitmo Torture Techniques Inspired by TV Series “24”
Overall war strategy inspired by movie Duck Soup.

Cindy McCain's “Family Recipes” Lifted From The Food Network
Husband's foreign, domestic policies lifted from Fox.

Dr. Jack Kevorkian to Run for Congress
Rest in Peace Now candidate says, “You shouldn't have to murder someone just to get a lethal injection.”

Anthropologists Synthesize Neanderthal's Voice
Similar to human's, but can't pronounce "nuclear."

Study: Boomers to Flood Medical System
Advised to smoke, drink, eat a lot, cease all but sudden bursts of strenuous exercise.

Heh.

Study: Sad Shoppers Spend More
First good news for retailers in months.

Have a day.

McCain: "Telling the truth is a cheap shot!"

The Hill

During a somewhat testy interview with George Stephanopoulos, Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) said Sunday that Elizabeth Edwards took a “cheap shot” at him by claiming that the presidential candidate had government healthcare his whole life.

Well, let's see - son and grandson of admirals - military dependent health care. Naval aviator - government health care (you guys who remember goin' to sickbay, quit laughin'!). Congressman and Senator since 1982 - the best medical plan money (ours) can buy.

If you figure he had government 'health care' from the North Vietnamese for a few years, and maybe spent the years after his release in the VA system, I'd say that's his whole life.

A term usually used for long-time repeatedly incarcerated folks pretty much applies to McCain as well: he's 'state-raised'.

Just go the doctor whenever you feel like it and don't worry about paying a bill or insurance premiums. That's McCain's experience with health care. He's possibly a little out of touch with the normal American experience in this regard as well as all the others.

Randi wrap-up

LTR

First, a follow-up in regard to the whole Randi Rhodes saga. With Rhodes finally finding a happy home courtesy of Nova M Radio, she opened up about what led to the falling-out with Air America Radio. And, contrary to popular belief, it wasn't the 'whoregate' thing that led to her departure. A very candid Rhodes opened up on the air about what transpired over the past few weeks.

Enjoy. We love ya, Mom!

"Bitter"?

Billy Joel got it right. (Embedding disabled, dammit!)

Lyrics here.

Bush's Trojan Taco

Why would anybody want a yummy taco encased in a rubber? Oh, I get it: to protect us from the Chinese NAFTA filling. But I digress...

Greg Palast

Psst! George Bush has a secret.

While you Democrats are pounding each other to a pulp in Pennsylvania, the President has snuck back down to New Orleans for a meeting of the NAFTA Three: the Prime Minister of Canada and the President of Mexico.

You’re not supposed to know that – for two reasons:

First, the summit planned for the N.O. two years back was meant to showcase the rebuilt Big Easy, a monument to can-do Bush-o-nomics. Well, it is a monument to Bush’s leadership: The city still looks like Dresden 1946, with over half the original residents living in toxic trailers or wandering lost and broke in America.

The second reason Bush has kept this major summit a virtual secret is its real agenda. More important, the agenda-makers, the guys who called the meeting, must remain as far out of camera range as possible: The North American Competitiveness Council.

Never heard of The Council? Well, maybe you’ve heard of the counselors: the chief executives of Wal-Mart, Chevron Oil, Lockheed-Martin and 27 other multinational masters of the corporate universe.

Harmonization has nothing to do with singing in fifths like Simon and Garfunkel. Harmonization means making rules and regulations the same in all three countries. Or, more specifically, watering down rules – on health, safety, labor rights, oil drilling, polluting and so on - in other words, any regulations that get between The Council members and their profits.

Take for example, pesticides. Wal-Mart and agri-business don’t want to reduce the legal amount of poison allowed in what you eat. Solution: “harmonize” US and Canadian pesticide standards to Mexico’s.
Can they do that? Can Bush just say, “Eat your peas – even if they’re radioactive?” Under NAFTA, at least the way George Bush reads it (or has it read to him), he can. At any rate, he does.

The three chiefs of state will meet privately with the thirty corporate chiefs where they are also expected to legally erase more of our borders, to expand the “NAFTA highway.” Technically, the NAFTA highway is a set of legal rules governing transcontinental shipment. Some fear NAFTA highway expansion will allow a new flood of cheap Mexican products into the US and Canada. Not so. Their hunger to expand the NAFTA highway is to bring in even cheaper Chinese goods.

Say what?

As trade expert Maud Barlow explained to me, the new “NAFTA highway” will allow Chinese stuff dumped into Mexico to be hauled northward as duty-free “Mexican” products. That’s one of the quiet agendas of this “Summit for Security and Prosperity,” the official Orwellian name for this meet. Think of the SSP “harmonization” as the Trojan Taco of trade.

There will be other anti-SSP protesters in New Orleans as well, from America’s populist Right. They are concerned that the Security and Prosperity Summit is worse than the “NAFTA on steroids” that Barlow fears. The populists see in the SPP a nascent “North American Union,” and the elimination of the good old US of A.

They’re wrong, of course. The U.S. of A. has been long eliminated, at least economically. The Competitiveness Council is a multinational crew, with one shared set of country clubs, beach homes, art collections, union busters and lobbyists knowing no borders.

The populist radio hosts railing against the coming North American Union don’t realize that these CEOs won’t take away their flags or Fourth of July or Star-Spangled Banner. The rags and flags will always be kept around to con the schmucks along the Yahoo Belt into donating their children to the Iraq Occupation or other misadventures. A billionaire like Carlos Slim, the richest man on the planet (sorry, Mr. Gates), didn’t buy the Mexican government to “protect” his nation from Gringos but to protect his media monopoly.

So there is no United States of America nor Canada nor Mexico - at least as we like to imagine ourselves in our national fairy tales: self-governing democracies run by we the people or nosotros el pueblo. There’s just the diktats of the North American Prosperity Council. Get used to it.

Barlow said that the US Ambassador to Canada told her the legal changes wrought in New Orleans will not be put before the three national Congresses for a vote. “We don’t want to open up another NAFTA.” So, they’ll skip the voting stuff. Democracy is so, like, 20th Century. (my em)

Is Bush just a reluctant participant in this “harmonizing” of our economic fate? The meetings are secret, so I can’t say for sure. But I note that, at the opening ceremony, if you read his lips, you can see our president singing the national anthem as, “José, can you see?”

Bush has done a pretty good job of leveling our economy and Mexico's. For God's sake don't anyone tell him about the economy in the Horn of Africa! That'll look to his masters like an even better role model for us.

Paraguay turns left

LATimes

The ruling party concedes power after six decades. Left-leaning Fernando Lugo ran on a platform of "change."

Lugo's victory was historic in Paraguay, where the Colorado Party has held power even longer than the communist regimes of China, North Korea and Cuba. Spurring his triumph was widespread discontent with the ruling party's long record of corruption, cronyism and economic stagnation.

The election of Lugo was the latest triumph by a left-leaning leader in Latin America, where a so-called pink tide of democratically elected presidents has altered the region's political map in recent years.

The days of relying on ruling-party contacts for jobs and other needs will end, Lugo declared. Supporters said his time as a priest and bishop cemented his honest image in this overwhelmingly Roman Catholic nation.

Despite his rhetoric, he has refused to be labeled a leftist, saying he is a centrist responding to the needs of the downtrodden and the teachings of Liberation Theology, a Catholic doctrine favoring the poor and subjugated.

The Vatican has assailed Liberation Theology for Marxist tendencies.

The Colorado Party's time in power includes the 35-year dictatorship of Gen. Alfredo Stroessner, the anti-communist strongman who was ousted in 1989. But the party survived Stroessner and went on to dominate almost two decades of shaky democracy - until Sunday's stunning defeat.

Congrats to the Paraguayans on gettin' the right wingers out of office. We hope to do the same here for almost exactly the same reasons. We've had enough 'shaky democracy' our own damn selves.

Note to the Bushes: Ha! Thought you were gonna hide yer Devil Spawn there after 1.20.09, didja? A nice landlocked right-wing dictatorship with no extradition treaty with the U.S. where he could live out his miserable life in comfort instead of in Leavenworth. Well, all of S.A. is goin' "red", seems like, but it means something a little different down there. Enjoy.

Note to Paraguay: Work on that extradition thing. We'll want him back. We can get him like Israel got Eichmann, of course, but that's messy and iffy. We're not as good at that sort of thing as Israel is.

Unraveling Iraq: Twelve Answers to Questions No One Is Bothering to Ask About Iraq

TomDispatch

Can there be any question that, since the invasion of 2003, Iraq has been unraveling? And here's the curious thing: Despite a lack of decent information and analysis on crucial aspects of the Iraqi catastrophe, despite the way much of the Iraq story fell off newspaper front pages and out of the TV news in the last year, despite so many reports on the "success" of the President's surge strategy, Americans sense this perfectly well.
...

Imagine what might happen if the American public knew more about the actual state of affairs in Iraq - and of thinking in Washington. So, here, in an attempt to unravel the situation in ever-unraveling Iraq are twelve answers to questions which should be asked far more often in this country:

As the colons indicate, there's an explanation of each one.

1. Yes, the war has morphed into the U.S. military's worst Iraq nightmare:

2. No, there was never an exit strategy from Iraq because the Bush administration never intended to leave - and still doesn't:

3. Yes, the United States is still occupying Iraq (just not particularly effectively):

4. Yes, the war was about oil:

5. No, our new embassy in Baghdad is not an "embassy":

6. No, the Iraqi government is not a government:

7. No, the surge is not over:

8. No, the Iraqi army will never "stand up":

9. No, the U.S. military does not stand between Iraq and fragmentation:

10. No, the U.S. military does not stand between Iraq and civil war:

11. No, al-Qaeda will not control Iraq if we leave (and neither will Iran):

12. Yes, some Americans were right about Iraq from the beginning (and not the pundits either):

Noticeably missing were representatives of the group of Americans who happened to have been right from the get-go. In our country, of course, it often doesn't pay to be right. (It's seen as a sign of weakness or plain dumb luck.) I'm speaking, in this case, of the millions of people who poured into the streets to demonstrate against the coming invasion with an efflorescence of placards that said things too simpleminded (as endless pundits assured American news readers at the time) to take seriously - like "No Blood for Oil," "Don't Trade Lives for Oil," or ""How did USA's oil get under Iraq's sand?" At the time, it seemed clear to most reporters, commentators, and op-ed writers that these sign-carriers represented a crew of well-meaning know-nothings and the fact that their collective fears proved all too prescient still can't save them from that conclusion. So, in their very rightness, they were largely forgotten.

Now, as has been true for some time, a majority of Americans, another obvious bunch of know-nothings, are deluded enough to favor bringing all U.S. troops out of Iraq at a reasonable pace and relatively soon. (More than 60% of them also believe "that the conflict is not integral to the success of U.S. anti-terrorism efforts.") If, on the other hand, a poll were taken of pundits and the inside-the-Beltway intelligentsia (not to speak of the officials of the Bush administration), the number of them who would want a total withdrawal from Iraq (or even see that as a reasonable goal) would undoubtedly descend near the vanishing point. When it comes to American imperial interests, most of them know better, just as so many of them did before the war began. Even advisors to candidates who theoretically want out of Iraq are hinting that a full-scale withdrawal is hardly the proper way to go.

So let me ask you a question (and you answer it): Given all of the above, given the record thus far, who is likely to be right?

"Right" is whatever gets votes this year. Damn, why couldn't there be a different word for 'wrong' than 'right', as in 'right wing'?

Quote of the Day

BooMan:

I'm kind of surprised at how many people are willing to go on the record as saying that John McCain is temperamentally unfit to be president of the United States. I don't really think of McCain as this unhinged, vindictive kind of a guy. I guess I've been somewhat brainwashed by the media's love affair with McCain, just like the rest of the nation. Dude is crazy. [my em]

Too bad many Americans think McCain is a 'stand-up guy'. Like I've been saying since McCain got the Rethug nom, don't feel too confident you'll have a Democratic president next year.

"Bomb, bomb, bomb ...

Bomb, bomb Iran." Since John McCain is so eager to feed the bloodthirsty Republican 'base' some red meat in the form of an escalation against Iran, Cdr. Huber takes a look at what might probably happen if we did begin a bombing campaign over there:

...

The Navy’s tasks in an operation against Iran would include projecting air power ashore (from the carriers and cruise missile shooters), keeping the Strait open, and deterring or stopping another tanker war like the one that broke out in the 80s during the conflict between Iran and Iraq. To do all those things, the Navy pretty much has to go into the Gulf, and it has to go through the Strait to get there.

In the bathtub, defense in depth becomes nearly impossible to conduct. The state of the art anti-ship weapons Iran recently bought from the Russians—the SSN-22 Sunburn missile and the rocket torpedo—are bad news. One school of thought says the only way to defend against them is to stay tied to the pier stateside, but it’s not just the latest generation of ship-killers we need to worry about. Any time you find yourself in a point defense situation against a homing weapon designed any time after 1970 or so your whole day just became irretrievable.

I rather doubt that anything short of extra terrestrial intervention could actually sink a 100,000-ton Nimitz class carrier, but a rocket torpedo up its stern could send it out the Strait under tow. That would be an unmitigated nightmare. Even if not a single member of the ship’s crew were killed or injured, for a minor power like Iran to have knocked one of America’s preeminent instruments of military might out of action would be a strategic catastrophe for the U.S.

...

We've already gamed this scenario, in 2002, and the U.S. was handed it's ass.

...

In the days since the encounter with five Iranian patrol boats in the Strait of Hormuz, American officers have acknowledged that they have been studying anew the lessons from a startling simulation conducted in August 2002. In that war game, the Blue Team navy, representing the United States, lost 16 major warships — an aircraft carrier, cruisers and amphibious vessels — when they were sunk to the bottom of the Persian Gulf in an attack that included swarming tactics by enemy speedboats.

...

We cannot 'win' in Iran, just as we can't win in Iraq. We don't have the money, the troops, or the national will. If the Chimp doesn't destroy this nation before he leaves, McCain will once he's elected.

Cross-posted at API.

"Bring it on."

Haven't we learned? Seems Condi is as clueless* as her boyfr ... boss:

BAGHDAD — Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice mocked anti-American cleric Muqtada al-Sadr as a coward on Sunday, hours after the radical leader threatened to declare war unless U.S. and Iraqi forces end a military crackdown on his followers.

...

The only reason we've been able to show some sort of 'success' (questionable at best) is because the Mahdi Army has generally remained at home. Baiting Moqtada into all-out hostilities can only have dire consequences.

Update:

Quoting Skippy:

you tell 'em, condi! nothing's worse than a leader who talks tough but refuses to join the fighting himself!

Update:

Analysis from Moon of Alabama:

...

Sadr's last campaigns were not impressive in a military sense. But by now he might have gotten some serious advice on how to achieve something. A good advice might have been to look at logistics.

...

If you can't feed, fuel, and resupply an army, it ain't much of an army anymore.

*Great thanks to Pale Rider for the link.

Sunday Crazy Crossdressing Redneck Music Blogging

Yesterday on our shopping trip I picked up Dolly Parton's Backwoods Barbie. I like it, so I went lookin' for the title track to share with you. Just as an aside, one track may be the first time I ever heard Dolly cover Fine Young Cannibals!

Sometimes when I'm lookin' fer crazy redneck music I get a hell of a lot more than I bargained for!

See the best drag/cabaret performances in town at the Monkey Business Bar in Wilton Manors, Florida. Never a cover charge!

Next time I'm in town...

Lady Fancy

Never. Ever. Forget.

Sometimes when I'm lookin' fer crazy redneck music I find something entirely different.

Very touching video of Katrina disaster put to the music of Mary Gauthier's "Mercy Now"

Fun stuff ...

Via Danger Room, neighbors beware. Heh ...

What's wrong with this picture?

Click to embiggen

Fuck it. Bush should make sure they display the flags of Nazi Germany and The Japanese Empire for state greetings as well. They lost too. Difference being, those flags are not a national embarrassment to the majority of Americans..

Out of touch?

McCain ain't 'out of touch'. He's delusional. Oliver Willis:

This guy just doesn’t get it. In an interview with Fox News’ Neil Cavuto, John McCain told him that America’s economic problems are “psychological” and just a little of his patent-pending straight talk would do wonders for the Republican Recession.

...

Flag Criminals ...

Maybe we should yank their pensions and benefits?

...

To the public, these men are members of a familiar fraternity, presented tens of thousands of times on television and radio as “military analysts” whose long service has equipped them to give authoritative and unfettered judgments about the most pressing issues of the post-Sept. 11 world.

Hidden behind that appearance of objectivity, though, is a Pentagon information apparatus that has used those analysts in a campaign to generate favorable news coverage of the administration’s wartime performance, an examination by The New York Times has found.

The effort, which began with the buildup to the Iraq war and continues to this day, has sought to exploit ideological and military allegiances, and also a powerful financial dynamic: Most of the analysts have ties to military contractors vested in the very war policies they are asked to assess on air. [my em]

...

I would certainly feel comfortable calling these retired flag officers traitors.

Update:

Greenwald is on this too:

...

At the same time, though, in light of questions on this very topic raised even by the NYT back in 2003, it is difficult to take the article's underlying points seriously as though they are some kind of new revelation. And ultimately, to the extent there are new revelations here, they are a far greater indictment of our leading news organizations than the government officials on whom it focuses. [em in orig]

...

Cross-posted at API.