Sunday, May 27, 2007

Support The Troops

For some reason this warm happy furry puppy slogan has been translated into meaning endless financing to keep our troops mired down in a civil war.

You can't support the troops unless you insist they remain hostage to a lunatic White House policy of Operation Iraqi Liberation (OIL).

Town scold Jonathan Alter over at Newsweak cajoles the dirty fucking hippy far left of hurling epithets like "Dick Cheney Democrats" for voting in favor of the Iraq capitulation bill. He rightfully points out that the razor thin majority held by Democrats is insufficient to override a Presidential veto.

The unspoken claim about defunding the war is the default belief that President Bush would simply let them sit there until they ran out of ammo and fuel and food and were completely overrun and slaughtered by the enemy.

Is this why the Democrats signed a blank check to The Mad-Man-In-Chief? If they didn't "support the troops" no one else would? The President would leave them stranded?

That seems to be the view among the American people. Certainly the compassionate conservative-in-chief would bring troops out of theatre if no funding existed, wouldn't he?

Shedding a little light on this matter would be a mighty public service by our intrepid media. Perhaps someone should ask Dubya if the war were defunded, would he abandon the troops to slow starvation and certain death. For a follow-up it would be curious to know if Bush did decide to bring the troops home, due to congressional defunding, how many American troops lives would be saved as a result.

I have been truly stunned overall at the across the board defense of the Democrats votes on this issue last Thursday by the media. It is as if they sensed the white-hot anger of a thousand supernovas was about to be released, and they instinctively reached for the fire extinguishers.

They completely missed a golden opportunity to gleefully point out the spineless nature of Democrats. Perhaps they knew others would be using that term quite prodigiously and decided to use their time, like Jonathan Alter, to cast pearls of wisdom before the dirty fucking hippy crowd of ignorance.
May 24, 2007 - It isn't easy to make the case for capitulation and gamesmanship when human lives are at stake, but I'm going to try. That's because many Americans—especially on the left—don't understand why Democrats in Congress had no choice but to proceed the way they have this week on the war in Iraq.
Okay, let's unpack what Mr. Alter is saying here. First off, let's just eliminate the modifier "especially on the left", M'kay? Well over sixty percent of Merkins, you know, folks who like baseball, hot dogs, apple pie and Chevrolet, are opposed to the war in Iraq. That isn't even "many Americans", that is actually "most Americans."

As far as the claim "Democrats in Congress had no choice" is knee-slapping funny. The issue of Iraq was the ignition that sparked groundswell opposition across America that Democrats rode into power. For them to merely turn around, drop their laundry, bend over and grab their asscheeks as an invitation for an empty cod-piece-in-chief to have his way with them, is an affront to every political activist nationwide.
But it's one thing to be tough; it's another altogether to criticize any member of the party who doesn't vote with and others on the antiwar left as “Dick Cheney Democrats” cruising for a primary challenge, or at least a flaming from the liberal blogosphere.
Well, Mr. Alter, in November the primary issue was Iraq; either you are for it or against it. In a completely stunning election, that even defied "the math" as established by Karl Rove, the pro-war assholes, aka Republicans, lost both the House and the Senate. The message was "End The Fucking War." Now, when you win on primarily a single issue, you better damn well deliver.
Popularity ratings of Dick Cheney and the Iraq war are in the same range as explosive diarrhea, and several social diseases, so please refrain from labeling those opposed to such things as dirty fucking hippies, who everyone knows is all that peoples the antiwar left.
It's fine to urge opposition to the Iraq spending bill, but it's juvenile to toss around threats or make it seem as if voting wrong on this bill means you aren't sincerely against the war. In fact, what's going on inside the Democratic Party now is a family argument about tactics, not principle.
Aw, now the town scold is chiding us as wayward children, who won't eat our veggies and shit. Perhaps he has confused us with the bratty Motherfucker in the Oval Office who wants everything his way with no strings attached or he'll stomp his baby Gap boots. This is the whole point. We have an infantile dry-drunk frat-boy snot with his twitchy finger inches from the button. A rubber-stamped congress got us into this mess. There is no adult at the steering wheel of the mightiest country in the world and we are adrift, heading for an abyss of third-world status.
We have every right, in fact a duty, to be extremely disappointed in the blank check the Democratic congress just sent to a degenerate chicken hawk war junkie. We categorically reject the notion that we are being big ol' babies for not welcoming with open arms the continuation of a catastrophe that will only result in more death and misery, with absolutely no benefit to American national security.
The rest of Mr. Alter's article explains why Thursdays vote could not have played out any other way, and grudgingly it makes sense, only because the Democrats have completely failed on messaging.
If the tables were turned we have no doubt their would have been an endless stream of Republican operatives given ample media time to screech about the obstructionists Democrats trying to slake their unquenchable thirst for power from the blood of our troops.

What I cannot abide by is this idea of the antiwar left (most Americans) labelled as juvenile for wanting their Representatives to represent the wishes of (most Americans) to end the war. Those Representatives like Rham Emmanuel who try to put lipstick on this pig and call it a "victory" will suffer the fate of any mealy-mouthed politician.

Let's make it real simple. This vote will be a death sentence for many in our military, who fight for Democracy in a country that wants it less than us.

The Goodling Version Of Justice

A couple of things trouble me about the recent testimony of Monica Goodling before House investigators. The first was her reference to the allegations of Tim Griffin, protege of Karl Rove installed as the US Attorney for Arkansas without congressional approval, being involved in "caging" during the 2004 Presidential elections.
On Feb. 15, Griffin suddenly announced that he had “made the decision not to let my name go forward to the Senate” for approval. Instead, he will serve indefinitely as an “interim” prosecutor. By avoiding Senate approval, Griffin will also avoid having to answer questions under oath about his role in a plan to suppress Florida votesprimarily those of African-American servicemembers — in the 2004 election.
Caging is a direct-mail term that describes the practice of requiring a response from the receiver. Those who do not respond are eliminated from future mailing list.

In 1981, Republican operatives engaged in this practice by targeting areas populated heavily with minorities. Those who fail to respond to certified mail are then challenged at the polls for proof of residency, having the option to return home to get a utility bill and come back to the polls and rejoin the process at the end of the line at the polls.

Or, they may be offered a provisional ballot that may not be counted unless the vote is close.

In Ohio, some 100,000 provisional ballots from 2004 remain uncounted today.

Since 1986, the Republican party has been under a restraining order from engaging in the practice of "caging" as the result is voter suppression and election fraud.

This law has been ignored, and one of its alleged practitioners is now the US Attorney in Senator Clinton's old backyard, one can only surmise, to root through her panty drawer for any buttscoot stank Mr. Griffin can dredge up.

The second disturbing revelation by Ms. Goodling was the discussion of testimony between her and Attorney General Alberto Gonzales.
Goodling said for the first time Wednesday that Gonzales did review the story of the firings with her at an impromptu meeting she requested in his office a few days before she took a leave of absence.

"I was somewhat paralyzed. I was distraught, and I felt like I wanted to make a transfer," Goodling recalled during a packed hearing of the House Judiciary Committee.

Gonzales, she said, indicated he would think about Goodling's request.

"He then proceeded to say, 'Let me tell you what I can remember,' and he laid out for me his general recollection ... of some of the process" of the firings, Goodling added. When Gonzales finished, "he asked me if I had any reaction to his iteration."

Goodling said the conversation made her uncomfortable because she was aware that she, Gonzales and others would be called by Congress to testify.

"Was the attorney general trying to shape your recollection?" asked Rep. Artur Davis, D-Ala.

Goodling paused.

"I just did not know if it was a conversation we should be having and so I just didn't say anything," she replied. She added that she thought Gonzales was trying to be kind.

Democrats pounced.

"It certainly has the flavor of trying to get their stories straight," said Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., a member of the committee.


Alberto Gonzales peppered his own testimony before congress numerous times with "I can't recall," insisting that he was unable to discuss any facet of the matter of the forced resignations of the 8 US Attorneys with anyone in his department because he did not want to interfere with the investigations.

The Justice Department has not refuted Goodlings claim, but characterizes the meeting as an attempt to "help Goodling."

Numerous times during Gonzales' testimony he complained his inability to answer certain questions was due to his inability to talk with people within his DoJ. Clearly Mr. Gonzales is aware, by his own numerous admissions, that his discussions with Goodling about the matter were illegal.

An internal investigation is also ongoing, which further points out Gonzales' own admission that discussing testimony is a very serious matter.

The President has termed the investigation into his Justice Department and Alberto Gonzales as "political theater", and complaining that is "drawn out".

Constant stonewalling by the DoJ and White House has prevented congress from adequately discharging their oversight responsibilities, however, it is remaining less clear whether President Bush's obstinate support of Alberto Gonzales will be enough to protect to the Attorney General, much less hide the stain that blankets our entire Justice system.

Thursday, May 24, 2007

US Military Plans Surrender In Iraq

World-wide shock and awe resulted from the United States Military announcing it cannot defeat its enemies in Iraq and are prepared to negotiate for peace.

The officials cited an inability to maintain current troop levels into the summer as a reason for the changed course.

"We have been focused too long on defeating the enemy," one official said. "We need to bring them to the negotiating table."

"The enemy" in Iraq has consistently been declared "terrorists" by the Bush administration for years. The American policy of not negotiating with terrorists has been in place for much longer.

Chief architects of the American surrender and terrorist negotiator in Iraq is General David Petraeus and U. S. Ambassador to Iraq Ryan Crocker, according to CNN.

Congress Issues Blank Check

Congress approved a blank-check funding for President Bush's continuing occupation of Iraq. In a pitiful fashion, they huffed and puffed about the "benchmarks" included, that amount to requiring a bludgeoned rape victim stand up straight and act right, or the rehab money will be revoked.

We appreciate all the hard work the Democrat majority has done since given the majority position to end the war in Iraq. But the five thousand pound obstinate elephant shitting in the living room removes the right to brag about all the dust bunnies cleaned out of the corner.

We understand Democrats do not have the votes to override a Presidential veto, and we do not, at this moment care. The only vote that matters is the vote an individual member casts. When it is demonstrated that Democrats cannot do what they were elected to do, end this war, it makes it difficult to vote for someone who refuses to represent the will of the people.

This vote takes place before Memorial Day, a time when America honors her Veterans and fallen soldiers. We have soldiers now, in harms way. Placed there by President Bush, in Iraq, a country that was not a threat to us, did not invade us, had no connection to 9/11 or Osama bin Laden.

What exactly will this funding accomplish? According to Bush:
This summer is going to be a critical time for the new strategy. The last of five reinforcement brigades we are sending to Iraq is scheduled to arrive in Baghdad by mid-June. As these reinforcements carry out their missions the enemies of a free Iraq, including al Qaeda and illegal militias, will continue to bomb and murder in an attempt to stop us. We're going to expect heavy fighting in the weeks and months. We can expect more American and Iraqi casualties. We must provide our troops with the funds and resources they need to prevail.
And so, yes, it could be a bloody -- it could be a very difficult August, and I fully understand --
Not to mention June and July. This is what your vote has bought on the eve of memorial day.

Tuesday, May 22, 2007

Educating The Ignorant

Before any neocon or their apologists are allowed to abort American Principles, also known as the children of Democracy, they must undergo an intensive deprogramming regime.
(edited by an oil filter)
Conservatism, as a rule, is not in the best interest of the neocon; that neocons are often misled or ill-informed about its risks to their own physical or emotional health.
These are poor, wayward children that deserve all the sympathies our widdle pearl-clutching souls can muster. At least this is the latest and shiniest attempt to dress-up the pending coathanger laws surely set to come forth in light of last months Supreme Court decision upholding the Partial Birth Abortion Ban Act.

Flush with pride with victory of seizing partial title to a woman's womb, the authoritarians will carry their message to state houses all across the country in their goal of subjugating women.
"Informed Consent" is the shiny new title for the pocket-knife used to whittle away at a woman's right for self-determination. Counseling will be mandatory because as every misogynist rightard knows, women are just silly and need to be told what's best for them.

If a girl is raped by her father, she simply must give birth to her brother.

Or, get permission from her father, get preached to by a state-appointed fundie, probably watch some heinous videos, all in order to terminate the pregnancy. "Informed Consent" is so patronizing it borders on the ridiculous.

Thank goodness we have Nancy Keenan, the head of NARAL, to derail this effort.

In light of Nancy Keenan's remarkable track record of unfettered mediocrity, why does she still have a job? The movement to defend against the onslaught against reproductive rights in today's climate demands strong and fearless leadership.

Nancy, you ain't it.

Neverending War

Democrats grant the occupation an additional four months.
In grudging concessions to President Bush, congressional Democrats intend to draft an Iraq war-funding bill without a timeline for the withdrawal of U.S. troops -- and shorn of billions of dollars in pork-barrel spending on extraneous domestic programs, officials said Monday.

However, the legislation would include the first federal minimum wage increase in more than a decade, a top priority for the Democrats who took control of Congress in January, the officials added.

While details remain sketchy, the measure is designed to close the books by Friday on a bruising veto fight between the president and the Democratic-controlled Congress over the war. It would provide funds for military operations in Iraq through Sept. 30, the end of the fiscal year.

Unable to override the President's veto and unable to respond to ludicrous claims from the rightard enablers--like our military will run out of bullets unless chimpy gets his way--the Democrats capitulate to financing the occupation and terrorist recruitment and donation vehicle known as Iraq.

President Bush's occupation of Iraq is a terrorist multiplier. But it only gets worse.
This “second surge” of troops in Iraq, which is being executed by extending tours for brigades already there and by deploying more units, could boost the number of combat troops to as many as 98,000 (from 52,500) by the end of this year. When support troops are included, the total number of U.S. troops in Iraq could increase from 162,000 now to more than 200,000 — the most ever — by the end of the year.

So when the funding runs out in September, and General Petraeus delivers his assessment on Iraq to the Congress, can their be any doubt what he will ask for?
Funny thing is, this "second surge" (and at what point does it qualify as an escalation?) does not enjoy the fanfare and muscular approach used by the empty codpiece-in-chief.
The little-noticed efforts to reinforce U.S. troops in Iraq are being carried out without the fanfare that accompanied President Bush’s initial troop surge in January.
Retired Army Maj. Gen. William Nash, the U.S. commander who led NATO troops into Bosnia in late 1995, asked to comment on the findings, said: “It doesn’t surprise me that they’re not talking about it. I think they would be very happy not to have any more attention paid to this.”

Clearly, this occupation and escalation has done little more than mire down the sons and daughters of America in a country that was not a threat and did not attack us. It has been a disaster of epic proportions, radically weakening our military and completely draining our treasury.
And as far as the one responsible for attacking us on 9/11, what has been the effect on him and his organization?
In one of the most troubling trends, U.S. officials said that Al Qaeda's command base in Pakistan is increasingly being funded by cash coming out of Iraq, where the terrorist network's operatives are raising substantial sums from donations to the anti-American insurgency as well as kidnappings of wealthy Iraqis and other criminal activity.

The influx of money has bolstered Al Qaeda's leadership ranks at a time when the core command is regrouping and reasserting influence over its far-flung network. The trend also signals a reversal in the traditional flow of Al Qaeda funds, with the network's leadership surviving to a large extent on money coming in from its most profitable franchise, rather than distributing funds from headquarters to distant cells.

Al Qaeda's efforts were aided, intelligence officials said, by Pakistan's withdrawal in September of tens of thousands of troops from the tribal areas along the Afghanistan border where Bin Laden and his top deputy, Ayman Zawahiri, are believed to be hiding.

Little more than a year ago, Al Qaeda's core command was thought to be in a financial crunch. But U.S. officials said cash shipped from Iraq has eased those troubles.

"Iraq is a big moneymaker for them," said a senior U.S. counter-terrorism official.
emphasis added

Congress needs to end this war, because Bush never will. To paraphrase TRex, George Bush conducting a Global War On Terror, is like changing a dirty diaper with a molotov cocktail. He hasn't done anything about the shit, and now everything's on fire.

Bertie Walnuts Thuggery

Video Link Here.
You simply must watch that video. It captures the essence of James Comey's testimony about the late night visit by Bertie Walnuts and Andy Card to John Ashcroft's sick-bed.
The authorization was set to expire on one of the Bush Administrations highly dubious and sooper sekrit "Spy on America" programs, and to them, enemies included anyone who threatened their power.
Ashcroft and Comey had discussed the program, and had decided not to re-authorize it. Immediately after that, Ashcroft took ill and before he went in for surgery, filed the paperwork to deputize Comey to act in his stead.
Mrs. Ashcroft, being a good spouse, barred all contact from anyone to her husband while he recovered in ICU.
But the White House called to say they were sending over their two top thugs to badger Ashcroft, while he was in pain and heavily medicated, into signing a permission slip for the unlawful acts of the White House.
Comey was notified of the surreptitious meeting and he called FBI Director Robert S. Mueller III, and the race was on to John Ashcroft's soon-to-be-crowded hospital room.
President Bush refuses to answer whether he ordered Bert and Ernie, er, I mean, Alberto Gonzales and Andy Card to the bedside of a heavily sedated, recovering man to browbeat him into signing a document he had no authority to sign, or whether he thought this was okey dokey, lapsing into his usual dodge of not talking about a sooper sekrit program, designed to protekt wimmins and chilluns from Islamomunifascistic radicals.
Now this whole sordid spectacle took place a full 2 and a half years after the implementation of the program. The Gestalt theory of applied law is well and thriving in the Bush administration. Even after Comey refused to authorize a program that had been in existence for 2 1/2 years for having "no legal basis", Bush continued the program for another two and a half weeks before "modifying" it to prevent mass resignations from top officials.
Asked why Bert and Ernie tried to get a signature from one unauthorized to do so, they gave the "dog ate my homework" excuse.
From Newsweek:
Comey didn't tell the Senate panel that the bad feelings were stoked even more the next morning when White House officials explained the hospital visit by saying Gonzales and Card were unaware that Comey was acting A.G. (and therefore the only person authorized to sign off on the surveillance program), according to a former senior DOJ official who requested anonymity talking about internal matters. Top DOJ officials were furious, the source said. Just days earlier, Justice's chief spokesman had publicly said Comey would serve as "head of the Justice Department" while Ashcroft was ill.

Heckuva job there, Bertie. Now, he is our illustrious Attorney General. The Republican mantra is behave or be replaced. Sorta like the General before the war who claimed we need 400,000 troops in Iraq, or the post-occupation Generals who were opposed to an escalation.

Saturday, May 19, 2007

Why We Fight Them Over There

I guess we just have to file this one under slack jawed amazement via USAToday:
PHOENIX (AP) — A military contractor is recruiting current and former agents with the U.S. Border Patrol to teach Iraqis how to secure their national borders.

The U.S. State Department has asked Virginia-based DynCorp International to find 120 people with Customs and Border Enforcement experience to go to Iraq for the training.

The company already has 700 police trainers in Iraq. The department made the request for border security trainers in late March.

Arizona Gov. Janet Napolitano said she was worried that DynCorp's effort is distracting from security along the U.S.-Mexico border. She and New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson wrote President Bush this week to say the deal "makes no sense."

"We should be focused on supporting our nation's security efforts along the Mexican and Canadian border instead of hampering (the Customs and Border Patrol) by sending our best agents to a war zone in Iraq," the governors wrote.

Uh, I got nuthin'.

Support Attorneys By Donating To Republicans

Money donated to political campaigns can be spent to keep crooked legislators out of jail, according to Federal Election Commission rules, as long as the charges resulted from political activity. Tom Delay, indicted former House Majority Leader (R-Abramhoff) tops the list of the biggest spender on legal fees from his campaign chest, with over one million dollars. Keep in mind, all of this money comes from campaign contributions. In fact, the top ten biggest "keepin' they asses outta jail" politicians are all Republicans. Here is a list compiled by USAToday:

Former Rep. Tom DeLay, R-Texas $1,100,000
Rep. Jerry Lewis, R-Calif. $905,800
Former Rep. Randy "Duke" Cunningham, R-Calif. $570,000
Former Rep Bob Ney, R-Ohio $518,000
Rep. Dennis Hastert, R-Ill. $285,000
Former Rep. Mark Foley, R-Fla. $253,800
Former Sen. Conrad Burns, R-Mont. $160,376
Rep. John Doolittle, R-Calif. $149,200
Rep. Alan Mollohan, D-W.Va. $140,000
Former Rep. Curt Weldon, R-Pa. $132,025

Not on this list is Ted Klaudt, a Republican state representative from South Dakota who faces the following charges:
A former South Dakota lawmaker is accused of molesting his own foster children and legislative pages.

Ted Klaudt, 49, a Republican rancher from Walker, faces a long list of charges: eight counts of rape, two counts of sexual exploitation of a minor, two counts of witness tampering, sexual contact with a person under 16, and stalking.

Court documents mention five possible victims. Three were foster children between the ages of 15 and 19 who lived with Klaudt's family. One is a cousin of one of those girls, and the fifth is a friend of Klaudt's daughter.

In the most disturbing accusation, the girls say Klaudt had them convinced they could earn up to $20,000 by donating their eggs to a fertility clinic. And even though he has no medical training, the girls say Klaudt did all the supposed "exams" and "procedures" himself.

Tristero, over at Digby's dug out a list of bills this perv has been working on. As one would suspect, it is total dominion of men and old white fundies over not men parts. Oh, and everybody gets guns.

Yeah, give these guys your money and your vote.

H/T to DownWithTyranny!

How Low Can Bush Go?

President Bush still commands a solid popularity among his die hard base, that unflagging thirty percent of authoritarian cultists who pledge their undying fealty, at least until resolute Commander Guy threw in the towel on his War On Brown People. Nowhere is the presence of Bush lovers more apparent than in the rightard half of the blogosphere, many of whom coagulate in the fetid swamp of the Free Republic. Freepers, as they are called, have thrown Bush under the bus. via Wonkette:
  • We still have Tancredo, Hunter and Fred Thompson on our side. This bill wont go anywhere when our representatives start receiving our faxes
  • The rule of law has just been thrown out the window. I agree that impeachment is in order.
  • And the SELL OUT of the AMERICAN people begins!
  • Bring my Step-Son home from Iraq now El Presedente. You don’t deserve his service.
  • Bush blasphemy! Shameful leader!
  • I’m done with him on this and many other issues. I’ll never vote for him again. Illegal invaders are going to kill us all.
  • “BUSH SUCKS” And the leftists blogs are now PROUD of this fool! What a dichotomy.
  • I just said the same thing to my husband - my nephew has been ordered back for the second time after being home for only 10 months. I want them home now, why fight and die for this country of Mexico. I just can’t believe I worked so hard to get this man elected not once but twice. NEVER AGAIN - no more money and no more volunteer hours for the grand ole GOP
  • His brother Bill was the first black president, now we have the first Hispanic president.
  • The conservative movement has now been set adrift….like so much jetsam. Our champion has become our betrayer, IMHO.
  • My husband just recently retired and we where planning on going back to Texas but we are now seriously considering Australia. It looks better and better each minute. Our kids want to leave also !!! And you are right, we have been betrayed.
  • An thus the united States of America is being sold out by those that claim to love her. May they rot before they die. I see the end of my great nation, the shining star in a morass of mediocre to outright scum countries.
  • This is what happens when you kill 40 million unborn US citizens.
  • I pray he gets IMPEACHED. This is a dark day in America.
  • I have long thought that BJBilly was the worst president in history, now I am not so sure………..At least Clinton stuck to BJs instead of trying to f*ck the entire country, like Jorge.
  • Look this is what it all boils down to, these people in Washington are no different than the celebrities in hollyweird,they do not respect the rule of law or the ten commandments. These people feel they are above the law and can do as they please. And that means they can turn the United States into a third world country.Right now these Washington jackasses are NOT paying attention to Iran because they are too busy making life easier for the RICH in MEXICO.
  • The invasion of the United States by the criminal army of Aztlan is complete.

Yes, these are comments from the last bastion of the famed Bush base. See, when you build a party upon the foundation of law and order resulting in the protection of things and property values at the expense of people, especially the "other" people, you should expect such a reaction.

Bush clearly violated the law with his domestic warrant less wiretapping program, but the rightards defended it by calling anyone who called his actions criminal "terrorist sympathizers."

He promises to veto a bill that recognizes if some redneck catches some fairy mincing down his block and runs over him in a pickup truck, two crimes have occurred--murder and terrorizing a group of people. So who here is the terrorist sympathizer?

The Bush administration shredded the constitution by eliminating habeus corpus and his hard right thirty nary flinched.

I guess the only law rightards want applied by a Republican, is the law of white supremacy

Saturday, May 12, 2007

Deadlines For Thee, But None For Me

President Rexall Ranger just luuuvs him some deadlines. Remember this from March 17, 2003?
Saddam Hussein and his sons must leave Iraq within 48 hours. Their refusal to do so will result in military conflict, commenced at a time of our choosing. For their own safety, all foreign nationals -- including journalists and inspectors -- should leave Iraq immediately.

High noon, or midnight, or something. Definitely a deadline. When violence raged prior to the first Iraqi election, and a threatened Sunni boycott which would virtually guarantee a permanent and violent divide in Iraq, our Rexall Ranger stood firm on the deadline of January 30, 2005:

President Bush yesterday flatly ruled out any delay in Iraqi elections scheduled for Jan. 30 despite the unrelenting insurgency, rejecting Sunni Muslim boycott threats and framing the vote as a critical step toward bringing U.S. troops home.

In his strongest reaffirmation of the election plan, Bush attempted to end any doubt about whether the vote would go forward after days of debate among Iraqi politicians. Organizations representing the once-powerful Sunni minority have demanded the elections be put off until security is restored, while leaders of the majority Shiites have insisted the balloting proceed.

"The elections should not be postponed," Bush said. "It's time for the Iraqi citizens to go to the polls. And that's why we are very firm on the January 30th date."

Sounds like a deadline to me. Then there was the Iraqi constitution. Our Tin Star Texan stuck to his guns:


Bush, who instinctively dismisses doubters and abhors changing course, again stuck to the plan. "We've got to keep the deadline there to force the parties to make the hard decisions to reach compromise," Bush told advisers, according to Hadley.

Dayamm. There's that word--deadline--coming right out of Dubya's own mouth--if you can believe Hadley. But we all know what happened on Iraq's constitution. They were a little late on the deadline, punted on the hard stuff, which are still the main points of contention today, primarily sharing of the revenue. Seems some sillies are having a little trouble rewarding their past tormentors. It is a small wonder Iraq is such a disaster when Dubya peoples his brain trust for the war with people like Douglas Feith:
Former undersecretary of defense Douglas J. Feith, a key architect of the war, said the political process has not been perfect but that Bush was right to stick rigorously to the timetable. "That was a calculation," he said. "It involved some risk. It turned out not only not to be a disaster but a great success."
[...] my bold

Uh, yeah Doogie Howitzer, craptacular. Rumor has it Dougie beats the side of head because it feels so good when he stops.
Now the congress attempts to place some deadlines on Bush. But he stamps his baby Gap boots and calls everybody names. Lately he is warming up to the idea of "benchmarks" for Iraqi's.

It's not that the President was for deadlines before he was against them before he was for them, it is deadlines that apply to him, or any rules whatsoever, like torture, or habeus corpus, or warrantless wiretapping etc.

There is an expert in field in dealing with these types of people: Supernanny! No one is better at dealing with spoiled brats than her, I mean, Mary Poppins she ain't. Perhaps we should pass the hat and buy the boxed set for Pelosi and Reid. Or, they can just use the CliffsNotes:

Lower yourself to their level so you can see eye to eye.

Use a stern voice.

Waggle a disapproving finger and say:

"This is unacceptable."

Tuesday, May 08, 2007

To Blog Or Not To Blog

I came across this post from Atrios, about why Matt blogs. Atrios was sorta worried about the way the regular media was covering politics, so he sorta jumped in to do his bit. Cool. Now Matt descends into the realm of the town scold, telling others how and what to expect when they blog.

Matt may be doing a huge service here, I have no way of knowing. Neither do I know if anyone is linking to my blog or why. I do not really care. Perhaps there are those who blog merely for traffic or recognition, and if they don't get it they require a tissue.

Fuck that. I'm a big picture sort of guy and do not go into "niche" blogging. In case anyone hasn't noticed, this is not a battle for the margins of Democracy, but a war for the very heart and soul of our country.

We now have over 300 million people in this country and the government of this nation is allegedly "of, by and for the people".

Conservatives, aka, Republicans do not represent the people. The role of Government, according to Republicans, is to provide a strong national defense, and maybe some roads and bridges.

The private sector should be left alone to prey on its victims without interference from the government.

Did you get that? That is what I call "big picture". In case you didn't get it, let me repeat myself:

The private sector should be left alone to prey on its victims without interference from the government.

However, progressives and non republican lite democrats (DLC) tend to view government as a mechanism to benefit the people of America--all Americans, even and especially minorities.

The reason most Americans do not have cholera is because we chlorinate our water. It is just as important to administer the commons in our homeland as it is to hunt terrorists abroad. We cannot turn over our commons like air and water to private companies for profit while republicans move to limit their liabilities in the judiciary.

Do you see how this works?

And now my cat is dead. The concern from this administration for national security fills my mouth with ashes when bin Laden is in the wind and these cocksuckers can't even protect my goddamm cat.

And when an entire city drowns the best they can do is call the victims stupid and lazy. Go ahead and vote for anyone with an R attached to their name. You are getting fucked in the ass without a reacharound you stupid sonofabitch.

And Matt, That's why I blog. I promise not to cry if you don't link to me, and I won't draw a pony for Atrios for one.

Hell, the only thing I draw is flies in the summertime.

Sunday, May 06, 2007

Piss On The Fire And Call The Dogs

It is time to draw the curtain on the PNAC misadventure known as Iraq. We should not have invaded to begin with, it was poorly done and now that we have "delivered Iraq" from the stranglehold of a Tyrant into the welcoming bosom of democracy, it is clear they must want it worse than us, or it just won't happen.

The latest warfare on the homefront entails the battle of the razor-thin democratic majority, a majority that owes fealty to Americans, not whacky dirty hippy lefties, there are not enough of them, but the Americans that just shook their heads at Bush and his little band of apologists for the war in Iraq.

The bill to fund the troops was vetoed by Bush because it included a time to go date.

As much as the corporate media try to paint democratic leaders being held hostage by the far left, it just is not true. Unless the dirty fucking hippy crowd is now defined as seventy percent of America. Dude!

It is time to go. Never worry about how Republicans will try to spin and blame the failures on Democrats because they will do that no matter what.

I suppose the Dems will toss out a 3 month band aide for funding until they get their collective shit together. This will be done mainly to get Boner (R-tobacco) and McConnell (R-anti pillowcase) from screeching that our troops are pinned down and running out of bullets.

These guys are soulless and morally bankrupt corporate shills that continually ratchet up the hyperbole in hopes of making it on teevee.

The time this buys for the dems will allow about a one-half FU (Freidman Unit) to expire. During this interim it will provide an opportunity to peel off more Republican support from the Presidents "Majik Pony Plan" (all this manure, got to be a pony here somewheres--geddit?) to get enough votes to override a Presidential veto.

It matters not what happens politically here in America when the Democrats are finally successful in pulling our troops out of Iraq--according to Republicans, it will be the Democrats fault.

This is what they do. Republicans cannot govern because they do not believe in governance. They are very adept in formulating shiny talking points to promote social Darwinism, a concept they deny the creator.

If, after we depart and a bloodbath ensues, they will shout very loudly how right they were while wrapping themselves in the bloody flag. Consider how unhinged and screechy conservatives like Boehner, Mitch McConnell, Bush, Wolfowitz, Cheney and Rumsfeld have been up to this point, when they have been wrong virtually all the time.

Now imagine how screechy they shall become if, by some accident, they get lucky and get one right. I can't remember who said "Ten thousand monkeys typing on ten thousand typewriters for ten thousand years will produce the entire works of William Shakespeare.

They are bound to get one right once in awhile.

But if the other happens--the Americans pull out and the Iraqi's say, "Gee golly gosh, I guess we better sorta figure this thing out," and produce a stable government.

Then the Republicans will say, "We managed to hold to our principles just long enough and stave off the dirty fucking hippy horde to allow this to happen."

These shitwhistles are asshats. Fuck'em. The dog barks while the caravan marches on. I urge the Democrats to hold fast and do not capitulate to the resolute decider codpiece in chief. This man is irrelevant. All pressure must be placed on those republicans in vulnerable districts. Target them mercilessly in their own districts with their own hate-filled warmongering Bush ass-kissing ads possible. Shake down all lefties for money to buy the ads. Any Dem in a safe seat with a vast warchest must be coerced to pony up.

It is time to go.


No one in the reality based community has ever denied that Faux "News" was nothing more than a propaganda tool for the Republican party, indeed getting its "news" from the blast faxes of the RNC and the White House.

But, to be "fair and balanced" they sometimes get their talking points from their BFF, Al Qaida. I'm not kidding.

WALLACE: Let's talk about one aspect of that. The Democrats now seem in a race to try to come up with a plan to get out of Iraq.

Ayman al-Zawahiri, the number two Al Qaida leader, says the bill that you Democrats sent the president is proof of the American defeat in Iraq. And we'll talk about the details in a moment.

But does your party run the risk of being seen by the American people, as they were after Vietnam, as soft on national security?

Now, smirky Wallace, posed this question to the senior Senator from CT, the real Democrat and Presidential candidate, Chris Dodd.

As an armchair consultant, allow me to field this question for the Senator.

OFG: Now Wally, I think the fact this administration, prior to 9/11, received over 52 separate warnings, including a PDB stating Osama Determined to Attack Inside the US and not taking any action, or even calling a meeting, instead opting to take multiple lengthy vacations shows which party is soft on national security.

Further, the fact that Al Qaida makes more videos than Girls Gone Wild, and that Zawahiri and bin Laden are taking up oxygen that could be going for some useful purpose illustrates that this administration has done little more than recruit more terrorists.

Just. Too. Easy.