But last night the plans for a future war
Was all I saw
On Channel 4...
-- The Smiths, "Shoplifters of the World Unite"
Me, Too
Dread
Dave Johnson at Seeing the Forest:
Wouldn't it be interesting if it turned out that one of the major players in convincing America to tie its military up in Iraq, was at the same time providing North Korea with technology to improve its missiles? (Not to mention providing NK with submarines.)Why, yes. It would be interesting. Though not in an especially good way.
Wouldn't it be interesting if it turned out that one of the major players in convincing America to take sides in the Middle East conflict turned out to be an espionage front for that side? (See also here.)
Remember the STF rule. When Republicans accuse...
(See more accusations here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here ...)
Meanwhile, Scott Ritter suggests that the US has already begun war with Iran, in much the same way we began war with Iraq, as we’re now finding out care of the Downing Street Memos:
President Bush had signed a covert finding in late spring 2002, which authorised the CIA and US Special Operations forces to dispatch clandestine units into Iraq for the purpose of removing Saddam Hussein from power.Go read the rest. And when you’re finished, check out this piece at Freiheit und Wissen that pulls in additional information (such as the military installation currently being readied in Azerbaijan, just north of Iran), and see if you aren’t ready to shit your breeks at the thought of what’s in store for us as regards the two remaining players in Bush’s “Axis of Evil.”
The fact is that the Iraq war had begun by the beginning of summer 2002, if not earlier.
[…]
It represents a record of precedent on the part of the Bush administration which must be acknowledged when considering the ongoing events regarding US-Iran relations. As was the case with Iraq pre-March 2003, the Bush administration today speaks of "diplomacy" and a desire for a "peaceful" resolution to the Iranian question.
But the facts speak of another agenda, that of war and the forceful removal of the theocratic regime, currently wielding the reigns of power in Tehran.
[…]
The reality is that the US war with Iran has already begun. As we speak, American over flights of Iranian soil are taking place, using pilotless drones and other, more sophisticated, capabilities.
The violation of a sovereign nation's airspace is an act of war in and of itself. But the war with Iran has gone far beyond the intelligence-gathering phase.
I'm swelling with patriotic mucus!*
Another colossal waste of taxpayer's time and money.
Because nothing else important is going on at the moment.
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The CIA believes the Iraq insurgency poses an international threat and may produce better-trained Islamic terrorists than the 1980s Afghanistan war that gave rise to Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda, officials said on Wednesday.
But don't worry about that horrifying thought. Worry about those poor defenseless little flags being burned by them commie artists.
"No one... I repeat, no one ever died for a flag. They may have died for freedom, which, by the way, includes... the freedom... to burn the fucking flag."- Bill Hicks
*Don't blame me. It was Dr. Zoidberg.
(Don't you... cross-post about me...)
DNC Releases 2004 Ohio Election Report
And here are some findings that won’t shock you at all:
More then ¼ of Ohio voters had problems at the polls.
Twice as many black voters reported problems as white voters.
Black voters were far more likely to come up against challenges to their registration status and to experience intimidation, and reported waiting an average of 52 minutes to cast their ballots versus the 18 minutes average reported by white voters.
Voters in counties using touchscreen voting machines had far more problems than voters in other counties.
BradBlog’s got the lowdown.
I don’t know whether Kerry really won the election or not. Proof that there were voting problems doesn’t prove that the election results were wrong, not definitively. What I do know is that to cruise right along as if nothing happened is an insult to those who had to suffer the abovementioned indignities just to cast their votes…and a sign of the utter disregard for ensuring the fully functional democracy we foolishly take for granted that we’re guaranteed.
Slap a little Slaughter on 'em
Go over to Blanton's and Ashton's, read this post, and then go sign the petition.
I'm sick of money vanishing into the pockets of the least deserving when American soldiers are going without body armor, truck armor, and are being forced to purchase their own supplies.
Thinking about Chimpy in Chief throwing away who-knows-how-much taxpayer money away on a doomed stumping plan has put this kind of slippery money hiding in my mind all day.
WE WANT OUR MONEY BACK!!
Oh, there are also naked frogs.
(I am a cross-post for the county...)
Snarkin' on Bolton
I’m sure you’ve heard by now that Bush is considering bypassing the Senate entirely and making a recess appointment of Mr. Moustache to the United Nations while Congress is not in session.
I don’t have much to say on this, because it’s so patently undemocratic and absurd that I can’t imagine what needs to be said other than, “Figures.”
However, I just wanted to share with you the funniest description of this possibility, care of Maru the Crankpot:
No-talent assclown John Bolton's hopes for the UN job appear to hinge on whether the unhinged President Stupid flipflops and goes around lawmakers to appoint him temporarily during summer recess.Ha.
Mission: Imprecise
A headline in the Washington Post today declares “Bush Defends Strategy In Iraq, Pledges to ‘Complete the Mission’.” The trouble is that Bush has changed the definition of “mission” so many times, it’s hard to have any confidence in his most recent declarations.Yeesh. I guess that’s the problem with a constructed war rationale easily exposed as phony—makes nailing down a definitive mission a bit of a problem.
THE PRE-WAR MISSION WAS TO RID IRAQ OF WMD…
Bush: “Our mission is clear in Iraq. Should we have to go in, our mission is very clear: disarmament.” [3/6/03]
AFTER THE WAR BEGAN, THE MISSION EXPANDED…
Bush: “Our cause is just, the security of the nations we serve and the peace of the world. And our mission is clear, to disarm Iraq of weapons of mass destruction, to end Saddam Hussein’s support for terrorism, and to free the Iraqi people.” [3/22/03]
Bush: “Our forces have been given a clear mission: to end a regime that threatened its neighbors and the world with weapons of mass destruction and to free a people that had suffered far too long.” [4/14/03]
THEN THE MISSION WAS COMPLETE…
Bush: “On Thursday, I visited the USS Abraham Lincoln, now headed home after the longest carrier deployment in recent history. I delivered good news to the men and women who fought in the cause of freedom: Their mission is complete, and major combat operations in Iraq have ended..” [5/3/03]
BUT THEN IT CONTINUED AGAIN…
Bush: “The United States and our allies will complete our mission in Iraq.” [7/30/03]
THEN THE MISSION WAS TO DEVELOP A FREE IRAQ…
Bush: “That has been our mission all along, to develop the conditions such that a free Iraq will emerge, run by the Iraqi citizens.” [11/4/03]
Bush: “We will see that Iraq is free and self-governing and democratic. We will accomplish our mission.” [5/4/04]
AND TO TRAIN THE IRAQI TROOPS…
Bush: “And our mission is clear there, as well, and that is to train the Iraqis so they can do the fighting; make sure they can stand up to defend their freedoms, which they want to do.” [6/2/05]
NOW, COMPLETION OF THE MISSION IS FAR FROM CLEAR…
Bush: “We’re making progress toward the goal, which is, on the one hand, a political process moving forward in Iraq, and on the other hand, the Iraqis capable of defending themselves… And we will — we will complete this mission for the sake of world peace.” [6/20/05]
The other day I was listening to some rightwing radio show, and a general (Keane?) was being interviewed, and he predicted it would be at least 2 years before we could start pulling out any troops, but more likely 5…based on the mission of not leaving Iraq a total shitpit nightmare for Iraqis.
I'm Shocked... Shocked!!
Gee, whaddaya know.
The latest Hillary-bashing book is full of goddamned lies.
I'm sure the media will be all over this, and really hold the author's feet to the fire when they interview him.
Just watch me hold my breath.
(Via The Liberal Avenger)
(We are the cross-post, we are the children...)
More Douchebaggery from Texas Gov.
Good lord. First he was signing bills in churches, then he was suggesting that Texas queers maybe ought to go live somewhere else, and now the great Christian governor has been caught on tape mocking a reporter and calling him a “mofo.” (Watch the video; full story).
Perry had just completed a series of interviews with local TV stations, and had repeated declined to give KTRK-TV reporter Ted Oberg details of his education proposal. Excerpts from the article follow:Spoken without malice—ha ha, okay. Yeah, when I called Perry a “motherfucking cockwanking scumsucking ratshit douchebag,” that was without malice, too.
After the interview was over and Mr. Perry had said you're welcome and so long, Mr. Oberg acknowledged that Mr. Perry had successfully maintained the secrecy of his plan for another day: "Try as I may, Governor, I guess I can't win this one."
Mr. Perry looked off camera and appeared to mock Mr. Oberg, saying: "Try as I may, governor, I'm just not going to wait that long. ... "
Then the governor added as a sign-off: "Adios, mo-fo."
On Tuesday morning, the station aired the end of the interview. Mr. Oberg said during his report that the governor had called him back and apologized, saying that he had spoken without malice.
Odds on Perry learning from this experience that perhaps his holier-than-thou act is really kind of pathetic and anti-Christian, since we all make mistakes: Slim to none.
Odds on his constituents seeing through his thin veneer to the dark lord of hatred and bigotry hiding underneath: Slim to none.
Odds on any of them caring even if they did see it: Zip.
Mofos.
El Floppo
No, that's not a clown name.
Private Accounts Not in Social Security Bill
Gee, if I had a cocktail right now, I'd raise it in salute.
WASHINGTON - With the acquiescence of their leaders, key House Republicans are drafting Social Security legislation stripped of President Bush's proposed personal accounts financed with payroll taxes and lacking provisions aimed at assuring long-term solvency.
And yet another one of the Lame Duck's pet projects bites the dust.
Either way, the emerging legislation marked the latest blow to Bush, who has said repeatedly he intended to spend the political capital gained in last fall's re-election to win fundamental changes in Social Security. The president has traveled to more than two dozen states since last winter trying to build support. Polls have shown his recommendations generate insufficient popularity to galvanize Republican lawmakers to action.
Instead, with Democrats unified in opposition and threatening to use the issue in the 2006 elections, GOP leaders have been reluctant to act.
*Snicker*
Apart from Bennett, Sen. Jim DeMint, R-S.C., is crafting legislation along the lines of the bill being prepared in the House.
In an interview, DeMint said the measure was designed to mark the first step on a longer road toward transforming Social Security, a recognition that Congress isn't ready to enact everything the president wants.
He, too, indicated the bill was designed to outflank Democrats.
"The party of 'no' will have a hard time saying 'no' to saving Social Security," he said.
It doesn't need to be saved, asshole. The Democrats are the ones that are protecting social security. Sour Grapes.
Go read the whole thing. We still have to keep a close eye on this, but we should consider this a victory against more Bush shenannigans. Well done, everyone.
Update: A side note... does anyone know how much Bush spent on his little whistle-stop tour to put lipstick on his doomed private accounts pig?
More Update: Pam has more, plus some pretty amusing freeper quotes. Here's my favorite:
"Is it just me, or does it feel like the Democrats are in charge?"
You might want to get used to that feeling, Spanky.
(If you want my cross-post, and you think I'm sexy...)
Good News for Queers Like Us
By us, I mean Mr. Shakes and me—that is, international couples, who can only be together through the immigration process.
Legislation was introduced in Congress Tuesday that would treat same-sex couples the same as opposite sex-couples for the purposes of immigration.This is excellent, just brilliant, news. I’m very excited!
The bill, sponsored by Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-NY) in the House and Sen. Pat Leahy (D-Vt) in the Senate, has a large number of bipartisan cosponsors in both chambers.
The Uniting American Families Act was previously named the Permanent Partners Immigration Act which died when the last session of Congress ended.
Nadler said he expected the new measure to fare better because it has broader support.
[…]
At least 16 countries recognize same-sex couples for the purposes of immigration including Australia, Belgium, Brazil, Canada, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Iceland, Israel, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, South Africa, Sweden and the United Kingdom.
His support for exactly this legislation was one of the reasons I supported Howard Dean. He was the only Democratic candidate during the last election who specifically outlined a plan for equal rights in immigration laws on his website.
That this bill has bipartisan support is great—I truly, truly hope it passes. I know the absolute despair of being separated by thousands of miles and a mountain of red tape from the person you love, and the only thing that kept us going was the thought that there was a light at the end of that very dark tunnel. In the age of the internet and cheap international travel, there are more and more couples in this situation, and I am thrilled beyond words that gay couples will be given the same opportunity we were.
Thank you, Representative Nadler! Thank you, Senator Leahy!
Huzzah!
(And a hat tip to Pam.)
Question of the Day
Gary Hart thinks that political parties as we know them are going the way of the dodo, and that we are entering a new political age, wherein traditional political parties will become obsolete, to be replaced with an entirely new political paradigm.
I’m not convinced. I see that in our collective future, but I certainly don’t think we’re on the cusp of that future the way Hart does. And perhaps it’s because of the difference in the way we view Americans. Hart sees:
a nation of independent, socially tolerant, fiscally cautious, environmentally concerned, well-informed, globally-conscious citizens.Really? He hasn’t been hanging out in my neighborhood.
Now, I’m not denigrating small-town red-staters; I happen to be one. You don’t have to be sophisticated to be a good person. But generally speaking, I wouldn’t describe my neighbors as independent, socially tolerant, fiscally cautious, environmentally concerned, well-informed, or globally conscious. The truth of the matter is that even people who aren’t dogma-spewing, bigoted, paycheck-to-paycheck, anti-social program and pro-defense spending, non-recycling, ill-informed, xenophobic, ignorant jerks still tend to have rather limited and poorly informed views of the world. Most Americans are not the cosmopolitans that Hart describes (and that includes plenty of big blue city folks, too). If we were, Welcome to the Neighborhood wouldn’t be airing on network television.
I think that there is indeed lots of disillusionment among Americans regarding the two prominent parties, but if I had to make a wager, I’d say we’ll see a significant third party emergence before we’ll see the end of the party system altogether.
What do you think?
Accountability Schmaccountability
As an appropriate follow-up to Durbin’s apology for calling out the heinous nature of abuses going on at Gitmo, the White House has rejected the proposed creation of an independent commission to investigate abuses of detainees held at Gitmo and elsewhere.
White House spokesman Scott McClellan said the Pentagon has launched 10 major investigations into allegations of abuse, and that system was working well.Oh yeah—like who? Lynndie England? Swell.
“People are being held to account," he said. "And we think that's the way to go about this."
Democrats on Capitol Hill have increasingly called for an independent commission to look into detainee abuses. On Tuesday, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., said a commission is crucial to answering questions about the atmosphere that permitted abuses, troop training and the length of detentions at Guantanamo.Silly Nancy Pelosi. Apparently, she doesn’t know that it’s not the mistreatment of prisoners that undermines our reputation; it’s the reporting of that mistreatment. It’s not pissing on the Qu’ran; it’s announcing that Qu’rans have been pissed on.
"These questions are important because the safety of our country depends on our reputation and how we are viewed, especially in the Muslim world," she said.
And in case there’s any more confusion, let me also clarify that even if you’re one of the jagoff blowhards who lambastes anyone who has the audacity to suggest that perhaps the treatment of prisoners at Gitmo et. al. might be losing us the PR war in Iraq, you still have absolutely no responsibility not to make a mockery of it. Especially if it makes ya a few bucks.
Durbin Apologizes
Under fire from Republicans and some fellow Democrats, Sen. Dick Durbin apologized Tuesday for comparing American interrogators at the Guantanamo Bay prison camp to Nazis and other historically infamous figures.Just for shits and grins, let's revisit what Senator Durbin actually said. He read this FBI report on abuses at Gitmo:
"Some may believe that my remarks crossed the line," the Illinois Democrat said. "To them I extend my heartfelt apologies."
His voice quaking and tears welling in his eyes, the No. 2 Democrat in the Senate also apologized to any soldiers who felt insulted by his remarks.
"They're the best. I never, ever intended any disrespect for them," he said.
On a couple of occasions, I entered interview rooms to find a detainee chained hand and foot in a fetal position to the floor, with no chair, food, or water. Most times they urinated or defecated on themselves, and had been left there for 18-24 hours or more. On one occasion, the air conditioning had been turned down so far and the temperature was so cold in the room, that the barefooted detainee was shaking with cold... On another occasion, the [air conditioner] had been turned off, making the temperature in the unventilated room well over 100 degrees. The detainee was almost unconscious on the floor, with a pile of hair next to him. He had apparently been literally pulling his hair out throughout the night. On another occasion, not only was the temperature unbearably hot, but extremely loud rap music was being played in the room, and had been since the day before, with the detainee chained hand and foot in the fetal position on the tile floor.Then he said:
If I read this to you and did not tell you that it was an FBI agent describing what Americans had done to prisoners in their control, you would most certainly believe this must have been done by Nazis, Soviets in their gulags, or some mad regime--Pol Pot or others--that had no concern for human beings. Sadly, that is not the case. This was the action of Americans in the treatment of their prisoners.In spite of the yowling to the contrary, Durbin never suggested that what was happening at Gitmo was of the same degree as what happened at the hands of the Nazis, Soviets, or Pol Pot. What he said was that, lacking context, any right-minded person would have assumed that description of prisoner treatment was from an accounting of what happened in one of those regimes. And he was fucking right.
Making the point that what we're doing is leading us down the same path to the much worse offenses committed by the examples he offered is worth making, if we're at all interested in not becoming as bad as Nazis, Soviets, or Pol Pot.
And the saddest part about all this is that people who can't discern the difference are taking us one step closer to that madness.
Welcome to the Neighborhood
Nothing makes me happier than to see the worst of Americans’ prejudice, xenophobia, intolerance, and ignorance displayed in the form of entertainment. The bad thing about the Jerry Springer Show was that all the fuckwits who graced his stage could often be too easily dismissed as imposters, fakes. This, on the other hand, sounds as though it might be pretty convincing, and thereby extremely helpful in solidifying our nation’s reputation as a collection of ass-backwards, unrepentant bigots:
A new reality series in which three white, self-described "Christian" families get to pick their new neighbors from among a group of minority families is already drawing fire.Someone who’s seen those first two episodes, Damon Romine, the Los Angeles-based entertainment media director for the Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation, said, in what I can only imagine is quite the understatement:
And it hasn't even aired yet.
The show is called "Welcome to the Neighborhood" and it's coming to ABC July 10.
"I will not tolerate a homosexual couple coming into this neighborhood," one of the neighbors, Jim Stewart, says on the show about one of the candidate families — a gay couple with an adopted baby.
"I want a family similar to what we are," asserts another neighbor, John Bellamy, in a statement that would seem to dismiss at least six out of the seven candidate families.
The diverse group includes African-American, Caucasian, Korean, Latino and gay families, plus one family in which husband and wife are heavily tattooed, and another in which mom and dad are devoted to the practice of Wicca, sometimes known as witchcraft or paganism.
The show's first two episodes are filled with statements such as those above.
Watching three privileged couples vote to get rid of disenfranchised families they don't like is really disturbing.The entire concept, which, in essence, makes a mockery of very real issues such as racism, homophobia, religious intolerance, and housing discrimination, just to name a few, is really disturbing. And I can’t decide who’s more loathsome—the white, self-described "Christian" families who agreed to be paid bigots or the diverse group who agreed to play the foil to their bigotry and put up with such heinous judgment for the chance to win a stinking house.
"Welcome to the Neighborhood" was filmed over a four-week period last winter in a suburban housing development in Austin, Texas.It’s quite an accomplishment that this show seems rife with the potential to be equally demeaning to members of multiple races, adherents of several religions, gays, straights, squares, punks, and probably some other subgroups not identified in this article. Truly shocking. A pitiful commentary on the state of our culture.
The winning family gets a four-bedroom, three-bath home, plus furnishings, upgrades and two years' worth of property taxes paid for them — a prize worth somewhere in the neighborhood of $900,000, estimates two of the show's executive producers, Jay Blumenfield and Tony Marsh.
If you’d like to tell ABC how much they suck, here’s the info:
ABC, Inc.
500 S. Buena Vista Street
Burbank, CA 91521-4551
Phone number: (818) 460-7477
Audience Relations Department at netaudr@abc.com
(Hat tip Pam.)
Downing Street Stuff
RJ Eskow writes an open letter to the members of the Big Brass Alliance, wanting to know if perhaps it’s time for some old-fashioned shoe leather.
Rob at Captain Oblivious suggests checking out this editorial. I agree.
The King of Zembla points us in the direction of Empire Burlesque, and notes:
Chris Floyd of Empire Burlesque has reposted an article he wrote in September 2004 "detailing the incontrovertible evidence of deliberate deception by the "Coalition" leaders in the invasion of Iraq. The material, all in the public domain, was pre-Downing Street Memo -- but did draw upon equally damning official UK material leaked and reported well before the U.S. election of 2004." BBA members might find it entertaining, especially in light of the wingnut campaign to paint the DSM and related memos as fraudulent.AfterDowningStreet.org’s David Swanson asks the question, Remember When Bush's Lies Weren't "Old News"?, and answers “Neither do I.” You have to check it out. Not only is it a great piece, but the floating Milbank heads nearly ended me!
And Crooks and Liars has the video of the DSM being discussed on Hardball last night. I haven’t had a chance to watch it yet, but I’ve heard mixed reviews.
If you’ve seen something else interesting, leave it in comments. I’m busy again today, so I haven’t much time to look around.
Best Defense I’ve Read of Dick Durbin’s Statements
He totally gets it:
The moral question is not simply of degree - how widespread and systematic is this kind of inhumanity? It is of kind: is this the kind of behavior more associated with despots than with democracies? Of course it is. When a country starts treating its prisoners like animals, it has lost its moral bearings; and, in the case of the United States, is also breaking its own laws (and, in this case, the president has declared himself above the law). … I'm sick of hearing justifications that the enemy is worse. This is news? This is what now passes for analysis? … This administration - by design, improvisation, desperation, arrogance, incompetence, and willful blindness - has enabled this to occur. They must be held accountable until this cancer is rooted out for good. It has metastasized enough already.See here and then here.
Who is he? Conservative Andrew Sullivan.
