Wednesday, November 30, 2005
“The President is more determined than ever to stay the course,” [a] former defense official said. “He doesn’t feel any pain. Bush is a believer in the adage ‘People may suffer and die, but the Church advances.’ ” He said that the President had become more detached, leaving more issues to Karl Rove and Vice-President Cheney. “They keep him in the gray world of religious idealism, where he wants to be anyway,” the former defense official said. Bush’s public appearances, for example, are generally scheduled in front of friendly audiences, most often at military bases. Four decades ago, President Lyndon Johnson, who was also confronted with an increasingly unpopular war, was limited to similar public forums. “Johnson knew he was a prisoner in the White House,” the former official said, “but Bush has no idea.”
We are so screwed.
Tuesday, November 29, 2005
No more "high road". This is combat. I want Democrats with spine. I want victory over the right-wing bastards that are destroying my country. If the Republicans want to get down and dirty, I'm ready to get lower and dirtier. Nothing illegal--nothing dishonest--but I want results. If it takes being a sumbitch and exposing them for the corrupt, treasonous, lying garbage they are, so be it.
Let slip the dogs of war.
BTW, don't buy the smear being leveled at Democratic Sen. Byron Dorgan of ND.
Sunday, November 27, 2005
Finally, and most importantly, if Clinton used the "same" intelligence to bomb Iraq in 1998, then wouldn't it be a natural question to ask whether the 1998 bombings destroyed any facilities/capabilities that Saddam Hussein had at that time? Well, it would be natural, say, for a 5-year old, but not for the Great Misleaders and their sheep.
As Bob Somerby highlighted back then (emphasis mine):
On the June 15  Meet the Press, Wesley Clark offered an intriguing thought about those AWOL WMD:
RUSSERT: Was there an intelligence failure? Was the intelligence hyped, as Senator Joe Biden said? Was the president misled, or did he mislead the American people?
CLARK: Well, several things. First of all, all of us in the community who read intelligence believe that Saddam wanted these capabilities and he had some. We struck very hard in December of ’98, did everything we knew, all of his facilities. I think it was an effective set of strikes. Tony Zinni commanded that, called Operation Desert Fox, and I think that set them back a long ways.
In other words, Clinton took effective and carefully delineated action to weaken Saddam, probably crippling his WMD program. Bush went in like a bull in a china shop. I'll give you one guess which approach I think made more sense.
A front page of USA Today last week showed it all in graphic detail. If we continue on the same track we are today, our annual $319 billion deficit will be more than $4 trillion in 2050, when our grandkids are nearing retirement.
"We face a demographic tsunami," insists David Walker, the U.S. comptroller general. He compares the United States to Rome before the fall of the empire. The country faces deficits in its budget, its balance of payments, its savings and its leadership, he told USA Today.
This is both tragic and unconscionable. America will bitterly regret having "elected" Bush president.
Or more precisely, having allowed him and his cronies to seize power in 2000.
Saturday, November 26, 2005
Is the administration lying about its lies? That many of the arguments in favor of the war were false is beyond question. Nor can there be any serious doubt that the new argument that it is irresponsible to question the old arguments is also false. But if a lie is a conscious effort to deceive, then the charge that the president and the men around him deliberately lied and are now lying again, then that issue must be left to heaven. It is enough to say they spread falsehoods three years because they had made up their minds that there had to be a war and are now spreading falsehoods about the original falsehoods. The president is not a man who likes to admit he was wrong. Therefore, one must cover up the mistakes.
How can America survive in the hands of people so morally bankrupt and dishonest?
(Courtesy of Lance Ehlers at Slowcurl.)
Friday, November 25, 2005
For his entire career, he sought untrammeled power. The Bush presidency and 9/11 finally gave it to him - and he's not about to give it up.
The hallmark of the Dick Cheney administration is its illegitimacy. Its essential method is bypassing established lines of authority; its goal is the concentration of unaccountable presidential power. When it matters, the regular operations of the CIA, Defense Department and State Department have been sidelined
You really need to read this.
Again: in any serious society Coulter would be rotting in an institution for the criminally insane. The very fact that she repeatedly is allowed to air her views on national television is a sign of how low public discourse in America has really fallen.
Thursday, November 24, 2005
Wednesday, November 23, 2005
Bush KNEW that Iraq hadn't been involved, and yet he invaded in part because he claimed that in so doing he was fighting terrorism. The Administration's paid liars hinted and implied REPEATEDLY that Saddam was implicated in the attack on America. Many Americans still believe this, due in large part to Republican lies.
An outrage, pure an simple.
Tuesday, November 22, 2005
The 2000 election was a Republican coup d'etat and Scalia was a part of it. Is there any wonder that he would defend it so ardently now?
By the way, as a reminder, here, to me, is the key moment in the Florida recount: a riot staged by Republican goons to stop the Miami Board of Elections from completing its work. Check out the identities of the rioters.
Sunday, November 20, 2005
All the talk about Republicans being big supporters of the military is bullshit. If there’s someone insulting a vet and calling him a coward, chances are it’s a Republican who’s never served. If there’s a choice between money for shit people really need or a sexy new weapon system built by a company that donates heavily to the Party, the company will profit.
Heh heh. Suck on that, Karl.
"I think this has the potential to be the biggest scandal in Congress in over a century," said Thomas E. Mann, a Congressional specialist at the Brookings Institution. "I've been around Washington for 35 years, watching Congress, and I've never seen anything approaching Abramoff for cynicism and chutzpah in proposing quid pro quos to members of Congress."
It's time to clean out the Republican crooks, liars, thugs, and con artists. This is all a prelude to the Big Clean Out that's going to take place on Tuesday, 7 November 2006, when the American people elect a Democratic Congress.
Saturday, November 19, 2005
It's time to take this son of a bitch out.
Rove, first of all, is a draft dodger who avoided military service and yet loves to attack people who have served if they dare to cross him. Second, he's a piece of human garbage who learned his dirty tricks working for Nixon. Third, every campaign in which he's been involved has gotten unbelievably ugly. Rove spread lies about Bush's opponent in 1994, Ann Richards, deliberately spreading rumors in gay-hostile Texas that Richards was a lesbian. He smeared a Democratic candidate for the Alabama Supreme Court by spreading rumors that the Democrat was a child molester. He personally coordinated the horrible attacks on John McCain in the 2000 South Carolina primary campaign. (I lost all respect for McCain--almost--when he meekly supported Bush in 2004.) Rove personally coordinated the Swift Boat bullshit against John Kerry, with Bush's personal approval. And now Rove is attempting to destroy yet another veteran. (What is it with these chickenhawk bastards like Rove and Limbaugh? Anger and guilt because they know what gutless cowards they actually are?) But whatever the case, one thing is clear: ROVE MUST BE POLITICALLY DESTROYED FOR ALL TIME. Democrats must attack him by name, relentlessly, angrily, ruthlessly, incessantly. There must be no let up on the assault against Rove. Every political weapon must be used against him. Democrats have a reputation of not being willing to fight back as hard and as dirty as the Republicans do. Well, this Democrat, J. Miller the Rampant, isn't a Democrat who just takes it. I FIGHT BACK. My blog may be tiny, but with whatever voice I have, I will call for Rove's destruction. Rove is the brains, heart, and soul of the utterly corrupt and morally bankrupt Republican Party. Tear him down, and you decapitate the Republican Right. Use any dirt you have on him. Attack him by name on the Sunday talk shows. Start the rumor mill going against him. Shed light on this lousy little cockroach every chance you get. And above all, push for Patrick Fitzgerald to stay focused on Rove and his traitorous actions in the Plame Affair.
This is it, Democrats. A good man is under attack by Rove. What do you intend to do about it? I'll be waiting.
And I'll be fighting back.
UPDATE: Check this column out from the LA Times.
Friday, November 18, 2005
By the way, check out these disgusting, filthy remarks by Republican scum Jean Schmidt during the debate on a phony resolution about the war the Rethugs are pushing. Remember, she's talking about a guy who was in the Marines for over 30 years:
The fiery, emotional debate climaxed when Rep. Jean Schmidt, R-Ohio, the most junior member of the House, told of a phone call she received from a Marine colonel.
``He asked me to send Congress a message - stay the course. He also asked me to send Congressman Murtha a message - that cowards cut and run, Marines never do,'' Schmidt said.
Garbage. Just outright human garbage, that's what Jean Schmidt is.
The strategy is clear: Wrap Dubya around the throat of every Republican candidate for office in 2006--and watch the GOP sink.
Thursday, November 17, 2005
The Georgia Republican Party: Keeping the Spirit of the Klan Alive in the 21st Century.
(See also this larger story in Kos that I found originally)
Tuesday, November 15, 2005
The administration had little company in saying that Iraq was actively trying to build a nuclear weapon. The evidence for this claim was a dubious report about an attempt in 1999 to buy uranium from Niger, later shown to be false, and the infamous aluminum tubes story. That was dismissed at the time by analysts with real expertise.
The Bush administration was also alone in making the absurd claim that Iraq was in league with Al Qaeda and somehow connected to the 9/11 terrorist attacks. That was based on two false tales. One was the supposed trip to Prague by Mohamed Atta, a report that was disputed before the war and came from an unreliable drunk. The other was that Iraq trained Qaeda members in the use of chemical and biological weapons. Before the war, the Defense Intelligence Agency concluded that this was a deliberate fabrication by an informer
Bush's enemies (like me) are not going to let him get away with twisting and distorting the record. We're going to nail his lies--relentlessly.
Monday, November 14, 2005
Did you see that?? Less than 10% say they want a Congressional candidate who agees with Bush on most major issues?? This is borderline cataclysmic. This is the stuff of potential Democratic landslides.
If the Democrats play their cards right.
If the Democrats don't let the Naked Emperor off the hook.
If the Democrats guts it up and act like Democrats.
P.S. And this must be making the radical rightwingers just writhe in agony:
A 53% majority say they trust what Bush says less than they trusted previous presidents while they were in office. In a specific comparison with President Clinton, those surveyed by 48%-36% say they trust Bush less.
HA HA HA HA HA HA HA
Damned right. Now that Bush and his fellow thugs have been shown to have been disastrously wrong, they're trying to say that they didn't pull the "inside info" trick on everyone. That's perhaps the most brazen lie of all.
And they're not going to get by with it.
Sunday, November 13, 2005
[Among Bush's lies and distortions]
Longstanding effort to convince the American people that Iraq maintained ties to al Qaida and may have played a role in 9/11. This was always just a plain old lie. (And if you want to see where the real fights with the Intelligence Community came up, it was always on the terror tie angle and much less on WMD.) The president and his chief advisors tried to leverage Americans' horror over 9/11 to gain support for attacking Iraq. Simple: lying to the public the president was sworn to protect.
Remember, a substantial percentage of the American people are still convinced that Saddam orchestrated the 9/11 attacks. That misconception is OVERWHELMINGLY because Bush and his lying thugs kept spreading this lie. After the evidence became too overwhelming to ignore, Bush was forced (in a low-key statement not given the attention it deserved) to admit that he had been wrong. But the damage had been done.
Read Marshall's whole post. It's an excellent summary of the disgusting tactics Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, and all the rest of this contemptible administration used to drag us into an unneccesary war.
Almost three years ago we went into Iraq to remove what we were told -- and what many of us believed and argued -- was a threat to America. But in fact we now know that Iraq did not have weapons of mass destruction when our forces invaded Iraq in 2003. The intelligence was deeply flawed and, in some cases, manipulated to fit a political agenda.
The argument for going to war with Iraq was based on intelligence that we now know was inaccurate. The information the American people were hearing from the president -- and that I was being given by our intelligence community -- wasn't the whole story. Had I known this at the time, I never would have voted for this war.
George Bush won't accept responsibility for his mistakes. Along with Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld, he has made horrible mistakes at almost every step: failed diplomacy; not going in with enough troops; not giving our forces the equipment they need; not having a plan for peace.
Because of these failures, Iraq is a mess and has become a far greater threat than it ever was. It is now a haven for terrorists, and our presence there is draining the goodwill our country once enjoyed, diminishing our global standing. It has made fighting the global war against terrorist organizations more difficult, not less.
Well said! Damned right! Sigh. If only John Edwards was Vice President right now, America could hold its head high. Instead, we have a vicious criminal in that office, a man so morally bankrupt that I sincerely believe him to be the most genuinely evil leader in our country's history.
Democrats, nationalize the 2006 election. Make it a referendum on Bush, Cheney, and DeLay--and then watch us win BIG.
Saturday, November 12, 2005
- Iraq did NOT have weapons of mass destruction.
- The intelligence data on this issue were manipulated by the Bush-Cheney crowd.
- The UN inspectors who said there were no weapons were right.
- Hans Blix was right.
- Scott Ritter was right.
- Bush, Cheney, and the NeoCon boys were looking for an excuse to invade Iraq from day one of the Administration in January 2001.
- The 9/11 attacks gave the Administration a perfect excuse to attack Iraq, on no evidence of Iraqi involvement in the attacks whatsoever.
- The planning for the aftermath of the Iraqi war was atrocious to the point of criminal negligence.
It is this set of issues, above all, which is hammering Bush's approval ratings down. Our country's involvement in Iraq is HIS FAULT. The lousy planning for the war is HIS FAULT. The mess we're involved in is HIS FAULT. His lies, his incompetence, his deception, and his moral bankruptcy have all led us here.
In an ideal world, the Democrats would capture big enough majorities in both houses of Congress in 2006 to throw him and Torture Master Cheney out the door.
Let's see if we can live our dream.
Friday, November 11, 2005
If the pragmatic gains in terms of information yielded are dubious, the loss to America in terms of public opinion are clear and horrifically large. Abu Ghraib was a gift to the insurgency in Iraq; Guantánamo Bay and its dubious military commissions, now being examined by the Supreme Court, have acted as recruiting sergeants for al-Qaeda around the world. In the cold war, America championed the Helsinki human-rights accords. This time, the world's most magnificent democracy is struggling against vile terrorists who thought nothing of slaughtering thousands of innocent civilians—and yet the administration has somehow contrived to turn America's own human-rights record into a subject of legitimate debate.
My God, how did America come to be in the control of such vile people, people who don't have the first inkling of what our country stands for? Thanks to The Economist for saying it straight.
Oh, and by the way. The most current Rasmussen poll has Santorum 20 points behind Pennsylvania's next U.S. Senator, Bob Casey, Jr. Santorum's not just going to lose--he's going to be trounced and humiliated. Heh heh heh.
It's unrealistic to expect Bush to say anything different, anything that is a response to reality. He's a puppet, a wind-up doll -- he can't say anything he's not programmed for. We might as well have "Tickle Me Elmo" as president.
Republicans Voted Against Veterans' Health Care FIVE TIMES This Year, Despite Warnings of Budget Shortfall. Before the Department of Veterans Affairs announced a $1 billion budget shortfall earlier this year, Senate Republicans voted twice against $1.98 billion for veterans' health care, while also opposing a proposal to increase veterans' health care funding by $2.8 billion. And last month, Republicans said "no" to keeping veterans' health care funding in line with inflation and population growth. These votes all came despite at least five warnings from Sen. Patty Murray that the proposed federal funding for veterans' programs would not be enough to cover costs. [Vote #89, 4/12/05; Vote #90, 4/12/05; Vote #55, 3/16/05; Vote #251, 10/5/05; CQ Today, 10/5/05; U.S. Senate Committee on Veterans Affairs Press Release, 6/23/05; Office of Sen. Patty Murray; Tacoma News Tribune, 6/29/05]
The Republicans are also attempting to cripple the Veterans Administration. I posted this last month; it's time to post it again.
And need I remind you about the lies that put our service people in the line of fire in Iraq? The lack of adequate Humvee and body armor for them once they got there? The rotten planning for post-war Iraq that has put our service people in grave danger every day? The disgusting lies about a genuine American hero, Pat Tillman, whose tragic death was exploited by right-wing Republicans for political gain?
Veterans, all you've gotten from Bush and his lying thugs is bullshit. He doesn't give a damn about you except as props for his photo-ops and Republican campaign commercials. It's time to stand with the people who have ALWAYS stood with you, have NEVER let you down, and WILL NEVER let you down: The Democratic Party.
Is there any way in which this disgusting bastard Cheney has not harmed our country?
For more, check here.
Thursday, November 10, 2005
At [a] press conference [Cardinal Paul Poupard] was discussing the issue of evolution, which is the critical dividing line between science and religion. Charles Darwin’s On the Origin of Species shook religious belief when it was first published in 1859 in a way that Isaac Newton’s equally important Principia had not shaken the faith of 1687.
In The Times Martin Penner reported the cardinal’s argument. He had said that the description in Genesis of the Creation was “perfectly compatible” with Darwin’s theory of evolution, if the Bible were read properly. “Fundamentalists want to give a scientific meaning to words that had no scientific aim.”
He argued that the real message of Genesis was that the Universe did not make itself, and had a creator. “Science and theology act in different fields, each in its own.” In Rome, the immediate reaction was that this was a Vatican rejection of the fundamentalist American doctrine of “intelligent design”. No doubt the Vatican does want to separate itself from American creationists, but the significance surely goes further than that. This is not another Galileo case; the teachings of the Church have never imposed a literal interpretation of the language of the Bible; that was a Protestant mistake. Nor did the Church condemn the theory of evolution, though it did and does reject neo-Darwinism when that is made specifically atheist.
Well said. More intelligent and thoughtful Christians need to add their voices in the increasingly vocal chorus that is denouncing the absurd creationist fairy tales of the religious right.
What kind of people are we dealing with here?
Historians will long ponder how the least qualified presidential candidate since William Jennings Bryan in 1896 was "elected" president in 2000. They will study the breathtaking venality and incompetence of Bush and his cronies at some length. And they may just see 2005 as the year the American people began to wake up from their dream world--and saved themselves.
Wednesday, November 09, 2005
And yes, the story was known before the 2000 election. And yes, it makes what the Clintons were accused of in Whitewater look penny-ante. And no, the mainstream press did not make an issue of it.
He's simply a lying, crooked little bastard.
Arnold Schwarzenegger's propositions all went down to defeat in Kaleefornia. The Gropenator is through. If he doesn't decide against running for re-election in 2006, he'll be voted out of office, and I have a hunch he knows that. (Robert Scheer weighs in here.)
Bush's popularity ratings are at record lows and going down. The Republicans are nervous and uncertain. Now is not the time to spend congratulating ourselves on yesterday's victories. Now is the time to start getting ready for the big show on Tuesday, 7 November 2006. The goals must be crystal clear in our minds:
Win control of the U.S. House of Representatives. There is no reason why the Democrats cannot gain 35-40 new seats.
Win control 0f the U.S. Senate. Republican seats are vulnerable in Rhode Island, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Missouri, Montana, Arizona, Tennessee, and maybe more.
Win control of the Governor's mansions in New York, Florida, California, and any number of other states.
Win control of state legislatures across the country.
Win county offices in every state in the country.
There is no reason why we can't. There is every reason why we must.
Tuesday, November 08, 2005
Where in hell did Cheney get his reputation for competence? He's an out and out disaster, as incompetent of a fool as has ever presumed to govern. Add to this his total lack of any moral compass whatsoever and his hideous, vicious personality, and you get a sense of what this blood-stained son of a bitch really is.
UPDATE: Dan Drezner piles on, too.
The message is simple: Vote Democratic from top to bottom. Send a message. Today.
Remember, it's OK for the "Christian Coalition's" churches to push for Republicans.
It's OK for right-wing churches to hand out pro-Republican "voting guides" in church prior to elections.
It's OK for Robertson, Reed, and Falwell to be intrinsic parts of the Republican Party.
But it's not all right for one church's leadership to criticize Dear Leader.
This is an outrage.
Sunday, November 06, 2005
How to exploit this advantage? This passage lays out the challenge--and the opportunity:
With incumbent re-election rates usually over 90 percent, it takes a nationalized congressional election — with a differentiated, unifying theme and anti-incumbent sentiment — to create real change. The template is the Republicans' realigning election of 1994, when they gained 52 House seats and the control they still enjoy today.
Yes! Nationalize the 2006 Elections. Make them a referendum on Bush, Cheney, and the entire rat-bastard Republican Party. Find a unified message and pound it relentlessly.
Democrats, grow a spine. Fight Alito. Fight the new round of tax cuts for the wealthy. Continue to demand answers about what went wrong in Iraq. Flush Cheney out of hiding and make him answer questions in public. The majority of Americans are waiting for you to take a stand--DO IT!
If conservatives dislike Dick Durbin's comparison of American practices to those of Hitler and Stalin, they should make clear to Dick Cheney that America doesn't condone the practices of Hitler and Stalin. Because apparently, the vice president of the United States does condone them. Vigorously. It's enough to make any decent human being puke.
Well said, Kevin. Well said.
Casey for Senate '06
Saturday, November 05, 2005
ALITO? HELL NO!
Again: these right-wing bastards thought it was worth turning the United States upside down for years at a time because Bill Clinton lied about sex in a civil suit, but they'll lie and distort and smear tirelessly when their own side lies the United States into a disastrous war and commits treason in order to destroy one of that war's critics. The Plame Affair reveals them in all their despicable reality.
With so many controversial provisions, the House measure is forcing Republican leaders to scramble for support in what could be the most difficult vote of the year. Some Republican moderates are balking at cuts to anti-poverty programs, especially in light of a $70 billion tax cut that could come to a vote soon after the budget bill, more than wiping out the first bill's deficit reduction.
This is the tenth paragraph of the article, by the way.
The Republicans: screw the poor, feed the rich, drive the nation into bankruptcy.
And you wonder why I despise them?
Friday, November 04, 2005
Cheney is a hideous, loathsome, repulsive excuse for a human being. He wants us to morally be no better than our enemies.
By the way, when is the press going to get aggressive about getting some damned answers out of this son of a bitch? Cheney is the most secretive Vice President in history. His arrogance, his cruelty, his dishonesty, and his contempt for the American people are unparalleled. He despises us. I guess we feel the same way about him.
"The wackos get their information through the Christian right, Christian radio, mail, the internet and telephone trees," Scanlon wrote in the memo, which was read into the public record at a hearing of the Senate Indian Affairs Committee. "Simply put, we want to bring out the wackos to vote against something and make sure the rest of the public lets the whole thing slip past them."
The Wackos. Did you see that everyone? Did the Republican Right's soldiers see that? The Republican leadership SNEERS AT THEM and thinks they're a bunch of suckers. The Republican leaders use the Religious Right's members as tools--to be discarded, presumably, when no longer needed.
Wednesday, November 02, 2005
Democrats, get a spine. (The closed session Senate thing yesterday was a good sign.) This lying, incompetent little weasel is WEAK AND VULNERABLE. Pound him relentlessly. Pound Cheney just as hard. Hit every weakness these sons of bitches have. Pound the whole damned corrupt, rotten, lying Republican Party. The American people are ready to stand with you, Democrats--GIVE THEM A REASON TO.
Face it--the only people really hot for this guy are the firebreathers on the Radical Right, who apparently believe themselves to be accountable to no one. Bush, being the coward that he is, caved in on the Miers nomination at the behest of these lunatics (so much for every nominee getting an "up or down" vote). Now he and the American Taliban are trying to foist a judge on us who is every bit as much of a far right authoritarian as Scalia. And to that I say,
ALITO? HELL NO!
Alito on the Supreme Court will be a consistent vote against workers rights. That is a clear message if you look over his history on the Third Circuit Court of Appeals. What is striking about Alito is that he is so hostile even to the basic right of workers to have a day in court, much less interpreting the law in their favor.
[In a number of cases]Alito dissented from a majority decision of the Third Circuit, cases where his views were more conservative than the overall panel. They cover minimum wage, discrimination, retirement, public employee rights, and interpretations of union labor law.
There are other cases as well, where Alito wrote anti-worker majority decisions, as in his opinion to exempt public employers from the Family and Medical Leave Act (a principle that the Supreme Court subsequently overruled, putting him to the right of William Rehnquist) [Emphasis added.]
To the right of Rehnquist? To that I say
ALITO? HELL NO!