Ha.Ha.Ha! President Bush went down to Florida today to campaign for Republican gubernatorial nominee Charlie Crist and Crist ran the other way.
(AP) -- The White House did not hide its irritation Monday at Florida GOP gubernatorial candidate Charlie Crist for ducking President Bush at a campaign rally in the Republican-friendly Panhandle.
You really can't blame him for not wanting to be around a guy with a 35 percent approval rating.
Monday, November 06, 2006
Dirty politics
Here is a low-life dirty trick that unsurprisingly is coming from the GOP:
Sources in Bergen County are reporting that an autodial robocall is being made that starts out sounding like a positive Bob Menendez message. If you hang up, it repeatedly calls you back. If you listen all the way to the end, it finishes by saying that Menendez is an embezzler and under criminal investigation.
This is a voter suppression tactic being used nationwide by the GOP. Initially callers will think they are hearing a call from the Menendez campaign asking for support. If they hang up, it will repeatedly call them back. The intention is to annoy the voter so much that they no longer support the candidate. For those who actually listen to the entire call, they are presented with a series of lies and smears against Menendez, also with the intention of suppressing turnout. It's a win-win tactic for them.
The NRCC is doing the same exact thing in Pennsylvania, New Hampshire and at least 53 other races across the country.
Sources in Bergen County are reporting that an autodial robocall is being made that starts out sounding like a positive Bob Menendez message. If you hang up, it repeatedly calls you back. If you listen all the way to the end, it finishes by saying that Menendez is an embezzler and under criminal investigation.
This is a voter suppression tactic being used nationwide by the GOP. Initially callers will think they are hearing a call from the Menendez campaign asking for support. If they hang up, it will repeatedly call them back. The intention is to annoy the voter so much that they no longer support the candidate. For those who actually listen to the entire call, they are presented with a series of lies and smears against Menendez, also with the intention of suppressing turnout. It's a win-win tactic for them.
The NRCC is doing the same exact thing in Pennsylvania, New Hampshire and at least 53 other races across the country.
Sunday, November 05, 2006
The E-N hates Billy Joel
I was inspired to write a letter to the editor of the E-N today in reaction to this incredibly lame editorial.
Is it now the consensus view of the San Antonio Express-News editorial board that Billy Joel sucks?
What gives with that editorial last Saturday complaining about the Rock Hall of Fame? That had to be one of the worst editorials I have ever seen in any paper. Did the editorial writer set out just to pick a fight, because that's about all they succeeded in doing. They certainly didn't have any constructive suggestion on how to fix the Hall of Fame balloting and selection process that they are so unhappy with.
If the editorial had simply been about the unworthiness of the Dave Clark Five to enter the Hall of Fame, I would have been OK with it. But where do they get off throwing Van Halen into the mix? A personal grudge against David Lee Roth? They diss the Dave Clark Five as a band that "sounded as if they were playing air guitar." I'm not sure what that is supposed to mean exactly, but there is probably no guitarist who inspired more kids to play air guitar than Eddie Van Halen. So why diss Van Halen? The editorial does not say.
But if Van Halen is not worthy of admittance to the Hall of Fame, who is? The editorial writer thinks some worthy candidates include the Stooges and the Ronettes. Excuse me?! Name one song by the Ronettes other than "Be My Baby." Yeah, I didn't think so. And the Stooges? Maybe if there were a punk hall of fame. The pioneering punk band featured lead singer Iggy Pop whose claim to fame is that he would smear himself with peanut butter on stage and cut himself with broken bottles. Yep, definite Hall of Fame material there.
And then there is this ridiculous slam against Billy Joel at the end of the editorial with no explanation. The editorial writer who wants to induct The Stooges and The Ronettes thinks that Billy Joel, the All-American troubedeaur, is an unworthy Hall inductee. The man was a hit machine throughout the 1970s, '80s and into the '90s. He has sold more than 100 million records and is the sixth best-selling artist in the U.S. My God, what does one have to do to get into the Rock Hall of Fame?
This reminds me of the movie critic who once gave thumbs down to "Lord of the Rings" the same year that he gave a big thumbs up to "Jackass: The Movie."
Is it now the consensus view of the San Antonio Express-News editorial board that Billy Joel sucks?
What gives with that editorial last Saturday complaining about the Rock Hall of Fame? That had to be one of the worst editorials I have ever seen in any paper. Did the editorial writer set out just to pick a fight, because that's about all they succeeded in doing. They certainly didn't have any constructive suggestion on how to fix the Hall of Fame balloting and selection process that they are so unhappy with.
If the editorial had simply been about the unworthiness of the Dave Clark Five to enter the Hall of Fame, I would have been OK with it. But where do they get off throwing Van Halen into the mix? A personal grudge against David Lee Roth? They diss the Dave Clark Five as a band that "sounded as if they were playing air guitar." I'm not sure what that is supposed to mean exactly, but there is probably no guitarist who inspired more kids to play air guitar than Eddie Van Halen. So why diss Van Halen? The editorial does not say.
But if Van Halen is not worthy of admittance to the Hall of Fame, who is? The editorial writer thinks some worthy candidates include the Stooges and the Ronettes. Excuse me?! Name one song by the Ronettes other than "Be My Baby." Yeah, I didn't think so. And the Stooges? Maybe if there were a punk hall of fame. The pioneering punk band featured lead singer Iggy Pop whose claim to fame is that he would smear himself with peanut butter on stage and cut himself with broken bottles. Yep, definite Hall of Fame material there.
And then there is this ridiculous slam against Billy Joel at the end of the editorial with no explanation. The editorial writer who wants to induct The Stooges and The Ronettes thinks that Billy Joel, the All-American troubedeaur, is an unworthy Hall inductee. The man was a hit machine throughout the 1970s, '80s and into the '90s. He has sold more than 100 million records and is the sixth best-selling artist in the U.S. My God, what does one have to do to get into the Rock Hall of Fame?
This reminds me of the movie critic who once gave thumbs down to "Lord of the Rings" the same year that he gave a big thumbs up to "Jackass: The Movie."
Friday, November 03, 2006
The Party of Family Values
It looks like the Republican/Evangelicals have another Jimmy Swaggart/Jim Baker scandal on their hands.
The president of the National Association of Evangelicals resigned Thursday after denying an accusation by a male prostitute that the pastor paid him for sex over three years.
The Rev. Ted Haggard said he is also temporarily stepping aside from the pulpit of his church in Colorado Springs, Colorado, pending an internal investigation by the church.
The National Association of Evangelicals is an umbrella group for more than 45,000 churches and some 30 million members across the country.
The word is that Haggard has confessed to elders in his congregation that at least part of the allegations are true. The confession came after a long-night of waterboarding overseen by Vice President Dick Cheney.
Seriously, though, this is a huge deal just days before the midterm elections. Joshua Micah Marshall calls it “the conservative equivalent of Jesse Jackson getting caught wearing a hood at a Klan cross burning.”
And here’s some more breaking news from the party of family values:
ALLENTOWN, Pennsylvania (AP) -- A Republican congressman accused of abusing his ex-mistress agreed to pay her about $500,000 in a settlement last year that contained a powerful incentive for her to keep quiet until after Election Day, a person familiar with the terms of the deal told The Associated Press.
The president of the National Association of Evangelicals resigned Thursday after denying an accusation by a male prostitute that the pastor paid him for sex over three years.
The Rev. Ted Haggard said he is also temporarily stepping aside from the pulpit of his church in Colorado Springs, Colorado, pending an internal investigation by the church.
The National Association of Evangelicals is an umbrella group for more than 45,000 churches and some 30 million members across the country.
The word is that Haggard has confessed to elders in his congregation that at least part of the allegations are true. The confession came after a long-night of waterboarding overseen by Vice President Dick Cheney.
Seriously, though, this is a huge deal just days before the midterm elections. Joshua Micah Marshall calls it “the conservative equivalent of Jesse Jackson getting caught wearing a hood at a Klan cross burning.”
And here’s some more breaking news from the party of family values:
ALLENTOWN, Pennsylvania (AP) -- A Republican congressman accused of abusing his ex-mistress agreed to pay her about $500,000 in a settlement last year that contained a powerful incentive for her to keep quiet until after Election Day, a person familiar with the terms of the deal told The Associated Press.
Thursday, November 02, 2006
House Dist. 23 ignored
There has been no polling done in the 23rd Congressional District and I find that rather odd. Nationally the race has been written off as a Leans Republicans seat and it could very well turnout that Republican Henry Bonilla waltzes to an easy re-election.
But this is the district that was most effected by the Supreme Court ruling on redistricting. Several heavily Republican precincts were taken away and several heavily Democratic ones were added. And there are at least three highly credible Democratic candidates making a concerted effort in the free-for-all open election that has resulted. Former Congressman Ciro Rodriguez has good name recognition. Wealthy rancher Lukin Gilliland has spent the most money and run the most aggressive race so far. And Albert Uresti has the benefit of being on the same ballot as his brother Carlos Uresti who is running for the State Senate.
Combine this with the fact that this is shaping up to be a very good year for Democrats nationally and you have to ask whether they will be able to hold Bonilla below 50 percent and force a run-off election? I really don’t know. I hope they do but nobody is talking about it much and I’m not sure what chance there is of that happening at this point. Bonilla, of course, has tons of cash and has been running lots of TV ads. He also picked up a rather lame and lukewarm endorsement from the incumbent/Republican-loving Express-News. But Gilliland has been out there too and I’m keeping my fingers crossed. Gilliland has my vote, but I would not hesitate to throw my support to Rodriguez or Uresti if they make it into a run-off.
One of the local TV news stations the other day covered a campaign event where Democratic gubernatorial candidate Chris Bell was making an appearance and they got an on-camera interview with Carlos Uresti, who defeated Frank Madla in the primaries for the state Senate race. But they were so clueless that they thought they were talking to Albert Uresti and identified him as such when they ran the interview during a segment on the District 23 race. The clip they aired even has Carlos talking about his state Senate race and it still wasn’t enough to tip them off about their mistake. But then TV newscasters aren’t the brightest bulbs out there as former TV newscaster Henry Bonilla demonstrates.
Shifting blame
House Republican Majority Leader John Boehner wants to blame the troops for the problems we are having in Iraq.
"Let's not blame what's happening in Iraq on Rumsfeld," Boehner said yesterday on CNN. "The fact is, the generals on the ground are in charge, and he works closely with them and the president."
After the flap about John Kerry supposedly demeaning our troops with his flubbed joke at a campaign rally, I find it incredible that Boehner would turn around the next day and point an accusing finger at the troops on the ground and say that it’s all their fault and not the fault of the Republican leadership back in Washington. How incredibly despicable. Boehner, of course, is another one of the many Republican chickenhawks - graduated high school in 1968 in the midst of the Vietnam conflict and yet somehow managed to avoid serving a day in the military. Now he is defending his fellow chickenhawks in the Bush administration by blaming all their failings during the Iraq war on the troops and their military leaders.
Kerry's gaffe about education aside, he did say one thing that is quite certain. We are definitely "stuck in Iraq" with no hope of getting out anytime soon. Americans's support for Bush's handling of the war is now at 29 percent, so his assurances that we will "stay the course" and his promise to keep his crack Iraq team of Rumsfeld and Cheney in place for the next two years means the only way people can hope to change things is to vote Democratic in the mid-term elections.
"Let's not blame what's happening in Iraq on Rumsfeld," Boehner said yesterday on CNN. "The fact is, the generals on the ground are in charge, and he works closely with them and the president."
After the flap about John Kerry supposedly demeaning our troops with his flubbed joke at a campaign rally, I find it incredible that Boehner would turn around the next day and point an accusing finger at the troops on the ground and say that it’s all their fault and not the fault of the Republican leadership back in Washington. How incredibly despicable. Boehner, of course, is another one of the many Republican chickenhawks - graduated high school in 1968 in the midst of the Vietnam conflict and yet somehow managed to avoid serving a day in the military. Now he is defending his fellow chickenhawks in the Bush administration by blaming all their failings during the Iraq war on the troops and their military leaders.
Kerry's gaffe about education aside, he did say one thing that is quite certain. We are definitely "stuck in Iraq" with no hope of getting out anytime soon. Americans's support for Bush's handling of the war is now at 29 percent, so his assurances that we will "stay the course" and his promise to keep his crack Iraq team of Rumsfeld and Cheney in place for the next two years means the only way people can hope to change things is to vote Democratic in the mid-term elections.
Saturday, October 28, 2006
Strong-willed women
Nothing seems to upset right-wingers more than strong-willed women.
Just look at who the No. 1 boogieman is for the right today, the person they villify the most of all: Hillary Clinton.
And then there is the person they are trying to turn into the boogieman for the mid-term elections: soon to be Speaker Nancy Pelosi.
Or how about of all the musical groups that are politically liberal and outspoken, which is hated the most on the far-right: The Dixie Chicks, of course.
And of all the people who are opposed to the war in Iraq, who has been demonized far more than anyone else: Cindy Sheehan, naturally.
And the list goes on...
Jane Fonda, Barbara Streisand, Martha Stewart... All seem to take more than their fair share of abuse.
So why do right-wingers seem to go after women so aggresively? A man has to really work hard to achieve the level of villification that these women seem to get naturally. Michael Moore and Ted Kennedy have worked hard to get where they are, but they still seem to get overshadowed by the raw hatred that spews forth from the far right whenever a woman seems to get uppity and starts acting like she doesn't know her place.
Just look at who the No. 1 boogieman is for the right today, the person they villify the most of all: Hillary Clinton.
And then there is the person they are trying to turn into the boogieman for the mid-term elections: soon to be Speaker Nancy Pelosi.
Or how about of all the musical groups that are politically liberal and outspoken, which is hated the most on the far-right: The Dixie Chicks, of course.
And of all the people who are opposed to the war in Iraq, who has been demonized far more than anyone else: Cindy Sheehan, naturally.
And the list goes on...
Jane Fonda, Barbara Streisand, Martha Stewart... All seem to take more than their fair share of abuse.
So why do right-wingers seem to go after women so aggresively? A man has to really work hard to achieve the level of villification that these women seem to get naturally. Michael Moore and Ted Kennedy have worked hard to get where they are, but they still seem to get overshadowed by the raw hatred that spews forth from the far right whenever a woman seems to get uppity and starts acting like she doesn't know her place.
Friday, October 27, 2006
A very effective ad
Michael J. Fox’s ad on behalf of Democratic senatorial candidate Claire McCaskill in Missouri was very effective. Visibly suffering from a debilitating disease that cut short his successful acting career, Fox now advocates for more research to help find cures to diseases like Parkinsons syndrome.
The ad was so effective, in fact, that in desperation the Republicans sicced their attack dog Rush Limbaugh on Fox the very next day. Limbaugh mocked Fox’s illness on camera and then accused him of not taking his medication in order to exaggerate the effects of his illness for the camera.
This was blatantly untrue as neurologists and experts with the National Parkinson’s Foundation attested, but that won’t matter to the legions of mindless sheep who listen to his show. All Limbaugh had to do was get the smear out there and he had done his job by giving his readers a hint of doubt on which to cling to so that they can dismiss the Fox ad out of hand and give it no more thought.
Fox has been incredibly gracious in responding to the insults and smears coming from that worthless waste of human flesh that is Limbaugh and others who parrot his words. And hopefully that will be enough to push people in the right direction on this crucial issue.
Culture of corruption
More and more Republicans keep getting sent to the slammer. This time it’s David Safavian, a Bush administration official who served as chief of staff in the General Services Administration. He has been sentenced to 18 months in prison for concealing his relationship with disgraced lobbyist Jack Abramoff.
Safavian will join fellow Republicans Jack Abramoff, Randy “Duke” Cunningham, Bob Ney, John Rowland and probably several others I can’t think of off the top of my head. Plus there are a whole slew of Republicans currently under indictment as you can see here. .
Meanwhile, federal lawmakers are currently investigating Republican Congressman Rick Renzi of Arizona over a shady land deal.
Safavian will join fellow Republicans Jack Abramoff, Randy “Duke” Cunningham, Bob Ney, John Rowland and probably several others I can’t think of off the top of my head. Plus there are a whole slew of Republicans currently under indictment as you can see here. .
Meanwhile, federal lawmakers are currently investigating Republican Congressman Rick Renzi of Arizona over a shady land deal.
Wednesday, October 25, 2006
Changing your mind
My conservative friend Bill Crawford has changed his mind on the issue of gay marriage and now believes it is OK.
We live in a tough world, and I know that without my wife I wouldn't be as happy a person, and I can't deny that to others. If two guys, or gals, love each other, and want to support each other through life's little bumps, then more power to them. Who am I to say no to love?
Changing one’s mind, especially on hot-button issues like this is never easy and Bill should be commended. It think it is all the more so because it meant rethinking and rehashing an issue that has been very key to the right-wing base of the Republican party over the past several years.
I hashed out this issue myself a while back.
I would just note that I too have changed my mind on some issues - affirmative action being one example - and it is never easy.
We live in a tough world, and I know that without my wife I wouldn't be as happy a person, and I can't deny that to others. If two guys, or gals, love each other, and want to support each other through life's little bumps, then more power to them. Who am I to say no to love?
Changing one’s mind, especially on hot-button issues like this is never easy and Bill should be commended. It think it is all the more so because it meant rethinking and rehashing an issue that has been very key to the right-wing base of the Republican party over the past several years.
I hashed out this issue myself a while back.
I would just note that I too have changed my mind on some issues - affirmative action being one example - and it is never easy.
Kinky the kingmaker?
I’ve done plenty of grumbling about the Democrats prospects in the upcoming elections. And I’ve been especially hard on Chris Bell, the Democratic nominee for governor.
So I’m pleased to say now that Bell has surprised me by running a better than expected campaign. In fact, at this point it looks like he will come in second, rather than fourth as I had predicted. Considering that he is still fourth in the fund-raising race, that is not a bad showing.
But now I think we’ve come to a time when Kinky Friedman will have to make a decision. His campaign is currently mired in fourth place, but he is still drawing about 16 percent in the latest polls. That is not enough to put him in the governor’s mansion. But it may be enough to allow him to play the role of kingmaker.
I think Kinky has three choices. If he stays in the race, he pretty much guarantees that Republican Rick Perry will be re-elected. But he could throw his support to someone else and possibly tip the scales in their favor. At this point, Chris Bell seems the best option for that to happen. But he could also throw his support to Strayhorn and possibly put her back into contention.
I’m guessing that he will take the first option and do nothing. And that is a shame. It means his quixotic campaign will soon be forgotten as a mildly amusing but ultimately meaningless interlude. He was never serious about actually changing the way government operates in Austin because when he had the chance to make a difference he chose not to.
So I’m pleased to say now that Bell has surprised me by running a better than expected campaign. In fact, at this point it looks like he will come in second, rather than fourth as I had predicted. Considering that he is still fourth in the fund-raising race, that is not a bad showing.
But now I think we’ve come to a time when Kinky Friedman will have to make a decision. His campaign is currently mired in fourth place, but he is still drawing about 16 percent in the latest polls. That is not enough to put him in the governor’s mansion. But it may be enough to allow him to play the role of kingmaker.
I think Kinky has three choices. If he stays in the race, he pretty much guarantees that Republican Rick Perry will be re-elected. But he could throw his support to someone else and possibly tip the scales in their favor. At this point, Chris Bell seems the best option for that to happen. But he could also throw his support to Strayhorn and possibly put her back into contention.
I’m guessing that he will take the first option and do nothing. And that is a shame. It means his quixotic campaign will soon be forgotten as a mildly amusing but ultimately meaningless interlude. He was never serious about actually changing the way government operates in Austin because when he had the chance to make a difference he chose not to.
Monday, October 23, 2006
Weird Al cracks the Top 10
Weird Al Yankovic has finally broken into the Top 10 on the music charts with his latest single - “White and Nerdy”, a parody of a rap song by the artist Chamillionaire.
I’m thrilled for Weird Al. I’ve been a big fan of his since I was in college. He first came to my attention through his popular parodies of Michael Jackson songs like “Eat It” and “Fat”. His "WEIRD AL" YANKOVIC IN 3-D album was one of the last records I ever bought. I have Dare To Be Stupid, Even Worse, Off the Deep End on casette tape and Bad Hair Day on CD.
My wife says Weird Al songs are funny the first couple of times you hear them then they just become annoying. Not for me, I can listen to his music all day and still get tickled.
Weird Al is one of the most successful and talented music parodists of our generation and I’m glad he is finally getting some mainstream recognition. Not that he hasn’t been hugely successful on the fringes. He has a huge cult-like following. People follow his concerts around like it was the Grateful Dead and they have fan conventions and much more. Check out The Official "Weird Al" Yankovic Web Site and his popular MySpace page.
Saturday, October 21, 2006
Texas will lose clout in next Congress
From BOR I see that Texas will have no leadership positions in the next Congress thanks to Tom DeLay. That is assuming the Democrats retake control as looks increasingly likely.
If they succeed, no Texans are in line to be chairmen of House committees. DeLay helped send four of the state's most senior members packing when he orchestrated a wholesale redrawing of Texas' congressional districts in 2003.
...
But if they had remained in office and Democrats took control, Texas would have three committee chairmen.
Frost would become chairman of the Rules Committee, which decides which bills and amendments get a vote.
Former Rep. Charlie Stenholm would head up the Agriculture Committee. Jim Turner would lead the Homeland Security Committee, which oversees border enforcement agencies.
Gee, thanks, Tom!
As Karl says at BOR: "DeLay was never interested in doing what was best for Texas. It was all about power for himself and the Republican Party."
If they succeed, no Texans are in line to be chairmen of House committees. DeLay helped send four of the state's most senior members packing when he orchestrated a wholesale redrawing of Texas' congressional districts in 2003.
...
But if they had remained in office and Democrats took control, Texas would have three committee chairmen.
Frost would become chairman of the Rules Committee, which decides which bills and amendments get a vote.
Former Rep. Charlie Stenholm would head up the Agriculture Committee. Jim Turner would lead the Homeland Security Committee, which oversees border enforcement agencies.
Gee, thanks, Tom!
As Karl says at BOR: "DeLay was never interested in doing what was best for Texas. It was all about power for himself and the Republican Party."
E-N endorses incumbents/Republicans
The San Antonio Express-News has reluctantly endorsed Henry Bonilla in the newly drawn 23rd Congressional District.
We reluctantly recommend Republican incumbent Henry Bonilla, but encourage him to be more responsive to the needs of his district, including the San Antonio area.
Idiots!! There are several well qualified Democratic challengers in this race including former Congressman Ciro Rodriguez, businessman/rancher Lukin Gilliland and veteran firefighter Albert Uresti (also the brother of State Sen. Carlos Uresti.) So if they are disappointed with Bonilla, why not consider them? Here is their lame reasoning:
It's unfortunate that none of Bonilla's opponents exhibits the combination of leadership and preparedness necessary to replace him...
What the hell is that supposed to mean?!? Like Bonilla, a former TV newscaster, was so prepared to go to Congress when he was first elected. And Ciro has already been in Congress. As for leadership, Bonilla is not going to do a lot of that when the Republicans fall back into the minority as is almost assuredly going to happen this election.
But this endorsement fits with their policy which can be summed as such: Endorse every incumbent and/or Republican on the ballot. The sole exception was for one of the state Supreme Court races where they are backing Bill Moody against an unqualified Rick Perry appointee.
I'm really disgusted with the E-N editorial board. They are spineless on most issues and the few that they have stood up and taken a stand on are clearly undercut by their endorsements which scream out that they are perfectly happy with the status quo and want more of it.
I have no doubt that tomorrow they will endorse Rick Perry for governor. You can bank on it.
So much for the so-called liberal media.
We reluctantly recommend Republican incumbent Henry Bonilla, but encourage him to be more responsive to the needs of his district, including the San Antonio area.
Idiots!! There are several well qualified Democratic challengers in this race including former Congressman Ciro Rodriguez, businessman/rancher Lukin Gilliland and veteran firefighter Albert Uresti (also the brother of State Sen. Carlos Uresti.) So if they are disappointed with Bonilla, why not consider them? Here is their lame reasoning:
It's unfortunate that none of Bonilla's opponents exhibits the combination of leadership and preparedness necessary to replace him...
What the hell is that supposed to mean?!? Like Bonilla, a former TV newscaster, was so prepared to go to Congress when he was first elected. And Ciro has already been in Congress. As for leadership, Bonilla is not going to do a lot of that when the Republicans fall back into the minority as is almost assuredly going to happen this election.
But this endorsement fits with their policy which can be summed as such: Endorse every incumbent and/or Republican on the ballot. The sole exception was for one of the state Supreme Court races where they are backing Bill Moody against an unqualified Rick Perry appointee.
I'm really disgusted with the E-N editorial board. They are spineless on most issues and the few that they have stood up and taken a stand on are clearly undercut by their endorsements which scream out that they are perfectly happy with the status quo and want more of it.
I have no doubt that tomorrow they will endorse Rick Perry for governor. You can bank on it.
So much for the so-called liberal media.
Friday, October 20, 2006
Old School
I have GOT to get THIS!!!
"Sesame Street: Old School Volume 1: 1969-1974" (List price: $39.98)
Release Date: Oct. 24
Those are the years when I was a kid watching Sesame Street. Classic!
Governor’s races
It has long frustrated me that so many reliably “Blue” states today have Republican governors. For instance, I don’t think you can come up with a grouping of more liberal states than this: Hawaii, Vermont, Rhode Island, New York, Massachussetts, Connecticut, Maryland, California, Minnesota. And what do all these states have in common? They all currently have Republican governors.
That is definitely going to change in a couple of weeks - in New York and Massachusetts for sure, and maybe in Maryland and Minnesota as well.
In recent years, though, Democrats have managed to make similar inroads on traditionally “Red” states. Here is a grouping of reliably red states that all voted for Bush and all of which currently have Democratic governors: Montana, Wyoming, Arizona, Kansas, Oklahoma, North Carolina, Tennessee, Virginia and Louisiana.
The upcoming mid-term elections are looking good for Democrats all around, but especially in the gubernatorial contests. Democrats seem to be on track to win governors races in Arkansas, Colorado, Massachusetts, Ohio, Maryland, Minnesota and New York. The WaPost columnist has already declared the New York race over saying “The fat lady has sung, showered and is currently sitting on her sofa watching "Desperate Housewives." State Attorney General Eliot Spitzer (D) will be New York's next governor.”
Democrats also seem certain to maintain governor’s seats in Wisconsin, Maine, Michigan, Iowa and Oregon.
And all of this leads to me current frustration, that being why Texas can’t be part of this partisan sea change that seems to be taking place. It’s almost like the Red tide that engulfed the country 12 years ago is finally receding, but is still drowning us here in Texas. Rick Perry is an exceedingly unpopular governor and by all rights should be shown the door by the electorate on Nov. 7. But instead it looks like he is about to two-step his way to an easy victory with less than 40 percent of the vote.
Maybe the sea change will finally catch up to the Lone Star state during the next election cycle, but it would sure be nice to see some evidence of the shift taking place here next month.
That is definitely going to change in a couple of weeks - in New York and Massachusetts for sure, and maybe in Maryland and Minnesota as well.
In recent years, though, Democrats have managed to make similar inroads on traditionally “Red” states. Here is a grouping of reliably red states that all voted for Bush and all of which currently have Democratic governors: Montana, Wyoming, Arizona, Kansas, Oklahoma, North Carolina, Tennessee, Virginia and Louisiana.
The upcoming mid-term elections are looking good for Democrats all around, but especially in the gubernatorial contests. Democrats seem to be on track to win governors races in Arkansas, Colorado, Massachusetts, Ohio, Maryland, Minnesota and New York. The WaPost columnist has already declared the New York race over saying “The fat lady has sung, showered and is currently sitting on her sofa watching "Desperate Housewives." State Attorney General Eliot Spitzer (D) will be New York's next governor.”
Democrats also seem certain to maintain governor’s seats in Wisconsin, Maine, Michigan, Iowa and Oregon.
And all of this leads to me current frustration, that being why Texas can’t be part of this partisan sea change that seems to be taking place. It’s almost like the Red tide that engulfed the country 12 years ago is finally receding, but is still drowning us here in Texas. Rick Perry is an exceedingly unpopular governor and by all rights should be shown the door by the electorate on Nov. 7. But instead it looks like he is about to two-step his way to an easy victory with less than 40 percent of the vote.
Maybe the sea change will finally catch up to the Lone Star state during the next election cycle, but it would sure be nice to see some evidence of the shift taking place here next month.
Thursday, October 19, 2006
Tolerant blogging
In the middle of a rather lengthy thread over at All Things Conservative a comment was made that liberals don’t tolerate conservatives commenting on their blogs to the same degree that the reverse is true. My friend Mark Harden went so far as to make the following challenge:
I would like to issue a challenge to any liberal commentators here to identify and link to a left wing blog - other than Mike's - which displays the same sort of interactive debate with minimal abuse. I sure haven't seen one.
While I appreciate that I was singled out as the exception, I think there are any number of sites that are tolerant of diverse opinions on both sides of the spectrum. But rather than throwing out a long list of links, I would like to step back and look over my experience blogging these past four years.
My first blog post was made on Jan. 10, 2003, when absolutely no one else was reading this site besides myself. (Not that there are very many more people reading it today.) The first bloggers I came across were fellow liberals like the college activists at Burnt Orange Report, who were nice enough to link me up even though I am an Aggie, and Charles Kuffner of Off the Kuff who was then trying to make a comprehensive survey of the political blogging landscape in Texas.
But while BOR and Kuff are excellent sites and daily reads for me, I have to admit that commenting there was not very interesting since I agreed with most of what was being said.
More interesting, I thought, was to find people with different views who could challenge my perception of the world and who would be open to a debate. I was a debater in high school and always enjoyed the rigorous give-and-take that it entailed.
I was pleasantly surprised to find that not only were there a lot of conservatives out there, which I expected, but many were open to having intellectual discussions that did not devolve into name-calling and insults. I was also surprised to find that many of the conservative sites tended to be more apt to give me a reciprocal link which was very much appreciated in those early days.
Many of those sites are no longer around, unfortunately, including Mark’s InSane Antonio which he inexplicably shut down two years ago. Others that are now missing in action include Joe Kelley's The Sake Of Argument; BeldarBlog; Reductio Ad Absurdum; and Owen Courreges. I used to have lengthy debates with Owen over the Texas House Redistricting controversy. Today he is apparently working at a libertarian think tank and attending law school.
Some conservative blogs that are still around which are open to debate include my friend Rantin’ Raven’s The View From the Nest; Jimmy K.’s but that's just my opinion and my fellow Aggies who run the popular Boots & Sabers blog.
And, of course, there is Bill Crawford’s invaluable ATC.
One more that I should mention is Roscoe’s Excuse. I met Roscoe at the San Antonio Blogger BBQ last year that Ranting Raven organized. However, while I like to read his blog, I rarely comment there because as he aptly explains in his introduction to the site:
“This is not an "argument" blog nor is it a "debate" blog. Heck, it's not even a "discussion" blog. It's all about me, my views, attitudes, and opinions. Any comments left here that are overly critical of me, of my opinions, or of those I choose to embrace will simply be deleted. Get your own soap box to stand on if you want to, this one's mine.”
Fair enough.
I’m not going to name names, but there have been some conservative blogs, local and statewide, that made it quite clear that my comments were not welcome and I have avoided them ever since.
Also, in some cases it took a little effort on my part before I felt welcome at some sites. In some cases, I was not recieved well at first until the blog site owner came to understand that I was not a “troll” coming to take potshots at them. Once they understood that I was respectful of their views, they were more willing to tolerate my dissenting opinions.
I would like to issue a challenge to any liberal commentators here to identify and link to a left wing blog - other than Mike's - which displays the same sort of interactive debate with minimal abuse. I sure haven't seen one.
While I appreciate that I was singled out as the exception, I think there are any number of sites that are tolerant of diverse opinions on both sides of the spectrum. But rather than throwing out a long list of links, I would like to step back and look over my experience blogging these past four years.
My first blog post was made on Jan. 10, 2003, when absolutely no one else was reading this site besides myself. (Not that there are very many more people reading it today.) The first bloggers I came across were fellow liberals like the college activists at Burnt Orange Report, who were nice enough to link me up even though I am an Aggie, and Charles Kuffner of Off the Kuff who was then trying to make a comprehensive survey of the political blogging landscape in Texas.
But while BOR and Kuff are excellent sites and daily reads for me, I have to admit that commenting there was not very interesting since I agreed with most of what was being said.
More interesting, I thought, was to find people with different views who could challenge my perception of the world and who would be open to a debate. I was a debater in high school and always enjoyed the rigorous give-and-take that it entailed.
I was pleasantly surprised to find that not only were there a lot of conservatives out there, which I expected, but many were open to having intellectual discussions that did not devolve into name-calling and insults. I was also surprised to find that many of the conservative sites tended to be more apt to give me a reciprocal link which was very much appreciated in those early days.
Many of those sites are no longer around, unfortunately, including Mark’s InSane Antonio which he inexplicably shut down two years ago. Others that are now missing in action include Joe Kelley's The Sake Of Argument; BeldarBlog; Reductio Ad Absurdum; and Owen Courreges. I used to have lengthy debates with Owen over the Texas House Redistricting controversy. Today he is apparently working at a libertarian think tank and attending law school.
Some conservative blogs that are still around which are open to debate include my friend Rantin’ Raven’s The View From the Nest; Jimmy K.’s but that's just my opinion and my fellow Aggies who run the popular Boots & Sabers blog.
And, of course, there is Bill Crawford’s invaluable ATC.
One more that I should mention is Roscoe’s Excuse. I met Roscoe at the San Antonio Blogger BBQ last year that Ranting Raven organized. However, while I like to read his blog, I rarely comment there because as he aptly explains in his introduction to the site:
“This is not an "argument" blog nor is it a "debate" blog. Heck, it's not even a "discussion" blog. It's all about me, my views, attitudes, and opinions. Any comments left here that are overly critical of me, of my opinions, or of those I choose to embrace will simply be deleted. Get your own soap box to stand on if you want to, this one's mine.”
Fair enough.
I’m not going to name names, but there have been some conservative blogs, local and statewide, that made it quite clear that my comments were not welcome and I have avoided them ever since.
Also, in some cases it took a little effort on my part before I felt welcome at some sites. In some cases, I was not recieved well at first until the blog site owner came to understand that I was not a “troll” coming to take potshots at them. Once they understood that I was respectful of their views, they were more willing to tolerate my dissenting opinions.
Wednesday, October 18, 2006
Worst.Congress.Ever
Rolling Stone has an entertaining read this week on our current crop of Congress critters. They even put together a 10-worst list beginning with Speaker Denny Hastert, probably the most ineffective speaker since Democrat Thomas Foley (no relation to Republican Mark Foley).
Thomas Foley, of course, was the Washington Democrat who led the party into their version of Little Big Horn in 1994 when Newt Gingrich and his band of wild Indians slaughtered 54 of them and even walked away with Foley’s scalp.
But today, Hastert is leading a Congress that is even more unpopular than the Democrats were in 1994.
Republicans are counting on the inherent flaws in our democratic system to help them maintain power - the gerrymandered districts, the financial and logistical advantages incumbents have over their challengers, and so forth.
It could still work. The polls seemed to favor John Kerry in the 2004 presidential race and yet he still fell short on election day. Although, Ohio, the swing-state in that election, seems to have had a serious change of heart recently.
Thomas Foley, of course, was the Washington Democrat who led the party into their version of Little Big Horn in 1994 when Newt Gingrich and his band of wild Indians slaughtered 54 of them and even walked away with Foley’s scalp.
But today, Hastert is leading a Congress that is even more unpopular than the Democrats were in 1994.
Republicans are counting on the inherent flaws in our democratic system to help them maintain power - the gerrymandered districts, the financial and logistical advantages incumbents have over their challengers, and so forth.
It could still work. The polls seemed to favor John Kerry in the 2004 presidential race and yet he still fell short on election day. Although, Ohio, the swing-state in that election, seems to have had a serious change of heart recently.
Friday, October 13, 2006
Too little, too late
Something I wanted to comment on the other day but did not have time to, was the $1 million cash infusion into Chris Bell's struggling gubernatorial campaign by a wealthy trial lawyer and Bell's pathetic, and definitely unheeded plea to Kinky Friedman to drop out of the race and endorse him.
Both items are too little, too late in my opinion. I think it is a foregone conclusion that Rick Perry is going to waltz into re-election with possibly under 40 percent of the vote while the troika of challengers split the rest.
The fact that Perry could be that unpopular and still win re-election so easily is a sad testament to the state of our democracy. Why they cannot have a runoff in a race this important is beyond me, but it is clearly a disservice to the electorate. We are getting screwed.
Meanwhile, I think too much of our electoral process goes toward these countless judicial and administative positions which should all be appointed anyway. Why do we need to elect a county clerk or even a tax collector? And all these judges that nobody pays any attention to. Let's have them appointed and leave the voting for representative positions like city council, county commissioners, state reps and Congress critters. Then maybe people's eyes wouldn't glaze over when they get their ballots and they might even cast their votes more intelligently.
Both items are too little, too late in my opinion. I think it is a foregone conclusion that Rick Perry is going to waltz into re-election with possibly under 40 percent of the vote while the troika of challengers split the rest.
The fact that Perry could be that unpopular and still win re-election so easily is a sad testament to the state of our democracy. Why they cannot have a runoff in a race this important is beyond me, but it is clearly a disservice to the electorate. We are getting screwed.
Meanwhile, I think too much of our electoral process goes toward these countless judicial and administative positions which should all be appointed anyway. Why do we need to elect a county clerk or even a tax collector? And all these judges that nobody pays any attention to. Let's have them appointed and leave the voting for representative positions like city council, county commissioners, state reps and Congress critters. Then maybe people's eyes wouldn't glaze over when they get their ballots and they might even cast their votes more intelligently.
Agreeing with Gurwitz
Jonathan Gurwitz had a column earlier this week that I almost fully agree with. With the exception of a gratuitous knock at Democrats as "anemic and philosophically barren" towards the end of the column, I would have to say that I agree with it nearly 100 percent.
The scandal is that colleagues who had some inkling that Foley was engaging in inappropriate behavior — to give his Republican cohorts a very generous benefit of the doubt — did nothing to seriously confront him and failed to fully investigate the matter.
House Speaker Dennis Hastert and Rep. John Shimkus, the Republican chairman of the House Page Board, may have had a good grasp of Foley's turpitude for months. They may have hoped Foley's proclivities would simply fade away or at least be kept quiet until after the midterm election.
More likely, Hastert and others simply deemed what they thought was Foley's inordinate interest in pages as an acceptable bending of the rules. Some members of Congress shower their attention on lobbyists and special interest groups. Some have a weakness for travel, others for Louis Philippe period commodes. "So what," they might have thought, "if Foley's special interest is well-groomed young men?"
Either explanation gets to the essence of the GOP's problem: the abandonment of principle.
And that abandonment is certainly costing them in the polls. As many as 20 to 30 House seats have shifted toward the Democrats since the Foley scandal broke.
Political scientist Larry Sabato on his Crystal Ball blog is now predicting that the Democrats will win the majority in the House next month. He has 11 Republican-held seats now leaning toward Democrats and another 16 Republican-held seats are rated as tossups. If they truly are tossups, that would mean at least half would go Democratic giving the Democrats a net gain of 17 seats at the minimum. They need only 15 to take control.
Can you say - Speaker Pelosi? Better get used to it.
The scandal is that colleagues who had some inkling that Foley was engaging in inappropriate behavior — to give his Republican cohorts a very generous benefit of the doubt — did nothing to seriously confront him and failed to fully investigate the matter.
House Speaker Dennis Hastert and Rep. John Shimkus, the Republican chairman of the House Page Board, may have had a good grasp of Foley's turpitude for months. They may have hoped Foley's proclivities would simply fade away or at least be kept quiet until after the midterm election.
More likely, Hastert and others simply deemed what they thought was Foley's inordinate interest in pages as an acceptable bending of the rules. Some members of Congress shower their attention on lobbyists and special interest groups. Some have a weakness for travel, others for Louis Philippe period commodes. "So what," they might have thought, "if Foley's special interest is well-groomed young men?"
Either explanation gets to the essence of the GOP's problem: the abandonment of principle.
And that abandonment is certainly costing them in the polls. As many as 20 to 30 House seats have shifted toward the Democrats since the Foley scandal broke.
Political scientist Larry Sabato on his Crystal Ball blog is now predicting that the Democrats will win the majority in the House next month. He has 11 Republican-held seats now leaning toward Democrats and another 16 Republican-held seats are rated as tossups. If they truly are tossups, that would mean at least half would go Democratic giving the Democrats a net gain of 17 seats at the minimum. They need only 15 to take control.
Can you say - Speaker Pelosi? Better get used to it.
Thursday, October 12, 2006
Bonilla's bin Laden ad
Now back to that mailing I got from Henry Bonilla. It was rather odd, to say the least. On the front page is a grouping of three photos of beared Arabic men wearing turbans. One of the men pictured is obviously Osama bin Laden. The caption says “For Men Like These, America is Still a Target”.
My first thought on reading this was to say “Sure, because President Bush failed to capture them after 9/11.”
Do the Republicans really think reminding us that bin Laden is still loose is a good campaign strategy? Apparently so.
Another smaller picture in the ad is of another high-ranking al-Qaeda figure whose name I can’t recall.
But the third picture is of the Iraqi Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr who founded the Mahdi Militia or Mahdi Army
in Iraq.
There are several problems with this. First, al-Sadr has no connection to al-Qaeda. But that has never stopped Republicans from trying to tie Iraq to 9-11. Second, you would think that if they are going to try and force this link they would at least pick a guy who was one of the Baathists affiliated with Saddam Hussein. But the Baathists were all Sunnis and this guy is a Shiite cleric. Third, while the Mahdi Army is a problem for our troops in Iraq, saying that they consider the continental United States a target of their aggression is a bit of a stretch. This guy is only fighting with us because we are in his country and he wants us out. He never had any intention of coming over here and attacking us.
I figure that when they were putting the ad together they had a picture of the Sunni militant Al-Zarqawi filling that slot. But when he was killed, they were trying to find someone else to fill that spot. I'm sure they figured any old guy in a turban would do.
My first thought on reading this was to say “Sure, because President Bush failed to capture them after 9/11.”
Do the Republicans really think reminding us that bin Laden is still loose is a good campaign strategy? Apparently so.
Another smaller picture in the ad is of another high-ranking al-Qaeda figure whose name I can’t recall.
But the third picture is of the Iraqi Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr who founded the Mahdi Militia or Mahdi Army
in Iraq.
There are several problems with this. First, al-Sadr has no connection to al-Qaeda. But that has never stopped Republicans from trying to tie Iraq to 9-11. Second, you would think that if they are going to try and force this link they would at least pick a guy who was one of the Baathists affiliated with Saddam Hussein. But the Baathists were all Sunnis and this guy is a Shiite cleric. Third, while the Mahdi Army is a problem for our troops in Iraq, saying that they consider the continental United States a target of their aggression is a bit of a stretch. This guy is only fighting with us because we are in his country and he wants us out. He never had any intention of coming over here and attacking us.
I figure that when they were putting the ad together they had a picture of the Sunni militant Al-Zarqawi filling that slot. But when he was killed, they were trying to find someone else to fill that spot. I'm sure they figured any old guy in a turban would do.
A real congressional race
I got my first campaign mailing from Henry Bonilla the other day, but more on that later. I live in the 23rd Congessional District which was impacted by the recent Supreme Court decision on redistricting. Bonilla is the closest thing to an incumbent in the race and the only Republican. Meanwhile, a whole host of Democrats are in the race with varying degrees of support.
At first, I thought former Congressman Ciro Rodriguez would be the best bet for a credible challenger to Bonilla. But after his hesitant off-again, on-again start to the campaign I’m not so sure anymore. Plus he has the definite aura of a has-been after first losing his congressional seat and then failing to win it back in a rematch with DINO Henry Cuellar.
Another credible contender in the race is Albert Uresti, brother of Carlos Uresti who recently won a Texas Senate seat.
But right now I am most impressed with Lukin Gilliland. He seems to be the best financed and most serious challenger to date. I’ve gotten mailings from his campaign, at least one phone call and I am starting to see signs for him go up everywhere. He is also on TV with some positive, biographical spots.
I’m basically an Anybody But Bonilla voter, so I will support any Democrat who gets into a runoff with Bonilla.
At first, I thought former Congressman Ciro Rodriguez would be the best bet for a credible challenger to Bonilla. But after his hesitant off-again, on-again start to the campaign I’m not so sure anymore. Plus he has the definite aura of a has-been after first losing his congressional seat and then failing to win it back in a rematch with DINO Henry Cuellar.
Another credible contender in the race is Albert Uresti, brother of Carlos Uresti who recently won a Texas Senate seat.
But right now I am most impressed with Lukin Gilliland. He seems to be the best financed and most serious challenger to date. I’ve gotten mailings from his campaign, at least one phone call and I am starting to see signs for him go up everywhere. He is also on TV with some positive, biographical spots.
I’m basically an Anybody But Bonilla voter, so I will support any Democrat who gets into a runoff with Bonilla.
Wednesday, October 11, 2006
Baseball playoffs
George Steinbrenner was smart to keep Joe Torre as the manager of the Yankees. It would have been nuts to get rid of him. He is an incredible manager and I imagine about 90 percent of the teams in baseball would have been ready to snap him up had Steinbrenner given him the heave-ho.
You don't just ditch a Hall-of-Fame caliber manager because you don't win the World Series every single year. I just remember what happened to my beloved Cincinnatti Reds in the late '70s when they decided to get rid of Sparky Anderson. They didn't make it back to the World Series for more than a decade and they had to sit back and watch Sparky take his new team - the Detroit Tigers - all the way to the top.
The Yankees' problem right now is that they have a lot of talent, but they are lacking the chemistry or the spark that makes it all gel together. That chemistry is more important than having superstars. The Yankees of 1998-2000 proved that when they dominated the game for three years with a bunch of unknowns like Scott Brosius, Paul O'Neil, Tino Hernandez and Chuck Knoblauch. The only guys left from that era are Derek Jeter and Mario Rivera. So they still have to find that spark again that they lost around the time that they got rid of Knoblauch. But they sure won't find it any faster by dumping Joe Torre.
As for the playoffs, now that the Yankees are out of it I can whole-heartedly back the Detroit Tigers. They are long overdue for another championship and they have put together a heck of a good team with one of my favorite players - former Texas Ranger Ivan Rodriguez leading the way once again. Pudge is reunited with his Florida Marlins manager Jim Leyland who, kind of like Sparky, seems to find a way to get to the World Series no matter who he is coaching.
I'm rather indifferent as to whether the Cards or the Mets should win the National League championship. I was pulling for the Padres since they are the new affiliate for the San Antonio Missions, but now I'll just root for the Tigers all the way.
You don't just ditch a Hall-of-Fame caliber manager because you don't win the World Series every single year. I just remember what happened to my beloved Cincinnatti Reds in the late '70s when they decided to get rid of Sparky Anderson. They didn't make it back to the World Series for more than a decade and they had to sit back and watch Sparky take his new team - the Detroit Tigers - all the way to the top.
The Yankees' problem right now is that they have a lot of talent, but they are lacking the chemistry or the spark that makes it all gel together. That chemistry is more important than having superstars. The Yankees of 1998-2000 proved that when they dominated the game for three years with a bunch of unknowns like Scott Brosius, Paul O'Neil, Tino Hernandez and Chuck Knoblauch. The only guys left from that era are Derek Jeter and Mario Rivera. So they still have to find that spark again that they lost around the time that they got rid of Knoblauch. But they sure won't find it any faster by dumping Joe Torre.
As for the playoffs, now that the Yankees are out of it I can whole-heartedly back the Detroit Tigers. They are long overdue for another championship and they have put together a heck of a good team with one of my favorite players - former Texas Ranger Ivan Rodriguez leading the way once again. Pudge is reunited with his Florida Marlins manager Jim Leyland who, kind of like Sparky, seems to find a way to get to the World Series no matter who he is coaching.
I'm rather indifferent as to whether the Cards or the Mets should win the National League championship. I was pulling for the Padres since they are the new affiliate for the San Antonio Missions, but now I'll just root for the Tigers all the way.
Tuesday, October 10, 2006
Everything is worse
Can anyone name one thing that has actually gotten better as a result of actions taken by the Bush administration? And I mean something that has gotten better that doesn’t have a correspondingly awful downside, like tax cuts.
Iraq is worse. Iran is worse. North Korea is worse. In fact, since Bush linked the three countries as the “Axis of Evil” at the start of the administration, they have all turned into foreign policy debacles.
As if that were not bad enough, the terrorism threat has gotten worse according to the latest National Intelligence Estimate and, of course, Osama bin Laden is still on the loose. Meanwhile, our military is stretched far beyond its means, our reserves and our National Guard have been exhausted and we are unprepared if any new threats suddenly emerge.
The economy has stank throughout the Bush tenure, with job growth mostly stagnant and wages unable to keep up with inflation. Meanwhile, health care premiums have continued to skyrocket and gas prices have sat around $3 a gallon for the better part of a year.
The immigration problem has continued to fester. FEMA went from being a first-rate government agency to a disaster waiting to happen - staffed with incompetent administration cronies. New Orleans, of course, is much, much worse.
Then, of course, the deficit and the national deficit are both worse. The public’s opinion of Congress is probably at an all-time low as corruption and incompetence have been the themes of this administration.
Surely there is something this administration has done that is positive, but I can’t think of anything right now.
Iraq is worse. Iran is worse. North Korea is worse. In fact, since Bush linked the three countries as the “Axis of Evil” at the start of the administration, they have all turned into foreign policy debacles.
As if that were not bad enough, the terrorism threat has gotten worse according to the latest National Intelligence Estimate and, of course, Osama bin Laden is still on the loose. Meanwhile, our military is stretched far beyond its means, our reserves and our National Guard have been exhausted and we are unprepared if any new threats suddenly emerge.
The economy has stank throughout the Bush tenure, with job growth mostly stagnant and wages unable to keep up with inflation. Meanwhile, health care premiums have continued to skyrocket and gas prices have sat around $3 a gallon for the better part of a year.
The immigration problem has continued to fester. FEMA went from being a first-rate government agency to a disaster waiting to happen - staffed with incompetent administration cronies. New Orleans, of course, is much, much worse.
Then, of course, the deficit and the national deficit are both worse. The public’s opinion of Congress is probably at an all-time low as corruption and incompetence have been the themes of this administration.
Surely there is something this administration has done that is positive, but I can’t think of anything right now.
Monday, October 09, 2006
Truth does not matter
This effort by Republicans to shift the blame for the Foley scandal onto Democrats is the most pathetic thing I've seen in years. And yet it is very typical of right-wing strategy these days. The fact that they have no evidence to back up the charge does not matter. What the Republican strategists understand is that all they need to do is throw out the charge - regardless of its veracity - and then the media will dutifully report it and the rank and file dittoheads will buy it. The truth does not matter, they just need the charge to be out there and that will be enough to keep their core constituency on board.
Perfect timing
If the Democrats retake the House, as looks more and more likely, the political dynamic in Washington will shift decidely.
It is a good time for the Democrats to regain the majority at this time. They've been lost in the wilderness long enough - 12 years - to fully appreciate what it means to be back in the majority, while at the same time they are not so far from when they last lost power - 1994 - that they have no institutional memory of it.
This is good because it means there should be enough Democrats who remember the mistakes that were made prior to 1994 so that they are less likely to repeat them. Plus they have the fine example set by the corrupt GOP as a kind of How-Not-To-Govern Guide.
It is a good time for the Democrats to regain the majority at this time. They've been lost in the wilderness long enough - 12 years - to fully appreciate what it means to be back in the majority, while at the same time they are not so far from when they last lost power - 1994 - that they have no institutional memory of it.
This is good because it means there should be enough Democrats who remember the mistakes that were made prior to 1994 so that they are less likely to repeat them. Plus they have the fine example set by the corrupt GOP as a kind of How-Not-To-Govern Guide.
Thursday, October 05, 2006
Stay, Denny, Stay
If he were the leader of my party, I would want him gone. But for purely partisan political reasons, I hope that Denny Hastert sticks it out and remains in his position as Speaker of the House.
The longer Hastert remains in office, the longer this Mark Foley scandal will play out in the media. Questions about what Hastert knew and when will continue to be raised along with speculation that the Foley situation was purposefully kept under wraps to protect a Republican-held Congressional seat during an election year.
The fact that the Democrat on the House Page panel was kept in the dark about the Foley e-mails is the clearest indication that it was part of a cover-up. There is no other explanation. They were obviously concerned that the Democrat on the panel would not have the same partisan motivation for keeping the Foley story under wraps and might leak it to the press in an effort to damage his re-election chances. So they purposefully did not tell him about it.
So that is really all you need to understand about this situation. If it had been left up to the House Republican leadership, we would know nothing about this scandal today and Mark Foley would still be a member of Congress, free to pursue cybersex relationships with more high-school age children at the Capitol. That’s despicable and there is no way they can soft peddle it, blame it all on Bill Clinton, or anything else.
UPDATE
Hastert's decsion to stay put may be short-lived if too many more polls like this come out:
Internal Poll Shows Hastert Dragging Down GOP
"House Republican candidates will suffer massive losses if House Speaker Dennis Hastert remains speaker until Election Day, according to internal polling data from a prominent GOP pollster", Fox News has learned.
Said the source: "The data suggests Americans have bailed on the speaker. And the difference could be between a 20-seat loss and 50-seat loss."
The source also said "the internal data had not been widely shared among Republican leaders, but as awareness of it spreads calculations about Hastert's tenure may change. The source described the pollster who did the survey as 'authoritative,' and said once the numbers are presented, it 'could change the focus' on whether the speaker remains in power."
Stay, Denny, Stay!!!
Wednesday, October 04, 2006
(Sniff! Sniff!) Do you smell sulfur?
It looks like the Prince of Darkness himself made a stop in San Antonio the other day. Vice President Dick Cheney poked his head out of his undisclosed location to briefly offer support for one of his minions - Congressman Henry Bonilla.
The vice president's hour-plus appearance before 110 GOP supporters raised more than $200,000 for Bonilla
But as one would expect with a visit from the devil, trouble follows where ever he goes:
the vice president's visit here wasn't all upbeat.
The visit triggered a traffic nightmare for motorists caught in jams as police cordoned off streets and U.S. 281 exits to allow his nine-vehicle motorcade to maneuver unimpeded.
Cheney has worse approval ratings than President Bush, and that is not easy to do these days. So I hope he gets out and campaigns for more and more Republicans these next few weeks.
The vice president's hour-plus appearance before 110 GOP supporters raised more than $200,000 for Bonilla
But as one would expect with a visit from the devil, trouble follows where ever he goes:
the vice president's visit here wasn't all upbeat.
The visit triggered a traffic nightmare for motorists caught in jams as police cordoned off streets and U.S. 281 exits to allow his nine-vehicle motorcade to maneuver unimpeded.
Cheney has worse approval ratings than President Bush, and that is not easy to do these days. So I hope he gets out and campaigns for more and more Republicans these next few weeks.
Monday, October 02, 2006
The See No Evil Party
I was glad to see there are some conservatives who are at least as disgusted by the Foley scandal as I am.
If Hastert and other members of the House leadership knowingly covered up for a pedophile, then they should step down from the leadership. They have lost the credibility and trust needed to lead.
But they still want to give themselves wiggle room that they would most certainly not grant if the accused was a Democrat being protected by Democratic leaders in the House:
If, however, he saw some emails that were not nearly so cut and dry pedophilia but were clearly inappropriate, then I might cut him some slack.
I think it is clear that there were enough red lights going off early on to warn about Foley’s behavior that waiting for sexually explicit IMs to show up was a failure of leadership. I think it would not have taken too much prodding to find the nastier stuff, but they didn’t want to find out about it and thus chose not to look. That is inexcusable.
So when is Denny Hastert going to step down?
If Hastert and other members of the House leadership knowingly covered up for a pedophile, then they should step down from the leadership. They have lost the credibility and trust needed to lead.
But they still want to give themselves wiggle room that they would most certainly not grant if the accused was a Democrat being protected by Democratic leaders in the House:
If, however, he saw some emails that were not nearly so cut and dry pedophilia but were clearly inappropriate, then I might cut him some slack.
I think it is clear that there were enough red lights going off early on to warn about Foley’s behavior that waiting for sexually explicit IMs to show up was a failure of leadership. I think it would not have taken too much prodding to find the nastier stuff, but they didn’t want to find out about it and thus chose not to look. That is inexcusable.
So when is Denny Hastert going to step down?
Wednesday, September 27, 2006
Democratic Senate prospects
The race for control of the U.S. Senate is getting more interesting by the day.
The Democrats essentially need to pick up five seats to wrest control from the Republicans and so far there are at least four seats that have been looking real promising.
In Pennsylvania, incumbent Republican Rick Santorum has been down by double digits to Democrat Bob Casey Jr. for almost the entire race.
In Montana, Democrat John Tester is starting to pull away from scandal-plaugued incumbent Conrad Burns.
In Ohio, Democrat Sherrod Brown has consistently held a lead over incumbent Mike DeWine for some time now.
And in Rhode Island, Democrat Sheldon Whitehouse has been ahead of RINO Lincoln Chafee since July.
Meanwhile, two more races are looking better recently:
In Tennessee, Democrat Harold Ford has pulled ahead of Republican Bob Corker in the race to replace Bill Frist.
And in Virginia, Republican George Allen’s campaign is in a full-scale meltdown over allegations of his racist past. He still has a slight lead over his Democratic challenger James Webb, but that may not last much longer at this rate.
Then in Missouri, Democrat Claire McCaskill is in striking distance of Republican Jim Talent, who had a slender 1-point lead in the latest polls.
The one problem area for Democrats is in New Jersey where Democrat Robert Menendez has recently fallen behind Republican Tom Kean Jr. in the latest polls.
But Democrats are looking good in several other races that were thought to be potentially vulnerable earlier in the year:
In Maryland, Democrat Ben Cardin has a comfortable lead over Republican Michael Steele.
And in Minnesota, Democrat Amy Klobuchar looks like she will hold on to the open seat being vacated by Sen. Mark Dayton.
Also, in Washington, Maria Cantwell is well ahead of her Republican challenger.
So assuming the Democratic tide continues to rise it is not hard to imagine a Democratic takeover of the Senate, even with a loss in New Jersey.
The Democrats essentially need to pick up five seats to wrest control from the Republicans and so far there are at least four seats that have been looking real promising.
In Pennsylvania, incumbent Republican Rick Santorum has been down by double digits to Democrat Bob Casey Jr. for almost the entire race.
In Montana, Democrat John Tester is starting to pull away from scandal-plaugued incumbent Conrad Burns.
In Ohio, Democrat Sherrod Brown has consistently held a lead over incumbent Mike DeWine for some time now.
And in Rhode Island, Democrat Sheldon Whitehouse has been ahead of RINO Lincoln Chafee since July.
Meanwhile, two more races are looking better recently:
In Tennessee, Democrat Harold Ford has pulled ahead of Republican Bob Corker in the race to replace Bill Frist.
And in Virginia, Republican George Allen’s campaign is in a full-scale meltdown over allegations of his racist past. He still has a slight lead over his Democratic challenger James Webb, but that may not last much longer at this rate.
Then in Missouri, Democrat Claire McCaskill is in striking distance of Republican Jim Talent, who had a slender 1-point lead in the latest polls.
The one problem area for Democrats is in New Jersey where Democrat Robert Menendez has recently fallen behind Republican Tom Kean Jr. in the latest polls.
But Democrats are looking good in several other races that were thought to be potentially vulnerable earlier in the year:
In Maryland, Democrat Ben Cardin has a comfortable lead over Republican Michael Steele.
And in Minnesota, Democrat Amy Klobuchar looks like she will hold on to the open seat being vacated by Sen. Mark Dayton.
Also, in Washington, Maria Cantwell is well ahead of her Republican challenger.
So assuming the Democratic tide continues to rise it is not hard to imagine a Democratic takeover of the Senate, even with a loss in New Jersey.
Shameless U.N. bashing
In Jonathan Gurwitz’ latest column he bashes the United Nations with complete disregard for the irony of his complaints. First he is upset that countries he deems to be morally inferior are given equal status with other nations.
Within the august international body, governments that imprison and murder political opponents have equal standing with those that follow the rule of law.
But, but, but... We torture people in secret prisons and we still get equal standing (better than that since we are on the Security Council with a prized veto power that most other nations lack). And as for the rule of law, Bush and company pretend that it does not apply to them in most cases, regardless of whether its the U.S. Constitution, the Geneval Accords or the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
And then there is this gem:
And regimes that threaten to wipe other countries off the map — in clear violation of the U.N. Charter's prohibition against the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state — are, like every other genocidal regime, members in good standing.
But, but, but... What about countries that don’t just threaten, but actually do use force against the territorial integrity or political independence of another state? You know, like we did with our unprovoked invasion of Iraq that went directly against a U.N. directive?
Then Gurwitz has this to say about Chavez’ suggestion that the U.N. headquarters be moved to Syria...
A diplomatic ensemble that pays homage to thugs such as Ahmadinejad and Chávez harmonizes far better with the groans of oppression in Damascus than the hum of freedom in New York.
Oh, I see. I guess that is why the Bush administration chooses to send prisoners to Syria to be tortured — so that their groans don’t disturb the “hum of freedom” over in this country.
Within the august international body, governments that imprison and murder political opponents have equal standing with those that follow the rule of law.
But, but, but... We torture people in secret prisons and we still get equal standing (better than that since we are on the Security Council with a prized veto power that most other nations lack). And as for the rule of law, Bush and company pretend that it does not apply to them in most cases, regardless of whether its the U.S. Constitution, the Geneval Accords or the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
And then there is this gem:
And regimes that threaten to wipe other countries off the map — in clear violation of the U.N. Charter's prohibition against the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state — are, like every other genocidal regime, members in good standing.
But, but, but... What about countries that don’t just threaten, but actually do use force against the territorial integrity or political independence of another state? You know, like we did with our unprovoked invasion of Iraq that went directly against a U.N. directive?
Then Gurwitz has this to say about Chavez’ suggestion that the U.N. headquarters be moved to Syria...
A diplomatic ensemble that pays homage to thugs such as Ahmadinejad and Chávez harmonizes far better with the groans of oppression in Damascus than the hum of freedom in New York.
Oh, I see. I guess that is why the Bush administration chooses to send prisoners to Syria to be tortured — so that their groans don’t disturb the “hum of freedom” over in this country.
Monday, September 25, 2006
Total vindication
The report on Sunday about the National Intelligence Estimate in the NYTimes and the Washington Post has totally and completely vindicated everything I’ve been saying about the war in Iraq from day one - which is that it has only made the terror threat worse and not better.
The war in Iraq has become a primary recruitment vehicle for violent Islamic extremists, motivating a new generation of potential terrorists around the world whose numbers may be increasing faster than the United States and its allies can reduce the threat, U.S. intelligence analysts have concluded....
The intelligence estimate, completed in April, is the first formal appraisal of global terrorism by United States intelligence agencies since the Iraq war began, and represents a consensus view of the 16 disparate spy services inside government.
The idiocy of the Bush administration’s response to 9/11 has now been completely exposed (or at least it will be if they ever release the NIE report). Iraq was the wrong war at the wrong time in the wrong place. It was like someone who got stung by a swarm of hornets and then decided to go stamp on a fire ant mound rather than search for the hornets’ nest.
Our nation has paid a heavy price for this administration’s incompetence and stupidity. I can only hope that there will not be an even bigger price to pay before we can finally get some halfway intelligent people back in charge of our government. This mid-term election will be crucial in that respect. People who still insist on voting for Republicans this time around are either thoroughly blinded by ideology or simply have their heads stuck in the sand. There is no other explanation at this point.
The war in Iraq has become a primary recruitment vehicle for violent Islamic extremists, motivating a new generation of potential terrorists around the world whose numbers may be increasing faster than the United States and its allies can reduce the threat, U.S. intelligence analysts have concluded....
The intelligence estimate, completed in April, is the first formal appraisal of global terrorism by United States intelligence agencies since the Iraq war began, and represents a consensus view of the 16 disparate spy services inside government.
The idiocy of the Bush administration’s response to 9/11 has now been completely exposed (or at least it will be if they ever release the NIE report). Iraq was the wrong war at the wrong time in the wrong place. It was like someone who got stung by a swarm of hornets and then decided to go stamp on a fire ant mound rather than search for the hornets’ nest.
Our nation has paid a heavy price for this administration’s incompetence and stupidity. I can only hope that there will not be an even bigger price to pay before we can finally get some halfway intelligent people back in charge of our government. This mid-term election will be crucial in that respect. People who still insist on voting for Republicans this time around are either thoroughly blinded by ideology or simply have their heads stuck in the sand. There is no other explanation at this point.
Sunday, September 24, 2006
Terrorism geting worse - Thanks, President Bush!
Oh, my!This is quite shocking:
A stark assessment of terrorism trends by American intelligence agencies has found that the American invasion and occupation of Iraq has helped spawn a new generation of Islamic radicalism and that the overall terrorist threat has grown since the Sept. 11 attacks.
So BushCo. has made things worse since 9/11 by launching their misguided war in Iraq, according to our intelligence agencies. They have helped to spread the jihad philosophy and turned more Muslims around the world into anti-American radicals.
A stark assessment of terrorism trends by American intelligence agencies has found that the American invasion and occupation of Iraq has helped spawn a new generation of Islamic radicalism and that the overall terrorist threat has grown since the Sept. 11 attacks.
So BushCo. has made things worse since 9/11 by launching their misguided war in Iraq, according to our intelligence agencies. They have helped to spread the jihad philosophy and turned more Muslims around the world into anti-American radicals.
Thursday, September 21, 2006
Torture case
The case of Maher Ararshould be very disturbing to most Americans. He is a Canadian citizen of Syrian descent who was falsely accused of being an Islamic extremist by the Candadian authorities in 2002.
The Syrian-born Mr. Arar was seized on Sept. 26, 2002, after he landed at Kennedy Airport in New York on his way home from a holiday in Tunisia. On Oct. 8, he was flown to Jordan in an American government plane and taken overland to Syria, where he says he was held for 10 months in a tiny cell and beaten repeatedly with a metal cable. He was freed in October 2003, after Syrian officials concluded that he had no connection to terrorism and returned him to Canada.
So when our government was informed that this man may have had connections to al-Qaeda our first reaction was to have him shipped over to Syria and tortured. And of course that was soooo effective considering that he immediately confessed to training with al-Qaeda at one of their camps in Afghanistan. But that turned out to be complete B.S. - he had never been to Afghanistan and had zero connection to al-Qaeda or any other extremist groups - so it was all for nothing. Meanwhile, we lied to the Canadians about his whereabouts so that they could not intervene.
As if this story was not awful enough, President Bush and the morally bankrupt Republican Party continues to push legislation that would make torture the common, everyday routine practice of our government - not even something that we would try and cover up anymore.
Quite frankly, the November elections can't get here soon enough. I just hope that there are still enough decent Americans paying attention to what has been going on to make a difference on election day.
The Syrian-born Mr. Arar was seized on Sept. 26, 2002, after he landed at Kennedy Airport in New York on his way home from a holiday in Tunisia. On Oct. 8, he was flown to Jordan in an American government plane and taken overland to Syria, where he says he was held for 10 months in a tiny cell and beaten repeatedly with a metal cable. He was freed in October 2003, after Syrian officials concluded that he had no connection to terrorism and returned him to Canada.
So when our government was informed that this man may have had connections to al-Qaeda our first reaction was to have him shipped over to Syria and tortured. And of course that was soooo effective considering that he immediately confessed to training with al-Qaeda at one of their camps in Afghanistan. But that turned out to be complete B.S. - he had never been to Afghanistan and had zero connection to al-Qaeda or any other extremist groups - so it was all for nothing. Meanwhile, we lied to the Canadians about his whereabouts so that they could not intervene.
As if this story was not awful enough, President Bush and the morally bankrupt Republican Party continues to push legislation that would make torture the common, everyday routine practice of our government - not even something that we would try and cover up anymore.
Quite frankly, the November elections can't get here soon enough. I just hope that there are still enough decent Americans paying attention to what has been going on to make a difference on election day.
Wednesday, September 20, 2006
The Devil made us do it
While making one of his patented Bush-bashing speeches at the U.N. today, Hugo Chavez, the brash, outspoken leader of Venezuela, waved a copy of a book by Noam Chomsky, demonstrating that he at least has good taste in literature.
This will, of course, excite a lot of the right-wing Chomsky-bashers into a frenzy of condemnation of the Cambridge-based linguist and U.S. foreign policy critic. But of course, Chomsky can’t control who reads his books (not that he would want to) nor does the character of the person reading the book detract from its truthfulness and sincerity.
But Chavez didn’t stop there in his provocations. I think he stepped over the line when he referred to President Bush as the Devil. This was an outrageous statement from a national leader and Chavez should apologize promptly. First off, it is clearly not true. Everybody knows that Dick Cheney is the Devil. Secondly, even if he was the Devil, we as U.S. citizens have the right to elect whomever the Supreme Court says we can. That’s what democracy is all about.
Tuesday, September 19, 2006
Which to believe?
Yesterday’s Washington Post had this article:
Corruption That Shook Capitol Isn't Rattling Elections
For all the influence-peddling that has been exposed in the run-up to the midterm election, corruption on Capitol Hill has not become a decisive issue -- here or in much of the country.
Today’s Wall Street Journal has this article:
Candidates Find It Hard To Shake Scandal
Politicians and pollsters say this year, widespread voter dissatisfaction with Congress has the electorate in a less forgiving mood. This campaign season also is marked by a number of close contests, making politicians vulnerable to charges of ethical lapses -- and raising the political stakes if the charges stick.
Corruption That Shook Capitol Isn't Rattling Elections
For all the influence-peddling that has been exposed in the run-up to the midterm election, corruption on Capitol Hill has not become a decisive issue -- here or in much of the country.
Today’s Wall Street Journal has this article:
Candidates Find It Hard To Shake Scandal
Politicians and pollsters say this year, widespread voter dissatisfaction with Congress has the electorate in a less forgiving mood. This campaign season also is marked by a number of close contests, making politicians vulnerable to charges of ethical lapses -- and raising the political stakes if the charges stick.
Saturday, September 16, 2006
The blind leading the blind
Reason 1,567 why George W. Bush is a doofus who should never have been elected president.
This is truly astounding. Here is a story in the Washington Post explaining in part why things are such a mess today over in Iraq. It's because this administration valued ideology over competence when picking people to send to help rebuild Iraq.
...A 24-year-old who had never worked in finance -- but had applied for a White House job -- was sent to reopen Baghdad's stock exchange.
... The daughter of a prominent neoconservative commentator and a recent graduate from an evangelical university for home-schooled children were tapped to manage Iraq's $13 billion budget, even though they didn't have a background in accounting.
It seems the most important consideration when picking people to rebuild Iraq was not whether they knew what they were doing and could get the job done, but whether they were loyal devotees of George W. Bush and fellow travelers in the right-wing conservative movement.
The decision to send the loyal and the willing instead of the best and the brightest is now regarded by many people involved in the 3 1/2 -year effort to stabilize and rebuild Iraq as one of the Bush administration's gravest errors. Many of those selected because of their political fidelity spent their time trying to impose a conservative agenda on the postwar occupation, which sidetracked more important reconstruction efforts and squandered goodwill among the Iraqi people, according to many people who participated in the reconstruction effort.
If you can stomach it, I would recommend reading the whole article. Why anyone would ever support anyone involved with this administration again is beyond me. It can only be explained by blind ideology or willful ignorance.
Launching this war in the first place was one of the worst, most-boneheaded decisions ever made by a U.S. president, but screwing up the occupation afterwards is probably a close second.
This is truly astounding. Here is a story in the Washington Post explaining in part why things are such a mess today over in Iraq. It's because this administration valued ideology over competence when picking people to send to help rebuild Iraq.
...A 24-year-old who had never worked in finance -- but had applied for a White House job -- was sent to reopen Baghdad's stock exchange.
... The daughter of a prominent neoconservative commentator and a recent graduate from an evangelical university for home-schooled children were tapped to manage Iraq's $13 billion budget, even though they didn't have a background in accounting.
It seems the most important consideration when picking people to rebuild Iraq was not whether they knew what they were doing and could get the job done, but whether they were loyal devotees of George W. Bush and fellow travelers in the right-wing conservative movement.
The decision to send the loyal and the willing instead of the best and the brightest is now regarded by many people involved in the 3 1/2 -year effort to stabilize and rebuild Iraq as one of the Bush administration's gravest errors. Many of those selected because of their political fidelity spent their time trying to impose a conservative agenda on the postwar occupation, which sidetracked more important reconstruction efforts and squandered goodwill among the Iraqi people, according to many people who participated in the reconstruction effort.
If you can stomach it, I would recommend reading the whole article. Why anyone would ever support anyone involved with this administration again is beyond me. It can only be explained by blind ideology or willful ignorance.
Launching this war in the first place was one of the worst, most-boneheaded decisions ever made by a U.S. president, but screwing up the occupation afterwards is probably a close second.
Friday, September 15, 2006
Tortured logic
I should know better than to ever let my radio dial stray anywhere near a station that plays Rush Limbaugh. The other day while I was surfing the AM stations I let it stay on Rush Limbaugh for just 30 seconds, but that’s all it took for him to say something that just ticked me off for the rest of the day. Rush Limbaugh is such a lying pig. People who listen to his show must just get stupider by the day. It is unreal.
During that 30 seconds, Rush was in a huff about critics of Bush’s interrogation policy and he suddenly announced that waterboarding is not torture because our own troops go through waterboarding as part of their training.
Bull! They do not!! Argghhh!!! Such a liar!!!!
I can guarantee you that our troops do not get strapped to a board and submerged underwater and made to think they are going to drown as part of any kind of training.
Now there is one secretive program at Fort Bragg, as I understand, where a few elite troops who regularly go behind enemy lines are specially trained to resist torture techniques, one of which is a form of waterboarding. But to imply that all our troops receive such training, or that waterboarding is therefore not a form of torture is B.S.
I remember my dad talking about his Air Force survival training before he was sent to Vietnam. It mainly involved being dumped out in the middle of a desert with little more than a pocket knife and a compass. It certainly did not involve being strapped down and held underwater.
But Rush Limbaugh wants his gullible listeners to think that waterboarding is no big deal. Just another college frat prank like George W. used to pull all the time at Yale. HaHaHa.
Like I’ve said before, torturing people is wrong. I don’t care if we are talking about Osama bin Laden himself, it is still wrong. We are better than that and for our president to insist that we must stoop down to Saddam Hussein’s level is just shameful.
RINO victorious
The Republicans managed to prop up liberal Sen. Lincoln Chaffee the other day by dumping a lot of money into the Rhode Island Republican Primary so that he could ward off a stiff challenge from a conservative newcomer.
I was conflicted by the results. A victory by the conservative candidate would have pretty much guaranteed a Democratic victory in November — Rhode Island is about 80 percent Democratic. Republicans were prepared to pull up stakes and concede the seat in that case.
But by winning, Republicans will have to spend even more money in the fall if Chaffee hopes to hang on against Democrat Sheldon Whitehouse.
I can think of worse ways for Republicans to spend their money than supporting a guy who I agree with about 90 percent of the time. Heh heh heh.
I was conflicted by the results. A victory by the conservative candidate would have pretty much guaranteed a Democratic victory in November — Rhode Island is about 80 percent Democratic. Republicans were prepared to pull up stakes and concede the seat in that case.
But by winning, Republicans will have to spend even more money in the fall if Chaffee hopes to hang on against Democrat Sheldon Whitehouse.
I can think of worse ways for Republicans to spend their money than supporting a guy who I agree with about 90 percent of the time. Heh heh heh.
Wednesday, September 13, 2006
Ann Richards remembered
One of my favorite politicians has died.
Ann Richards was 73.
It was a thrill to see her win the governor's election in 1990, defeating a prominent Aggie by the name of Clayton Williams. How prominent? The Texas A&M Association of Former Students building is named after him, if that's any indication.
I still have my "Aggies for Ann Richards" T-shirt from her first gubernatorial campaign. A very rare item indeed.
I had an Ann Richards for Governor bumper sticker on my truck when I got married. And one of the first trips my wife and I took after our honeymoon was to go to Ann Richard's inauguration in Austin.
I thought she did an excellent job as governor and truly deserved a second term. Her one big mistake, in my opinion, was signing the Texas Lottery into law. Unfortunately, I think public support for a lottery back then was so strong that it would have been hard for any politician to stand in its way and it probably would have been approved regardless of who was governor.
I only got to meet Richards one time, during an Aggie Democrats function during her first campaign (Carol Channing was there too!) In 1994, she did not campaign in Kerrville (one of the most solidly Republican areas in the state) so I did not have the opportunity to interview her like I did George W. Bush.
Bush wasn't a bad governor, but he has been a lousy president. It is too bad that Ann Richard's political career ended so soon. If she had won re-election, and Bush had been forced to go back and do something he was good at, like being part-owner of the Texas Rangers, then things would be very different today. We would not be bogged down in Iraq. Osama bin Laden would already be dead or captured. And we might even still have a surplus.
Rest in Peace, Ann Richards.
Tuesday, September 12, 2006
Tie a yellow ribbon
It’s getting easier to find my car in the parking lot these days. All I have to do is look for the one that still has one of those yellow-ribbon magnets on the bumper.
It used to be that the those yellow-ribbon magnets were everywhere, but now it seems as if the novelty has worn off. I think it is ironic that I would be one of the last ones still sporting a “Support the Troops” sticker on my car, considering that I have opposed this war from the start. However, the beauty of the yellow ribbon sticker was that it could mean different things for different people. For war supporters it meant “I support the troops, now go kick some butt!” While for war opponents it meant “I support the troops, now get them the Hell out of there!”
But today the predominant message seems to be one of bored indifference. Except for those people who have family or friends in Iraq, the war coverage doesn’t excite us anymore. In fact, it has become something of a bummer and most of us would just as soon watch a re-run of CSI-Miami rather than hear about the latest attacks by the insurgency. The war in Iraq is suffering the same fate as a once-successful football team that is now having a string of losing seasons. When the team is winning, everyone is a fan. But when it is losing, the fans disappear and move on to the next winning team.
There are still some diehard fans of the war, cheering enthusiastically regardless of the reality in Iraq. And there are still some diehard opponents of the war who insist (rightfully so in my opinion) that we need to pull the plug on the whole operation. But the vast majority of folks in the middle seem to have just lost interest altogether. They seem content to just let Bush and Co. coast along with the status quo until his term in office ends. And the dearth of yellow-ribbon stickers on cars is just one small indication of our national boredom with the war.
Monday, September 11, 2006
What could have been
In recognition of the 5th anniversary of 9-11 I am posting an address that former Vice President Al Gore gave to the Council on Foreign Governments five months after the tragedy that I found over at Political Animal.
Al Gore
Address to the Council on Foreign Relations
February 12, 2002
I am grateful to be back before the Council on Foreign Relations and I want to congratulate Les Gelb and the entire Council — its staff and its members — on the great work you have been doing to deepen our understanding of America’s role in the world.
A lot of people have let me know they wished I had been speaking out on public affairs long before now. But in the aftermath of a very divisive election, I thought it would be graceless to do so and possibly damaging to the nation. And then came September 11th.
In the immediate aftermath, I expressed full support for our Commander-in-Chief, President George W. Bush. Tonight I reaffirm that support of the President’s conduct of the military campaign in Afghanistan, and I appreciate his candor in telling the American people that this will be a long struggle — for which the nation must be braced and its political leadership united across party lines.
Indeed, President Bush deserves tremendous credit for the way he has led the nation in a highly successful opening counter-attack in the war against terror.
All Americans are proud of our nation's triumph — and especially proud of the courage and skill that our armed forces have demonstrated in winning swift and decisive victories. Our men and women in uniform have shown uncommon valor and the highest levels of dedication, professionalism and preparedness in responding to this enormous challenge. They have proved they are up to the task and I know they will continue to protect and defend us in the coming stages of the military campaign as well.
If yesterday marked the five month anniversary of the darkest day in American history, today — the Day After — must mark the anniversary of one of the greatest days in American history: because on September 12, a bruised and battered nation began to fight back. Some fought back by rushing to aid and rescue the few surviving victims of the tragedy — and to aid and comfort the grieving and bereaved. Here in this city, even this today, remains are still being removed from the World Trade Center site.
Some fought back by reporting to reserve units or shipping out for extended tours of duty. And still others reported for duty on the front lines of our homeland defense as firefighters, police, nurses, border patrol, and others whose courage and sacrifices are admired and appreciated now more than ever.
The Axis of Evil
I also support the President's stated goals in the next phases of the war against terrorism as he laid them out in the State of the Union. What I want to talk about tonight are the fundamental, strategic questions before us as a nation. What are the next steps in the war against terrorism? And beyond immediate next steps, what is the longer-range plan of action? And finally, what should be done to deal with root causes of this threat?
Since the State of the Union, there has been much discussion of whether Iraq, Iran and North Korea truly constitute an "Axis of Evil." As far as I'm concerned, there really is something to be said for occasionally putting diplomacy aside and laying one's cards on the table. There is value in calling evil by its name.
One should never underestimate the power of bold words coming from a President of the United States. Jimmy Carter's espousal of human rights as an integral part of American foreign policy was in truth the crucial first step towards the democratic transformation of Latin America. And Ronald Reagan's blast against "the evil empire" was a pivotal moment reminding everyone that there was more at issue in the struggle between east and west than a contest for power.
As important as identifying Iraq, Iran and North Korea for what they are, we must be equally bold in identifying other evils that confront us. For there is another Axis of Evil in the world: poverty and ignorance; disease and environmental disorder; corruption and political oppression. We may well put down terror in its present manifestations. But if we do not attend to the larger fundamentals as well, then the ground is fertile and has been seeded for the next generation of those born to hate us, who will hold these things up before the world's poor and dispossessed, and say that all these things are in our image, and rekindle the war we are now hoping to snuff out.
"Draining the swamp" of terrorism must of course in the first instance mean destroying the ability of terrorist networks to function. But drying it up at its source must also mean draining the aquifer of anger that underlies terrorism: anger that enflames the hearts of so many young men, and makes them willing, dedicated recruits for terror. Anger at perceived historical injustices involving a mass-memory throughout the Islamic world of past glory and more recent centuries of decline and oppression at the hands of the West.
Anger at the cynicism of Western policy during the Cold War: often aligning itself with corrupt and tyrannical governments. And even after all that, anger at the continued failure to thrive, as rates of economic growth stagnate, while the cohort of unemployed young men under twenty continues to increase.
This is anger different than the pure evil represented by terrorists, but anger nonetheless — anger which is the medium on which the impulse to terrorism thrives. The evil we now confront is not just the one-time creation of a charismatic leader and his co-conspirators, or even of a handful of regimes. What we deal with now is today's manifestation of an anger welling up from deep layers of grievance shared by many millions of people.
Military force alone cannot deal with this. Public diplomacy alone cannot drain this reservoir. What will be needed is a far reaching American strategy for encouraging reform, and for engaging day in and day out with societies that are trying to cast off the curse of bitter experience relived continuously. Hope for the future is the only way to put out these fires.
What is "evil" anyway? I do not pretend to have the answer to such a question but my faith tradition teaches me that all of us have the potential inside of us for both good and evil. Indeed, the first example of murderous violence in the Bible is the story of the two sons of Adam and Eve. With slight differences, it is the same story told in Chapter five, verses 27 through 31 of "Sura" in the Koran, where Muslims read that both Cain and Abel "offered an offering, but it was accepted from one of them and was not accepted from the other." Feeling disrespected by God, Cain said to his brother, "I will most certainly slay you... then his mind facilitated to him the slaying of his brother, so he slew him; then he became one of the losers."
Disrespect, the feeling that what one has to offer in life has been rejected, the feeling that one has joined history’s losers can make us as human beings more vulnerable to evil.
Conservative theologian Michael Novak wrote recently of America’s founders’ view that, "there is evil in the world and it coagulates, it gathers force, and if it bursts its bounds endangers everybody." In a brilliant essay that was otherwise full of praise for President Bush’s actions in the war against terror, Novak concluded with an important caution: "The word ‘evil’, when used only of others, can intoxicate the user before he knows it. I commend to him [the President], and all of us, [Reinhold] Neibuhr’s pregnant warning: ‘the final enigma of history is therefore not how the righteous will gain victory over the un-righteous, but how the evil in every good and the un-righteousness of the righteous is to be overcome.’"
We must also expand our idea of what constitutes a threat to our security in the long run, and be prepared to confront and deal with these things, too. It is time to accept that massive environmental disorder including global warming is literally a threat to international peace and stability. We must finally develop alternatives to mid-eastern oil, internal combustion engines, inefficient boilers and the inertia that has paralyzed needed efforts at conservation.
HIV/AIDS is a national security threat. It is now the most deadly pandemic in the history of the world. U.S. leadership is needed.
We must acknowledge that the utter poverty of hundreds of millions of people is not a matter for compassion only, but a threat in the long term to the growth and vigor of the global economic system. We must see it as a part of our charge to help create economic opportunity so that the gap between the richest and poorest does not grow ever wider.
Globalized crime is a cousin to globalized terror, and along with corruption needs to be dealt with as an urgent threat to civil society.
Our most important immediate task is to continue to tear up the Al Qaeda network, and since it is present in many countries, it will be an operation, which requires new forms of sustained cooperation with other governments.
Even if we give first priority to the destruction of terrorist networks, and even if we succeed, there are still governments that could bring us great harm. And there is a clear case that one of these governments in particular represents a virulent threat in a class by itself: Iraq.
As far as I am concerned, a final reckoning with that government should be on the table. To my way of thinking, the real question is not the principle of the thing, but of making sure that this time we will finish the matter on our terms. But finishing it on our terms means more than a change of regime in Iraq. It means thinking through the consequences of action there on our other vital interests, including the survival in office of Pakistan's leader; avoiding a huge escalation of violence in the Middle East; provision for the security and interests of Saudi Arabia, Turkey and the Gulf States; having a workable plan for preventing the disintegration of Iraq into chaos; and sustaining critically important support within the present coalition.
In 1991, I crossed party lines and supported the use of force against Saddam Hussein, but he was allowed to survive his defeat as the result of a calculation we all had reason to deeply regret for the ensuing decade. And we still do. So this time, if we resort to force, we must absolutely get it right. It must be an action set up carefully and on the basis of the most realistic concepts. Failure cannot be an option, which means that we must be prepared to go the limit. And wishful thinking based on best-case scenarios or excessively literal transfers of recent experience to different conditions would be a recipe for disaster.
But still, the question remains — what next? Is Iran under the hard-liners less of a proliferation threat than Iraq? Or less involved with terrorism? If anything, Iran is at this moment a much more dangerous challenge in each area than Iraq. Iran is flight-testing longer range rockets. Iran has loaded up at least one merchant ship with a cargo of death for Israel.
The vast majority of the Iranian people seem to disagree with the policies and actions of the small group of mullahs now in control of their military and intelligence apparatus. We have to deal with that nation’s actions as they take place. In the process, however, we should find ways to encourage the majority who obviously wish to develop a more constructive relationship with us.
On the Korean peninsula, unlike in the previous two cases, we have a strong ally in South Korea. It is not enough to call North Korea what it is — evil. We need to continue to keep the peace by remaining ready for war, as we have for almost fifty years. We also need to work with President Kim Dae Jung and the government in the Republic of Korea to galvanize positive action on the peninsula. Throughout the 1990s we proved that a creative, sustained program could help move the North Korean regime in new directions. Such creativity and commitment to addressing our interests in Korea are needed more than ever now.
And supposing even that we could eliminate the threat presented by the "Axis of Evil?" at what point, can the United States declare that the job is done, and leave the scene? Here, a too narrow definition of the threat, and a too limited assessment of its causes, can lead us into trouble.
It is important that America not just stand tall against terrorists, but America must also stand for economic opportunity and democratic freedoms. America must stand for human rights. America must stand for the rights of women. America must stand for environmental protection and energy conservation.
Unilateralism and hubris
The Administration in which I served looked at the challenges we faced in the world and said we wished to tackle these "With others, if possible; alone, if we must." This Administration sometimes seems inclined to stand that on its head, so that the message is: "With others, if we must; by ourselves, if possible."
The coalition so skillfully assembled by the President is one that may dissipate as rapidly as it coalesced, unless we make an investment in its permanence, beginning with a more evident respect on our part for the views and interests of its members. As regards our most important established alliance, NATO, we convey impatience and disdain for the military capabilities of its other members, and little patience for their views about longer-term objectives.
Maybe they have earned a good deal of that by their failure to invest in capabilities they only talk about; maybe some of them have been much too ready to believe that the best way to deal with dangerous forces is always to engage them in dialogue. Maybe some of them have bought peace for themselves by not looking too hard for terrorists who plot against us on their soil, so long as their plans did not disturb domestic tranquility.
But we need them with us — and equally for sure, we cannot bind them to us for fierce battle over the long term if we take them lightly. We may be the world’s sole remaining super-power but we are going to need allies. In Greek mythology, Hercules was the super-power of his day, but when he faced his most dangerous foe, the multi-headed Hydra which — like the terrorist networks of today — grew two new heads every time one was cut off — he had to build a coalition. Uncharacteristically he teamed up with an ally because it was the only way he could prevail.
Continuity of effort
One of the truly bad things about our politics is that it incites each administration to attack every last thing its predecessor has done, and to either tear down what was left or rename it so that its parentage can be forgotten. We did some of that — but we also kept a lot of what we inherited from the first Bush administration and we protected it and built upon it. The struggle against terror may last for a very long time, even past a shift of parties in power. You know, the Cold War was won by the cumulative work of administrations from Harry S Truman to George H. W. Bush. And I hope that the present administration chooses to invest in reconstructing a sense of what bipartisanship in the defense of the country is all about: even after the planes land and the guns stop firing.
I don't pretend to any received wisdom but I learned a lot from my experience in the Clinton-Gore administration: lessons I think are worth remembering and incorporating into the normal practice of our diplomacy — and of protecting from the vicious rip- tides of our politics. I know from experience that bi-partisanship is no easy matter. It is difficult to go against one's own political base, whether it’s a Democrat supporting the MX missile or a Republican trying to cancel an obsolete 70 ton artillery piece.
Above all, I learned that our engagement with others on behalf of common values is something that must be of profound intent, and of long duration. It isn't enough to destroy what is evil, and then seek to leave by the nearest door. We must make the commitment to work with those whom we have rescued until they can stand on their own feet.
That means supporting an increase in the size of the international security force in Afghanistan and enlarging its mandate beyond Kabul to the whole country. And it means remaining engaged ourselves, if not with a small symbolic presences in the international force on the ground, then at least as on the horizon ready to respond with help from the air when needed.
When all is said and done, I hope that when the people of our country next return the White House for a time to the Democratic Party, our leadership then will be big enough to salute the present administration for what it will have done that is wise and good. And to build upon it forthrightly.
Towards that end, we must now expand our concept of what is needed to reach the goals upon which we all agree. The United States needs to create a world made more just and more hopeful, not just a world made more profitable for ourselves. I hope that this President’s record makes it damn hard for the competition to complain about his record in foreign policy. That may be bad for the loyal opposition. But it’s good for the people, who deserve it. And I promise my support for whatever he may do in support of that prayer.
Saturday, September 09, 2006
A hunting we will go...
Check out the front page of Saturday's San Antonio Express-News.
A big photo of Gov. Rick Perry in full hunting regalia complete with a dead buck. And here is the caption that runs with the photo (I kid you not):
Gov. Rick Perry's image as a hunter is so important in Texas politics that his campaign provided this picture.
And so, of course, the Express-News dutifully ran the picture on the front page of the paper today. Thank you, Express-News! I'm sure the Rick Perry for Governor campaign greatly appreciates it!
Sheesh! I suppose tomorrow they might as well formally endorse the governor and drop the charade of being objective in this election.
Update
On Sunday the E-N had another story on the governor’s race, this one about the importance of religion in the campaign. The only surprise was that they did not run a photo of Gov. Perry on his knees, praying in church. I suppose the Rick Perry for Governor campaign missed a great opportunity by not supply the E-N with that photo.
A big photo of Gov. Rick Perry in full hunting regalia complete with a dead buck. And here is the caption that runs with the photo (I kid you not):
Gov. Rick Perry's image as a hunter is so important in Texas politics that his campaign provided this picture.
And so, of course, the Express-News dutifully ran the picture on the front page of the paper today. Thank you, Express-News! I'm sure the Rick Perry for Governor campaign greatly appreciates it!
Sheesh! I suppose tomorrow they might as well formally endorse the governor and drop the charade of being objective in this election.
Update
On Sunday the E-N had another story on the governor’s race, this one about the importance of religion in the campaign. The only surprise was that they did not run a photo of Gov. Perry on his knees, praying in church. I suppose the Rick Perry for Governor campaign missed a great opportunity by not supply the E-N with that photo.
9-11 will never happen again
The one thing that still strikes me about 9-11 is how ingenious it was. They couldn't fly a plane over here and drop bombs on us, so they hijacked planes instead and turned them into bombs. The hijackers didn't need explosives or WMDs. Just some box cutters.
Nobody saw it coming and thus they were able to pull it off at first. But the novelty wore off before the attacks were even finished. Once the passengers on United 93 found out via cell phones that other planes had been used to strike the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, they fought like hell and brought the plane down.
That's why there will never be another 9-11 like that. It doesn't have anything to do with what President Bush has or has not done with regards to Homeland Security. It is simply a matter of a change of perspective of airline passengers. A terrorist today could not take control of a plane using just a razor blade or a knife. People today just aren't going to let them take control of a plane without putting up a fight. The days of passengers sitting back on hijacked planes expecting that they will just be flown to some other location where the hijacker will seek asylum are over. In fact, I would bet there have been fewer hijackings since 9-11 because of this. I don't actually know if that is true, but that would be my guess.
And even if someone did get control of a plane, our military would not hesitate to shoot it out of the sky before it could get near any major target areas.
What still worries us, however, is that bin Laden probably knew it was a one-shot deal and is now busy plotting other very different, but equally ingenious ways to attack us. That fear of the unknown is what has kept the Bush administration propped up these past five years. But now, at long last, people are finally starting to realize that this president, the worst president in modern history, is not making us safer and more secure. To the contrary, he has depleted our military resources, inflamed Muslim passions against us and provided al-Qaeda with incredible recruiting opportunities which they are currently using to great effect in Iraq and Afghanistan to launch suicide bombing attacks everyday.
Nobody saw it coming and thus they were able to pull it off at first. But the novelty wore off before the attacks were even finished. Once the passengers on United 93 found out via cell phones that other planes had been used to strike the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, they fought like hell and brought the plane down.
That's why there will never be another 9-11 like that. It doesn't have anything to do with what President Bush has or has not done with regards to Homeland Security. It is simply a matter of a change of perspective of airline passengers. A terrorist today could not take control of a plane using just a razor blade or a knife. People today just aren't going to let them take control of a plane without putting up a fight. The days of passengers sitting back on hijacked planes expecting that they will just be flown to some other location where the hijacker will seek asylum are over. In fact, I would bet there have been fewer hijackings since 9-11 because of this. I don't actually know if that is true, but that would be my guess.
And even if someone did get control of a plane, our military would not hesitate to shoot it out of the sky before it could get near any major target areas.
What still worries us, however, is that bin Laden probably knew it was a one-shot deal and is now busy plotting other very different, but equally ingenious ways to attack us. That fear of the unknown is what has kept the Bush administration propped up these past five years. But now, at long last, people are finally starting to realize that this president, the worst president in modern history, is not making us safer and more secure. To the contrary, he has depleted our military resources, inflamed Muslim passions against us and provided al-Qaeda with incredible recruiting opportunities which they are currently using to great effect in Iraq and Afghanistan to launch suicide bombing attacks everyday.
Tuesday, September 05, 2006
Things are looking brighter
I’m still wary of being overly optimistic about the upcoming mid-term elections, but stories like this one are beginning to give me hope that the American electorate may have finally regained its sanity.
This administration has been a complete and total disaster by every conceivable measure. There is nothing they can show as a positive in trying to make the case for keeping their party in power and the best they can do is yell “Booga, booga!! The terrorists are gonna’ get you!!” at every opportunity.
There was a graphic that ran in Sunday’s NY Times that made a particularly compelling case about the precarious position House Republicans find themselves in today. It compared a number of statistics between past mid-term elections and the one coming up next month. Here is the gist of it looking at the 1994 election that ushered the Republicans into power 12 long years ago:
President’s approval rating:
1994: 45 percent
2006: 37 percent
Percent of voters who say their vote will be against the president:
1994: 18 percent
2006: 35 percent
Congress’ approval rating:
1994: 27 percent
2006: 27 percent
Favorable rating of the Republican Party:
1994: 63 percent
2006: 40 percent
Percent satisfied with national conditions:
1994: 24 percent
2006: 30 percent
Gasoline prices per gallon:
1994: $1.52
2006: $2.92
In 1994, Democrats lost 53 House seats as Republicans took majority control of Congress for the first time in decades.
In 2006, Republicans need only lose 15 House seats to lose their tentative grip on the House majority.
This administration has been a complete and total disaster by every conceivable measure. There is nothing they can show as a positive in trying to make the case for keeping their party in power and the best they can do is yell “Booga, booga!! The terrorists are gonna’ get you!!” at every opportunity.
There was a graphic that ran in Sunday’s NY Times that made a particularly compelling case about the precarious position House Republicans find themselves in today. It compared a number of statistics between past mid-term elections and the one coming up next month. Here is the gist of it looking at the 1994 election that ushered the Republicans into power 12 long years ago:
President’s approval rating:
1994: 45 percent
2006: 37 percent
Percent of voters who say their vote will be against the president:
1994: 18 percent
2006: 35 percent
Congress’ approval rating:
1994: 27 percent
2006: 27 percent
Favorable rating of the Republican Party:
1994: 63 percent
2006: 40 percent
Percent satisfied with national conditions:
1994: 24 percent
2006: 30 percent
Gasoline prices per gallon:
1994: $1.52
2006: $2.92
In 1994, Democrats lost 53 House seats as Republicans took majority control of Congress for the first time in decades.
In 2006, Republicans need only lose 15 House seats to lose their tentative grip on the House majority.
Croc Hunter RIP
I hated seeing the news about Steve Irwin dying the other day. I think it is the most tragic celebrity news I’ve seen since the late Christopher Reeve fell off his horse and became a parapalegic. Irwin was the kind of guy you expected to live forever, despite the fact that he constantly took risks. Kind of like Evil Kneivel.
The Crocodile Hunter was a favorite show at our household where the TV can usually be found skipping between Animal Planet, The Discovery Channel and Home and Garden Network.
I think what disturbed me the most is that he was only a few years older than me and his son is the same age as my little boy. Life is precious and he lived it to the fullest. My most sincere condolences to his family.
Thursday, August 31, 2006
The Armitage revelation
My friend Mark Harden is dancing a little jig in the endzone to celebrate what he believes is the ignominious end of the CIA Leak scandal brought on by the revelation that Robert Novak’s primary source was Richard Armitage, a top aide to then-Secretary of State Colin Powell.
Why this should make any difference is unclear to me, however. We know that Novak was not the first journalist to learn about Valerie Plame, just the first to actually go to press with it. We also know that Novak went to Karl Rove with this information to get confirmation before going to press.
Kevin Drum sums it up well here.
Armitage is hardly the end of the story. Whether his gossiping was innocent or not — about which I remain agnostic — the fact remains that several other people were also aggressively talking to multiple reporters about Plame's role at the same time. If Armitage really didn't have any malicious intent, it's a helluva coincidence that he happened to be gossiping about the exact same thing as a bunch of other people who did have malicious intent.
And David Corn makes clear why and how the White House campaign to discredit Ambassador Wilson set the ball to rollling in the first place.
The Armitage leak was not directly a part of the White House's fierce anti-Wilson crusade. But as Hubris notes, it was, in a way, linked to the White House effort, for Amitage had been sent a key memo about Wilson's trip that referred to his wife and her CIA connection, and this memo had been written, according to special counsel Patrick Fitzgerald, at the request of I. Lewis Scooter Libby, the vice president's chief of staff. Libby had asked for the memo because he was looking to protect his boss from the mounting criticism that Bush and Cheney had misrepresented the WMD intelligence to garner public support for the invasion of Iraq.
Finally, if the fact that Armitage was Novak’s primary source somehow makes everything OK with respect to the administration’s involvement in outing a covert CIA operative, why did Patrick Fitzgerald go forward with the investigation anyway? We also know that Novak went to Fitzgerald at the outset and told him who his sources were. So Fitzgerald has known all along that Armitage was Novak’s first source, and yet he pushed forward with the case and still indicted Scooter Libby for perjury and obstruction of justice. So the Armitage revelation changes nothing in that respect.
Also, if it was all no big deal, as Bush supporters are now claiming, why did Libby perjure himself before the grand jury?
Why this should make any difference is unclear to me, however. We know that Novak was not the first journalist to learn about Valerie Plame, just the first to actually go to press with it. We also know that Novak went to Karl Rove with this information to get confirmation before going to press.
Kevin Drum sums it up well here.
Armitage is hardly the end of the story. Whether his gossiping was innocent or not — about which I remain agnostic — the fact remains that several other people were also aggressively talking to multiple reporters about Plame's role at the same time. If Armitage really didn't have any malicious intent, it's a helluva coincidence that he happened to be gossiping about the exact same thing as a bunch of other people who did have malicious intent.
And David Corn makes clear why and how the White House campaign to discredit Ambassador Wilson set the ball to rollling in the first place.
The Armitage leak was not directly a part of the White House's fierce anti-Wilson crusade. But as Hubris notes, it was, in a way, linked to the White House effort, for Amitage had been sent a key memo about Wilson's trip that referred to his wife and her CIA connection, and this memo had been written, according to special counsel Patrick Fitzgerald, at the request of I. Lewis Scooter Libby, the vice president's chief of staff. Libby had asked for the memo because he was looking to protect his boss from the mounting criticism that Bush and Cheney had misrepresented the WMD intelligence to garner public support for the invasion of Iraq.
Finally, if the fact that Armitage was Novak’s primary source somehow makes everything OK with respect to the administration’s involvement in outing a covert CIA operative, why did Patrick Fitzgerald go forward with the investigation anyway? We also know that Novak went to Fitzgerald at the outset and told him who his sources were. So Fitzgerald has known all along that Armitage was Novak’s first source, and yet he pushed forward with the case and still indicted Scooter Libby for perjury and obstruction of justice. So the Armitage revelation changes nothing in that respect.
Also, if it was all no big deal, as Bush supporters are now claiming, why did Libby perjure himself before the grand jury?
Tuesday, August 29, 2006
Bush hosting murdering, theiving dictator
Remember this the next time Bush talks about his support for freedom and democracy around the world:
This week President Bush will be rolling out the red carpet for Nursultan Nazarbayev, the autocratic leader of Kazakhstan who is currently under investigation by the Justice Department for accepting millions of dollars in bribes.
Nazarbayev has banned opposition parties, intimidated the press and profited from his post, according to the U.S. government. But he also sits atop massive oil reserves that have helped open doors in Washington.
Nazarbayev is the elected leader of Kazakhstan in the same way that Saddam Hussein was the elected leader of Iraq. He won his last “election” with more than 91 percent of the vote, but that’s not hard to do when you have outlawed the political opposition and when your political opponents keep winding up gunned down on the side of the road.
This week President Bush will be rolling out the red carpet for Nursultan Nazarbayev, the autocratic leader of Kazakhstan who is currently under investigation by the Justice Department for accepting millions of dollars in bribes.
Nazarbayev has banned opposition parties, intimidated the press and profited from his post, according to the U.S. government. But he also sits atop massive oil reserves that have helped open doors in Washington.
Nazarbayev is the elected leader of Kazakhstan in the same way that Saddam Hussein was the elected leader of Iraq. He won his last “election” with more than 91 percent of the vote, but that’s not hard to do when you have outlawed the political opposition and when your political opponents keep winding up gunned down on the side of the road.
Canon Rock
I can’t believe this kid hasn’t been signed to a recording contract yet! Are the record company executives insane?
If the Baha Boys were able to make a mint with “Who Let the Dogs Out?”, then surely Jeong-Hyun Lim and the composer Jerry Chang should make a small fortune for this.
They should invite these two fellows to perform this piece during the halftime show at the Super Bowl.
If the Baha Boys were able to make a mint with “Who Let the Dogs Out?”, then surely Jeong-Hyun Lim and the composer Jerry Chang should make a small fortune for this.
They should invite these two fellows to perform this piece during the halftime show at the Super Bowl.
Monday, August 28, 2006
Chicks’ boost country music sales
I finally bought the Dixie Chick’s latest cd last week and was intrigued by this story about the last country radio station in L.A. shutting down:
Despite big sales, L.A. loses country radio
...the city lost its last country music channel when KZLA-FM (93.9), self-billed as "America's most listened-to country station," changed its format for the first time in 25 years - to a pop format focusing on beat-heavy R&B and dance tunes....
Ironically, KZLA's change comes at a time when country music is flourishing. While album sales of most musical genres have declined, country music has experienced one of its best years. During the first six months of 2006, U.S. sales of country albums increased by 17.7 percent to 36 million, according to Nielsen SoundScan. Best sellers from bands such as Rascal Flatts and the Dixie Chicks have driven those increases.
So if I am getting this straight, the Dixie Chicks are helping to boost country music sales at a time when country radio stations are suffering. The irony, of course is that many of these country radio stations refuse to play the Dixie Chicks despite their popularity because they are run by people who are unhappy with the Chicks’ political views. I guess it is just too much to expect that these stations would play the music that people want to hear. They would rather stick to their right-wing agenda even if it means that they will suffer financially.
Despite big sales, L.A. loses country radio
...the city lost its last country music channel when KZLA-FM (93.9), self-billed as "America's most listened-to country station," changed its format for the first time in 25 years - to a pop format focusing on beat-heavy R&B and dance tunes....
Ironically, KZLA's change comes at a time when country music is flourishing. While album sales of most musical genres have declined, country music has experienced one of its best years. During the first six months of 2006, U.S. sales of country albums increased by 17.7 percent to 36 million, according to Nielsen SoundScan. Best sellers from bands such as Rascal Flatts and the Dixie Chicks have driven those increases.
So if I am getting this straight, the Dixie Chicks are helping to boost country music sales at a time when country radio stations are suffering. The irony, of course is that many of these country radio stations refuse to play the Dixie Chicks despite their popularity because they are run by people who are unhappy with the Chicks’ political views. I guess it is just too much to expect that these stations would play the music that people want to hear. They would rather stick to their right-wing agenda even if it means that they will suffer financially.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)