U.S. Establishing Diplomatic Presence in Iran?

Here’s my theory:

A younger, well-read student of history disguises himself as an older, white male Republican. Imagine a light navy suit, white shirt with the collar that buttons down at the corners, bright-red tie, over-sized American flag lapel pin, light brown hair - slightly graying - that’s been calling for a clip for a week. Somehow, this Navy Suit gains audience with the president - the specifics aren’t important - and extracts a thin, hollow tube from his pants - no, not that tube! - a bamboo tube.

Without notice, a dart tipped with the Secret Serum of Logic (found at one of the oldest, unnoticed library’s in the U.S.) is loaded into the thin tube. The Navy Suit raises the tube to his lips and, much like we’ve seen on TV or even practiced ourselves with paper-wrapped straws, emits a sharp, intense breath into the elongated apparatus, forcing the dart from its launching position into the neck of the President of the United States of America, who unfortunately carries the name George W. Bush and dreams of spooning Dick Cheney in the nighttime.

Not-so-coincidentally, soon after the so-called “Dart Incident,” Army Lt. Gen. James Dubik says U.S. ground troops will be “mostly finished” in Iraq by mid-2009.

Most stunning of all, a week later The Guardian claims the U.S. will establish a diplomatic presence - “a halfway house to setting up a full embassy” - in the capital of Iran, Tehran. After 30 years of relatively cool relations between the U.S. and Iran, George W. Bush has chosen a bold strategy of reaching out to Tehran in an effort to slow the Middle East country’s development of nuclear technology.

Such out-of-character developments originating from the White House cause hopeful brows to furrow in consternation over the sharp 180 (can a 180 be sharp? anyway…) in U.S. foreign policy. Theories of all kinds have emerged to explain such an enigma:

• With a little less than 200 days left in office, Bush is grasping at straws - or logic, as we call it in the left-wing blogosphere - in a desperate effort to save the embers of his legacy after a tumultuous tenure at the helm of the American government.
• Bush no longer feels beholden to his voters, donors, supporters - most of whom suffer from chronic headupassness - and is grasping at all straws in sight to have a least one, true success before leaving office.
• Bush was kidnapped and water-boarded by former Secretary of State James Baker who convinces the current Executive to thank Iran for helping us with Afghanistan in the early days following 9/11.
• Bush will want to ride the coattails of potential positive policy utilized by the next president, Obama, and claim that the strategies this new president has found beneficial were actually introduced by Bush. No one will believe the failed oilman who duped a small majority of the country into believing he’d be the best leader to steer the U.S. into the next century.
• Presidential candidate John McCain has angered Bush by trying to forge a gap of reputation between the two old, white Republicans - prompting Bush to initiate policies that follow ideology spouted by Obama, not McCan’t.
• Or, conversely, Bush wants to initiate these more leftist strategies he mistakenly believes will fail, allowing McCain to distance himself from Bush and garner voter approval after these Democratic tactics fall short. First of all, too little too late for McCain and secondly - most surprising to Bush, these strategies actually WORK. Tally-ho!
• Bush wanted to plant a diplomatic effort in Iran to cover for a spy-team meant to infiltrate Iran’s confusing and secretive government hierarchy. Little did he know that President Obama would actually use the diplomatic team for diplomacy, goshdarnit.

Nevertheless, as the global population sits stunned over their morning coffee, reading rumors of the U.S. actively extending a diplomatic hand to Iran under the direction of W, the young, well-read student of history chuckles to himself in fond memory of his morning with the president and the dart that changed history.

Notes on Obama’s Speech on Iraq and McCain’s Rebuttal

Notes taken live during Obama’s speech this morning:

• I cringe every time Obama flubs a line - unlike giggling with glee when McCain trips up.
• Steady the camera, MSNBC.
• The repetition of points of interest is annoying.
• As he looks from teleprompter to teleprompter, you’d think he was watching a match at Wimbledon. I’m getting motion sickness.
• Is it (phonetically) Tal-e-ban or Tal-ee-ban? Obama says Tal-ee-ban.
• I’ve said this before, Obama needs to meet with a public speaking coach who can teach him not to clip the ends of his words.
• I feel very content that this speech will overshadow Bush’s ridiculous speech this morning.
• “Securing nuclear weapons from rogue states.” Will that include Pakistan once Musharraf is removed from power?
• “Senator McCain was one of the biggest supporters of the war.” That statement should be clarified to indicate he was a supporter of GOING to war. To indicate he supported the failed strategy afterward is a stretch and I hate when the Democrats take a page out of the Republicans’ play book.
• He just said Tal-ee-ban again.
• We need ribbons for our cars that say “Remember Afghanistan” and “Our Troops are Over-Taxed and Over-Burdened.”
• “Iraq is not going to be a perfect place and we do not have unlimited resources to try and make it one.” Excellent point.
• Residual forces left in Iraq to go after remnants of Al Qaeda. I find this acceptable. I think this force should be multi-national and under the authority of the U.N., however.
• With all the talk of getting our forces out, Obama needs to address the defense contractor’s presence as well as our government’s involvement in their oil production and war profiteering.
• Tal-ee-ban again. Is this going to be his nuke-u-lar? I just looked it up on dictionary.com and it indicates pronunciation as [tal-uh-ban].
• Tripling aid to Pakistan? Would this be in return for our ability to go in and get Bin Laden?
• Steady the cam, MSNBC or I might switch to CNN…
• Goal of 80 percent of global emissions by 2050. Preach it!
• America is strongest when we act alongside strong partners. Excellent point. W, are you listening? Oh, I forgot. You only listen to people who agree with you. Or Cheney.
• Chris Matthews’ Hardball Number today should be how many times Obama used the word “moment” in his speech. (UPDATE: the Hardball number was how many times Obama mentioned the word “Afghanistan” in a speech that was meant to be about Iraq.
  
• Obama should being referring to the Iraq War as a “war of choice” more. That will help raise voter ire toward Bush and McCain.
  
• Great speech, give that speech writer a promotion! But it doesn’t distract me from his FISA vote.

**McCain plans to criticize Obama for never having visited Afghanistan and not having visited Iraq recently, yet establishing a strategy for ending the Iraq War. Does this mean that McCain believes the Americans who have not visited Iraq should have no opinion on the Iraq War? If my tax dollars are being used to perpetuate an unnecessary war, do I still have an obligation to keep my mouth shut regarding the prosecution and strategy of said war? Of course not. How ’bout this? How ’bout I use a portion of my taxes to visit Iraq so that I may be empowered to formulate a credible opinion of the war. We could set up programs akin to those European tour groups old people join so that Americans everywhere can have a say in the decisions of our government.

McCain speaking immediately after Obama’s speech.

• He called again on Obama to participate in the town hall meetings. It’s an empty entreaty similar to his pander strategies.
• McCain gives Obama quotations that indicate he didn’t think the surge would have any effect and then later claimed he always knew the surge would reduce violence. “Flip-floppers all over the world are enraged?” So, you’re enraged, McCain?
• “The surge in Iraq shows us the way to succeed in Afghanistan.” This seems naive. The situations on the ground in Iraq are extremely different than the situations on the ground in Afghanistan (and I’m not just talking topography). But what am I talking about, I’ve never been there. Those countries in the Middle East are all the same!
• “Iraq and Afghanistan are not disconnected. Success breeds success. Failure breeds failure.” What? What did our “failure” in Vietnam breed?
• “I know how to win wars.” Um…which wars have you won? I forget.
• Ooooh. McCain just said Tal-ee-ban as well.
• “The drug issue in Afghanistan is the world’s problem and the world should share its cost.” True. Alternative crops is a good idea, though it hasn’t worked in Colombia and hasn’t worked in Afghanistan previously. The whole supply and demand thing…
• McCain says that we must strengthen Pakistani tribes that are willing to fight terrorists in their region and this is what has worked in Iraq. This is true. But the U.S. has paid billions to Iraqi tribes to do this and they’ve also shelled out billions to the violent tribes, “bribing” them to stop their assaults. What will happen when we stop paying? And how long can we continue to pay when McCain and Bush won’t even increase college tuition for soldiers.
• “Defeat radical Islam.” What breeds radical Islam? Poverty. Just FYI.
• “When I am Commander in Chief, there will be no where the terrorists can run and no where they can hide.” Mkay, we’ll see. Does this mean you’re going to continue the “You’re either with us or against us” line.
• “I will bring Osama Bin Laden to justice. I will do that.” (Audience gives standing ovation.) And if Osama’s in Pakistan?
• The “galvanizing” factor of McCain’s speech cannot compare to that of Obama’s.

** While speaking with Andrea Mitchell, Trent Lott reiterated the claim that McCain “cornered” Obama into going to Iraq. These Republicans know fully well that, as the most probable presidential candidate, of course Obama would have visited before the election. He probably would have gone sooner had the Democratic primary not been so protracted.

Republicans are so comfortable in their cesspool of lies - whether it’s the China drilling off the U.S. Coast, Chuck Hagel going to Israel with Obama, Obama being Muslim and Racist, and many others. The Democrats are certainly not without their own political rhetoric, but an infestation of lies has not permeated Democrat strategies they way one has Republican strategies. Have they no honor, dignity or respect for the truth? They’re probably making Baby Jesus really, really angry.

Did Obama Just Lose My Vote?

This is serious. I’ve been saying for quite a while that Obama has not yet earned my vote and I am quite happy voting for Nader to help strengthen efforts toward a multi-party system. However, I voted for Obama in the primary here in Texas and was excited to vote for the first viable African-American candidate in the U.S.

Also, this is the most important election in years, if for no other reason than the necessity to populate the Supreme Court with judges who will protect civil liberties unlike those Bush has appointed or McCain would appoint.

While I have continuously lambasted the lack of character Hillary Clinton and her husband have shown during the primary season, I would not say I have been sipping “Obama Kool-Aid.” I understand that his “Change We Can Believe In” slogan is only as effective as his ability - to put it simply - to get things done. And politicians have to work together to accomplish progress. (Unless you’re President Bush, in which case you use the 9/11 attacks and existence of terrorism to scare Americans and politicians alike into marching behind your efforts to make the U.S. more of an authoritarian regime than ever before. Ugh, the thought makes it difficult to keep my coffee and chocolate granola cereal down.)

Obama is a politician first. With a degree in Government, I never lose sight of this. While Democrats fall in love (and Republicans fall in line) we must not forget that politicians must operate within the existing confines of the Washington Dance. This will inevitably lead to widespread disapointment with Obama, when he’s president, because he simply cannot please everyone and will have to compromise in order to accomplish certain goals. A president must make decisions when no option is the right one. It’s a hard gig - the hardest one in the world; I thoroughly recognize this.

However, much of my free time this week has been spent trolling the internet for a reasonable justification for Obama’s approval of the new FISA Act of 2008. Of course, I already have my fair share of underlying bitterness because the Democrats have performed disgracefully since taking control of the Congress. They are inexplicably banner ankle-grabbers again and again despite Bush’s record disapproval ratings. Yes, they do not want to seem weak on national security, but they are greatly underestimating the American people’s desire to have their civil liberties protected in this era of heightened danger.

Congressional members have far more concern with the length of their federal careers than casting the appropriate vote - rendering them impotent in the areas of war profiteering (Diane Feinstein’s husband is a defense contractor and why she still enjoys support in California, I have no idea. BTW, she vote AYE on FISA as well), criminal activity at the executive level (erasing emails, Karl Rove and Harriet Miers refusing to testify, Valerie Plame, fixing EPA reports and much, much more), reforming health care and national energy policy, policing unfair lending practices and allowing the establishment of a credit industry that works against the American people, not for them. It inexplicable that Congress has utterly failed to inhibit Bush’s harmful activities when the majority of Americans do not favor his policies in the slightest. It is frustrating and goddamned ridiculous.

So, Obama is Change personified, right?

Apparently, not so. Yes, I have read his blog on The Huffington Post regarding his FISA vote, which proffered no substantial logic for his approval of the bill. A few gems from the piece are:

Given the choice between voting for an improved yet imperfect bill, and losing important surveillance tools, I’ve chosen to support the current compromise. I do so with the firm intention — once I’m sworn in as president — to have my Attorney General conduct a comprehensive review of all our surveillance programs, and to make further recommendations on any steps needed to preserve civil liberties and to prevent executive branch abuse in the future.

Democracy cannot exist without strong differences. And going forward, some of you may decide that my FISA position is a deal breaker. That’s ok. But I think it is worth pointing out that our agreement on the vast majority of issues that matter outweighs the differences we may have.

The problem with our agreement on the vast majority of issues is that his vote on the FISA bill illustrates his inherent weakness and willingness to compromise when no comprise is needed simply to prove (which he fails to do with this vote) that he is strong on national security. This “aye” was unnecessary, dangerous, wrong, hurtful and potentially, yes, a deal breaker. Especially when assessing the guts of the bill, along with those who voted against it. On The Huffpo website, David Bromwich provides a very concise, yet in-depth look at the governmental powers granted with this legislation. I strongly recommend reading the blog and the readers’ comments below.

Among the senators who opposed the vote are Biden, Boxer, Dodd, Clinton, Byrd, Durbin, Feingold, Harkin, Kerry, Leahy, Reid and Levin.

The bottom line is that political agreements with a candidate are moot if the candidate does not have the political strength or fortitude to operate in accordance with that agreement.

Of course, Obama’s folding on FISA was a political calculation - that’s practically consensus. And I wish he could offer an honest defense of his vote; but, alas, this theater of election season would lead any such candor to damage the candidate.

Obama will be elected president barring any unforeseen, intensely damaging and highly unlikely circumstances. Though the media portrays the presidential race as close - it is a facade. McCain’s chances of succeeding in November, in my opinion, are around 1 in 5. Incumbent parties do not win when the economy is in the tank - mentally or not (and it’s not mental, Phil, when milk, bread, cereal, gas and all other necessities are more and more expensive and the dollar is weaker and weaker). McCain is not galvanizing and voter trust of most election issues points toward Obama. I wish Obama the best and will be hopeful as he takes his oath of office.

Furthermore, I applaud Obama’s willingness to work across the aisle and understand there will be areas in which he will break with Liberals. Support of faith-based community initiatives, for one (and this coming from an agnostic).

The FISA Act, however, is so detrimental to democracy itself, my respect for not just Obama himself, but the very idea of Obama has been irreparably damaged. I would encourage hardcore Obama supporters to keep this particular vote of his in mind when daydreaming of the days to come as he takes on the heavy mantle of President of the United States of America. Perfection at this level does not exist and any romance with a candidate will certainly abate over time.

I would never cast a vote for McFlip-Flop, nor would I ever stay home and waste a voting opportunity. Also, I am a thorough, complete supporter of a multi-party system. While I wanted to vote for Obama - and was excited to vote for him - my decision was not cast in stone. It still is not cemented. However, the odds I would pull the lever in support of him this November are greatly diminished. Truthfully, I am ever more looking in Nader’s direction.

If Obama’s political contributions continue to decline, I encourage him to address his FISA ‘08 support with increased seriousness. This is no small issue for those of us who follow politics and government activity.

This weekend, I plan on purchasing Obama’s two books and will begin reading them with a large grain of salt. Perhaps this will allow me some insight behind this recent mind-boggling decision of his.

As of this point, Obama is not Hope and he is not Change We Can Believe In. He is merely Better Than Bush, but isn’t everybody else?

Freaky Friday: John Edwards & Karl Rove to Debate

Did anyone catch this last Friday? The Buffalo News has learned that the University of Buffalo intends to include in its Distinguished Speaker Series a debate between John Edwards and Karl Rove on September 26. John Edwards and Karl Rove. Naturally, my mind immediately searches for the nearest comparison to such an unpredictable and unlikely competition of the minds (I use that term loosely).

The fastest duo to surface is, of course, Dopey vs. Beelzebub. But that’s too easy. I’m looking for something more nuanced. More apropos. Barbie vs. Cobra Commander? No…. Nemo vs. Ursula? No…. Luke Sykwalker vs. Jabba the Hutt? No! Not even close. John Edwards has no Force.

Gumby vs. Squealer from Animal Farm. That’s it.

Yes, I remember that John Edwards is a former trial attorney, but the images of him getting smoked by Dick Cheney in 2004 are seared into my brain. And while Karl Rove may have the morality of a dung beetle, his ability to misrepresent facts with a straight face is supernatural and would require Edwards to acquire an encyclopedic knowledge of politically-related statistics and their sources to properly refute Rove’s machinations. My not-so-amateur prediction is that John ain’t got the stuff. And I’m being kind.

If the debate is televised, I will certainly perform the masochistic duty of viewing the event - with a fist firmly planted between my teeth. Naturally, I try to avoid having Rove’s visage offend my home from the television and relegate my involvement with him by reading his erroneous comments online. Blech.

In the meantime, I’m going to entertain myself with paint.net and make fun graphics with hopeful themes.

john edwards crushes rove's head

I made Rove’s eyes red, but they may be too small to tell.

And did you see the headline on The Huffington Post this morning that Rep. Henry Waxman is considering legislation that would prevent a White House employee from being paid by taxpayer money to work on political affairs? He might wait until Obama is elected to launch this legislative attempt.

I’m encouraged by the possibility that Obama will roll back a number of powers Bush and Cheney concentrated at the executive level. McCain, of course, would not. Checks and balances are so silly, aren’t they?!

And one last tidbit of morning news - let’s give Howard Wolfson a big round of applause and wish him good luck as he joins Fox News. In a way I get it - he wants to bring a democratic voice to the network. But I also think he’s selling his soul to do it. Although, he seemed comfortable bending the truth when he worked for Hillary, so maybe he’ll fit right in.

Rummy Declines to Endorse McCain

Looks like there’s dissent in the dysfunctional elderly Republican sandbox. When asked by The Hill whether he would support McFlipflop for president, former disastrous Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld would not offer an answer.

Afterwards, lightning struck the former SoD when he claimed he was not following the election and instead focusing on his private foundation. Not following the election. And I’m a size 2.

Rummy was not injured by the lightning strike. Apparently, he built up an immunity to lightning strikes during his latest White House cabinet tenure whenever discussing the Iraq War.

This photo, taken in July 2002, shows the bandaging required during Rumsfeld’s testifying before the Senate Armed Services Committee. The explanation given for the cast was “arthritis surgery.” We know the truth.

According to a Senate investigation, it was during this time that Rumsfeld started to research the use of waterboarding, stress positions and sensory deprivation.

Let’s Talk Scott McClellan

I waited to comment on the whole Benedict McClellan issue until I seen a few of his interviews and how the media reacted and, I have to say, I’m disappointed in our journalistic brethren - but when am I not, really? He’ll be on Hardball later today and I’ll watch that without expectation that Chris Matthews will somehow cunningly extract new revelations from our little Texas pudge muffin.

One of the most important, yet eentzy facts when addressing What Happened? has only reached my ears once amid the media and political brouhaha the book has stirred. He repeatedly says he’s from a political family and, as a Texas resident, allow me to offer you a little history. His mother is Carol Keeton Strayhorn, a well-known politician in our state having served as first female mayor of state capital Austin, state comptroller of public accounts, as well as the first woman on the Texas Railroad Commission (which largely regulates the oil and gas industry) and, lastly, having run for governor in our last election. She started out as a Democrat (most rural Oklahomans and Texans are old-school Democrats from the times before the parties swapped demographics decades ago), but caught up with the times and became Republican in the 80’s. Recently, she opted to break from the state Republican party, who currently suckles at the teat of Gov. Rick Perry (Bush’s Lt. Governor and arguably one of the worst governors in TX history) and register her gubernatorial campaign under the Independent banner. She claimed she wanted to set partisan politics aside. Now we’ve been hearing that theme from her son as one of the main reasons he served Bush and continued to serve Bush while disagreeing with him on weighted issues such as the war of choice that has developed into the quagmire of Iraq.

I’m not questioning the sincerity of their claims of detestation of the partisan politics - in fact, I’m glad to see long-established Republicans breaking from the good ‘ol boy system we have in Texas. However, those in search of an understanding of the motivations behind What Happened? as well as McClellan’s seemingly openness to an Obama vote must look to his status as mamma’s boy, rather than as former press secretary for Bush.

(that’s scott on the left - found the photo in The Austin Chronicle)

One of the assertions I have found helpful in my few efforts to understand Scott McClellan is that he was misused as press secretary and simply wasn’t a good candidate for the position. I concur. Having watched many of his press conferences, his inability to communicate effectively with the press corps and adversarial relationship with it made it painful to watch as he inartfully dodged question after question. Robert Draper, author of Dead Certain (I’ll submit a review of this book soon), characterized Scott McClellan as, “looking like nothing so much as a terrified if well-fed koala bear as he peered out from behind the press room podium and recited his message lines as if at gunpoint.”

While it is true the administration simply used the position of press secretary as merely a buffer from the intrusion of the media and not as a way to effectively reach the American people, Scott still clearly misunderstood the priority of the podium. He repeatedly, almost certainly, used plausible deniability as a justification not to push for information from the administration and clearly underestimated his responsibility as message-deliverer. While he states in his book that Bush convinces himself of whatever he needs to in order to stick to his guns, Scott obviously did so as well.

The mere fact that there is so much “pot calling the kettle black” in this book is quite unsettling. Also, upon hearing the style of speech and grammatical mistakes in McClellan’s interviews, I am almost positive he used a ghostwriter as the quotations I’ve read from the book are incredibly poignant and well-written. Many people write much better than they speak (especially with the help of an editor) and it is not a huge deal to use a ghostwriter, but it is an issue I think he should address in his media campaign. While many of these memoirs use ghostwriters, I doubt Dee Dee Myers, George Stephanopolous, Doug Feith or Ari Fleischer relied so heavily on someone else’s pen. As a writer, I feel this makes a difference in the sincerity of the book.

I do agree that Scott McClellan should have had the fortitude of character to leave the administration, or raise his voice, if he felt so out-of-step with the direction toward warfare Bush and Cheney so vehemently veered. Having not done so, the publishing of his critical memoir before the exit of Bush (and I’m no fan of the guy) is questionable. Obviously, he’s angry about the whole Plame debacle, as well he should be. But his memoir delivers no new evidence of the wrong-doings by the snakes in the White House. It’s simply a case of too little, too late, bubba. Anti-climactic and irrelevant.

The reaction out of the administration and its former members is so paltry and fake, however, it only lends credence to the memoir itself. Even those no longer in the employ of the administration stuck to the set talking points so deliberately, they should have just put Perino’s comments on replay. The reaction, no doubt planned during the month the White House had access to the memoir before its existence was leaked, only issued meager character assassinations of Scott rather than refuted a single fact in the book. Gag.

The subject is a tired one and won’t remain in the top news categories much longer, if it still is. I have no idea where Scott goes from here besides aiding his mother’s possible run for Austin mayor next year. It’s still undecided if he’d be an asset to anybody at this point.

I suppose I’m glad Scott decided to write openly about his misgivings during his tenure in the Bush administration. Better late than never. This however, shouldn’t be a celebration for us lefties, but more a sad realization that the plague of acquiescence in the government during run up to the Iraq War has cost hundreds of thousands of lives, untold collateral damages as illustrated in the rise of commodity prices, and should never, ever be duplicated by anybody in the government or military claiming to have a spine and the ability to reason.

Prosecuting the Bush Administration

This morning is a beautiful morning, if a little chilly. And it only improved when I clicked on The Huffington Post and read the headline “Obama Would ‘Immediately Review’ Potential Of Crimes In Bush White House.”

The HuffPo basically provided an excerpt from The Philadelphia Daily News’ Will Bunch’s Attywood column in which Obama said:

What I would want to do is to have my Justice Department and my Attorney General immediately review the information that’s already there and to find out are there inquiries that need to be pursued. I can’t prejudge that because we don’t have access to all the material right now. I think that you are right, if crimes have been committed, they should be investigated. You’re also right that I would not want my first term consumed by what was perceived on the part of Republicans as a partisan witch hunt because I think we’ve got too many problems we’ve got to solve.

So this is an area where I would want to exercise judgment — I would want to find out directly from my Attorney General — having pursued, having looked at what’s out there right now — are there possibilities of genuine crimes as opposed to really bad policies. And I think it’s important– one of the things we’ve got to figure out in our political culture generally is distinguishing betyween really dumb policies and policies that rise to the level of criminal activity. You know, I often get questions about impeachment at town hall meetings and I’ve said that is not something I think would be fruitful to pursue because I think that impeachment is something that should be reserved for exceptional circumstances. Now, if I found out that there were high officials who knowingly, consciously broke existing laws, engaged in coverups of those crimes with knowledge forefront, then I think a basic principle of our Constitution is nobody above the law — and I think that’s roughly how I would look at it.

Now, there have been plenty of crimes committed by the Bush administration, whether it was illegal domestic spying, no-bid contract assignment in Iraq, torture, the illegal destruction of mountains of documentation and more. It would give me untold satisfaction if Congress or the next administration conducted effective investigations of the goings-on under Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld. I have little faith that such investigations will proceed as most politicians are in the re-election business and obviously care more about the preservation of their careers than carrying out their fundamental duties as lawmakers and designated check-and-balancers.

Furthermore, I have not allotted my general election vote as of yet and am seriously considering marking the box next to Nader’s name. If Obama gives serious commitment to investigating criminal activity in the Bush White House, he will greatly increase the odds I will vote for him. But, he wants to be a uniter and that probably entails glossing over most of the illegal activity or going after smaller potatoes than those at the top of the administration. Also, Bush will most likely strategically hand out pardons, as he did with Scooter Libby, that will help prevent investigation of his activities the way his father did at the end of his term regarding his participation in the Iran Contra affair.

It’s enough to make me want to win the lottery and buy an island in the South Pacific on which to live and wear a sarong for the rest of my days.

You know what else makes me want to go native among palm trees? This comment on The Huffington Post:

“In the end, elitist liberals are impotent and embittered by that fact. They cling to fantasies such as prosecuting righteous, upstanding American patriots. They fall back on empty rhetoric such as “I’ll fight for the common man, because they know in their own feeble, prejudiced minds, that they don’t have the courage to fight anything evil or anything with the capacity to fight back.

They denigrate core beliefs such as Christianity, because they are empty vessels, devoid of any faith other than weak dependence on the wished-for power of twisted liberal government to FORCE their will upon those made of real and stronger stuff. They are deathly afraid of true faith because they have none. They are terrified of tools such as guns because they generally don’t know how to use them to feed themselves and are too afraid to use them to defend themselves.

They are everything in reverse that Obama tried and failed to heap disdain upon with his elitist mumblings in San Fran. No, we know who they are and what they lack; and they know we know, and that’s what really destroys them.”

To which I responded, complete with typos:

“wow. you are seriously living in fantasy-land. and your one-sided, close-mindedness makes me shudder because your zeal presents you prime meat for the those politicians who would take advantage of your brainwashed, sheep-like desire to follow and believe the lies you are fed.

Committing torture does not make you a patriot. It makes you an immoral hypocrite.

We have faith. Faith in reason, logic, common sense. Not unfounded fairytales only constructed as a tool to control. It is a good thing to question everything. And I’m not deathly afraid of anything except profound ignorance.

And I’m from Texas, honey. I KNOW how to use a gun.

Remember, discussion and debate is always a good thing. No one is right on ALL the issues and when you are certain you are right and no one else, it is time to retire. For your mind is petrified, you can progress no more and are no longer useful.”

I should proofread, I know, I know…

Just Finished My 2007 Taxes!! Woohooo!

I just finished my taxes and feel excellent. It’s beertime, fo’ sho’!

And let me just say that I’m sooooooo happy this Iraq war is costing our household $100 a month. It’s great the the government sees fit to use our hard-earned cash to assign profiteering contracts to favored companies while they try to stop the bleeding in Iraq. How excellent that this military effort has refocused our endeavors away from Afghanistan and Bin Laden and left our military de-moralized and stretched beyond any ability to respond quickly or effectively to an unforeseen event. Magnificently, the Iraqi infrastructure is in shambles, with water and electricity function merely based on hope and luck.

It is just such a privilege for me to contribute my income to one of the biggest military blunders in world history and allow Bush and Cheney to perpetuate the fairy tale that they felt the responsibility to spread U.S.-flavored Democracy to the Middle East. How funny that their culture doesn’t adapt readily to our philosophical governmental institution. ESPECIALLY, since you can barely call U.S. government a functioning democracy.

Ah yes, I have much to be thankful for. Just like all those blessed Iraqis.

News of the Day 080305

1. Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson would do away with pennies but doesn’t think it’s “politically doable.” I think we should get rid of pennies too. They take up too much room and it would be so much easier for me to do math in fives.
2. According to AP, “FBI Director Robert Mueller says an upcoming Justice Department report will show the bureau improperly used national security letters to obtain personal data on Americans during terror and spy investigations.” How unsurprising that the more power the government is given to spy on us, the more they abuse it. Under a Republican administration. Go figure.
3. McCain likely won’t investigate any possible criminal activity perpetrated by Bush and Cheney if elected. I really don’t think Obama or Hillary would either. Whoever wins the election likely wants to just get on with running the country and Bush and Cheney will get away with years of criminal an unconstitutional behavior on many, many levels.
4. Obama lawyer crashes Clinton Campaign conference call. Haha - why haven’t they done this before and when they do do it, they only bring up Clinton’s attacks of the caucus process. Well, the caucus process is seriously flawed and needs to be reformed. Why couldn’t they bring up how she’s pissing on the Democrats’ chances in November by spouting slimy rhetoric about Obama?

News of the Day 080304

Here are some articles that caught my eye.

1. A whistleblower at the Bureau of Arms, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives claims officials at the Department of Justice ignored him and later retaliated against him. Question: Does he know Bush is president and Cheney is Vice President? Shouldn’t it have been clear from the get go that justice was the last thing happening under the supervision of Alberto Gonzales? Any government agency that answers to the executive branch is pretty much, at this point, as effective as doing the naughty in water is at preventing pregnancy.
2. The FCC wants to investigate “technical problems” that prevented the airing in parts of Alabama of a 60 Minutes piece on the imprisonment of a former Alabama governor. Wow, and we’re not even in China or Iran. Have you heard about this - the former governor’s prosecution is under extreme question and they’re not even letting him out on bail while the case is under appeal. If you want to watch the 60 Minutes report, you can watch it here. I recommend watching it. There is significant evidence Karl Rove, otherwise known as The Repugnant Doughboy, is involved and Newsweek has even said it will rethink it’s hiring of him if the allegation against Rove is legally proven. Of course, the dickheads at Newsweek never should have hired someone who has worked methodically for years to thwart quality journalism. You sold your soul, Newsweek! No, I’m not over it.
3. Howard Dean, DNC Chairman, won’t say it publicly, but reports say he’s privately issuing warnings about the negative effects of a lengthy Democratic primary season. The longer this thing goes on, the more disenchanted Democrats become as Hillary continues to hurl invectives at Obama and they fail to stick to the teflon candidate. Weren’t we so excited only a couple months ago? I think Hillary will do significant damage to herself the longer she stays in it if she doesn’t win big in TX and Ohio. But, more than that, she’ll do damage to Democratic sentiment and she has to do something she has never done and think about the big picture rather than herself. Someone needs to give her a bottle of wine and when she’s good and soused, say, FYI, babe - good job. You were great. No, you were! But it’s over.
   I’ll supply the wine.

WashPo - Special Report on Dick Cheney

Ooooh, this series looks really interesting. I’m going to read it.

ANGLER, The Cheney Vice Presidency

Comments to come. It’s long. Many pages.

German Arms Co. Halts Cooperation w/ Blackwater

It’s good to  know that not everyone is so money hungry, they’re willing to look past the U.S. government’s outsourcing of the war in Iraq. German arms manufacturer Heckler & Koch says it will end its relationship with mercenary firm Blackwater (legally answerable to no one, btw) after a media report in Germany that the Blackwater was using H&K’s arms in Iraq. The report went on to say that the German government had not issued permission to H&K to provide Blackwater with arms.

Aaaahhh, we don’t need not steenking laws! Perhaps one day when the birds once again sing and The White House no longer subverts the American legal system for its own gain, indictments will naturally gravitate to all those involved in the no-bid contract work in Iraq (Halliburton, Cheney, Bush, Blackwater, etc.). Hopefully, this will not happen before Goober Bush is out so he can’t pardon ever Tom, Dick and Shithead (pronounced Shi-theed) he helped make rich with his baseless war.

News of the Day 080215

1. This is seriously the best piece of news I’ve read all week: Tom Scholz of the band Boston wrote a letter to Huckabee’s campaign, asking them to cease using their song “More Than A Feeling” at rallies, saying, “Boston has never endorsed a political candidate, and with all due respect, would not start by endorsing a candidate who is the polar opposite of most everything Boston stands for.” Scholz goes on to say he is an Obama supporter. Hey Yuckabee - go back to Arkansas already and quit using your presidential campaign to audition for Television show!
2. When are we going to insist people’s rights quit being trampled on under the guise of protection from terror? Lotfi Raissi, an Algerian pilot who was wrongly accused of training the 9/11 hijackers has won the right to sue the British government for compensation. He was arrested 10 days after 9/11, but the British government overturned the charges in 2002. He has been blacklisted from all airline jobs and says his life is ruined.
3. Bush today again admonished Congress as though they were toddlers to approve the extension of the FISA legislation that covers wire-tapping, saying the Senate is preventing the government from protecting Americans by dragging their feet. Hmmm. What violence threatens American more than terrorism right now? Gun violence. Why don’t you protect me by getting semi-automatic weapons off the street and instituting gun control?? We face much more danger at home because of all the crazies with all the guns. Does Bush actually think we believe the words coming out his mouth? Retard.
4. The White House, surprise, surprise, is asking the Supreme Court to review a legal decision requiring extensive evidence to classify the 180 Guantanamo detainees as enemy combatants. First, the administration creates a new word for “prisoners of war” so they don’t have to abide by the Geneva Convention in their treatment of these “detainees.” Skirting the law through semantics. I’d want bad things to happen to Bush if it didn’t mean Cheney would inherit the presidency. There is, however, one silver lining. And that’s #5.
5. You can download a clock on Firefox for free that counts down the days until Bush is booted. We’re at 11 months and 6 days, people.
6. Best gaffe: Jack Cafferty called Roger Clemens “Roger Steroids” by accident today. heehee.
7. I love stuff like this: test your news retention on this MSNBC news quiz.
   

Judging Bush’s Legacy

Bush has repeatedly claimed that history will judge his administration only after he has died.

Question. Does he plan on committing suicide right after he leaves office? Maybe he’ll “accidentally” drive off a bridge.
Has someone not told him that we’ve pretty much figured out how to judge Carter’s presidency (mmm, not so great. that revolution in iran kinda killed things), Reagan’s presidency (we whitewash it now, but iran-contra remains commonly-used vernacular), Bush Sr.’s presidency (saved kuwait since they had oil, then we fell into a recession), and Clinton’s presidency (lucky-ass rise in the economy with the tech boom, gross-ass activities with a cigar).

And all those presidents are STILL alive. Except for Reagan, of course. But he’d probably still be alive if he wasn’t so old when he was elected. Duh.

Reagan was 69, just shy of his 70′th birthday when he was inaugurated. Bush was 55.

I’m guessing we’ll have Bush’s presidency wrapped up by January 30, next year. Unless Congress decides to indict him for war crimes or one of the other many, many crimes he’s committed while in office. Then maybe history will say “George W. Bush, former president and convict.” That would be sweet. Come on - how many convicts does Congress have? They should share the wealth on ethics investigations. It’s obvious Cheney’s over there, just asking for it. Sitting there and asking for it. Saying, “Come and get me you sniveling, wretched lawmakers, you!” He’ll probably lock himself up in his man-size safe with his bird-shot shotgun by his side shouting words like “impudent!” and “undermining!” and “menace!”. Do those man-size safes work with magnets? Do magnets stop pace-makers?

Anyway…

It’s going to be a hard retirement for Bush. He’s moving to Dallas. And I’ll be able to toilet-paper his house whenever I want. I’ll be keeping Charmin in business!