Live Notes Taken During Al Gore’s Speech Today

• all the thanking he’s doing right now probably made a decent minority of viewers turn the channel to a TV judge show. we get it, already.
• he says politicians need get with the program or step aside. Ahem, Republicans.
• so many things going awry simultaneously (mortgage, bank, gas prices, we’re at war…).
• in five years, the entire northern polar ice cap could disappear one summer.
• has he lost weight? he looks better than he has in a long time.
• stats, stats and more stats.
• comment on situation iraq.
• crazy weather: floods, fires, etc.
• Stats.
• he’s much better with a teleprompter than even Obama. we won’t even get into McCain.
• politicians presenting old solutions to each crisis separately without taking the other crises into account.
• these solutions are not only ineffective, they make the other crises worse.
• borrowing money from china to buy oil from middle east. that has to change.
• the answer is to end our reliance on carbon-based fuel.
• talking about his solution summits. solutions to the climate crisis are the same solutions to the economy and guaranteeing our national security.
• Stats.
• production of electricity cheapest and easiest way to take advantage of renewal energy.
• New strategic initiative is linchpin of bold, new strategy to empower America.
• 100% of energy electricity and renewable and carbon-free sources within 10 years.
• Has he been talking with Boone Pickens? I hope so.
• Wind, solar, etc. getting cheaper and cheaper.
• Stats.

Dammit, CNN cut him off and now I’m watching McCain at a Kansas City Town Hall meeting talking about dependency on foreign oil and alternative energy resources and nuclear power. “Senator Obama opposes nuclear energy. He has a presidential seal I saw that says, ‘Yes, We Can.’ I think we should change it - ‘No, We Can’t’ or ‘No, We Won’t.’” Wow, CNN - this is sooooo much more important than a new energy initiative proposed by a former presidential candidate. Morons.

Found the transcript on The Huffpo.

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.

Decreased Violence in Iraq - More to do with Money than the Surge

It is intensely irritating to hear McCain repeat again and again that he supported the “Surge” strategy and that this strategy is responsible for a reduction in violence in Iraq. Furthermore, Obama is now whistling this tune in an effort to endear uninformed Americans and convince them of his competence on national security.

In all this talk of surge success, very little is being mentioned of the immense amount of cash being handed over to many of Iraq’s violent tribes and militias - putting vast amounts of criminals on U.S. payroll to NOT reach for their automatic weapons and plant IEDs. You got it. We’re monetarily bribing down the violence. And we’ll likely continue to do so as we reduce troop numbers.

I’m not saying I oppose this strategy. Whatever works, right? But to continuously claim “The surge is a success” without acknowledging the effect of these payoffs is equivalent to presenting a facade to the American people. Of course, we should expect nothing less. How many lies were told to garner support for the war in the first place?

Yet we hear over and over that the surge’s success has proven McCain right. I know at some point I should develop a callous to the lies, but it seems nearly impossible and we’re all left with high blood pressure and anger over our leaders’ inabilities to prioritize truth over popularity.

Finally, CNN offered an interview with terrorism expert Peter Bergen on 360 last night in which he said,

I actually think both the Democrats and the Republicans have been overemphasizing the surge. If it was just about the surge, the violence would be back up again because the surge is over. There are some underlying factors that are much more important in Iraq in my view.

One — the fact that Al Qaeda in Iraq, they basically scored a series of own goals by its Taliban-style tactics, producing this wave of revulsion against and amongst the Sunnis. Now we put up a 100,000 Sunni militia on the American payroll, people who used to be shooting at the United States who are now on our payroll.

We also see the Prime Minister Maliki, no one could say a good thing about him a year and a half ago in Washington. Turning out to be a somewhat effective leader going into Basra, taking out the Shia militias there, going into Sadr City, taking out the Shia militias there.

We’ve also seen the Iraqi army which, Anderson, is really much larger than the Afghan army and much more effective in a country which is smaller and with a smaller population.

So there were some underlying factors that actually suggest that long- term success in Iraq is plausible. It’s possible the surge, of course, was one aspect of it. But to say that the surge caused all these changes is I think simply very simplistic essentially.

Also, Rick Rowley of Big Noise Films produced a video report entitled Uncovering the Truth Behind the Anbar Success Story showing Sunni leaders who had formerly been associated with Al Qaeda in Iraq and responsible for ethnic cleansing being paid off. In an interview with Katie Halper of Alternet.org last September, Rowley indicated,

There have been a lot of reports about the fact that the people who the U.S. is working with, the supposed “freedom fighters,” the “counter-insurgents” are former insurgents. They were Iraqi al Qaeda before they started working with the Americans. That is troubling because if they were fighting the Americans once, they’ll fight Americans again. And more troubling for the future of Iraq is the fact that many of the tribes that the U.S. is working with are war criminals who are directly responsible for ethnic cleansing and who are using American support to prepare for sectarian civil war. The U.S. is funding Sunni militias. They already funded the Shia militias. They’re now funding all sides of this sectarian war.

Here’s an NPR interview with British journalist Peter Cockburn discussing U.S. payments to Iraqi militiamen.

In an April 2008 report, The Christian Science Monitor stated,

He (Abu Abdullah of the Islamic Army of Iraq) also maintains that while the US has succeeded in driving a wedge between AQI (Al Qaeda in Iraq) and Sunnis in Anbar Province, many of the tribesmen there who are now on the American payroll are still aiding IAI and other insurgent groups.

Members of these US-backed militias now number almost 91,000 and are paid a total of $16 million a month in salaries by the US. They are often lauded by President Bush in his speeches on Iraq.

The US military now calls these Sunni militias “Sons of Iraq.” Iraqis simply refer to all these groups as sahwas. But the Shiite-led government is resisting US pressure to fold these groups, especially the ones in Baghdad and Diyala provinces, into the Army and police. “Trust me, the sahwas are ultimately with the resistance, heart and mind,” says Abu Abdullah.

There is no debating the fact that the drop in violence in Iraq is largely due in part to the payoffs - right or wrong - the U.S. is giving the militias. I am not squabbling with this strategy. I am merely raising my voice in protest of the campaign of misinformation of the surge’s success by the president, McCain and now Obama.

We cannot judge our approval or disapproval of these candidate’s ideas if they are not straightforward. I have little doubt the empty political rhetoric will continue, but at least those of us with a minute ability to apply research and information to our opinions and decision-making can help proliferate necessary evidence to support or refute the politicians’ shameful mumbo-jumbo.

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?

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.

How Obama Can Beat McCain I: Use McCain’s Words Against Him

I have never been involved in a political campaign other than my successful run for National Junior Honor Society President and my unsuccessful shot at National Honor Society President.

Inside the Campaign?

I imagine it cannot be far from living in the eye of a hurricane 24/7, the unpredictability of embarrassing revelations or gaffes, the threat of darkening skies always looming off the horizon and the ethereal moments of clarified victory when poll numbers are favorable. The tantalizing possibilities behind voter psychology, the sea of wadded paper full of unrealized brainstorm sketches, unending analysis of electoral demographics, passionate debates, cultish ideology, coffee and Redbull, pizza and deli sandwiches, and the numbers - always the numbers. I saw War Room. I know what’s up.

Having a government degree, I’m sure I romanticize the goings on in a campaign headquarters and have considered applying my efforts to local organizations. Being in Texas, however, I’ve never quite found that candidate I could wholly support and the thought of working at a phone bank does not hit me in the sweet spot. Furthermore, I’m probably one of the least diplomatic people I know and would have a hard time maintaining that vaseline-required smile when speaking with dissenters.

So, I maintain my safe, self-indulged distance while I write commentary and opinion and shout at the television when necessary - which is a lot under the current circumstances. And I’m convinced, that an outsider’s opinion (including other outsiders, not just moi) could be a valuable asset were campaign strategists inclined to listen. The whole forest for the trees argument is applicable.

2004

I wanted to rip somebody’s arm off in 2004 when nary a Democratic ad used footage of Bush’s 2000 campaign promises - the majority of which the man reneged on, becoming the disastrous tragedy we now have before us. Need I remind anyone of the 1992 stroke of genius when Democratic strategists replayed “No New Taxes” over and over again? If speech writers comb through the archeology of presidential oratory for inspiration, why didn’t the 2004 strategists use the triumphant advertising maneuvers of yesteryear? I still believe W. could have been a one-termer had his broken campaign promises been used against him.

McCain

Now Obama must turn his focus to McCain. This should be an easy one, though no one on the inside can take anything for granted, lest they find themselves confetti-free November 5. I hate negative advertising, which normally doesn’t work on educated voters, so McCain is the gift that keeps on giving because the man has already produced a library of gaffes this primary season and there’s no end in sight. Now, I’m not sure where the boundaries are, but I think ads that simply use the candidate’s words (albeit, against him) are not necessarily negative enough to turn off voters.

Here’s a recount of a few verbal missteps of McCain:

• He asserted May 29 that American troop levels in Iraq had been reduced to pre-surge levels.
• Last month, he insisted to Joe Klein that Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is the leader of Iran.
• McCain claimed last year there were parts of neighborhoods in Baghdad where “you and I” could go for a walk - even though his walk was guarded by 100 soldiers, 3 Blackhawks and 2 Apache gunships.
• Humorously, on June 2, McCain said he will win in January, kinda forgetting the election and, thus, potential victory, occurs in November. The 5th, to be exact.
• He’s forever mistaking Sunni/Shiite and Iran/Al Qaeda.

His gaffes, while funny and likely effective should they be played on a loop closer to the election, do not compare in seriousness to his policy flip-flops, which are also quite numerous:

• Ethanol
• Tax Cuts
• Abortion
• Talking w/ Hamas
• Religious Right
• Immigration
• Torture
• English as the Official Language
• U.S. troops in Iraq 100 years
• Warrantless Wiretapping
• Social Security
• Foreclosure Crisis
• Ethics Reform

Now, I’m not good at math, but I think - I think that’s more flip-flops than I can count on two hands. McCain makes Romney look like a party-line loyalist.

It’s quite possible that Obama’s camp is allowing the blogging, online and YouTube universe to attack McCain for him and biding time until polls dictate the right moment to release the marketing big guns. Needless to say, McCain’s own words can easily cost him the election and should be used against him relentlessly.

McCain’s folks are already taking note of the hard times these flip-flops will bring. I haven’t heard his campaign use the term “Straight Talk Express” in a while, but that’s most likely because it’s being used against him:

• Double Talk Express
• McCain Straight Talk Express Loses Some Wheels
• Straight Talk Express Derailed?
• Straight Talk Express Stalls
• Not-So Straight Talk Express
• Straight Talk Express Takes Scenic Route to the Truth (Ann Coulter, by the way)
• Less-Than-Straight Talk Express
• “McCain’s ‘Green Straight Talk Express’ is actually the ‘Black Energy Twisted Action Delay Machine’” (personal fave)
• Straight Talk Express Veers into Mud
• McCain’s Straight Talk Express Takes Every Fork In The Road?
• No Free Rides on the Straight Talk Express
• Straight Talk Express blows a tire in Baton Rouge
• McCain’s Straight Talk Express Hits the Gravy Train
• Detours on the ‘Straight Talk Express’

Wow. The longer this blog goes on, the more I think, Obama - you sit this one out, we’ll take care of McCain.

I’m not saying this campaign is in the bag. Not at all. Crazy things happen in an election cycle and Obama has to be vigilant (ahem, guns-and-religion) while presenting a sincere and honest resume to the American people.

Yes, the Willie Horton ads are coming. In fact, the strategist behind the Swift Boat ads, Chris Lacivita, has already indicated he’s out for blood, saying, “We will attack Obama viciously on all fair issues, whether they are national security, whether they are taxes or the economy.”

But the Obama camp has to keep in mind: 1. The Rush Limbaugh zombies and the evangelical vote McCain is losing could cancel out any underlying racists and the bitter Hillary voters Obama could lose, 2. Democrats turned out in droves during the primaries to vote and will do so even more in the general, 3. The incumbent party has not won in recent history when the economy is in a recession, 4. Bush is an anathema across the country and McCain differs from him by about .0045 degrees.

When countering McCain, Obama should stick to the issues. Despite McCain’s questionable personal history (there’s a lot of meat there), do not launch personal attacks. Do not issue advertisements with some deep-throated, long-time smoker narrator hurling accusations at McCain and making me want to take a two-hour shower after each viewing. His camp ran an ad here in Texas with a guitar riff that was just amazing. I certainly didn’t mind seeing it over and over and over would suggest replaying it during the general. I can’t find it on Youtube, though, which really bites.

If Obama can stay positive, stay on message and build his credibility with voters by delivering specific solutions (specific being the operative word here), McCain’s words alone will do him in and the Obama camp should allow them to do so. Never has one candidate in history had so much video of his many 180’s, reneges, retreats, reversals and turnabouts. It’s a campaign goldmine.

Democrats, there should really be no excuse for a loss this year. Unless a freak, unpredictable political meteorite of untold proportions manages to sabotage this election, Obama should take this thing home handily. If it even looks questionable or like it’s slipping away, an unleashing of McCain flip-flop videos in torrential volumes will at least encourage Republicans to stay home rather than vote for a dishonorable liar. That’s right. I said it.

There’s a lot at stake here. This is the most significant election in modern history and it is of the utmost import that McCain not win. Luckily, he’s been helping us make the case against him - which I, at least, will continue to do. I will be on the lookout for the next gaffe, the next flip-flop and continue to update this post each time I spot one.

It’s our time people. With the primaries over, it’s time to get focused and get smart and get organized. We have to take our hijacked government back. This is still a representative democracy and it’s time to represent!!

UPDATE:

Latest Flip-flop: Offshore Oil Drilling

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.

Screw The White Working Class

David Axelrod took the words right out of my mouth. According to The Huffington Post, David Axelrod told NPR 4/23, “The white working class has gone to the Republican nominee for many elections, going back even to the Clinton years.”

All day yesterday, as I’m hearing the news stations ask over and over, “Why can’t Obama close the deal? Why can’t Obama close the deal?”, it became even clearer that mainstream media has once again donned the dumbass cap and can’t see the forest for the trees. Again.

You can spin the Pennsylvania results however you like. Hillary won by 10 percent, giving her divine right to continue in the primary and torture the democrat electorate with her negative campaigning and hypocritical criticisms. Obama, however, had been behind in the polls 30 percent when the race for Penn. started and managed to close the gap some 20 percent while being forced off message by the Wright bullshit and Bittergate. Take your pick. They’re both right and irrelevant.

The only guarantee we have is that the race will continue on its U-G-L-Y, YOU AIN’T GOT NO ALIBI, YOU UGLY, YOU UGLY, YO MOMMA SAY YOU UGLY course. Hillary effectively paralyzes Obama when she attacks him and he still has not been able to reach the “everyday man” with specific policies that will better the lives of the lower-middle, white working class.

So, the white working class stays with Hillary. Just like they did in Pennsylvania and possibly will in Indiana and definitely will in Kentucky. The silly white working class! Gotta love ‘em! Right?

Give me a freaking break! Let’s talk about these white working class. They’re the ones who picked Bush. They’re the ones who picked Bush AGAIN. They’ll probably head over McCain’s direction in the general ANYWAY.

I say screw ‘em! They’ve jacked this country up enough. Why don’t we let the educated, young people who will inherit this nation decide this presidency. We’re the ones who are entering the workplace and finding decent salaries and ethical treatment and good management sacrificed in the name of the almighty dollar by the whores who went before us. We’re the ones who will die from black lung as unfair trade with China and others vastly increases pollution in the U.S. because we’re not holding them to our same environmental standards as we hold our own factories. We’re the ones who see inflation, commodity prices, and housing prices double and triple while pay rates go down. Congress has given themselves what, eight?, pay-raises since the last time they increased minimum wage. Thanks, whitey.

You can thank the white working class for giving Bush the free pass to continue Iraq with failed polices. You can thank the white working class for prejudicial Constitutional Amendments across the country against gay marriage. Amendments that would make founding fathers cringe. You can thank the white working class for continued government support for abstinence-only programs that have never proven to be effective and are possibly harmful. You can thank the white working class for ensuring that semi-automatic weapons and other needless, non-hunting fire-arms stay on the street and continue to wreak havoc in poor neighborhoods with ever-spreading tentacles.

I say it’s time the white working class stepped aside and retire their failed philosophies. We are worse as a nation - and as a world - than we were eight years ago. And, you know what I think, peeps? It’s only going to get worser. Especially in the last 270 days of the Bush presidency. Especially if McCain is elected president. They the white working class is truly insane if for no other reason than they keep doing the same thing over and over and expecting things to change or improve. Talk about tyranny of the masses - or, at least, the majority. The rest of us suffer because of their inadequate critical analysis and decision-making.

Forget political correctness. The white working class as a demographic, as an electorate, and as a decider has failed themselves and failed the rest us.

Let us pick this one, White Working Class, and I bet your life will improve. The Republicans have tricked you into thinking they’re looking out for your best interests by holding poor people accountable for their poorness. They haven’t. They’ve just ceded power to the multi-billion dollar corporations in exchange for campaign contributions and free golf games while your kids go without health care. It’s not your fault. You didn’t know. But if the reprehensible actions of Bush and Cheney and a whole slew of Congressional members haven’t taught you anything, I don’t know what will. You’re losing your homes. You can’t afford your medicine. You’re overweight and unhappy. Well, take a seat. Sit back. Put the Depends on. And give the rest of us a chance to right your wrongs.

And OBAMA - for CHRISSAKES - start giving specific examples of policy you will enact instead of simply saying You’re Going To Change Washington. We’ve heard that shit over and over before. We want specifics and we want them now. Definable, tangible solutions. Not generalities. Not campaign rhetoric. It’s time to get with the g.d. program. And if you lose Indiana, so help me, I’m voting for Nader!

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.

Freakonomics Posts Newt Gingrich’s Answers to Reader Questions

You can read his answers here.

Of course, they were boring and politically contrived. The explanations he gives for the partisanship of the 90’s is an example of his delusional excuses for the behavior of him and his ilk. He seems to be reaching into the same bag of untruths and ambiguous explanations that provide Dick Cheney with all his diarrhea of the mouth.

Example:

“Q: Do you think that corporations have too much power in government, through lobbyists and monetary incentives? What should be done to correct what I see as an imbalance of power between voters and the rich/powerful?

A: There is a direct relationship between the size, influence, and power of a government and the influence of lobbyists on that government. If we are serious about limiting the ability of lobbyists to dictate government policy, we should be serious about limiting the size and scope of the government’s power. Until that happens, the wealthy and powerful will always be able to have influence through lobbying.”

I disagree wholeheartedly. Anyone can see that through lobbying efforts, corporations receive tax privileges and are not regulated, increasing the burden on consumers. I agree that there is a direct relationship between lobbying and government and it seems very much that the more lobbyists there are, the less government. Blackwater has received no-bid contracts and has answered for only a few of their many criminal actions. Yet, they have a slew of lobbyists and have made more money than god on the war in Iraq.

Gingrich, buddy, you’re on the train going to hell and no amount of old-school Republican dogma cult bullshit followers are going to stop it. I’d recommend you pull your head out of your ass, but it’s probably too swollen.

Religion Pendulum Swinging In Iraq

Yes, I do think history is cyclical and the religious extremism in the Middle East can only last so long. Could it be the violence perpetuated by the religious leaders in Iraq is causing disenchantment among the youth? It’s too close to call at this point, but the International Herald Tribune has a really interesting article on this development.

WashPo Says Chiarelli Likely To Replace Patraeus At The End Of The Year

Apparently, Patraeus is looking to head over and revitalize NATO. I wonder if he’s friends with Wes Clark, who is backing Clinton.

“Another possible candidate discussed by administration officials, Lt. Gen. Martin Dempsey, was nominated earlier this month to be the top U.S. Army commander in Europe. Dempsey is currently the deputy chief of the Central Command, the U.S. military headquarters for the Middle East.

Chiarelli, currently the senior military assistant to Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates, commanded the 1st Cavalry Division in Iraq in 2004 and early 2005, and then was the No. 2 officer in Iraq in 2006, preceding Lt. Gen. Raymond Odierno. Opinions inside the Army are mixed, with some officers noting that Chiarelli was one of the first advocates of shifting course in Iraq and adopting classic counterinsurgency techniques, while others say that in his second tour, he presided over a failing strategy as violence skyrocketed. Some influential insiders are still advocating that Odierno, who was recently nominated to become the Army’s vice chief of staff, replace Petraeus later this year.”

I hope the presidential candidates are picking up the phone and getting to know these people. Iraq still needs to be at the forefront of concern during this election and has been slipping for a while. And Obama certainly needs to build his weak military-leader credentials if he plans to present a rational argument for his qualifications as commander-in-chief. It’s been time to step away from the “I’ve been against the war from the beginning!” We know you have. We’re sick of hearing it (it’s like Chinese water torture for crissakes!) and aren’t quite sure you would have felt the same way if you were a U.S. senator back then and a bit more of your ass was on the line. I understand you’ve worked with the urban poor int he U.S., but the urban poor (and rural poor) in certain other areas of the world can turn into terrorists.