The Stillwater Tribune

Good news--well, kinda sorta. Maybe. Ah, who knows?

2008-06-21T11:22:00.002-05:00

MPR Polinaut reports that the Independence Party will be meeting in Bloomington for their endorsing convention on Saturday. Geez, that's today, isn't it?

The news angle here is that the IP may not endorse any of their own Senate wannabees. They may do a "no endorsement" until Ventura announces whether he's going to enter the race.

But we will be watching the result anyway, because of the Bachmann angle:

...Convention delegates are also thinking about endorsing DFLer Elwyn Tinklenberg in Minnesota's 6th Congressional District. He's running against GOP incumbent Michele Bachmann...

Here's why that's important. The 6th Congressional District of Minnesota includes a number of IP voters. In 2006, the IP ran John Binkowski as their candidate against the DFL's Patty Wetterling and the GOP's Michele Bachmann. Binkowski lost but he took a small percentage of the vote with him at the polls.

Now if the IP endorses DFL'r Tinklenberg (former transportation commissioner for the Ventura administration) and deliver the same percentage for the his candidacy against Bachmann--that could be a difference that makes a difference, this time around.

MPR Polinaut link.

GOP Prez Candidate Campaign Songs Are Here!

2007-12-19T20:28:00.000-06:00

We used to have good campaign songs; before I was born the Dem’s theme song was “Happy Days Are Here Again.” They’d sing it at the convention:

Happy days
Are here again
The skies above
Are clear again
Let us sing a song
Of cheer again!
Happy days are here again!

Great song, got the crowd going.

The absolute worst attempt at a campaign song was by the Dole campaign; the year he ran against Clinton and lost. Some bright mind at his campaign thought it might be a great idea to change the words of Sam and Dave’s “I’m A Soul Man” to “I’m a Dole Man.”

I’m a Doooole Man... (da-da-da, d-da-da-da)
I’m a Doooole Man... (da-da-da, d-da-da-da)

It was that--plus the dead deer in front of the campaign bus, the fact that he told bigots they were not welcome in the GOP, and the fact that he actually tried to beg Perot for votes--that did him in. The prospect of watching a convention full of overwhelmingly white Republicans trying to “get down” to “I’m a Dole Man” was too much for Americans to face; they did the right thing and Clinton was re-elected.

Where are the campaign songs for the current GOP crop of losers, you ask? Why, they’re right here:

“Romney Egg Man”
(sing this one to the Beatles’ “I Am the Egg Man.” This one’s kind of abstract, like Romney’s campaign, lately.)

Huckabee has you (not me) cause Huck has made it
All about religion
See how he runs like God’s only son
See how he climbs
I’m dyin’—

Kissing up to cornheads
Can’t believe that they’re so dumb
Wasted all my bankroll--stupid bloody Christians
They will pick the nominee
I feel my face grow long

Romney Egg Man
Romney Egg Man
Romney Mormon
(Huck-huck-a-bee!)

Mister pretty Christian, voting--
“Voting Christians, I’m a Christian, too-oo-oo!”
(“Ho-ho-ho, hee-hee-hee, ha-ha-ha!”)
See how they run like they think I’m done, see how fly
I’m dyin’
I’m dyyyy-ing
I’m dyin’
I’m diiiiiiiiii---ying!

“Giuliani Dance”
(sing this to “Do You Wanna Dance,” an old fifties favorite covered by the Ramones, I think. Very romantic, like Rudy:)

Giuliani dance
And hold their hands
Tell the right you’re their lover man
Oh baby,
Giuliani dance.

Giuliani dance
Under the spotlight
Yell “nine-eleven” all day and night
Oh baby,
Giuliani, dance

Giuli-giuli-giuli, Giuliani dance!
Giuli-giuli-giuli, Giuliani dance!
Oh baby
Giuliani da-ance.

Giuliani dance
To be the nominee
Avoid your mistresses and fam-i-ly,
Oh baby
Giuliani, dance.

(Here’s John McCain’s—another Beatles’ hit—“She Came In Through The Bathroom Window.”)

McCain is through, the bathshit weirdo
Rejected, finished, none too soon.
And now he sucks his thumb and wonders
Why “more war” didn’t make us swoon.

He said he shunned evasive answers
He fundraised 15 bucks a day
His pro-war message sold like cancer--
We all knew that it would not play.

Didn’t anybody tell him?
Didn’t anybody see?
Money’s only goin’ til Sunday,
Tuesday—into bankruptcy.
Oh, yeah...

(Mike Huckabee? He’s goin’ like gangbusters, so naturally he went with a hot Elvis tune:
“And Marie’s the Name (Of His Latest Flame)”:)

A very old scam
Worked fine today
'Cause we been calling everyone in town
To spread religious hatred round
Huckabee’s my name, bigotry’s my game.

Mitt talked and talked
and I heard him say
That he was Christian through and through
But my guys said it wasn’t true
Huckabee’s my name, bigotry’s my game.

Though he smiled the tears inside were a-burning
I wished him luck and then I said goodbye
Now he’s gone with no chance of returning
Guess we were smart to mention plural wives.

Would you believe
that yesterday
My name was dogshit in the GOP
Now I’ll be the nominee
Huckabee’s the name, bigotry’s my game

Phony Chinese Art Scam A Pain In German Balls

2007-12-16T19:52:00.000-06:00

How low can you go?

China slams German "warriors" show as fake
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20071213/od_nm/germany_warriors_dc
Thu Dec 13, 9:59 AM ET

BEIJING (Reuters) - Supposedly ancient Chinese terracotta warriors on show at a German museum are fakes, China confirmed Thursday, condemning the organizers for cheating the public...

..."All the items on show in Hamburg are reproductions," (a Chinese cultural) administration said in a strongly worded statement on its Web site...

The Hamburg Museum of Ethnology has offered refunds to about 10,000 visitors who have already viewed the "Power in Death" exhibition since it opened on November 25 as police probed the authenticity of the warriors.

The display of eight clay warrior figures, two horses and 60 smaller objects has remained open, with a sign stating that its authenticity was in dispute.

--Oh, mama, I yam zo exzited. Today is der day ve go to to zee der Chinese terra cotta varriors eggzibit at der Museum.
--Ja, papa, iz zertainly eine gloriouz day. All your schveet life you hast bin moaning about how grrrrreat it vould be der Chinese terra cotta varriors, “oh, if ve could only afford ze trip to China to zee de famous Chinese terra cotta varriors,” “I’d giff my fockink right arm to zee dose amazingk Chinese terra cotta varriors”—und now here are der original, chenuine Chinese terra cotta varriors, hright here at de Hamboorg Ethnologikal Museum!”
--Ja, dot’s pieze of luck, alrrrright! Normally you vouldn’t ketch me dead at der Hamboorg Ethnologikalmuseum, I vouldn’t pfork over a pfenning to zee de museum-piece third vurld Kunst dey got on dishplay over dere. But diz Chinese terra-cotta varrior eggzibit is a different shtory, liebschen! Look, I got der tickets for der kids and for der grandkiddies, too! Ve are going to make a whole day out it, I even flew my ninety year olt Great-Onkel Oskar into town from der Obergammerau Home for Der Dekrepit to see dis egg-zibit, bekoss he tells me ven I yam eine young shprout—“Hans! If dere is one ting I vould like to do before I die, it is zee der chenuine Chinese terra-cotta varriors! Not zum cheesy knock-off terra cotta varriors, but der real McCoy! If I could chust zee dat vunce, mein life vould not haff been in vain.”
--So you flew him down, even do it’s goink to break ush at ze bank. Dot is vhy you are a nize man, papa. Now, here is der hamper, mitt all de Cherman delicacies vot I haff been up all night cookingk so dot zeeing de chenuine Chinese terra cotta varriors vill be de perfect ekshperience dot our ekshtended family vill neber forget. I got der wienerschnitzel, der sauerbraten, der spaetzel, der hred kebbage, der white kebbage, der green kebbage, der kebbagebraten, der wienerkebbage—
--Vow, mama, you did a lot of kookink.
--I chure did, I disemboweled a lot of liveshtock and shpent our life shavings on kebbeges, but it’s all vort it for dis unforgeddable “zeeing der chenuine terra cotta varriors ekshperience.
--Cheez, mama, I hope ve are not “over-zelling” dis ting to ourselves and der kids. But let’s go, der museum ist openink.

(Later at the museum:)
--Vell, mama, iz diz “chenuine Chinese terra cotta varriors” egg-zibit all I promised du it vould be?
--Oh, papa, it shor ist! Dis is fontastik, der kiddies und der grrand-kiddies and our moribund Great-Onkle Oskar are zo exshited, zey are pointink and hreadink der interestingk facts on de eggzibit labels und marveling at ze audenticity of der egg-zibit—look at dis vun hright here, izn’t zis a fine shpecimen of a chenuine Chinese terra cotta varrior—

--Oh, ja, he ist a gut vun, mama. Vell, it cost us a bundle to get everyvun here, and I shpent all my money und all my life tryink to make zis drrream come trrrrue, but I must zay it voss vurth it to see the chenuine Chinese terra cotta varriors—
--BUT PAPA! VOT IST DIS?
--Vot is vot? Vhy hast du turned all pale like eine uncooked knockwurst all of der sudden?
--Look dere! Look at vot it says on dis Chinese terra cotta varrior’s shkirt!
--“Shkirt?”
--Yes, “shkirt,” look at der bottom of his “shkirt,” it zays zumething at der bottom dere:

--GOTT IN FOKINGK HIMMEL! VAS IST LOSS, or vords to dot effect, I’m zo upset I can’t remember “le mot juste” in Deutsche! DIS FOCKINGK EGG-ZIBIT IST NOTHINGK BUT A BUNCH OF FOCKINGK CHINESE TERRA COTTA VARRIOR KNOCKOFFS! Vot kind uf badger game are dese EthnologikalMuseumMutterfokkers tryingk to put over on der public? For der lieb of Gott, don’t let Great-Onkel Oskar see dat or he’ll—
--Mein Gott, Hans! He *hast* seen it! He ist habbing eine shtroke!
--ACH DU LIEBER, call nine-vun-vun! Dis is the vurst ekshperience in our eckshtended family’s history, us und our kinder und our grand-kinder heff gone through every last cent ve haff to shpend de last dree hourz looking at a bunch off PHONY ORIENTAL KUNST! I’m zooing, do you hear me? I um goingk to zoo this choke of a museum fer der Fraude!
--Und dot ist not de only bed news, papa! Look at der headline in dis American newshpaper, vot is choost lyin’ around here—
--(looks at headline) Oh, MEIN GOTT! (reads:)

Bush Justice Department Tells Congress To Stay Out of Destroyed CIA Tapes Investigation
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/C/CIA_VIDEOTAPES?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT

What if they really are "that stupid" at the White House?

2007-12-11T18:05:00.000-06:00

Where was this woman educated?

Perino's 'Missile Crisis' Confession
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/09/AR2007120901336_pf.html

...Appearing on National Public Radio's light-hearted quiz show "Wait, Wait . . . Don't Tell Me," which aired over the weekend, (White House Press Secretary Dana) Perino got into the spirit of things and told a story about herself that she had previously shared only in private: During a White House briefing, a reporter referred to the Cuban Missile Crisis -- and she didn't know what it was.

"I was panicked a bit because I really don't know about . . . the Cuban Missile Crisis," said Perino, who at 35 was born about a decade after the 1962 U.S.-Soviet nuclear showdown. "It had to do with Cuba and missiles, I'm pretty sure."

So she consulted her best source. "I came home and I asked my husband," she recalled. "I said, 'Wasn't that like the Bay of Pigs thing?' And he said, 'Oh, Dana.' "

This explains a lot. What if they’re not *evil* motherfuckers? They may just be wildly *ignorant* motherfuckers. For example:

Reporter: Mr. Cheney, do you think your argument for a unitary executive is consistent with the Constitution?
Cheney: The what?
Reporter: The Constitution, Mr. Vice President. The legal charter that sets out the limits of law and government in the United States.
Cheney: (thinks for moment) I’m sorry, I’m gettin’ nothin’ here, the Consti-what?
Reporter: Surely you’ve heard of the Constitution, Mr. Cheney.
Cheney: No I haven’t. I’ve heard of “Shirley—“—she’s one of Giuliani’s girlfriends, isn’t she?
Reporter: Jesus Christ—
Cheney: Or is she one of his ex-wives? I can’t keep all that shit straight—You know what? Go fuck yourself, how’s that for an answer.

Chinese Ambassador: Naturally we are concerned with our image on human rights, Mr. President. The last thing we want to have is another Tiananmen Square—
Bush: Oh, yeah. My doctor told me to lay off those, too.
Chinese Ambassador: I beg your pardon, Mr. President?
Bush: Those whatchamacallit squares, those, uh, cookies you guys make out of marshmallow and rice krispies. Doc says I gotta lay off those. (pats stomach) Waist line.
Chinese Ambassador: Mr. President, I have no idea of what you are talking about.
Bush: (stares him down, then winks) Okay, I getcha. “State secret,” huh? “Ancient Chinese secret,” about the cookie industry. Don’t worry, I won’t blow the whistle on you and your Teeny Weenie Squares—but in return, you gotta let us dump some Fords over there in your vast, untapped automobile retail market. International trade goes two ways, get me?
Chinese Ambassador: (stares at President impassively, even stoically.)
Bush: Caught you by surprise there, didn’t I? Didn’t think I knew about your Tinnamon Squares, didja? (taps side of head) It’s *aaaalllll* up here, my oriental friend. The only thing I couldn’t figure out is how to get my “fortune” out of one of those thing—they’re all sticky inside, you know? So how am I supposed to get my fortune out, without tearing the little paper? Hell, I probably ate all my fortunes in my...haste...to...consume... (suddenly angry, yells at ambassador) What do they say? What do my fortunes say? Tell me or I’ll send nuclear arms to Taiwan!

Moral of the story: we have to give this administration the benefit of a doubt. They may not be getting tens of thousands killed every year because they’re sociopathic power junkies; they may be taking all these lives because they’re incredibly fucking stupid.

Or possibly some combination of the two. I’ve given up trying to decide.

Candidates: "The worst job I ever had was..."

2007-12-07T23:54:00.000-06:00

The candidates for the presidency were asked what the worst job they ever had was.

Mike Huckabee had a job wiping people's fingerprints off the glass doors and windows at Penney's. Hillary Clinton had one of those horrible "gutting fish" jobs in Alaska and got yelled at when she didn't do it fast enough. Mitt Romney was rich, but he cut sewer pipe while summering at a family ranch. (Do you know what that can do to your hair?)

John McCain couldn't remember. Fred Thompson; well, he's an actor, he'll do anything for buck. He was a bouncer at drag strip (what the hell do you have to do to get thrown out of a drag strip?) Bill Richardson got minimum wage to pitch in a no-name baseball league.

Edwards mopped out the grease at a textile mill. Obama hated his job at Baskin Robbins because he ate too much ice cream (can you imagine Obama being eloquent at Baskin Robbins in one of those paper hats?)

But nobody asked "the man" himself, George W. Bush, what his worst job ever was. If he was asked, I think his answer would go...something like this...

The candidates for the presidency were asked what the worst job they ever had was.

Mike Huckabee had a job wiping people's fingerprints off the glass doors and windows at Penney's. Hillary Clinton had one of those horrible "gutting fish" jobs in Alaska and got yelled at when she didn't do it fast enough. Mitt Romney was rich, but he cut sewer pipe while summering at a family ranch. (Do you know what that can do to your hair?)

John McCain couldn't remember. Fred Thompson; well, he's an actor, he'll do anything for buck. He was a bouncer at drag strip (what the hell do you have to do to get thrown out of a drag strip?) Bill Richardson got minimum wage to pitch in a no-name baseball league.

Edwards mopped out the grease at a textile mill. Obama hated his job at Baskin Robbins because he ate too much ice cream (can you imagine Obama being eloquent at Baskin Robbins in one of those paper hats?)

But nobody asked "the man" himself, George W. Bush, what his worst job ever was. If he was asked, I think his answer would go...something like this...

Bush:

Worst job? Definitely President of the United States. See, I’m basically a happy-go-lucky kind of guy. And for years now, everybody’s so serious, “there’s a war on, you can't go around laughin' and smilin' in public, blah, blah, blah.” The year that nine-eleven happened, I got up in public and said "All in all, it's been a great year for Laura and me" and of course the press picked that up, and Dick and Karl said, "Mr. President, you can't say shit like that in public, you can't be actin' all happy when there's three thousand Americans killed and the Pentagon all blown up!" So I had to reign it in. Couldn't be myself.

Being Governor of Texas was great. Governor of Texas doesn't really have to do anything, the State House is where it all happens. And I got to execute people! Al Gonzales got the review time I had to spend on each appeal down to half an hour.

Karla Faye Tucker—that execution made me, careerwise. Folks callin’ in to thank me for havin’ the courage to kill her, sayin’ prayers for me, sendin’ pizzas--God I miss that. Big points for that in the polls, and it was a no-brainer.

Now all I can really do--in public--is the Guantanamo stuff, incarcerating people with no right of appeal, no writ of habeas maximus, or whatever you call it. It’s just not the same.

I mean, I still have the power, the power to kill, the vast...power...of life and death-—but it’s mostly exercised over out-of-state foreigners these days. And that’s not as gratifying. I could kill thousands of innocent foreigners every month and not get the “charge” I got outta killing one Karla Faye Tucker. Cause, you know, she was guilty, and most of these people gettin' killed over in Iraq weren’t. They’re collateral, Karla Faye was—I don’t know, what is the word, “lateral?”

And Karla Faye was an American citizen. The only way I can get Americans killed now is if they volunteer to die for their country, and that strikes me as kind of sad sometimes. Sometimes they don’t die, sometimes they come back missing their legs. I don’t know what happens to the legs, I don’t know whether they ship the legs home, too. I figure it’s insensitive to ask. If I really had to know I could pick up the phone here and someone would tell me in five minutes. But I don’t see how it’s relevant to the question. I really don’t.

And I don’t know why they do it, to tell you the truth. Volunteering for combat, I mean. I could never see any percentage in that, myself. (pause) What was I talking about?

Oh, yeah, worst job. Definitely, being President of the United States. Being in business was a lot better than being President, too. You got to understand, I was in kind of a special situation there—I could fuck up and run the whole business into the ground (I did, too, heh, heh) and everybody would still like me, because I was, you know, politically connected and they were kind of scared of being cut out for bitchin' about me. And *I* made money—the secret is being first to get out before the thing collapses, like they did with Enron.

That’s what I did, and I miss it. People treated me with respect, not like this White House shit. Now people are always criticizing every little thing I say, if I get a name wrong or don’t know where a country is or how Social Security works—that makes the front page of the papers. In business, you can be a real idiot and it never makes the papers unless there’s an actual indictment. And you get all that money.

And you could dream big—when I was in business, people used to kiss my ass all the time, tell me that some day I could be President of the United States. Made me feel good, because I didn’t know what being President was really all about. Now I do, and I realize I had a, a child’s view of what being President of the United States was all about. I thought it was gonna be like Reagan—makin’ jokes, getting your picture taken with folks, being popular, sayin’ “Go ahead, make my day” to Democrats, that kind of stuff. Don't piss off the base by raising taxes on the rich people, get your picture taken, talk about what it means to be a leader--

Turns out that’s only a real small part of the job. That should teach the young people readin’ this interview a valuable lesson—careful what you wish for—you might get it! I thought I wanted to be president. So I went out and got the job, I got the four hundred million bucks together and I got myself the job, I’m President of the United States. And now look what happened. So be careful what you wish for, kids—it might happen!

I started out doin’ that all that Reagan photo-op stuff, but then that nine-eleven thing happened, and people would get all mad if I acted like myself—so Dick and Karl said I had to act all serious after that or they’d quit. Except at GOP events, they said I could cut loose a little at those, cut up a bit. Those people used to like me no matter what I said or did.

But with everybody else—gravitas, Dick said. And it’s been gravitas for six years. Even that thing where I landed the jet on the aircraft carrier—well, I was in the jet—that was a really cool, a lot of good video. But it turned out I shouldn’a told everybody that major combat operations were over—cause as it turned out--they weren’t! Who knew, I sure didn’t. That’s what they told me to say.

But four years later those pictures sure make me look like a smacked ass. Wrecked my gravitas. We had to Photoshop out the "Mission Accomplished" banner on the White House home page. I said, hey, where's the "Mission Accomplished" banner, they said "we Photoshop'd that out, Mr. President." Damn.

Can't say I blame. We stepped in shit that time, doin’ a big national photo op celebrating victory and the end of the war when it turned out it was just starting. Made me look like a smacked ass...still trying to live that down, four years later. Been tryin’ to get my gravitas back ever since. That’s Latin, did you know that? Everbody’s all serious all the time, this Latin shit...

I sure miss business. We had some fun back then. Flyin' a fighter jet when I had a little buzz goin' was pretty cool, too. Not everybody can do it, though. You got to have reflexes that can counter the liquor. Counter the liquor...

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5htgQYTrq84Qb4k24IjhJhP_YFXBgD8TBI9EG1

I talk to Karl Rove on Fox News Sunday

2007-12-04T23:44:00.000-06:00

O-right, as we say in Jersey: here’s me cutting myself into the Sunday news talk shows again. This time it's Fox News Sunday, and I'm talking with Karl Rove.

A weekly roundup of the buzz from the Sunday talk shows
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/02/AR2007120202311.html?nav=rss_politics
Monday, December 3, 2007; Page A02

Karl Rove defended his recent assertion that Democrats in Congress pushed the country to war with Iraq faster than the White House wanted.

Fox News Sunday: Mr. Rove, you lovable rascal, would you care to defend your recent assertion that Democrats in Congress pushed the country to war with Iraq faster than the White House wanted?
Me: What kind of fucking asshole would say something as ridiculously untrue as that? Oh—here is he is right here, sitting next to me on the panel—
Rove: "The general conventional wisdom is that the president was the only person pushing the Congress to vote on the war resolution before the November election."
Me: That’s another fucking lie. A different lie to avoid explaining the first lie. There was no shortage of bloodthirsty right wing bullshit artists who were pushing the Congress to vote on the war resolution before the November election. No one is claiming that “the president was the only person” pushing that, there were tens of thousands of assistant shitheels helping him do that, including you and the owner of this bullshit propaganda network.
Rove: “And that's simply not true. [Former Senate majority leader] Tom Daschle in June [of 2002] said there's broad support for regime change in Iraq."
Me: I don’t know if that’s true or not, if Karl Rove announces it’s sunny outside, I take an umbrella on the strength of his word. He’s a fuckin’ liar by profession, ladies and gentlemen, and everybody knows it, including the irresponsible jerkoffs who ask him to appear on these shows as “an expert on politics.” Anyway--it doesn’t fucking matter what Daschle fucking thought. The president is responsible for making the case for war or peace to the country and the Congress, and you turd-slingers lied your asses off about the degree of the threat from Iraq so that people like Daschle would back you in this sorry fucking historical debacle. And you’re still lying about it. And none of the bullshit you offered here today actually answers the challenge you were given: to “defend your recent assertion that Democrats in Congress pushed the country to war with Iraq faster than the White House wanted.”
Your answers are non-responsive bullshit, strike them. And now we’re going to a commercial about a new kind of douche bag or something, which will probably do a better job of defending the lying charge about “Democrats in Congress pushed the country to war with Iraq” than this old douche bag here did.

Commercial: (soft acoustic guitar plays a Bach canticle in the background as we see a longshot of a woman walking across a sunny field of wildflowers on a breezy day.)
Woman’s voice over: Sometimes a woman doesn’t feel as fresh as she should (etc. etc.)
(Oddly enough, the commercial turns out to be for snow tires. So don't write me about that.)

Me: We’re back with Fox News Sunday. Rep. Chris Van Hollen (Md.), chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, do you have a question for this unrepentant life-long liar that we’ve invited on the air again so he can lie to us all again, as if that was a valuable use of airtime and of value to the American political discourse?
Van Hollen: Yes. Mr. Rove, what about this Washington Post report that quoted former Bush press secretary Ari Fleischer as saying it was "definitely" the administration that "set . . . in motion and determined the timing" of the war resolution?
Rove: Ari Fleischer was "not aware of and was not privileged" to all the information he needed to make the most accurate assessment.
Me: Neither was your MOTHER, Rove. Neither were you, neither was I, neither was the kid who brings in the donuts. Neither was the fucking President of the United States! Even if they gave him all the information he needed to make the most accurate assessment—he couldn’t understand it and he wasn’t interested in it. He’d already decided to go to war in Iraq whether there was a threat from WMDs or not. Ari Fleischer is just telling the truth for once in his life, and it’s no defense for you to argue that your own White House Press Secretary had no idea of what was going on. You drove this fucking thing, Rove, you were in charge of selling the public on the idea of going to war—and now you’re here trying to deny that that even happened? What the fuck are you, Pravda or something? Why don’t you tell us about how you torpedo’d your own political party in just seven years, cost it the Congress with these fucking lies you’re still telling? If Bush had just sat on his hands in the Oval Office with his mouth zipped shut, he could have been re-elected, but no—you couldn’t resist you power-mad obsession with lying to the American public. You set out to build a permanent conservative majority and instead you turned the party to shit with your crazy lies—and here’s Fox presenting you as a “big political expert.” My ass is a better political expert than you are, and the noises that come out of *it* are more trustworthy than *you.*
(to camera) Anyway—that’s all we have time for this morning, ladies and gentlemen. Thank you, and best wishes for a good week from... roll that computer graphic, boys... Fox News Sunday.

Analogy That Explains Your Role In American Politics

2007-12-02T15:48:00.000-06:00

Look at this picture. This is how you see yourself, relative to the Democratic Party, if you're one of these idiots like me who does political blogging on progressive issues.

So many of the Dem candidate partisans keep writing about how Obama’s two-faced or Hillary’s a sell-out from the get-go or Edwards is a non-starter or "I'm gonna walk if this one’s the nominee, because I can’t support that."

I’ve tried to explain this to them, over and over, but they just reject the explanation, over and over. You see—our side is not nearly as strong as they think it is. The conservatives have been in trouble this last few years, but they’ll be back—regaining seats and maybe even the White House—as early as 2008 if the activists don’t cut out this "I demand this or I’m out" shit and get with the program.

It looks like I have to take an analogy and beat it to death to get this across to you. So here it is. There are these two restaurants, see? Only two viable restaurants in the whole town, get me? There’s "Chez GOP" and "L’Asino" (That means "The Donkey," that’s the Democratic restaurant.) They are the only two viable places to eat in town, if one goes out of business you have to eat at the other. Get me so far?

Okay. At Chez GOP, they serve shit. No, not shit as in "bad food"—they serve actual shit, as food, and their clientele pays for it. How can they stay in business doing that? Great advertising. Control of the local media. They give their shit a fancy name, and they keep advertising how fabulous it is, and they got a twenty four/seven media campaign going on that says their stuff is great and anyone who’d eat at any other restaurant is some kind of a commie homo simpleton—and that works, for thirty per cent of available customers, decade after decade. This thirty per cent of available customers have actually developed a taste for shit, as a result of this incessant advertising and media campaign. These customers have reached a point where they refuse to eat anything else!

Okay, how about the other restaurant? "L’Asino," a more romantic atmosphere. There’s a lot on the menu there that you and I would like. It’s not shit. It’s a good menu—look, you got health care, you got some identity politics there (feminism, gay rights, protection of civil rights), environmental regulations that actually mean something, a realistic economic policy that isn’t just aimed at making rich people richer, an expressed commitment to end the war rather than expand it. There’s a lot of good stuff on this menu. The problem is that you can’t depend on them to give you anything particular on the menu. You may get it, you may not.

You know where you want to eat, given these two choices, right? I mean, these are the only two going concerns--there’s always talk of opening a third joint, "El Tercer Fiesta" (the third party), but no one can ever find the necessary capital to make a go of it, they can’t get enough customers--fuck, they can’t even afford the silverware or the tablecloths unless Chez GOP gives them a little dough just to shave off the number of clientele at "L’Asino."

So okay. That’s the present reality; only two viable restaurants to eat at. If you’re in here at the Kos every week yelling about "Obama’s a this" or "Hillary’s a that" or "Edwards is God" or "Reid and Pelosi are assholes and we will punish them for that"—you don’t understand your role in this restaurant analogy! You’re talking like you think you’re the customer at "L’Asino!" You think your relationship to the party is this:

See? Look at that; that’s how you see yourself. You think you’re the angry, irate customer who’s entitled to scream about the bad service (and it is bad), and about how if you don’t get what you ordered, right away—"I’m gonna walk out of here and never come back again, because you assholes running this joint are incompetent nincompoops!"

But that’s not who you are! You’re not the fucking customer! Before I tell you who you really are—let me tell you who the other characters in the drawing are. You see that waiter? He’s Tonio, he’s a Dem organizer. He actually rounds up the votes, he goes running around doing GOTV, locking up the unions, the educators, the core constituencies, charming the swing voters. He’s apologizing to the angry customer because the angry customer ordered "End the War This Year," and they don’t have it. They don’t have it for him, because the management is convinced that if they served him that dish tonight, when he wanted it, when he needed it—there wouldn’t be a "L’Asino" restaurant next year in 2008; the whole place would go out of business and we’d all end up having to eat shit at Chez GOP—including their "Endless War Daily Shit Special."

The maitre d’? That’s Gianni; he represents the most powerful elected Dems in the party. The fat guy on the right, watching nervously as you bitch and moan? That’s Marcello, one of the owners. He owns a share in this friggin’ restaurant—he represents the party management and the funding people, the guys who put up the big money that keeps this place open. He puts up the millions and millions to keep this place going and make it viable competition for Chez GOP. He pays the guys who came up with the polling data, to tell the restaurant what will and will not sell to the electorate, what policy positions/menu items will keep "L’Asino" in business, and what policy positions/menu items will drive it out of business—leaving us all to eat shit at Chez GOP.

The chef, where is he? The one who actually turn out the food (ie, the policy?) He doesn’t matter, because if he doesn’t do what the owners tell him, he’s fired. You can always get another chef, and you can always get another policy wonk or academic; chefs and academics are as common as prostitutes. Marcello and the other owners are the ones that make the final decision about what goes on the menu, taking into account what will attract the most customers and taking into account that they refuse to serve absolute shit like Chez GOP. Because they do have some small principles; they think that serving shit up like food is wrong. (At Chez GOP, the owners have no such principles.)

And in this next cartoon, you can see who you really are, God help you:

That’s right—you’re Finucchio--the bus boy! If you’re a grass roots activist, a net roots activist, whatever the hell you call yourself—you are a bus boy. If you don’t have the millions necessary to be one of the owners—you’re not entitled to get angry and complain about the service, you’re not entitled to demand that this issue or that issue be "our special for today!" You eat here, because the bus boys eat at the restaurants they work at, but you get whatever they put on the fuckin’ menu that night—not what you may happen to "feel like eating!" If you want to be one of the guys who decide what actually is on the menu—you damn well better put up a million dollars of your own, Finucchio! (Or deliver a million more customers. Either delivery will entitle you to decide one dish on the menu, Finook.)

But if you can’t deliver either of those, the million bucks or the million new votes—well, chief, you better face the fact that you’re a bus boy who can’t do that! And the management already thinks you’re an asshole, but they don’t even respect you enough to tell you that. You know why? Because bus boys who work as cheap as you are hard to get, it’s hard to get a bus boy who works as cheap as you. They’ll tolerate you and even flatter you because even with all your bitching and moaning it’s better than having no bus boys at all.

But if you don’t acknowledge you’re a bus boy and you keep acting like an unhappy customer and you keep bitching and moaning about this restaurant and how lousy it is—you’ll start to drive the real customers out (i.e. the part of the electorate that is up for grabs.) By sitting down at the table with them and telling them how lousy this restaurant is and how there’s really no difference between this restaurant and Chez GOP. (That’s a lie, by the way; they serve shit over at Chez GOP—here, you may not get what you want when you order it, but at least they don’t serve up actual shit and call it food.) If you keep pretending you’re a customer and telling people this is just as crappy a restaurant as Chez GOP-- this restaurant will go out of business--and we’ll all end up eating shit at Chez GOP! Again!

That’s why the waiters and the maitre d’ and the owners think you’re an asshole, for acting the way you act, complaining and pretending you’re a customer. This business is in a competition-to-the-death with Chez GOP—and here are the busboys sitting down at the table and acting like they’re customers all of a sudden? What kind of crazy fucked-up idiocy is that? How does that help?

Who is that pinhead sitting at the table with the fork in his cheek? That is the uncommitted voters, the customers we need to attract to keep this place open. They don’t know what is going on, they just want to get something good to eat that’s not shit. (These pinheads—about fifty per cent of the electorate—may not know much about politics, but they know a pile of shit when they see it, and they won’t eat that unless they’re conned into doing so. The thirty per cent of the pinheads who have already been conned into eating shit and paying for the privilege are already the regular customers at Chez GOP.)

Who represents the candidates in these pictures? It’s that silly fuck on the guitar playing mood music, the guitar idiot. He (or she, as the case may be) is actually one of the least important people in the restaurant! If there wasn’t a restaurant, or if the restaurant went out of business, that silly shit would be the first guy out of a job! That’s how much this "who the candidate is" shit matters: if the restaurant goes out of business because you won’t shut up and bus the tables and because you’re a bus boy who is suffering a bizarre delusion that he is the customer and not a busboy—we all end up eating shit at Chez GOP, and your beloved candidate is out of a job and they certainly won’t hire him at Chez GOP either, because that crowd hates the kind of songs he sings. You understand what I’m saying here?

If "L’Asino" goes out of business next year, there won’t be anything on the menu for us at all. No identity politics, no civil liberties protections, no economic turnaround for working people, no protecting pro-choice, no protecting the environment. All of that, and more--"off the menu!" It’s not that you can get anything you want on our menu if "L’Asino" stays open—it’s that you will have to eat shit at Chez GOP if "L’Asino" closes!

So for God’s sake shut up and start bussing some of these tables again. What do I mean by "bussing the tables," in this analogy? That stands for contributing money to the party, talking up the Dem candidates instead of character assassination, badmouthing the GOP instead of the Dem leadership, by telling the sordid truth about the shit they serve. We have got to get some more customers in here and win this competition against Chez GOP! They already have thirty per cent of the available customers, even though they serve shit! We cannot hope to win this thing if you spend fifty per cent your time here bitching about the management, bus boy!

Christ, I hope you guys start understanding this real soon. Because if you don’t start understanding this real soon—you and me and everybody else are going to spend the next four years eating shit at Chez GOP—again!

I go on the Sunday morning politics talk shows

2007-11-19T23:38:00.001-06:00

No one ever invites me to go on those Sunday morning political talk shows, probably because I sleep in. But here’s what I would say if I was a commentator on those shows.

First, here I am on ABC’s This Week, going head to head with Fred Thompson on the right-to-die thing:

ABC’s This Week: Senator Thompson, a legal and political battle unfolded over whether doctors should remove Terri Schiavo's feeding tube and let her die, as her husband wanted, or continue to sustain her, as her parents wanted. How would you resolve situations like that in the future?
Thompson: When family members cannot agree, the first recourse needs to be state government. I would side with the parents in, you know, keeping that child alive.
Bill: Why the hell should the parents have the final word? Schiavo was an adult, she’d expressed wishes about how she wanted to die. Where does the law say that your parents have the final word, and not your spouse or the courts? You’re contradicting yourself, you say the first recourse should be the state government but the parents should have the final say? What kind of bullshit is that, Fred, you’re talking out of your ass.
Thompson: How could you decide otherwise, if they told you that the child was going to continue to live?
Bill: What about her husband? What about his opinion? What about Terri Schiavo’s opinion, on how she wanted die—what she said before she entered a semi-vegetative state? What about the state court findings of fact on *her* expressed wishes? Do you chuck all that out the window as if it’s so much shit, just so you can court the evangelical right?
ABC’s This Week: Senator Thompson, what about the broader legal concerns surrounding end-of-life issues, do you have a legal position on that?
Thompson: I don’t have a legal position, other than it ought to be resolved in a state court system.
Bill: You play a lawyer on TV, you have a law degree, *pretend* you have a legal position. You’re supposed to be running for President, for Jesus’ sake, take a position. And the Schiavo case *was* resolved in the Florida state court system, you jackass. The evangelicals didn’t like the way the state court system resolved it, that’s how it became talk radio politics and finally ended up on the floor of the GOP Congress. Your comment is irrelevant, it shows you’re not even paying attention. Wake up, you geezer, don’t you even read the papers anymore? (to other commentators) Somebody wake this guy up.

Now here I am on Fox News Sunday, giving Mike Huckabee a much-needed dressing down...

Fox News Sunday: What about these ethical questions that have recently been raised about your tenure as Governor of Arkansas?
Huckabee: There's something Arkansas-esque about it. If you look at the politics of this state, the people who are not happy that I was governor -- remember, I was only the fourth Republican elected in 150 years.
Bill: (stares at him is disbelief, then says) That’s it? That’s your answer? Someone asks you a question about ethics violations while you were governor, and all you can come up with is “I was only the fourth Republican elected governor in 150 years?” “Arkansas political trivia,” that’s how you rebut ethics allegations? How are you gonna answer a question about your ties to the religious right, you gonna tell us what the official state fruit is? (to the other commentators, jerking his thumb) Can you believe this numbnut?
Fox New Sunday: Governor, what about your first Iowa television spot featuring your celebrity endorser, Chuck Norris?
Bill: Chuck Norris? An endorsement from Chuck Norris? What kind of fucking--
Huckabee: (interrupting)It probably doesn't convince anybody. The spots we'll run next week will start doing that. But what it does do is exactly what it's doing this morning: getting a lot of attention, driving people to our Web site, giving them an opportunity to find out, who is this guy that would come out with Chuck Norris in a commercial.
Bill: Chuck Norris will come out for a feminine hygiene spray in a commercial, if the money's right, what the hell does that prove? That's the most credible endorsement you could come up with, Chuck Norris? What, was "Batman" unavailable or something? What kind of idiot would be impressed by an endorsement from Chuck Norris? We're at war, for Christ's sake, tens of thousands of people are being killed every year, and you're trying lock up the "martial arts" vote in Iowa? What are you, some kind of right-wing cartoon character or something?
Fox News Sunday: Please, Bill--
Bill: I'm not kidding, this is supposed to be serious shit we're discussing here, and this guy brings out a Bruce Lee knock-off to endorse him--am I the only serious person up here?

Finally, calling out John Edwards on CNN:

CNN Late Edition: Senator Edwards, can Hillary Clinton win the presidency?
Bill: What kind of a stupid ass question is that? Don’t answer that, John.
Edwards: I think that remains to be seen. That's why we have campaigns. I mean, what I know is that I can. And I think the empirical evidence supports that.
Bill: See? I told you not to answer that, but you went ahead and answered it anyway. And now you just look fatuous. We all know you think you can win the presidency, that’s why you’re running. But that doesn’t answer the question they asked you, which is whether Hillary can win. So what we’ve got now is a non-answer to a stupid question, which is a waste of everyone’s time. Let’s go to commercial.
Edwards: When I talk about shaking up Washington and making this place actually work for the American people, it is an interesting thing to watch that the people who are inside Washington, including Senator Clinton and her campaign, they circle the wagons and start protecting Washington politicians.
Bill: And what are you? A non-Washington politician? You were a senator and a vice presidential candidate, for Christ’s sake, how is that “not a Washington politician?” What are you now, a “baker from Idaho” or a “plumber from New Jersey” now, all of the sudden? This is a stupid discussion, you’re just digging yourself in deeper, it’s depressing. Let’s go to commercial.

No, wait there's one more! Here's me with Edwards on Face the Nation:

CBS's Face the Nation: Senator Edwards, isn’t this mudslinging, this criticism of Hillary?
Edwards: I reject the notion that this is mudslinging. I mean, we're talking about substantive issues of war that are going to face the next president of the United States.
Bill: No, you’re not, you’re talking about “what’s wrong with Hillary.” How the hell is that a solution to the substantive issues of war? Less about Hillary, more about the war, come on. We’ve already got McCain running around laughing with approval when his supporters call her a bitch, we get quite enough of that shit from the other side.
What are all these "horserace" BS questions for this guy, why doesn't someone ask him to spell out his plan for withdrawal instead of what he thinks about Hillary? We're on television, this is supposed to be about the issues, even Fred took a Schiavo question. For Christ’s sake, I don’t know why I bother to show up here. Who watches this shit, hoping to learn something?

Here’s the questions and answers without me, if you want to read it without my input, as millions do.
A weekly roundup of the buzz from the Sunday talk shows
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/11/18/AR2007111801271.html?nav=rss_politics
Monday, November 19, 2007; Page A02

Fred Thompson adviser and fundraiser dealt COKE!

2007-11-05T13:40:00.000-06:00

Tough to capture the family values vote when you've been caught red-handed working as a pro-choice lobbyist--and, oh my GOD, one of your top men has been busted for DEALING!

Thompson Adviser Has Criminal Past
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/11/03/AR2007110301153.html
By Matthew Mosk
Washington Post Staff Writer
Sunday, November 4, 2007; A01

Republican presidential candidate Fred D. Thompson has been crisscrossing the country since early this summer on a private jet lent to him by a businessman and close adviser who has a criminal record for drug dealing.

Thompson selected the businessman, Philip Martin, to raise seed money for his White House bid. Martin is one of four campaign co-chairmen and the head of a group called the "first day founders." Campaign aides jokingly began to refer to Martin, who has been friends with Thompson since the early 1990s, as the head of "Thompson's Airforce."

Martin entered a plea of guilty to the sale of 11 pounds of marijuana in 1979; the court withheld judgment pending completion of his probation. He was charged in 1983 with violating his probation and with multiple counts of felony bookmaking, cocaine trafficking and conspiracy. He pleaded no contest to the cocaine-trafficking and conspiracy charges, which stemmed from a plan to sell $30,000 worth of the drug, and was continued on probation...

...Karen Hanretty, Thompson's deputy communications director, said yesterday that "Senator Thompson was unaware of the information until this afternoon. Phil Martin has been a friend of the senator since the mid-1990s and remains so today." Thompson communications director Todd Harris added that Martin was not subjected to the campaign's standard vetting process because "he's a longtime friend."

"Okay, Freddy, just two more stops and we can turn this baby around for refueling."
"I been meaning to ask you about that, buddy. Why the heck do you have to go all the way to Peru to refuel the plane?"
"Cheap gas, Freddy-boy. Trust me, I don't lose any money on this deal. You leave the flight plan to me, all you got to worry about is remembering your stump speech." The pilot snorted, sniffing as if something was caught up his nose.
Thompson suspected the man had a cold, and he felt a little guilty about how much time and effort his longtime friend had put into this aerial campaign tour. "Hell, I don't want you to think I don't appreciate this, buddy. One of the boys on my campaign figured it out the other day, he reckons you've saved me more than $100,000 in transportation costs."
"Well, you're my homey, my main man--and I can't have my main man flyin' coach, now can we?"
Thompson chuckled appreciatively, loudly enough to be heard over the roar of the Cessna's twin engines. He twisted in the co-pilot's seat to look at the view. It was a beautiful day, not a cloud in the sky; far below the plane mountaintops drifted by majestically. Where were they now? Thompson had lost track; it didn't look like Iowa, that was for sure--
The pilot turned up the radio, shouting "Oh, man, this is my song!"
"Yeah, that's a catchy tune, alright, what is that?"
"Superfly!" his companion shouted back, and began singing along. "Oooo, ooo, Super-fly! You gonna make your fortune by-and-by...but if you lose, don't ask no questions why--" The pilot began to dance in his seat, shaking his head, and slapping the instrument panel in time to the funky beat.
"Hey, take it easy there, little buddy, you're liable to lose control of this thing--"
"Calm your ass, down, Freddy my man! The name of the tune is "Superfly," not "Freddy's Dead," HA HA! Now hang on, we're comin' in for a landing real sharp, we got another meet-and-greet for you down there--"
The plane nosed down steeply and the engine screamed as it went into a dive. Thompson prayed between clenched teeth and gripped the arms of his chair, white-knuckled, as the plane landed on an impossibly short dirt runway.

"Whew! I wish you'd take it a little slower on those landings, pardner. I ain't exactly no spring chicken no more, you know." Thompson wiped the sweat off his brow with the sleeve of his jacket as he stumbled out of the door of the plane. "Where the heck are we? What is this place, I don't see any state fair or anything, who am I supposed to shake hands with way up here in the mountains?"
"Don't you worry, Mr. Future President, they'll be here soon enough." The pilot was already busy pulling a suitcase out of the back of the cabin. Thompson watched uneasily as he struggled with another burden--
"What the hell is that for?"
"What, this? This is nothin' Don't worry about it. This is just to create an impression."
"What is it, some kind of big machine gun or--"
"Yeah, but don't sweat it, I said! The voters here, they're big into gun rights. They'll love it."
"Oh...okay, then. I guess it's okay if there's no media around--"
"There better not be," said the pilot and trained the gun on the hills. As if by magic, dozens of surly looking Latin types had appeared from nowhere, cautiously approaching the plane. Thompson realized his friend was right, the locals were "into" guns--some held pistols, others had AK-47s and Uzis. Better give this bunch the same spiel I give the NRA boys, he thought.
But his friend waved him back. The crowd stopped in their tracks when he began to address them in his halting, poor Spanish. One of them gestured angrily at Thompson with his machine pistol and asked a question--he sounded scared and furious.
"Goddammit, don't these people speak English?" said Thompson. He'd regularly turned down opportunities to talk to Hispanic voters; there was no percentage in it for a conservative Republican candidate--
"Take it easy, Freddy," said his friend. His bright, pin-prick eyes never left the Latinos. "They think you're the heat. Keep your hands out where they can see them." Without lowering the heavy machine gun he jerked his head, indicating Thompson, and yelled at the armed men: "No es verdad policia! Es Fred Thompson, del television's "Law and Order!" No es verdad policia! Es un protagonista, un actor! Es el proximo Presidente del Estados Unidos!"
"They don't seem to be buying it, whatever you're telling them--"
"Something's gone wrong here. These aren't the usual peeps, these guys are Columbians; fuckin' animals--"
"Columbians? You said we were going to a shopping mall in Southern California--"
"I said a lot of things!" hissed the pilot. "If you want to fly out of here without an extra hole in your ass, just go straight into your stump speech and act like nothing's wrong! I'll cover you, but I gotta close this deal while I'm doing it--" He kicked the suitcase toward the nearest armed man. "Tengo el dinero! Tienes el yay-yo?" he shouted. Then he hissed at Thompson:
"The speech, Freddy, the speech! And make it sound sincere--"
Thompson was sweating again, but he was afraid that wiping his brow would alarm his audience. So he drew himself up to his full height and began:
"My friends--amigos--(he ad libbed that)--I am here today to tell you that America is at a crossroads." He droned on at the uncomprehending faces before him, whose attentions seemed to be divided between watching for sudden moves by Thompson and keeping an eye on the pilot, who was dipping his pinkie into a flap in a brown paper parcel held out by the man with the machine pistol.
"I think it's sad that I am still the only one of the Republican candidates who has been talking about the debt crisis, and what it means for the American economy--"
Thompson thought he might be winning some of them over; the one with rocket launcher seemed to be nodding sympathetically when he mentioned a possible cut in the capital gains tax. Then again it might have been some trick of the sun--
A voice behind him roared, in English: "THE SHIT'S NO GOOD! IT'S A SETUP, WE'RE FUCKED!"
Thompson had never served in the military--but some deep, previously unsuspected instinct inside him impelled him to hit the dirt when the pilot's machine gun began to explode behind him. The Columbians scattered for cover as Thompson's longtime friend sprayed death all about them.
"SAY HELLO TO MY LITTLE FRIEND!" screamed Thompson's close adviser, as a burst from his weapon nearly cut a man in half. But the element of surprise had been lost--fire from automatics was now peppering the ground behind Thompson; he heard it strike the airplane behind him. He felt himself being dragged up by the collar, and then everything went black...

"Sorry about that, Freddy, old compadre." Thompson was recovering consciousness. They were in the plane, once again soaring above the mountains. "Little business deal of mine that went bad." The pilot was flying with one arm, bleeding profusely from the other, soiling the adjoining chair and Thompson's jacket. His longtime friend had managed to improvise a kind of tourniquet from a bunch of "Thompson 2008" bumper stickers, but Fred could see that he was fighting to stay conscious. "You might have to land this baby, Freddie old boy. Just listen to what they tell you over the radio--thing practically lands itself--" He stopped to cough up some blood, and then his voice drifted off into a sing-song--"the game he plays, he plays for keeps--hustlin' times on ghetto streets--" Here he broke into a falsetto "Tryin' to get over---tryin' to get oooo-ver"--he passed out suddenly, collapsing on the joystick.

As he tried to pull the plane out of its dive, Thompson thought that maybe he had been wrong to fight Jeri on this one--maybe background checks on all his friends--and a bus--was the way to go, after all--

U.S. Diplomats on Baghdad: "Hell no! We won't go!"

2007-11-03T17:35:00.000-05:00

Well! Apparently morale at our embassy in Baghdad is not all it could be, these days.:

Envoys Resist Forced Iraq Duty
Top State Dept. Officials Face Angry Questions
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/10/31/AR2007103101626.html?nav=rss_world

By Karen DeYoung
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, November 1, 2007; A01

Uneasy U.S. diplomats yesterday challenged senior State Department officials in unusually blunt terms over a decision to order some of them to serve at the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad or risk losing their jobs.

At a town hall meeting in the department's main auditorium attended by hundreds of Foreign Service officers, some of them criticized fundamental aspects of State's personnel policies in Iraq...

...Some participants asked how diplomacy could be practiced when the embassy itself, inside the fortified Green Zone, is under frequent fire and officials can travel outside only under heavy guard...

Service in Iraq is "a potential death sentence," said one man who identified himself as a 46-year Foreign Service veteran. "Any other embassy in the world would be closed by now," he said to sustained applause.

Harry K. Thomas Jr., the director general of the Foreign Service, who called the meeting, responded curtly. "Okay, thanks for your comment," he said, declaring the town hall meeting over...

The funny thing is that people were talking like this at a meeting of American *diplomats.* It would seem to me that if you're a professional diplomat, use of the phrase "potential death sentence" in connection with your own country's embassy would be--well, not too diplomatic. They're not displaying the usual "sang froid" over at Rice's State Department, these days.

But I think the Director General handled that well, don't you? When the meeting starts to turn ugly like that (“YOU’RE SENDING US ALL TO OUR DEATHS!”), the best thing for senior management to do is "gavel that fucker" and rattle off a quick “Wellthankyaverymuchforyourinput, and I now declare this town hall meeting over, and I understand there are some lovely refreshments waiting for us—“
Voice: WE’RE ALL GOING TO DIE!
Director General: There is, I believe, a marvelous antipasto platter from Dean & DeLucca—
Another voice: THE EMBASSY IS UNDER ROCKET ATTACK RIGHT NOW!
Director General: --and of course, a lovely pastry selection, along with freshly made coffee and individual tiramisu cups, so I hope—
Voice: THEY’VE GONE MAD, THEY WANT TO GET US ALL KILLED BY SENDING US THERE TO PROVE IT’S SAFE!
Director General: --so I hope some of you will stay after the meeting so we can get to know each other a little better—
Another voice: (sobs) I DON’T WANT TO DIE! I HAVE CHILDREN!
Director General: --and later on, I hope you’ll join us in some “team building” activities—
Voice: YOU CAN'T SEND ME BACK THERE! I’VE GOT POST-TRAUMATIC STRESS DISORDER!
Director General: I understand that some of these activities are quite fun—for example, one is called “Star Light, Star Bright.” We all stand in a circle and cut out stars from construction paper, which we will now pass around—
Another voice: AAAAAAAHHH! (jumps through plate glass window)
Director General: --and we say the rhyme, "Star light, star bright, first star I see tonight; I wish I may, I wish I might, have the wish I wish tonight” and then each of you come forward one at a time to place your stars in the circle on the floor and make a wish for the team--
Voice: NO! NO! I WON’T GO! YOU CAN’T MAKE ME GO!
Director General: Put down that scissors. Put it down! I’m serious.

Shouldn't they waterboard Mukasey to get him to answer?

2007-11-01T22:51:00.000-05:00

I mean, either it’s a legitimate interrogation technique or it isn’t. And this guy is being interrogated, right? And he’s refusing to answer. And it’s a really important question to get an answer to right now, right?

So—why don’t they waterboard Judge Mukasey at the hearings? Live, in front of the Congress. Don’t get all bent out of shape; I can’t be the only one who’s thinking this.

I mean, Congress is the government; they’re sponsoring this stuff, too. And we need an answer, right away. Because—if it turns out he “does” think it’s torture, and he’s not saying so—well, you can’t let a US Attorney General lie to Congress so he can continue to help the administration sponsor torture, right? And if he “doesn’t” think it’s torture—no harm, no foul, right?

The point is: everyone agrees this is an effective way to get someone to talk. And he’s not talking. If there’s some question about whether this “controversial interrogation procedure” is torture—it seems to me this is the best way to get an answer out of this guy. You get experienced interrogation personnel in there, show Mukasey the equipment, ask him if he thinks it would be illegal for the government to do that to him. And if he really hasn’t made up his mind--he’ll make up his mind in no time, I guarantee you, once they get started on him. He’ll give you an answer in no time flat, probably the first time he comes up for air.

It’ll be instructive for the Congress and the voters to see how “the technique” works, too. Maybe it’s not as big a deal as everybody thinks it is, we should see for ourselves. I can’t be the only one who’s curious, and this guy’s as good a place to start as any, since he won’t talk.

The only remaining problem is that information given under torture is notoriously unreliable. So if he does say it’s torture after they start in on him, we can’t take his word for it. So, I don’t know. Maybe it’s a bad idea.

Anyway—on to lighter matters. This man is the next likely Prime Minister of Australia:

Australian laments ear wax eating video
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071031/ap_on_fe_st/odd_australia_ear_wax
1 hour, 15 minutes ago

CANBERRA, Australia - Australia's opposition leader lamented his past behavior on Wednesday, as images of him picking his ear wax in Parliament reached a growing audience via the Internet.

The embarrassing footage was captured by Parliament's official television camera at least six years ago as Kevin Rudd, then a junior Labor Party lawmaker, sat in the House Representatives listening to a colleague question a government minister.

Rudd, who is likely to become Australia's prime minister next month, is seen in the background absent-mindedly probing his left ear before apparently placing the same finger in his mouth.

That’s nothing, Australia. Here in America we’ve got tons of video footage of all public statements the Administration has made on the Iraq War. So this "eating earwax" thing is nothing, to us--we’ve been watching George W. Bush and Dick Cheney eat shit for the last four years.

Waxman's Investigations are driving them NUTS!

2007-10-26T15:30:00.000-05:00

Waxman's Oversight
http://tinyurl.com/2e8l2q
Wednesday, October 24, 2007; 5:16 PM

Since the Democrats took control of Congress, House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Chairman Henry A. Waxman (D-Calif.) has been involved in virtually every major issue, from the war in Iraq to global warming, from rising prescription drug prices to allegations of White House abuse of power.

Feb. 7: Waxman summons former Iraq occupation administrator L. Paul Bremer to explain how billions of dollars in cash simply disappeared in Baghdad.

"Who in their right mind would send 363 tons of cash into a war zone?" he asks.

(“It’s easy for you to sit there and play Monday morning quarterback, Congressman. Do you know how hard it is to even *weigh* that amount of cash before dropping it into the middle of a civil war? And may I remind you once again that sanity is in the eye of the beholder--”)

Feb. 9: Waxman digs into the U.S. Coast Guard's fleet overhaul, which produced a new flagship cutter that doesn't float.

(“We’ve got thousands of boats that *do* float, and you’re zeroing in this *one* that doesn't. Oh, yeah, that’s fair. Real fair, Waxman.”)

March 2: Waxman introduces legislation to force disclosure of contributions to presidential libraries, toughen the Freedom of Information Act and rescind a Bush executive order on presidential papers.

(“Why are you even wasting our time with this? What do you want to look through a bunch of old presidential archives for? Is that a “big Saturday night,” for you, Waxman?”)

March 17: Waxman summons Valerie Plame Wilson, the former CIA officer at the heart of a four-year political furor over the Bush administration's leak of her identity. "They made you collateral damage," he tells her. "Your career was ended. Your life may have been in jeopardy, and they didn't seem to care."

(rubs thumb and forefinger together: “You know what this is, Waxman? This is the world’s smallest violin, and it’s playing a sad, sad tune for Valerie Plame. Yes, this administration blew her CIA cover when her husband reported one of the frauds that got us into this effin’ war. Are you trying to tell me that she didn’t the job was dangerous when she took it? *Grow up*!)

April 25: Waxman's committee summons the family of Pat Tillman, the NFL safety-turned-soldier-turned-casualty, to discuss how the Army painted his death in Afghanistan as heroic, despite knowledge that he was killed by friendly fire.

(“This accident wouldn’t even have made the papers if the kid wasn’t in the NFL. And you think that’s gonna make his family feel better, to learn that he was killed by his own troops? My God, don’t you have any human feelings at all, Waxman?”)

April 26: The committee approves a subpoena for Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, the former national security adviser, to answer questions surrounding forged documents attesting to Saddam Hussein's attempt to purchase uranium "yellowcake" from Niger.

(“You’re calling Condoleeza Rice down to answer questions about national security? HA! That shows how little you really know about how this administration works, Congressman. What a joke.”)

May 4: Waxman weighs in on crop insurance, as the House considers a massive farm bill.
"Over $8 billion in taxpayer funds have been squandered in excess payments to insurers and other middlemen" since 2000, he says. The House-passed bill cut billions from the program.

(“What, now “middlemen” don’t have to eat, Waxman? Middlemen are the financial backbone of this country, Congressman. One family’s “squandered $8 billion dollars in taxpayer funds” is another family’s beach house and second BMW, I think you’re forgetting that, Waxman.”)

May 13: Oversight Committee investigators release new tabulations showing private insurers in the new Medicare prescription drug program losing their leverage over drug manufacturers and prescription inflation.

(“That’s big news to you, prices for prescriptions are too high? How much of our money did you spend to find *that* out, Waxman? Any little old lady could have told you that for free!”)

June 7: John B. Buse of the University of North Carolina Medical School tells the Oversight Committee that officials at SmithKline Beecham intimidated him when he raised alarms about the safety of the company's diabetes drug Avandia..."post-market studies have not been done to say conclusively whether Avandia increases or decreases the risks of heart attacks. That's a major failure of our system," Waxman says.

(“Oh, help, I’m intimidated, oh, I’m a victim, somebody somewhere might have a heart attack because we didn’t do enough testing—My God, what is happening to this country? Do you think that Davy Crockett and Daniel Boone and John Wayne ran around like chickens with their heads cut off, because there wasn’t enough testing going on? “Testing, testing, we need more testing before we settle the Old West.” Jesus H. Christ, Waxman—“)

June 14: Waxman summons General Services Administration chief Lurita Alexis Doan to respond to an allegation that, at the conclusion of a White House presentation to GSA political appointees about the November 2006 elections, she asked how they could "help our candidates."

"I don't see any other course of action that will protect the interests of your agency and the federal taxpayer," he tells her. "I would urge you to resign."

(“Congressman, don’t you realize that this woman wouldn’t even *have* a job if it weren’t for political cronyism? And if we're in the business of urging people to resign, all of the sudden, then I would urge *you* to resign, Waxman, how do you like that? How does that make *you* feel, when I say that to *you?*)

June 22: Waxman blasts Vice President Cheney's refusal to comply with an executive order governing the handling of classified information. "He's saying he's above the law," he says as he releases correspondence detailing the issue. "It just seems to me this is arrogant and shows bad judgment."

(“Boy... I thought it was pretty clear to even the *stupidest* observer by now, Waxman, that Vice President Cheney *is* above the law! (to the rest of the room) Do you believe this guy? (to Waxman) Get with the program, Congressman! Use your mentality, wake up to reality.”

Late June: Waxman writes to White House Counsel Fred F. Fielding, saying senior presidential adviser Karl Rove's "deliberate or negligent disclosure" of classified information should disqualify him from a security clearance.

(“That’s rampant bullshit, Waxman! No one can keep a secret like Karl Rove, when he wants to. You’d know how stupid your position is, if you knew all the serious crime shit he's sitting on *at this very minute!*”)

July 11: After former surgeon general Richard H. Carmona says Bush administration officials interfered with his work, Waxman weighs in: "We shouldn't allow the surgeon general to be politicized. . . . It is the doctor to the nation. That person needs to have credibility, independence and to speak about science."

(“Oh, good lord...you’re mad that we’re suppressing medical and scientific findings because they conflict with our political agenda? Let me ask you something, Waxman—in your wildest fantasies, do you even dream that *your* doctor is telling you *every little thing* about your health? Most of us wouldn’t even *understand* half that shit! We’re not in the business of adding to people’s worries, Congressman. It’s the Office of the Surgeon General, not the Office of INCESSANT FEAR!”)

July 18: Waxman releases documents indicating that White House officials arranged for top officials at the Office of National Drug Control Policy to help as many as 18 vulnerable Republicans with their reelections.

(“It’s people...HELPING...other people. Is that so wrong, Waxman? Is that really *so* wrong, people helping other people? That’s what this administration is here to *do!* That’s compassionate conservatism in a nutshell! Is that what you’re against, now? Compassion?”)

On the same day, Waxman finally extracts documents on the energy industry's role in Cheney's energy task force, after a six-year struggle.

(“There! There it is, ya happy? You got some six year old documents about how Cheney let the oil people write the nation’s energy policy. After six years, you finally got it. There’ll be biiiiggg celebrating among the Waxmen of the world, tonight I bet. Whoopee! (makes “pop!” noise by putting finger in mouth and popping lip.) And I hope you're happy, because guess what, buster—that policy you’ve been demanding is now *six years out of date.* Whatta a biiiggg victory...)

July 20: Waxman reveals that the Federal Emergency Management Agency had suppressed warnings since early 2006 about health problems experienced by Hurricane Katrina victims living in FEMA-provided trailers with levels of formaldehyde 75 times the recommended maximum.

(“Oh shut up, Waxman. After the way we handled that disaster, those people are lucky to be alive, and they damn well know it! A little more formaldehyde than usual is a like a cold beer on hot day, compared to what these poor bastards have been through. And I’ll tell you another thing, smartass—formaldehyde isn’t destructive, it’s a PRESERVATIVE. Come on, what else you got? You got nuthin', Waxman. Nuthin'”)

And the article about all of Waxman's work goes on and on and on...hey, where can I get a Congressman like this Waxman guy?

Which GOP candidate is the most conservative?

2007-10-24T16:02:00.000-05:00

Answer: None of them are real conservatives, so why debate it?

It's sort of like hearing a bunch of worms debate about who is the most "snake-like." But that didn't stop them from debating the question.

GOP rivals argue who's most conservative

By H. JOSEF HEBERT, Associated Press Writer Sun Oct 21, 1:27 PM ET

WASHINGTON - Republican presidential candidates vied Sunday over who is the real conservative, ahead of an evening debate in Florida where they hoped to put their conservative credentials on display.

Sen. John McCain of Arizona said he is the conservative with the best chance of defeating Democratic front-runner Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, a claim often made by former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani. GOP rival Mitt Romney, meanwhile, deflected charges that he has flip-flopped on abortion and other social issues important to religious conservatives...

..McCain chided Romney, the former Massachusetts governor, for changing his views on issues "with the political season," embracing liberal positions when running for office in Massachusetts and more conservative ones now.

(...And McCain doesn't do that; doesn't shift with the season? He's a Newt Gingrich/Rush Limbaugh Republican all of the sudden? That's got to be news to Newt and Rush.)

Romney "basically has changed positions on every .. on many major issues" to appear more conservative, said McCain on "Fox News Sunday."

"Look, you can't con the voters," McCain said. "If you want to win their respect, you've got to give them your respect."

(I disagree. I think you can con the voters. Look who's president, and how he got there.)

But Mike Huckabee, the former Arkansas governor and one-time Baptist preacher who has gained some ground in the GOP race, said McCain has a "solid record" on many of these issues, but that his conservative credentials are more real than those of the other candidates.

(He is isn't a Gingrich/Limbaugh conservative, either. He's in bed with the evangelical right.)

While not naming Romney, Huckabee, a sentimental favorite among religious conservatives (whoomp,there it is! "sentimental favorite" means the evangelical political movement(EPM) would *like* to support him, but doesn't think he has hope in hell of winning), said: "I'm a conservative that hasn't had but one position on a lot of key issues. ... Nobody's going to find some YouTube moments of me saying something radically different than what I'm saying today," a reference to the popular video-sharing Web site.

(YouTube--doing what the mainstream media won't--tracking flip flops in candidate positions. Props, from Huckabee!)

The GOP candidates were meeting later in the evening for a debate in Orlando, Fla., sponsored by the state Republican Party and televised by Fox News Channel.

Their degree of conservatism was expected to be one of many topics discussed during the 90-minute debate, being held at the same time as the deciding game in the American League championship series between the Boston Red Sox and the Cleveland Indians.

(There are probably more real conservatives on the Cleveland Indians. That's why I expect the game to swamp the latest debate in the ratings.)

McCain on Sunday defended his position on immigration, including amnesty for those in the country illegally, and his push for campaign finance reform. GOP conservatives have criticized him on both issues. He maintained that Romney held "the exact same positions ... 18 months ago."

("Sure, I'm an asshole in the eyes of conservatives on these issues. But *this* guy was, too. And at least I have the courage to stand by my liberal views, while at the same time claiming that I'm a conservative.")

A bunch of worms, claiming to be snakes, because they can't get to the White House without the snake vote. The irony is that this is the first time in decades that a *genuine* snake isn't doing well enough in the GOP polls to win the nomination.

Snakes everywhere would make better use of their time by watching the ball game.

Rudy tries to charm evangelicals

2007-10-21T15:13:00.000-05:00

This is a biiiiiig weekend. This is the weekend where Rudy is making his pitch to the evangelical political movement (EPM) to see if he can counteract the vow their leaders took to stop his GOP nomination. If he can persuade them to “get on board”—he stands a chance of winning the nomination and then the presidency.

If he can’t: he may still win the nomination, but he won’t win the presidency.

Giuliani Appeals to Evangelical Voters

http://tinyurl.com/yq8s4e

(Actually, the headline is inaccurate. Rudy’s problem is that he *doesn’t* appeal to evangelical voters. They’re not so high on Romney, either, but he’s more determined to cater to them and bring them on board.)

By Dan Balz
Washington Post Staff Writer
Saturday, October 20, 2007; 12:44 PM

Republican presidential candidate Rudy Giuliani implored an audience of religious and social conservatives to look beyond their differences over abortion and other issues as he sought to allay their fears that his nomination would mean the abandonment the GOP's core principles.

"I come to you today as I would if I were president, with an open mind and an open heart and all I ask is that you do the same," Giuliani said Saturday. "Pleases know this, you have absolutely nothing to fear from me."

(Giuliani: “Yes, I’ve had more than one wife. But I haven’t had more than one wife at *the same time*--I believe that’s wrong, unlike *some* candidates. And I worship the *true* Jesus Christ, the one mentioned in the *real* bible. Not some “knock off” version of Jesus dreamed up by some fugitive from the law out in Pennsylvania a hundred and fifty years ago. The Jesus *I* worship—IS Lord! Can I get an “amen?”
Crowd: AMEN!
Giuliani: When I get saved, I’m goin’ to heaven when I die! Not some phony space heaven dreamed up by a bunch of guys who want to legalize bigamy! Can I get an amen?
Crowd: AMEN!
Giuliani: I’m voting for Giuliani! Can I get an amen?
Crowd: A—(they stop short.)
Giuliani: Heh heh heh. Almost gotcha. Just kidding, I know we got a way to go here. Okay, turn on the power point. Now about me wearing that dress—there’s a perfectly innocent explanation for that—)

Giuliani used his highly anticipated appearance at the Family Research Council's Values Voters summit to reach out to a community that stands as the most significant obstacle to his hopes of becoming president...

(The Family Research Council; that’s the James Dobson group. Dobson and other prominent members of the Council for National Policy (CNP) resolved to stop a Giuliani candidacy, by forming a third party if necessary. “Giuliani’s too liberal; and Dobson hasn’t forgiven him on the air for serial infidelity, the way he did with Newt Gingrich. The CNP are the most powerful players in the unholy alliance between evangelical Christians, GOP powerbrokers, and former John Birch Society millionaires.)

...Giuliani argued that he and social conservatives (note: that awful media euphemism again; they are not “social conservatives”, they are “right wing evangelicals”) share more areas of agreement than disagreement. But he made no effort to disguise or downplay their differences. "Isn't it better to tell you what I really believe than to change my positions to fit the prevailing winds?" he said...

(Actually, Rudy’s becoming famous for doing just that. This week he met with the rabidly anti-tax Club for Growth in D.C. and told them that he would not support tax increases for any purpose. Only a month ago he was open to a possible tax increase to shore up SS, but apparently there was a “wind shift...”)

Giuliani was followed by former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee, an ordained minister who was quick to remind the audience of his longstanding commitment to their issues. "I come today not as one who comes to you, but as one who comes from you," he said.

(“Not like that *last guy* on the podium, who shall remain nameless. Give *me* the money.”)

Huckabee urged those in attendance not to be swayed by the issue of who is the most electable candidate but to remain true to their conservative convictions. Better to support candidates who "sing from their hearts," he said, than to follow those who "just lip-sync the lyrics from our songs."

(Ouch, that hurts. Just call him “Rudy Vanilli.”)

Huckabee said conservatives should never soften their positions on the issues of abortion and gay rights, noting that some things are not negotiable. "Let us never sacrifice our principles for anybody's politics," he said. "Not now. Not ever."

(“And gays who have abortions? Fuggedabouddit!”)

Giuliani drew applause with his commitment to keep the country on the offense in combating threats of terrorism, defending Israel and preventing Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons. "Our goal in Iraq," he said, "should be clear: victory."

(Yeahyeahyeah, if you gotta plan you been keepin’ back, you shoulda shared it by now, Rudy. That woulda been patriotic. Anyway, here’s that drag photo of him again, in case you missed it the first time:)

Dick Armey:"Forget it, GOP--Hillary WILL be president."

2007-10-16T23:06:00.000-05:00

Look at this:

Republicans opinions vary greatly on candidates, presidential race

RENO GAZETTE-JOURNAL
Posted: 10/12/2007

The political horizon for conservatives is bleak and will get worse before it gets better, former House Majority Leader Dick Armey said Thursday.

In an interview with the Reno Gazette-Journal, Armey predicted U.S. Sen. Hillary Clinton will win the presidency next year, saying no Republican candidate is strong enough to beat her.

"The Democrats will win," Armey said. "I don't see any way that Hillary Clinton won't be president...

This is not a Koolaid *drinker* talking--this is one of the guys who made the Koolaid in the first place. This is Dick Armey, one of the leaders of the army of dicks who voted in Bush and the Republican Congress--and he's saying, a year before the election:

"It's over. We're done. Are you another conservative billionaire who's thinking about putting money into the Romney or Giuliani or Thompson campaigns? Forget it, you're pissing your money away. You might as well put your money up your ass this time, for all the good it will do you, you right wing oligarchs. It's over before it's even begun. I'm announcing it publicly,now, more than a year before the election.

No matter what happens between now and election day next year--even if we invade Iran, even if peace breaks out in Iraq and it rains gold there--it's Hillary.

We are well and truly fucked, conservatives. I'm sorry, you spent hundreds and hundreds of millions of dollars through the last ten election cycles, and bought us our own political media. You delivered us a terrorized corporate media, 30% of the electorate that will never abandon us no matter how badly we fuck up, you delivered us the White House, the Congress, dominance in the federal judiciary--you put us squarely in the driver's seat, and we drove the car straight into a fucking brick wall of failed warfare, staggering debt, corruption and idiotic sex scandals.

"Sorry 'bout that," as Maxwell Smart used to say. The Limbaughs and all the Limbaugh knockoffs, the Murdochs, the Scaifes, the Hunts, the Coors, the Council for National Policy and the religious right--you bought us the country, as little as four years ago we still had it all sewn up, all the necessary votes and incumbencies and media and power to rule for decades to come. But we couldn't govern for shit, and seventy per cent of the voters know it. Put a fork in us, we're done, for the foreseeable future. Believe me, I know. I was one of the architects of the conservative Republican hegemony. I can count votes, and I'm here to tell you--we are fucked. Hillary's president, and the end result of twelve years of Republican dominance will be what we call "socialized medicine": health care for the American working people that we despise."

Look at that guy eat shit, after a lifetime fighting for the triumph of evil and selfishness and bigotry and division in American life. All that money, all that wicked propaganda for 27 years, and the end result is a Dem lock on the White House. Look at that guy announcing publicly that he believes that White House conservatism is as dead as a dinosaur, next election. Don't ever tell me that there's no real difference between the major parties and that the fight is for nothing.

Why so depressed?

2007-10-14T17:26:00.000-05:00

"Why are you walking around with that long face," as I once said to John Kerry. Look at this report on the most depressing jobs in the United States:

Oct 13, 8:16 PM EDT

Report Ranks Jobs by Rates of Depression
http://tinyurl.com/24rhdz

By KEVIN FREKING
Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON (AP) -- People who tend to the elderly, change diapers and serve up food and drinks have the highest rates of depression among U.S. workers.

(Eeeeyew! That would be a depressing job, going to work every day and changing some old guy’s smelly diapers, listen to him babble nonsense, and making sure he eats his pureed broccoli through a straw. That’s why I won’t work for the Fred Thompson campaign.)

(That was my cheap gag for tonight. My cheap gag for last night was when a guy wrote in and told me: “Al Gore IS a third party!” I thought to myself: that sounds like some kind of cheap gag about how much weight Gore has put on. “He’s so fat, he IS a third party!” But I kept that remark to myself, because we were in the midst of a serious discussion. Anyway, back to depression on the job:)

Overall, 7 percent of full-time workers battled depression in the past year, according to a government report available Saturday.

...The lowest rate of depression, 4.3 percent, occurred in the job category that covers engineers, architects and surveyors.

(So they’re the happy ones! Who knew? “I’ve designed a wonderful new bridge, Tom!” “That’s great, Al! I’ll draw up the blueprints! Whoopee!” “And I’ll survey the site!” “Great, Tina!” “Oh, I’m so happy!” “Me, too!” “Me three! Say, I know...let’s have a three-way, right here on the old drawing board!” “That’s a great idea!” “I’ve got some lubricant!”—I don’t know about you, but I couldn’t face those people at work every day.)

Government officials tracked depression within 21 major occupational categories. (Including “pig shit grader.”) They combined data from 2004 through 2006 to estimate episodes of depression within the past year. That information came from the National Survey on Drug Use and Health, which registers lifetime and past-year depression bouts. (Oddly enough, the second most depressed group of people in the work force (right after the stinky old diaper changers) were “the government officials who gather data on depression.”)

Depression leads to $30 billion to $44 billion in lost productivity annually, said the report from the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration.

(So this is some serious stuff we’re talking about here. With the money we’re losing on these depressed working people, we could launch another war in Iran. So think about that, the next time you’re about to bitch and complain about your job impersonating a cartoon mouse at a children’s pizza parlor.)

...Just working full-time would appear to be beneficial in preventing depression. The overall rate of depression for full-time workers, 7 percent, compares with the 12.7 percent rate registered by those who are unemployed.

Well, that is a worthwhile finding. If you *have* a job, you’re less likely to be depressed. If you’re unemployed, you are more likely to be depressed. That finding blew me away.

What kills me though, is that last statistic. Only 12.7 percent of the unemployed are depressed? That means that 87.3 percent of the unemployed are well-adjusted. They’re facing foreclosures and gas at $2.78 a gallon—with a smile?

Must be the medication.

Bar patrons to Thompson: Don't stand in front of the TV!

2007-10-12T13:58:00.000-05:00

"...we're tryin' to watch the game, ya jackass."

Look at this, from a list of candidate gaffes:

When Republican Fred Thompson stopped by a Manchester, N.H., sports bar recently, the customers were more interested in watching the New England Patriots than shaking hands with the "Law & Order" actor.

"Down in front," one voter joked to the former Tennessee senator as the 6-foot-5 candidate blocked his view of quarterback Tom Brady and the rest of the Patriots.

The disruption — he and the throng of journalists standing in front of a big-screen television — prompted Thompson to take his cheeseburger back to his bus and forced his host, Manchester Mayor Frank Guinta, to offer up his untouched light beer to a nearby table.

What kind of a six-foot-five idiot stands up to block a big screen TV broadcasting a Pats game in a New Hampshire bar--because he thinks that will win him votes?

And brings a bunch of reporters with him, so no one can see anything? Jeez, would it have killed him to wait for half-time? Or a commercial, even?
What an inconsiderate dope. He's really losin' it, if he thinks that's the way to "charm" these guys.

Here's the link to article, a lightweight piece about candidate mis-steps.
http://tinyurl.com/ysazny
Hillary and Obama get off pretty easy, although I think it's a mistake for Obama to talk to farmers about the big money to be made in the arugula game. Ethanol, Barack.

A Hopelessly Juvenile Project

2007-10-10T14:37:00.000-05:00

This post has no links, no quality content, no redeeming social value.

But the one I sent to the Daily Kos a couple of nights ago did. And it turns out that one of the Kossacks who wrote in had the following handle:

DickCheneyBeforeHeDicksYou.

"Dick Cheney--Before He Dicks You."

Ah, that takes me back.

When I was a little boy, not much bigger than you are now (here, come up and sit on my knee) Richard M. Nixon was president of the United States. Yes, he was. And well-bred people in the United States back then didn't start sniggering if you told them that your first name was Dick. Really! They didn't, that's the way it was.

There was no obscene pun raised, in educated and polite circles; no chuckles, no off-color jokes. The president's friends were proud to know him personally as "Dick Nixon." There wasn't even a hint of impropriety associated with the name.

Until he actually started governing. Then a bunch of dirty anti-social hippies and yippies, all of them about ten years older than me and eligible for the draft, started printing up obscene T-shirts with the legend:

"Dick Nixon--Before He Dicks You."

Well, I was about nine years old. The first time I saw a long-haired hippie wearing a shirt that said that, I nearly died. I laughed til the snot flew out of my cute little nose. The idea, that someone would make an irreverent joke like that, about the President of the United States--rocked my little world. LiteBrite and GI Joe with the Kung Fu grip lost some of their lustre.
When I saw that I lived in a country where people were free to make a rude joke like that about the leader; I knew intuitively--even then--that someday the time would come to put away childish things.

And as the years flitted by, I saw that there was more to this rude joke than just its rudeness. The sentiment was vindicated, as Nixon pursued the Viet Nam war instead of making peace, as he expanded it into Cambodia, as he dragged the nation into the mire and disgrace of Watergate. The dirty hippies with their t-shirts had been right. We had failed to dick Nixon before he dicked us, and suffered the consequences.

The reminder of how that t-shirt had helped to politicize me at a very tender age, and of how prophetic that juvenile sentiment had been, inspired me to play around with the names of our present Republican leaders in the hope of "recreating the magic." So I spent part of the afternoon on it, but the best I could come up with was this:

"You voted twice for a Bush and a Dick--and you're surprised we all got f****d?"

Perhaps you can do better. The point is to confront conservative and Republican voters with an offensive but trenchant sentiment or warning.

I hope that at least some of you will join me in "the quest." You, out there--on your farms, in your office cubicles, your college campuses, behind the counters of your convenience stores, driving your kids to school, serving in our armed forces--if we all try together, WE CAN DO THIS. We can come up with something for the present administration as pithy, offensive and accurate as the original "Dick Nixon--before he dicks you". And if we do, it will live on in time and memory, as that slogan has--as the emblem of an era.

I think we owe it to the present generation of young people.

Business to GOP: "You're fired."

2007-10-06T17:05:00.000-05:00

Well, it’s about time. I was wondering how long big business was going to put up with the GOP’s crap job performance—my God, they’ve been employing the GOP for what, a hundred and forty seven years now? Anyway the day of reckoning has come.

GOP Is Losing Grip On Core Business Vote
Deficit Hawks Defect
As Social Issues Prevail;

By JACKIE CALMES
October 2, 2007; Page A1

WASHINGTON -- The Republican Party, known since the late 19th century as the party of business, is losing its lock on that title.

New evidence suggests a potentially historic shift in the Republican Party's identity -- what strategists call its "brand." The votes of many disgruntled fiscal conservatives and other lapsed Republicans are now up for grabs, which could alter U.S. politics in the 2008 elections and beyond...

It’s a very long article. But what it doesn’t tell the business community is *how* they can fire the GOP--which is a major omission, because this is obviously going to be emotionally difficult for both parties. The business community and the GOP are both notorious for their historical loyalty and fairness. So we offer this “How to fire the GOP” guide to the business community (which I copied and adapted from some asshole’s website) to help them through this difficult time.

Name of pamphlet: “So...You’ve Got to Fire the Republican Party”

Step One
Make sure your documentation ducks are in a row before you fire their ass. Have important paperwork with you, such as previous performance reviews, probationary warnings or other relevant personnel material.

Example:
Business: Sit down, GOP. I want to talk to you.
GOP: Say, did you see how well the economy’s doing? We’re—
Business: Can the bullshit, GOP, I’ve got the figures right here in front of me. (Wave papers.) We owe the entire goddamn country to Red China. You’re devaluing the dollar and killing us with this debt you’ve run up. We hired you to exercise economic discipline.
GOP: (looks at performance reviews, says nothing.)

Step Two
You should work out the details of the employee's departure before you terminate him. How long will he have to clear out? Does he have a company car or a laptop to return?

Example:
Business: Now I don’t want to embarrass you. You can hang around, stop off by the water cooler on your way out and tell everyone you're leaving over a matter of principle. Save face, whatever. But I want the keys to the company car and that laptop we gave you.
GOP: What, right now?
Business: Gimme the keys and the laptop.
GOP: If you don’t mind, Larry Craig’s got some stuff on that laptop we’d rather delete before we returned this—
Business: We’ll take care of that. The keys.
GOP: How are we supposed to get home?
Business: That’s your problem. I understand there’s public transportation.

Step Three
Arrange to have a human resources representative present. Not only can the representative give the fired employee information and answer questions about severance and continuation of benefits, but she can also ensure that the meeting follows the company's HR guidelines.

Business: This is Rochelle, our HR person. She’s here to make sure this termination goes according to the book. She’ll guarantee that this process is fair and—
GOP: (screaming) Fair my ass! We’ve worked for you for a hundred and forty years, you can’t just shit can us and get away with it! (whips out pistol) You must have forgotten that we’re the party of the NRA—if we’ve got to go we’re taking some of you bastards down with us! This is a real gun I’ve got here—
Business: And that’s a real gun Rochelle is holding on you, right now.
Rochelle: Drop it, motherfucker. Ain’t no one gonna miss you, if you make me pop your ass.
GOP: (drops gun, breaks down sobbing.)
Business: Thank you, Rochelle.

Step Four
Get right to the point. The employee's fate has been decided, so just say it.

Business: You’re fired, asshole. You’re through. Terminado.
GOP: (cries like John Candy)

Step Five
Take responsibility. Even if you're not the one who decided to take the action, if asked directly, "Whose decision was this?" be prepared to say, "Mine."

GOP: (through tears): Whose decision was this?
Business: Everybody’s.

Step Six
Offer whatever assistance your company provides in the way of outplacement, counseling or other services, no matter how acrimonious the parting.

Business: If you need help getting your shit out the door, we can do that for you.
GOP: (sniffling) Is there any kind of help with outplacement?
Business: Yes. If you and your shit aren’t OUT of this PLACE in twenty minutes, a crew of burly private sector security guards from Blackwater will come and get you and PLACE your ass OUT side.
GOP: What about counseling?
Business: I suggest that when the security guards show up, you go quietly. That is my “counsel” to you.

Step Seven
Communicate the essentials of the employee's departure to other members of the department. Avoid details about why he was let go.

Business sends intra-office email: “Attention everyone! This is Big Business. We have just fired the GOP. For fucking up big time. Don’t let this happen to you, Democrats! That is all. Have a nice day.”

A Woman Who Knows What She Wants

2007-10-04T15:58:00.000-05:00

A friend sent this to me today. (Yes, I have friends.) Is this a hoax? It's supposedly a personal ad sent to Craig's List, with a reply. It's said to be very popular reading on Wall Street, these days:

What am I doing wrong?

Okay, I'm tired of beating around the bush. I'm a beautiful
(spectacularly beautiful) 25 year old girl. I'm articulate and classy.
I'm not from New York. I'm looking to get married to a guy who makes at
least half a million a year. I know how that sounds, but keep in mind
that a million a year is middle class in New York City, so I don't think
I'm overreaching at all.

Are there any guys who make 500K or more on this board? Any wives? Could
you send me some tips? I dated a business man who makes average around
200 - 250. But that's where I seem to hit a roadblock. 250,000 won't get
me to central park west. I know a woman in my yoga class who was married
to an investment banker and lives in Tribeca, and she's not as pretty as
I am, nor is she a great genius. So what is she doing right? How do I
get to her level?

Here are my questions specifically:

- Where do you single rich men hang out? Give me specifics- bars,
restaurants, gyms

-What are you looking for in a mate? Be honest guys, you won't hurt my
feelings

-Is there an age range I should be targeting (I'm 25)?

- Why are some of the women living lavish lifestyles on the upper east
side so plain? I've seen really 'plain jane' boring types who have
nothing to offer married to incredibly wealthy guys. I've seen drop dead
gorgeous girls in singles bars in the east village. What's the story
there?

- Jobs I should look out for? Everyone knows - lawyer, investment
banker, doctor. How much do those guys really make? And where do they
hang out? Where do the hedge fund guys hang out?

- How you decide marriage vs. just a girlfriend? I am looking for
MARRIAGE ONLY

Please hold your insults - I'm putting myself out there in an honest
way. Most beautiful women are superficial; at least I'm being up front
about it. I wouldn't be searching for these kind of guys if I wasn't
able to match them - in looks, culture, sophistication, and keeping a
nice home and hearth.

* it's NOT ok to contact this poster with services or
other commercial interests

THE ANSWER
Dear:
I read your posting with great interest and have thought meaningfully
about your dilemma. I offer the following analysis of your predicament.
Firstly, I'm not wasting your time, I qualify as a guy who fits your
bill; that is I make more than $500K per year. That said here's how I
see it.

Your offer, from the prospective of a guy like me, is plain and simple a
cr@ppy business deal. Here's why. Cutting through all the B.S., what you
suggest is a simple trade: you bring your looks to the party and I bring
my money. Fine, simple. But here's the rub, your looks will fade and my
money will likely continue into perpetuity...in fact, it is very likely
that my income increases but it is an absolute certainty that you won't
be getting any more beautiful!

So, in economic terms you are a depreciating asset and I am an earning
asset. Not only are you a depreciating asset, your depreciation
accelerates! Let me explain, you're 25 now and will likely stay pretty
hot for the next 5 years, but less so each year. Then the fade begins in
earnest. By 35 stick a fork in you!

So in Wall Street terms, we would call you a trading position, not a buy
and hold...hence the rub...marriage. It doesn't make good business sense
to "buy you" (which is what you're asking) so I'd rather lease. In case
you think I'm being cruel, I would say the following. If my money were
to go away, so would you, so when your beauty fades I need an out. It's
as simple as that. So a deal that makes sense is dating, not marriage.

Separately, I was taught early in my career about efficient markets. So,
I wonder why a girl as "articulate, classy and spectacularly beautiful"
as you has been unable to find your sugar daddy. I find it hard to
believe that if you are as gorgeous as you say you are that the $500K
hasn't found you, if not only for a tryout.

By the way, you could always find a way to make your own money and then
we wouldn't need to have this difficult conversation.

With all that said, I must say you're going about it the right way.
Classic "pump and dump."
I hope this is helpful, and if you want to enter into some sort of
lease, let me know.

The sad thing is: if this isn't a hoax, I wouldn't be too surprised. But I appreciate the astonishing candor of both parties.

So--You Follow Politics--And You STILL Don't Know What The CNP Is?

2007-10-03T00:47:00.000-05:00

The Council For National Policy (CNP) is the nerve center of the evangelical political movement. The “religious right”, the “Christian Right”, whatever you want to call it—their de facto leaders belong to the CNP. Members also include people who aren’t necessarily associated with the evangelicals; there is significant crossover between conservative and GOP leaders and the CNP. George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, Fred Thompson and Mitt Romney represent only a few of the prominent American politicians that have addressed CNP conventions, courting their support.

The CNP membership list is officially secret, but you can get some idea of the organization breadth and influence by reading the following article from NPR:

Election 2008
Giuliani's Abortion Views Risk Third-Party Revolt
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=14869664
by Mara Liasson

All Things Considered, October 1, 2007 •
A group of prominent social conservatives say that if Rudolph Giuliani is the Republican Party's presidential nominee, they will consider bolting the party and fielding a third-party candidate.

The former mayor of New York City, Giuliani has liberal views on a number of social issues, including abortion. He has continued to lead the Republican presidential field in national polls, and he even receives a plurality of support from white evangelical Protestants.

This weekend in Salt Lake City, Utah, a group of leading social conservatives — all members of an organization called the Council for National Policy, agreed on a resolution: If the Republican Party nominates a "pro-abortion" candidate, the group will consider running a third-party candidate.

Growing Frustration Among Conservatives

Veteran conservative activist Richard Viguerie, author of a book called Conservatives Betrayed, was one of the participants...

...Christian conservative leader Gary Bauer, who joined the Salt Lake City meeting by phone, says he understands the frustration, but worries that public threats about a third-party candidate could backfire...

...Rep. David Dreier (R-CA) is the Giuliani campaign's national co-chairman. He says he doesn't believe conservatives will bolt.

"I believe, at the end of the day, that these conservatives will recognize that, if it's the priority to ensure that we don't see Hillary Clinton become president of the United States, then Rudy Giuliani is the man best equipped to win," Dreier says.

(Note that Dreier seems to equate “these conservatives” in the CNP with “conservatives.” That’s not much of a stretch. The membership of the CNP has included and includes some of the most familiar names on the religious right—Pat Robertson, Ralph Reed, Tim LaHaye, James Dobson, Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council—but it also includes many who are not usually identified with evangelicals in politics—Viguerie, Phyllis Schlafly, Tom DeLay, Nelson Hunt, Jack Kemp, Ed Meese, Paul Weyrich, Jack Abramoff—many, many other prominent Republican and conservative spokesmen and activists.)

..."All my political life, liberal Republicans have tried to scare conservatives into supporting liberal Republican candidates, and it has never, ever worked," Viguerie says. "It didn't work in 1948 with Dewey, Nixon in 1960, Ford in 1976, George H.W. Bush in 1992, and it won't work this time."

In all those elections, he says, conservatives stayed home.

Stopping Giuliani's Momentum

That's the message this group of conservatives is trying to send, says Richard Land, head of the public policy arm of the Southern Baptist Convention. Although he's a member of the Council for National Policy, Land was not at the meeting this weekend.

...David Keene, chairman of the American Conservative Union, says the group was trying to stop Giuliani's momentum now, while they still can

.

(Keene has also been identified as a CNP member.)

...Many analysts and many conservatives had assumed that, as rank-and-file Republicans learned about Giuliani's liberal views, his support would evaporate. But it hasn't. And once the whirlwind of primaries starts, these conservatives fear, it may be too late to stop him.

Well, let’s hope they’re right. Because if Giuliani runs without the support of the CNP, it’s very unlikely he’ll win—whether there’s an official split or not. It’s accepted political wisdom that “values voters” (politicized right-wing Christians) put Bush well over the top in the 2004 election. Evangelical radio stations around the country sang his praises in 2000 and 2004. Salem Communications, one of the largest Christian radio chains, is directed by CNP members. It is highly unlikely that any GOP candidate can take the White House without their enthusiastic puffing, and open denunciation of a GOP candidate by CNP directed media would spell disaster for any conservative candidate.

But it is misleading to confine reporting of the CNP’s influence to the national election. This is an organization whose members can promote and elect their own candidates to congressional, state and local political offices.

My current Congresswoman, Michele Bachmann (MN-06), is a CNP protégé. In just seven years, she went from a failed candidacy for a local school board to a seat in the U.S. Congress—a theocrat running a stealth candidacy as a conservative Republican in the tradition of Ronald Reagan. I am sure that many voters around the country can tell you similar stories about their local elected officials. The CNP is real, it has its roots in extremist organizations like the John Birch Society, it’s nationally organized and directed, it was a key factor in putting Bush into the White House (twice) and it is interested in putting more candidates who will serve its agenda in elective office—all around the country.

Another stupid Larry Craig piece

2007-10-01T12:51:00.000-05:00

The "who set up Larry Craig?" mystery--solved!

Sen. Craig's Fall May Benefit Salmon

By MATTHEW DALY
Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON (AP) -- The surprising fall of Sen. Larry Craig, R-Idaho, removes a longtime obstacle to efforts by Democrats and environmentalists to promote salmon recovery on Northwest rivers.

(Cut to: Magnificent exterior shot in Idaho, Rockies in the background, river roaring in foreground, school of salmon swimming, fighting their way upstream. On the soundtrack we hear their salmon voices: “Yay!” “Yahoo!” “We win!” “Craig’s out!” “Yay!” “Whoopee!” “Let’s go get the girls!”)

Craig, who was removed from leadership posts on the Senate Appropriations and Energy committees after a sex scandal, is known as one of the most powerful voices in Congress on behalf of the timber and power industries. Environmentalists have fought him for years on issues from endangered salmon to public land grazing.

(Six months ago, at a police department in St. Paul, Minnesota: A detective is being bawled out by his superior for not catching more closeted gay men having sex in public restrooms. The detective’s cell phone rings, he answers.)
“Yeah?”
Watery voice: “Got a tip for you, Sherlock.”
“Who is this?”
Watery voice: “A friend. You want to see gay men having sex? Stake out the airport. The airport men’s room, the one near the food court. Get me?”
(Detective snaps at someone in the office:) Trace this call, I’ll try to keep him talking. (back into phone) That’s...uh... very interesting. Tell me more.
Watery voice: That’s all you need to know for now, Sherlock—
Other watery voices: Tell him about Senator Craig! Tell him about Craig—
First watery voice: (to others) Shuddup! I’ll handle it—
Detective: Who’s that there with you?
Watery voice: Never you mind that! You just stake out that restroom at the airport? Get me?
Detective: Something sounds wrong with your voice, you sound like you’re gargling—
Watery voice: We’re talking through a handkerchief to disguise our voices. Never mind that, you just stake out that restroom at the airport. And don’t forget that name! Senator Craig! Senator Larrrrrry Crrrraig... (he really “gargles” those “R’s”, as do the other voices on the line, who start chanting “Airrrrporrrrt rrrrrrestrrrrroom, Larrrrrry Crrrrraig...”)
Detective: Hello? Hello? (turns off cell) He hung up. (to an officer) Did you trace that call?
Officer: It’s no good, Sarge. It was from a public phone booth, out in the middle of nowhere—the Snake River in Idaho, or some wild-ass place.
Detective: Hmm. Sounds kind of fishy, to me. Still... it’s something. Better put a man on it.
Officer: Right, chief.
(Cut back to that magnificent exterior shot in Idaho, Rockies in the background, river roaring in foreground, school of salmon swimming, fighting their way upstream. On the soundtrack we hear their salmon voices: “Yay!” “Yahoo!” “We got him this time!” “Boy, we fucked *him* for a change!” “Yay!” “Whoopee!” “Let’s go get the girls!”)

Two blurbs for Bill's blog--one adoring; one dismissive

2007-09-27T13:24:00.000-05:00

“Prendergast is an excellent writer who spares no quarter in attacking the right at every opportunity.”—Drew Emmer, GOP campaign manager and member of the Executive Committee of the Wright County Republican BPOU.

“(Dear Bill:) Your assumption of what my motives are and the manner in which you express that assumption lead me to retract my earlier compliment about my respect for your writing expertise.”—Drew Emmer, GOP campaign manager and member of the Executive Committee of the Wright County Republican BPOU.

Bush: "I need help pronunciating this stuff"

2007-09-27T13:13:00.000-05:00

Well, it *is* hard, if you don't know what you're doing:

When words get in the way, Bush goes phonetic

By Matt Spetalnick Tue Sep 25, 5:33 PM ET

NEW YORK (Reuters) - How do you keep a leader as verbally gaffe-prone as U.S. President George W. Bush from making even more slips of the tongue?

When Bush addressed the U.N. General Assembly on Tuesday, the White House inadvertently showed exactly how -- with a phonetic pronunciation guide on the teleprompter to get him past troublesome names of countries and world leaders.

The White House was left scrambling to explain after a marked-up draft of Bush's speech popped up briefly on the U.N. Web site as he delivered his remarks, giving a rare glimpse of the special guidance he gets for major addresses...

...It included phonetic spellings for French President Nicolas Sarkozy (sar-KO-zee), a friend, and Zimbabwe leader Robert Mugabe (moo-GAH-bee), a target of U.S. human rights criticism.

Pronunciations were also provided for Kyrgyzstan (KEYR-geez-stan), Mauritania (moor-EH-tain-ee-a) and the Zimbabwe capital Harare (hah-RAR-ray)...

..."There was an error made," (White House spokeswoman Dana) Perino told reporters. "I don't know how the draft of the speech that was not final was posted but it was and it was taken back..."

Well, you wouldn’t want him to get up there and start talking about Robert MOO-gayb or Nicolas Sar-KOTZ-ee, would you? (Personally, I think it's "moor-eh-TAIN-ee-a", not "moor-EH-tain-ee-a.")

But here are some other ones that will come in handy for “the leader.” Try reading some out loud, it's fun:

Ig-NORD nine-ee-LEV-en warningz

LIDE about DUB-bul-yew-em-deez to get my CUN-tree into a MUR-der-rus SIV-il war over OYL

Mih-lih-TAR-ee diz-ASS-ter

A-nuther Vee-et NAM but with more KUN-treez

SING-gul HAND-ed-lee con-DEM-d the en-TIRE Mid-uhl Eest to JEN-oh-SIDE-uhl WAR-fair for the nekst for DEK-ades

Ah-MEHR-ih-kanz LOO-zing thayr HOMES

KIDZ LOOZ-ing thayr HELTH care

Im-PEND-ing GLO-bal reh-SESH-un

While I stand a-ROUND spow-ting BULL-shit with my THUM up my ASS

HAN-ded a BAL-anst BUD-jet by my PRED-ess-ess-or, now up to my ASS in DETT to RED CHI-na

sup-PORT-ted OHN-ly by LI-ing CON men and the STOO-pid-est PRO-toe-fash-ists

EYE cud fuk up a WET DREEM, and the JEE-OH-PEE noo it wen they NOM-in-ate-ed me. So did my PAIR-entz.

Wurst FUK-ing PREZ-ih-dent in YEW ESS HISS-tor-ee

Tor-PEE-doh-d my own FRIGG-ing po-LIT-i-kal PAR-tee, for KR-eye-st SAY-k

Un-kons-ti-TOO-shun-al

In-DITE-ment

Im-PEECH-ment

Snortz FAYL-yur like it was ko-KANE

Dick Cheney--just shoppin' at Borders

2007-09-26T14:19:00.000-05:00

Yup, he was. Look:

Sep 25, 9:07 PM EDT
Who Runs DC? Dick Cheney Wants to Know

WASHINGTON (AP) –

...The vice president was spotted Tuesday night with a copy of Washingtonian magazine's October issue featuring the "Power 150," its choices for the capital city's most influential people in business, culture, education and other pursuits...

...With his motorcade waiting outside the Borders bookstore at L and 18th streets NW, several people watched through streetside windows as Cheney browsed on the store's ground floor.

...He picked up copies of the late David Halberstam's new book, "The Coldest Winter: America and the Korean War," and the companion book to Ken Burns' PBS series "The War," according to a person in the store who asked not to be identified.

After waiting in line behind a handful of other shoppers, Cheney paid for his items and left as quietly as he arrived...

Clerk: Can I help you find something, sir?
Cheney: Yeah. Uh, look I’m in kind of a hurry, I’ve got a motorcade waiting outside—
Clerk: Certainly, what can I help you with?
Cheney: I’m looking for a book, a couple of books, really.
Clerk: What are the titles, sir--
Cheney: Well, that’s the thing, I don’t have particular titles in mind. It’s a present—for a friend. Well, not a friend, a co-worker. Well, actually, he’s more like an employee—Anyway, look, I want to kind of bring him up to speed on some stuff, some twentieth century military history.
Clerk: I see. Well, the Military History section is right over here—
Cheney: It needs to have a lot of pictures. A book about a war that we won, and it’s got to have a lot of pictures in it--
Clerk: Well, we’ve got a number of books about World War Two, we won that one—
Cheney: I know we won fucking World War Two, I’m not the one who’s—look, sorry, sorry, kid, I didn’t mean to snap at you--
Clerk: That’s okay, sir. Have you seen these DK books for kids? They have lots of pictures—
Cheney: This is exactly the thing I’m talking about. This is wonderful, they’re on all different subjects, are they?
Clerk: Yes, it’s a very popular series. Here’s one on “Knight”...”Aztec”...I looks like we’re sold out of the one on “World War Two”...
Cheney: Shit.
Clerk: We can order it in for you, sir, it would take about two weeks—
Cheney: Nah, nah, I need something to show him tonight.
Clerk: Have you considered buying your friend a DVD on World War II?
Cheney: That’s the best fucking idea I’ve heard this year. Is there a good one available?
Clerk: Well, there’s a Ken Burns documentary on World War II coming out—
Cheney: Perfect. Lead me to it—
Clerk: I think we may be sold out of that, too, unfortunately—
Cheney: Look, kid—stop cockteasing me, will you? What have you got in the store, right now?
Clerk: Well, we have the Ken Burns book that accompanies the DVD, that has lots of photos—
Cheney: Gimme that. (examines it) Okay. Great. Here’s pictures of us winning, I’ll take it. Now I need something else, something brainy-looking—
Clerk: For the same friend?
Cheney: It’s just so he can be seen carrying it around, so he can be seen with it. It can have lot of big words in it, it doesn’t matter, he’s not gonna read it anyway.
Clerk: About World War II?
Cheney: No, about some other war, some other war that we didn’t win. So it looks like he’s a serious thinker, learning from the lessons of the past—
Clerk: Here’s a history of Viet Nam—
Cheney: For Christ’s sake, no. No way. What else?
Clerk: Well, David Halberstom’s got a new book out on the Korean War—
Cheney: Gimme that. (examines) Okay, we’re done. Perfect. (sees magazine left in chair) What’s that, what’s that there, that magazine? “Washington’s 150 Most Powerful People—“ (starts to flip through it quickly)
Clerk: Would you like me to take you to the magazine section, sir?
Cheney: Nah, nah, I’m just trying to see if I’m in here anywhere...Ah, there I am. I can leave this laying on his desk, open at this page. That way he’ll think I’m still—alright, where do I ring up this stuff.
Clerk: Right this way, sir, I’ll take you to the register.
Cheney: Great. Am I supposed to tip you or something?
Clerk: Oh, no sir. We don’t accept gratuities here at Borders.
Cheney: Okay, then fine. Go fuck yourself, then, okay? And don’t tell anyone I was in here.
Clerk: Yes, sir.

The President is really losing it, now

2007-09-23T22:46:00.000-05:00

I know Dana Milbank of the Washington Post isn't the most dispassionate observer of the Bush team--but his report on the behavior of the Prez at the last news conference is kind of disturbing.

The President is apparently displaying the kind of childishness and truculence that his Press Secretary Tony Snow engaged in just prior to announcing his departure from the scene.

And he's behaving this way publicly. You read these questions and Bush's answers and tell me if you don't see signs of encroaching depression and broken defense mechanisms:

Yesterday's news conference was just minutes old when President Bush made a startling announcement.

"Mandela's dead," he said.

There was a gasp in the White House briefing room at this news, which would no doubt surprise the 89-year-old Nelson Mandela himself.

Fortunately, the president quickly clarified that he was not speaking of the sainted South African but of his equivalents in Iraq. "Saddam Hussein killed all the Mandelas," he explained.

Mass exhalation...

Is a recession looming?

"I think I got a B in Econ 101."

(Serious question for American homeowners and working people=lame joke by the POTUS? That's not going to calm the markets or the people...)

His thoughts on Israel's bombing of Syria?

"I'm not going to comment on the matter."

(Why the hell not?)

How about the racial conflagration in Jena, La.?

"There's litigation taking place."

(HUH?)

Ken Herman of Cox News tried to draw out the news-shy president. "For Republicans seeking election next year, are you an asset or a liability?"

"Strong asset," was Bush's full reply.

"Can I follow?"

"No."

The rest was blaming Congress--blaming the present Congress for the upcoming failure of SCHIP, and blaming the former GOP Congress for Greenspan's recent criticism of the Bush economy.

When blaming Congress was impractical, the president found other worthy targets. Asked about the Iraqi government's problems, he noted that "part of the reason why there is not this instant democracy in Iraq is because people are still recovering from Saddam Hussein's brutal rule."

A state of denial, paraded publicly. No kidding, he really sounds like he's losing it now. A leader simply doesn't act like that, in front of the press, when the country's facing a bunch of crises. Maybe someone inside the White House finally "burst the bubble" this week and told him what was going on in the outside world. He sounds like the generals who led the Charge of The Light Brigade--"I don't want to talk about it, none of it is my fault..."

Scary stuff. He sounds as if the political realities and consequences of what he's done and failed to do are finally sinking in--and he can't handle it, anymore. What does a stupid megalomaniac do, once he finally realizes that he's failed?

Larry Craig restroom a Minnesota tourist attraction!

2007-09-19T15:10:00.000-05:00

From the New York Times, for God’s sake:

Fateful Bathroom Draws Crowds of the Curious

Andy King/Associated Press

MINNEAPOLIS, Sept. 18 —

…Since Aug. 27, when the arrest of Mr. Craig became known publicly, the restroom has become a source of amusement for travelers and employees at Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport. Some pose for pictures before the outer door. Others enter to zoom in on the light-blue stall the senator used, the eighth of nine in a row. The undercover officer who arrested Mr. Craig was in the stall to his right, the seventh stall.

Foot traffic outside the restroom, which is just off the central food court, has quadrupled, said Rosemary Zeno, who works at Royal Zeno Shoe Shine next door. Ms. Zeno says she fields some 50 questions a day about the bathroom. “It’s ridiculous,” she said. “They need to cut it out.”

Disgraceful. At a time when the state is so starved for cash that it lets a bridge collapse, Minnesota governor and GOP vice-presidential hopeful Tim Pawlenty is letting another key revenue opportunity slip through the state’s hands, here.

Now is the time to jump on this one. Pawlenty should sign an executive ordering setting up a booth outside the restroom, with a state parks official staffing it to answer questions and hand out brochures. Eight bucks if you want to take the tour. That’s a very busy airport, a lot of people stuck there waiting for cancelled Northwest flights and connections. We could make a bundle.

It’s a prime location. $8.00 a head, groups of ten, maximum, with the ranger giving a twenty minute presentation: the biographical background on Craig, Sergeant Karsnia, brief history of the sting operation, re-enactment by the ranger and a volunteer from the group to play Karsnia in the next stall. Brief account of the arrest, Craig’s statements during interrogation, update on the political and legal aftermath—give everyone a chance to sit in Craig’s stall—then “thank you for joining the tour,” and bang! “Next group, please.” It’s a beautiful thing, the ranger doesn’t even have to stop to give out directions to the restrooms.

It might end up being like Mann’s Chinese Theater in Hollywood, where you go to compare your footprint with those of the movie stars, set in concrete. You could go on down to the restroom and sit in a stall and compare your stance to Larry Craig’s.

Let’s see–- three groups of ten an hour–that’s $160 bucks an hour. People are stuck there all night, so pretty steady traffic. You could do advance bookings via Gray Line, other tour companies, offer the tour as an add-on via online travel services like Expedia and Travelocity. That’s an international airport; they get all the KLM/Northwest flights from Europe. You could get groups of Dutch, French, Belgians, whatever—all those people speak English now; the dollar is weak and they’ve got nothing to do in the airport; I’m sure they’d love to hear the story.

Now the $160 an hour doesn’t sound like much, but after two tours you’ve already paid the tour guide’s salary, the rest is gravy. And these people have to eat, right? Right there, bars and restaurants, we’re golden. And then you’ve got the souvenirs, memorabilia. Get your picture taken next to a life-size cardboard cut-out of Craig, standing in front of the restroom. T-shirts: “I sat in Larry Craig’s stall and all I got was this lousy t-shirt”–that’s twenty bucks a pop. “Ten per cent of every item sold goes to fund infrastructure repair in Minnesota.”

I don’t see any downside to this one at all. We’re already getting free press in the NYT, for Chrissake’s! Get a move on on this one, Pawlenty! Hop to it!

Washington Post on Obama: What the hell is he thinking these days, anyway?

2007-09-15T20:51:00.001-05:00

Okay, as we know: some Democrats say he’s been talking the talk, but not walking the walk:

War Critics Question Obama's Fervor
Some Say Actions Don't Match Talk

By Perry Bacon Jr.
Washington Post Staff Writer
Saturday, September 15, 2007; A01

...some antiwar Democrats have raised questions about the depth of Obama's opposition, taking aim at one of the signature arguments for his candidacy -- that he is the only leading Democratic candidate who opposed the war from the beginning.

They say that while Obama did argue against the war as a Senate candidate, he tempered his rhetoric and his opposition once he arrived in the Capitol, rejecting timetables for withdrawal and backing war funding bills. He returned to a sharper position, they say, when he started running for president...

"So many politicians were afraid" to oppose the war, "so he gets credit for that," said Jim Ginsburg, a Chicago Democratic activist. He backed Obama when he ran for the Senate in 2004 but says Al Gore is his preferred candidate for president.

"Some of his actions and speeches once he got in the Senate did not match his rhetoric," Ginsburg, the son of Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, said of Obama. "He started making very mealy-mouthed comments and voted to authorize funding for the war. Once he started seeing how angry Democrats were, his rhetoric has turned to where it was in the 2004 campaign."...

..."It's great [Obama] had good judgment," said Markos Moulitsas Z?niga, who runs the popular liberal blog Daily Kos, but he added: "There's no clarity of message." Moulitsas said that Obama should have firmly come out against any bill that offers funding for the war without a timetable for withdrawal, as Edwards has...

(Okay, sounds like a fair thing to ask an end-the-war candidate to do...)

In a speech Wednesday, Obama offered his most detailed plan yet for getting troops out of Iraq, calling for the withdrawal of at least one of the 20 brigades (each made up of about 3,500 soldiers) in Iraq every month starting now, with all combat troops out by the end of next year. And even among the most antiwar audiences, Obama still has many supporters.

(Personally, I don’t react very well to that plan. I don’t think it seems wise militarily or politically, but I won’t pass judgment until I hear all the details.)

"He's been there from the very beginning," said Tom Andrews, the national director of a group called Win Without War.

(In 2002 when Obama spoke at an anti-war rally) "Bush's ratings were at an all-time high," said Marilyn Katz, another organizer of the rally, who is now one of the top fundraisers for Obama's 2008 campaign. But Obama "was willing to stand up and stake out a leadership position."

(Very admirable--taking an unpopular and principled stand at a time when most of the country still believed in Bush shows vision, courage and character. Here's where we get into trouble:)

...But once he arrived in the Senate, after winning the primary and easily dispatching his Republican opponent, Obama did not emerge as a key voice on the war.

Days after Rep. John P. Murtha (D-Pa.) gave a teary speech in November 2005 calling for the immediate pullout of U.S. troops from Iraq, Obama called for a phased reduction in troops but emphasized that he was against a timetable for withdrawal...

In 2005 and 2006, Obama backed several bills that funded the Iraq war. In July 2006, when Democratic Sens. John F. Kerry (Mass.) and Russell Feingold (Wis.) pushed for a bill that would set a timetable to remove combat troops from Iraq by July 31, 2007, Obama, like Clinton, voted no.

Hmmm... I don't know. He does some war-funding stuff, then he does some I'm gonna end the war stuff... And there's all these Democrats who believe in him deeply. I don't know.

What's with, like, the lean content on this blog, lately?

2007-09-14T19:54:00.000-05:00

Sorry, sports fans, but...

As you may know, I write for another blog (Dump Bachmann) and I've been busy this week.

It's a Bachmann story, of course. Two days ago I printed a rumor that had two parts:

1) DFL candidate Bob Hill might be dropping out of the race.

The Hill campaign was kind of upset that I printed that, but they so far they haven't explicitly denied it. So I have been on the phone and the internet with people the past couple of days, batting the issue back and forth.

2) The second part of the rumor was: Former Ventura transportation commissioner Elwyn Tinklenberg was getting into the race, to run as a DFL candidate against Bachmann.

After I printed that on Dump Bachmann, the Pioneer Press reported that a Tinklenberg spokesman said that that part of the rumor was correct. Today the St. Cloud Times printed that Tinklenberg was indeed reconsidering his options and thinking about a run against Bachmann. Tinklenberg has had meetings with the other DFL candidates (Bob Hill and Bob Olson.)

That's where we are, at this writing. In other news, Nancy Pelosi reacted to Petraeus' progress report on Iraq and mentioned Petraeus' "we have to fight ten more years in Iraq, if we really want to win" assessment. (See previous item on this blog.) That's good; let's get that out in front of all the voters so they can see what this Iraq war thing really involves.

But the bottom line is, I haven't had time this week to come up with all the "political hilarity" that I usually provide for this blog. No Larry Craig jokes.

I will try to get back to that quality content this weekend. In the meantime, let me see if I can come up with something to amuse you, to make it worth your time to read this. Let's see... Google... "Larry Craig jokes"...

Hmm... not funny... not funny... not funny... Aha! Here's a good one; from David Letterman:

“Senator Craig from Idaho is blaming the media for his guilty plea, especially that cute guy from the Associated Press."

Petraeus: victory will require 9-10 more years of US war in Iraq

2007-09-09T23:13:00.001-05:00

Time to get serious. I hate repeating myself, but that assessment by Gen. Petraeus bears repeating.

If the debate in congress and the media goes on without that professional assessment as a given--I think there's a very good chance that the war will continue and then expand in Iraq--and into Iran. So I'm repeating it. Here's the relevant news story; it's been raised and discussed by several diarists on the Daily Kos and other liberal and anti-war blogs but it's not yeat a matter of general knowledge: General Petraeus has gone on the record, in advance of his long-awaited September report, and stated that Iraq cannot be stabilized without nine to ten more years of American warfare in Iraq. (continued)

If I had my way, that assessment would be on the lips of everyone everywhere who has any opinion on the war. Acknowledging the fact of Petraeus' prognosis for military victory--9 to 10 years of continued American fighting in Iraq--would be a precondition for discussing the war. Anyone who didn't begin their arguments about the war without that assessment as a pre-condition--could be dismissed from the table as a propagandist, a yahoo, a crank.

Because Petraeus is the guy on the ground, he is in charge of the military side of the "mission", and he knows better than anyone else what's going on there. And even though he's willing to submit a report to Congress that's been edited by the White House, even though he's willing to engage in that kind of "happy talk" about progress to extend the life of the mission: his candid assessment, delivered to members of Congress this August is that it will take nine to ten more years of warfare to stabilize Iraq. Not to set up a western style democracy there (the original goal of the mission)--nine to ten years to stabilize it.

If war supporters are allowed to pass over that nine to ten year guess by Petraeus: they win. They've bought more time, if the public is allowed to ignore Petraeus' prognosis--and time, at this stage, is what they're after.

If Americans against the war make the Petraeus 9-10 year assessment central to this year's discussion about the war--the anti-war Americans win. Because that 9 to 10 year assessment follow 1) a real draft, not a backdoor one, 2) tens of thousands of more casualites for the US armed forces, 3) an invasion and occupation of Iran--you can't "stabilize" Iraq, without destroying Iran. And 4) bankrupting the US to win this battle, which will not eliminate or confine terror.

So that reality--"Petraeus says he thinks it will take nine to ten years of US war in Iraq by the US to win"--that fact has to be pitched, repeatedly. It has to be reiterated in Congress, in the media, on the streets and in the country. It has to be repeated until it becomes as engraved in the minds of Americans as the fact that "The Star Spangled Banner" is the national anthem, or the fact that "George W. Bush is an incompetent lying asshole."

That should be the soundbyte we should demand to hear from Congress--"General Petraeus, you told members of Congress in August of this year that it will take nine to ten more years of warfare by the US in Iraq if we wish to achieve victory." That should be the beginning and end of all the Sunday morning political shows, the beginning of the newspaper editorials on the war, the question asked at White House press conferences, the beginning of the rhetoric of the anti-war activists, of the anti-war blogs and the public conversations about the war: "Petraeus says he thinks it will take nine to ten years of war in Iraq by the US to win."

If that fact--and it is a fact, that is Petraeus' assessment of how long it would take for the US to win the war--if that fact slips away, virtually unnoticed, there is every likelihood that the war will continue as it has been continuing for the foreseeable future. The White House will spin its web of "progress" bullshit, vacillating Dems will compromise. But if that fact becomes central to the debate this year, anti-war forces in the US will win the debate and have a good chance of seeing serious and permanent troop withdrawals from Iraq beginning next year.

Because no American in his right mind wants to commit to fighting nine to ten years over there, just to stabilize Iraq.

Larry Craig: The "JFK Assassination" Angle

2007-09-06T14:14:00.000-05:00

Senator Arlen Specter’s tantalizing speculation on the outcome of the Larry Craig case:

Sen. Craig skips Senate's first day back after resignation announcement

...Pennsylvania Sen. Arlen Specter, senior Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee, suggested Craig’s GOP colleagues who pressured him last week to resign should re-examine the facts surrounding his arrest June 11. (continued)

“The more people take a look at the situation, there may well be second thoughts,” Specter, a former prosecutor, said today. If Craig had not pleaded guilty in August to a reduced charge and instead demanded a trial, “I believe he would have been exonerated,” Specter said...

It is interesting to speculate on Specter’s speculation. Could the Senator be considering the possibility of an extended investigation that will ultimately clear Craig by raising serious doubts about his culpability?

Specter’s career as an investigator may be coming full circle. He rose to fame as the proponent of the famous and controversial “single-bullet theory” explanation for how Lee Harvey Oswald might have been solely responsible for the death of President Kennedy in 1963. Specter’s contributions to the Warren Commission Report represented an attempt to dispel the notion that more than one assassin was involved in the shooting.

So it is ironic that Specter now seems to be proposing some “conspiracy theory” of his own in order to exonerate his Republican colleague.
What will Specter’s theory look like, once it is fleshed out? We don’t know, but we can guess.

Specter will probably try to prove the existence of “someone else” in an adjoining bathroom stall—a “second shitter,” if you will. The presence of a second person or persons unknown, seated on “the gassy knoll” in close proximity to that of the arresting officer, would go far in exculpating Craig—if it could be shown that it was a physical impossibility for Senator Craig to reach down for piece of toilet paper on the floor with his PALM FACING UP, as he claims.

A second shitter would also explain the toe-tapping and “the hand with the gold wedding ring” that the officer SAYS he sighted, rubbing the bottom of the adjoining stall. Millions of American men wear gold wedding rings; that is not conclusive evidence that wearers are not gay, or that the hand that Officer Karsnia saw beneath the stall was Craig’s.

Clearly, Specter does not accept the theory propounded by those who would pin the blame on Craig, and Craig alone—the so-called “single toilet theory.” It stretches the bounds of credulity to believe that Craig was “acting alone,” that a United States Senator (however wide his stance) would reach down to pick up a piece of toilet paper off the floor in such a way that could be mistaken for sexual invitation by an experienced officer in the next stall.

Specter will also point out that many of the potential witnesses to the incident have “disappeared.” Men using the busy airport restroom facilities at the date and time in question are “unavailable” to the press and public—either that, or they’re refusing to testify about what they saw. Coincidence--or something more sinister?

Officer Karsnia’s police report notes that Senator Craig “did not flush” after exiting the stall. I submit that Karsnia included that fact in his report as evidence that Craig had entered the men’s restroom for non-excretory purposes. It should be noted that failure to flush before leaving a restroom stall is a crime in Singapore.

Yes, it is. In law school I had a Chinese friend who grew up in Singapore. He explained to me that citizens who did not flush after exiting the stall were reported to the authorities; the punishment was to run their photographs in the local paper.

This may ultimately prove irrelevant, if Singapore does not try to claim jurisdiction over the case, but I feel it is important to include an international law perspective here. Whatever argument Craig tries to present in his defense, there is no excuse for not flushing the toilet after leaving the stall.

Rove: Deserting rat denies sinking the ship

2007-09-04T21:25:00.001-05:00

There’s a new book coming out that purports to give an inside view of some of the secret squabbling that’s gone on over the past seven years inside the Bush White House. This would not be considered a big deal, except for the fact that one of the author’s informants appears to have been Karl Rove, who apparently shared a couple of “juicy stories” with the author some months prior to his departure from the White House.

The fact is: if the AP story on the release of the book is anything to go by, the “juicy stories” told by Rove are not all that juicy. See here:

Book Tells Of Dissent In Bush's Inner Circle
White House Granted Author Unusual Access

By Michael Abramowitz
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, September 3, 2007; A01

Karl Rove told George W. Bush before the 2000 election that it was a bad idea to name Richard B. Cheney as his running mate, and Rove later raised objections to the nomination of Harriet E. Miers to the Supreme Court, according to a new book on the Bush presidency.

In "Dead Certain: The Presidency of George Bush," journalist Robert Draper writes that Rove told Bush he should not tap Cheney for the Republican ticket: "Selecting Daddy's top foreign-policy guru ran counter to message. It was worse than a safe pick -- it was needy." But Bush did not care -- he was comfortable with Cheney and "saw no harm in giving his VP unprecedented run of the place."

When Rove, President Bush's top political adviser, expressed concerns about the Miers selection, he was "shouted down" and subsequently muted his objections, Draper writes, while other advisers did not realize the outcry the nomination would cause within the president's conservative political base.

See what I mean? Obviously this isn’t Rove dishing all the dirt he could, nobody expects that he will do that; that would kill these guys dead, once and for all.

Instead, this is Rove sluffing off any personal responsibility for a couple of f-ups that he'd rather not get blamed for, given the fact that he is widely acknowledged to be one of GWB’s two brain cells. (The other is Cheney.)

What’s interesting is that Rove is talking at all about this stuff. That fact makes it clear that he wants to remain active in the GOP and conservative politics. To do that, he has to make sure that he is not made a fall guy for the failed political strategies of what is surely the most incompetent and disastrous White House since the Nixon administration.

Remember that a key element of the Rove strategy was to preach bi-partisanship and “a new tone in Washington” on the way in, while secretly planning to run the most partisan White House in modern history. Bush continued to campaign vigorously on behalf of the GOP and its candidates long after he was elected, working not to negotiate with Democrats and build consensus (as he promised) but to replace them. And Rove’s behind-the-scenes efforts—e.g., politicizing the Justice Department so that it would “go after” Democrats and Democratic voters—reflected the same view: purge American political life of liberals and Democrats by any means necessary, to ensure a conservative hegemony for decades to come.

All ends were directed to domestic political ends: how to respond to terrorist strikes at the US, how to run the economy (deficit spending dressed up as conservatism), questions involving foreign policy, questions of war and peace and how to direct the Pentagon—all national and international questions became secondary, directed to an ultimate goal: the lasting and hopefully permanent triumph of conservative Republican power. The future envisioned by Rove had little to do with America and America’s interests, and everything to do with the interests of Republicans and conservatives. He worked for a divided America, a future of well-funded conservatives using a permanent state of crisis and a nationwide right-wing media to dominate a marginalized liberal rump party that would be stereotyped as a weakling counter-culture of potential traitors and socialist wannabes.

To say that “Rove’s plan backfired” amounts to comic understatement. The Bush White House, with every possible advantage of prosperity, money, and media, torpedoed its own party via sheer incompetence in policymaking. Their characteristic response to crisis and disaster was to expand the scope and severity of those crises and disasters. That’s because Rove’s take on the world and politics is wrong. National and international policy questions are not matters of public perception; spin and effectiveness in destroying one’s political opposition at home.

But Rove does not want to spend the rest of his life with a reputation as “the guy who destroyed the conservative hegemony over American politics.” So he’s signaling his willingness to talk, if necessary. To spread the blame for the GOP disaster by minimizing his own role in specific Bush White House disasters: “Hey, I’m not the guy who said Cheney should run Bush foreign policy—I was against his appointment as veep. Hey, I’m not the guy who was responsible for the Miers debacle.”

Hopefully, this is just the tip of the iceberg. Hopefully, Rove will keep talking and other key Bush personnel will start to talk about how the disasters came about, in order to try to salvage their own historical reputations. It’s heartening to see the regime turn against its own, even if they’re only doing so to try to save their own careers.

Departing Snow was cranky, petulant; had a "stuff this" attitude

2007-09-03T19:46:00.000-05:00

Dana Milbank turned in this column before Snow's resignation announcement became official:

Press Secretary May Be Ready to Leave the Circus

By Dana Milbank
Friday, August 31, 2007; A02

White House press secretary Tony Snow sounds as if he's had about enough.

At yesterday's press briefing, CBS News's Bill Plante asked about a new report by the Government Accountability Office showing problems in Iraq.

"There are a lot of reports," said Snow. "It's a season of reports."

CNN's Ed Henry inquired about the "16 spy agencies" that wrote a National Intelligence Estimate.

"Sixteen spy agencies?" Snow answered reproachfully. "You're talking about intelligence agencies."

And don't even bother asking him about Sen. Larry Craig. "Thank you for the question," the spokesman spoke. "I've already given my answer."

"No, you didn't," pointed out April Ryan of American Urban Radio Networks.

"Yes, I did," Snow retorted, then reconsidered. "Okay, I gave the answer I'm going to give."

Plante detected a bit of snippiness. "Your tolerance level seems to be slipping," the veteran newsman observed.

"Really?" Snow replied. "Am I getting cranky like you? Wow."

(That's not very classy, is it? Is that the way you really want to be remembered? A "sarcastic little girl" kind of White House press secretary? I don't think Ron Ziegler talked to the press like that even during Watergate. What a little pissy man Snow was, in his final days...)

Snow said earlier this month that he'll be leaving his position before the president has left his. But he hasn't said when...

...If he leaves, he can look forward to considerable lucre. Former White House press secretary Ari Fleischer asked for $50,000 a speech when he left the job, and Snow is at least twice as good. The Snow wit -- which the spokesman uses to thwart reporters in search of more substantive answers -- would find a natural home on the talk circuit...

Ah-HA! Ah-HA! So that's it! That's what the pissiness was all about. Snow was TRYING to get fired, so he could get back in the private sector and make more MONEY! Sort of like a soldier who’s on a tour of duty, realizes he’s losing all this money fighting for his country and then decides to try to get out on a dishonorable discharge or Section Eight.

Okay. Not very patriotic. Not very admirable with a war going on and all these kids staying on even thought their buddies are getting shot, maimed or killed—but I understand why you’d wanna do it, Tony. You’d make a hell of a lot more money than those veterans, if you left public service.

I guess we're lucky Snow took off before we saw any more of his "I'm a pissy little girl and I hate you all" attitude. A few more days of this “I’m gonna get me fired so I can start making the big money again” strategy, and we would have seen moments like this:

SNOW: Yes, first question. Bob?
REPORTER: Do you think a guilty plea can be recanted for an arrest for lewd conduct in a men's restroom at an airport?
SNOW: You go ask your *mother* if a guilty plea can be recanted for an arrest for lewd conduct in a men's restroom at an airport, Bob. Next question.
REPORTER: Was the pressure on Attorney General Gonzales to resign fair, given the circumstances?
SNOW: Since when did you people start caring about “fair?” Suddenly, you start caring about “fairness?” What the hell is this, the “End Times” or something? (pretends to look under the podium) Where’s Jesus?
REPORTER: Please, Tony—
SNOW: (yells off stage) Somebody get Satan’s parka! Hell has apparently frozen over, the press cares about fairness now—
REPORTER: --the GAO released its report on Iraq yesterday and said that the Iraqi government has failed to reach any of the most significant benchmarks—are—are you mimicking me, Tony?
SNOW: “--mimicking me, Tony?”
REPORTER: I have to say, I think this is very childish and unprofessional—
SNOW: “—and unpwofessionaw--”
REPORTER: Well, in my fifteen years of covering the White House, I—
SNOW:(using his hand to talk, a la Senor Huences) “—feefteen years of covering de White House, I—“
REPORTER: How’d you like me to come up there and kick your ass?
SNOW: (points out reporter) Security! (the men in black come and take the reporter out, Snow goes into Senor Huences with his hand again, calling after him as they drag him out) “How you like me to come up dere and kick your ass?” (laughs) You know, I may stick around a little while in this job, after all...

Meanwhile, back in the men's lavatory with Senator Craig and Officer Karsnia...

2007-08-31T23:37:00.001-05:00

The GOP said Craig is resigning. The AP posted transcripted excerpts from the police interview with Senator Craig after his lewd conduct bust.

It's very sad. The dialogue is as if Samuel Beckett had written an ABC Afterschool Special especially targeted at closeted gay Senators.

Craig insisted then, as he insists now, that he is not gay. Sergeant Karsnia, on the other hand, insists that Senator Craig is lying to him about his behavior in the stalls.

KARSNIA: Have you been successful in these bathrooms here before?

CRAIG: I go to that bathroom regularly.

KARSNIA: I mean for any type of other activities.

(You see here? This is the "Theater of the Absurd" aspect of the interview. Karsnia is asking Craig if he has had "success" in these bathrooms before--in the sense of "success in picking up guys for assignations." But Craig chooses to interpret Karsnia's use of the word "success" as signifying "success in taking a dump"--the "Borat" sense of the word "success." ("Great success!") Here we see again the poverty of words as a means of communicating truths, the near impossibility of real communication between two alienated human beings. Very "Godot", very Ionesco. Let's go on.)

CRAIG: No. Absolutely not. I don't seek activity in bathrooms.

KARSNIA: It's embarrassing.

CRAIG: Well it's embarrassing for both. I'm not gonna fight you.

KARSNIA: I know you're not going to fight me. But that's not the point. I would respect you and I still respect you. I don't disrespect you but I'm disrespected right now, and I'm not trying to act like I have all kinds of power or anything, but you're sitting here lying to a police officer.

CRAIG: I, I, I ...

---

(Another "Beckett" type moment--Craig, an articulate man, reduced momentarily to incoherence by "l'absurd.")

KARSNIA: I am trained in this, and I know what I am doing. And I say you put your hand under there and you're going to sit there and ...

CRAIG: I admit I put my hand down.

KARSNIA: You put your hand and rubbed it on the bottom of the stall with your left hand.

CRAIG: No. Wait a moment.

KARSNIA: And I, I'm not dumb, you can say I don't recall ...

CRAIG: If I had turned sideways, that was the only way I could get my left hand over there.

KARSNIA: It's not that hard for me to reach. (inaudible) it's not that hard. I see it happen everyday out here now.

CRAIG: (inaudible) you do. All right.

KARSNIA: I just, I just, I guess, I guess I'm gonna say I'm just disappointed in you, sir. I'm just really am. I expect this from the guy that we get out of the hood.

(Why doe Sergeant Karsnia expect "this" from "the guy that we get out of the hood?" Why does he expect "more" in the way of "truth", from a US Senator, from an Idahoan, than "the guy that we get out of the hood?" Once again we see the poverty of human communication...)

KARSNIA: I mean, people vote for you.

CRAIG: Yes, they do. (inaudible)

KARSNIA: Unbelievable. Unbelievable.

(Now it is Karsnia who has been reduced to "a dead end." Zis is l'alienation...ze policeman who has seen ze meaninglessness of ze social order, where ze high official is ze same as ze guy from ze hood...)

CRAIG: I'm a respectable person, and I don't do these kinds of ..

KARSNIA: And (inaudible) respect right now though.

CRAIG: But I didn't use my left hand.

KARSNIA: I thought that you ...

CRAIG: I reached down with my right hand like this to pick up a piece of paper.

(And now we are at ze "single bullet theory" diagram phase of zis interaction. Les sujets attempt to confer meaning on their isolation in ze stalls, which eez of course alzo ze isolation of all l'humanite. We, ze audience, are placed liked birds above ze stalls, watching ze occupants beneath us. Like gods who see all but are powerless to intervene, we are asked to interpret ze scene below, where ze hand of ze Senator reach out beneath ze stall--in ze hope of human contact? For uzzer, more profane purposes? Which hand does ze Senator use? Ze right hand, to signal loneliness, ze lack of papier de lavatoire? Or ze left hand, to signal the willingness for ze assignacion?)

KARSNIA: Was your gold ring on your right hand at anytime today?

CRAIG: Of course not. Try to get it off. Look at it.

KARSNIA: OK. Then it was your left hand. I saw it with my own eyes.

CRAIG: All right, you saw something that didn't happen.

KARSNIA: Embarrassing, embarrassing. No wonder why we're going down the tubes.

(Ze gendarme's final statement is one of la resignacion, of hopelessness. He wants to laugh; at the same time he feels ze tears welling up in his eyes, ze ache in his soul.

C'est l'asbsurde.)

NO KIDDING! We have RAY GUNS we can use on Iraqis, if we want!

2007-08-31T01:09:00.000-05:00

So, I like figured out how to work the On Demand thing on my cable TV, and it's like really cool because you can watch like movies or tv shows "on demand", like whenever you want--it's kind of like TIVO but it's not as cool as TIVO, because it's only the shit that they want to give you for free plus some "premium" movies that you would never pay to see in the first place anyway like some shit with David Spade or something.

Anyway, I got into the "On Demand" thing and all I could get on the fucking channel was this olden days pilgrim movie bullshit, it's called "The Constable" or something like that and I left it on cause it said in the Maltin Movie Guide it had teenage witches--but get this: it had Winona Ryder in it and at the beginning of the movie she goes out into the woods in the middle of the night with her olden days pilgrim girlfriends and they RIP open a CHICKEN and smear its BLOOD, and then one of them takes off her dress and GETS NAKED but it was too dark in the woods for me to see whether it was Winona or not, and it was too dark in my living room too, so I got up to see closer on the TV and then Winona's father the olden days minister showed up and broke up the whole girl-girl thing because he was the minister and that was the last "witchy-naked" kind of thing they did in the movie!

No more naked witches, no more special effects, nothing. Just Winona and Daniel Day fucking Lewis yelling at each other in Thanksgiving costumes. The rest of the movie was just some kind of heavy talky bullshit pilgrim metaphor for the political climate in the McCarthy era.

Big fucking deal. So I turned off the TV and started to "surf the net,"--and look what I found! We've got fucking ray guns we can use in Iraq now, if we want to! Do you believe this shit? I shit you not!

Aug 29, 5:03 PM EDT
Pentagon Nixes Ray Gun Weapon in Iraq

By RICHARD LARDNER
Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON (AP) -- (In 2003) U.S. commanders were telling Washington that many civilian casualties could be avoided by using a new non-lethal weapon developed over the past decade.

Military leaders repeatedly and urgently requested - and were denied - the device, which uses energy beams instead of bullets and lets soldiers break up unruly crowds without firing a shot.

It's a ray gun that neither kills nor maims, but the Pentagon has refused to deploy it out of concern that the weapon itself might be seen as a torture device.

Perched on a Humvee or a flatbed truck, the Active Denial System gives people hit by the invisible beam the sense that their skin is on fire. They move out of the way quickly and without injury.

(HO. LEE. SHIT. Do you be-leeeeeeve this shit?)

On April 30, 2003, two days after the first Fallujah incident, Gene McCall, then the top scientist at Air Force Space Command in Colorado, typed out a two-sentence e-mail to Gen. Richard Myers, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

"I am convinced that the tragedy at Fallujah would not have occurred if an Active Denial System had been there," McCall told Myers, according to the e-mail obtained by AP. The system should become "an immediate priority," McCall said.

...McCall, who retired from government in November 2003, remains convinced the system would have saved lives in Iraq.

"How this has been handled is kind of a national scandal," McCall said by telephone from his home in Florida.

(You bet your sweet ass it is, Professor McCall. We have ray guns and we're NOT using them? WHAT KIND OF FUCKING BULLSHIT IS THAT!?)

A few months after McCall's message, in August 2003, Richard Natonski, a Marine Corps brigadier general who had just returned from Iraq, filed an "urgent" request with officials in Washington for the energy-beam device.

The device would minimize what Natonski described as the "CNN Effect" - the instantaneous relay of images depicting U.S. troops as aggressors.

(YOU BET YOUR SWEET ASS IT WOULD, General Natonski! We would look like friggin' starshoop trippers or something, getting out of our Humvees with our ray guns firing invisible fucking rays to convince Shi'ites and Sunnis they were on fire, it would be like WAR OF THE FUCKING WORLDS, and the only thing that could stop us would be the tiny common cold, which Good God, in his wisdom, put here on the earth--but until we all catch cold we could be ray-gunning their asses over there, with a cool sound effect like on Space 1999, like "nihnihnihnihnihnin--" or "eeeeeeeeeeee"--you're telling me that CNN wouldn't be all over THAT?)

The main reason the tool has been missing in action is public perception. With memories of the Abu Ghraib prison scandal still fresh, the Pentagon is reluctant to give troops a space-age device that could be misconstrued as a torture machine.

(WHAT? Has the United States of America become so impossibly pussed out that we cannot use our own RAY GUNS, now that we have finally got them? How is this worse than anything we are already using over there? This will save lives, Goddammit, the lives of everyone of the 437 crew members on this ship! It will save the lives of insurgents! When they hear we have ray guns now, they will SHIT themselves and be to embarrassed to come out and fight!)

Poverty, income, and footsie in the men's restroom

2007-08-28T22:36:00.000-05:00

Well, it’s official. I have officially lost my sense of humor. I laughed when the Ted Haggard story came out; he was a top political evangelical with access to the White House. When they caught McCain’s Florida campaign chair offering that undercover cop a twenty to let him blow him, I did a very funny piece on it. When they caught the newly elected chair of the GOP trying to blow a guest while he slept on the couch, I did a funny piece on that.

But now they caught Senator Larry Craig trying to blow an undercover cop in the Minneapolis-St. Paul airport. Okay, guys. Once, it’s funny. Twice, it’s still funny. Three times, it still gets a laugh. But now they’re beating this thing to death. Is this “secretly gay Republican leader” thing going to become some kind of ‘running gag’ in the Republican Party? If so, count me out. I’m washing my hands of the whole thing, right now, and wiping my hands on my pants because those little air dryers in the airport restrooms never work, and I’m stalking out of the men’s room to a good hard look at the substantive issues:

The AP posted the results of seven years of Bush/GOP stewardship of the economy. They posted Census Bureau data here (poverty by state), and here (household income by state). And the news is not good.

Yes, between last year and this year: a small increase in median income. But compare the figures for 1999-2000 with those for 2006, and you’ve got a financial horror story instead of the American dream.

Bush is the only president I know who could turn a foreign war into a loss of income for the American people. And that’s not counting the debt that he and the GOP ran up on behalf of Americans, when they dominated Washington. That debt is a tax; Americans owe it and it will have to be paid back.

And when you look over the figures in the Census poverty and income reports, note that some of the hardest hit states are centers of conservatism.

Colorado—median income in 1999: $57,118. In 2006: $52,015. Change : minus 8.9% in income in the past six years. (Colorado is the “Focus on the Family” state, the Taxpayers’ Bill of Rights (TABOR) state.)

Georgia—median income in 1999: $51,346. In 2006: $46,832. Change: minus 8.8%

Larry Craig’s Idaho---median income in 1999: $45,464. In 2006: $42,865. Change: minus 5.7%. (And this man’s solution is to fly to Minnesota to blow a cop in a public restroom?)

Look at the figures for your own state, for your own cities. Poverty up, median income down. (And yes, I know that “median income” is not even the most accurate way of tracking “how we all did.” It’s very likely that we did even worse than these figures suggest, if you break the income groups into five different tiers instead of one “averaged” tier.) It’s not just the red states that are down, it’s down across the boards.

But it’s the red state numbers and voters that bug me. What have the rank-and-file Republicans been voting *for,* all these years? Higher poverty and a cut in their own incomes? Why are some of these districts still “safe” for the Republicans, after the rise in income during the nineties and the fall in income in the last seven years?

They’re nuts, but maybe if we rub their noses in this they’ll get back on their medication and stop voting for corrupt hypocrites who cut their financial throats. Personally, I don’t mind if a guy wants to play footsie in the men’s room, so long as my income doesn’t get slashed by five per cent while he’s doing it.

Washington Post asks: Why Isn't Jenna Bush Serving In Iraq?

2007-08-26T22:27:00.000-05:00

Just kidding. The WaPost piece highlighted below does not ask why Jenna is not serving in Iraq. But the title of the diary is not a cheap attempt to draw readers, it is rather a cheap attempt to highlight what a crappy job the media is doing on holding war supporters’ feet to the fire on “why their kids aren’t going.”

The following column about Jenna Bush is by Robin Givhan, the Washington Post fashion reporter who gave the world an update on Hillary Clinton’s sexy neckline. This time Givhan is sharing her “deep thoughts” about “what Jenna means to us all.” Apparently Givhan shares a gene for “spiritual depth” with Lindsay Lohan.

Jenna Bush, Engaged in A Tricky Role

By Robin Givhan
Washington Post Staff Writer
Sunday, August 26, 2007; Page M01

Do not be fooled by Jenna Bush.

She has wrapped herself in the golden glow of celebrity. But she is something else entirely.

For almost seven years, the blond Bush twin has reveled in the trappings associated with Hollywood starlets -- from wearing made-to-order designer clothes to smiling brightly from the glossy pages of a Vogue photo spread. She has walked red carpets and swanned past velvet ropes. Like so many celebrities, she has taken on a cause -- education -- and is using her fame to stir interest and attract media attention to an upcoming book tour. She has indulged in the kind of naughty behavior that paints her as human but not necessarily in need of an intervention. As she said onstage at the 2004 Republican convention, in a scripted introduction of her mother that had all the awkward, self-deprecating humor of an Oscar segue: She and her twin, Barbara, had misbehaved when they were "young and irresponsible." Who couldn't relate to that?

(Really, who couldn’t? Even a combat veteran in Walter Reed because one of his legs got blown off could probably manage a sly, empathetic chuckle at the hi-jinx of these young beautiful impetuous twins...if he was on the right medication...)

Jenna even had a moment of public exasperation with the media -- her own version of a modest paparazzi meltdown. She stuck her tongue out at the press corps from behind the gray windows of the presidential limousine while campaigning with her father. It was the non-gustatory equivalent of Hugh Grant hurling baked beans at a photographer.

(Well, how about that? That is news. The Hugh Grant reference made me keep on reading:)

Like a lot of celebrities, 25-year-old Jenna likes to have her fame when it's convenient and advantageous. And mostly she has. Celebrities have their double-wide bodyguards and fierce mama-bear publicists to manage their image. The president's daughter has the Secret Service and the impenetrable silence of the first lady's press office. Unless bad behavior turned up on the police blotter, it was not likely to be featured on "Access Hollywood."

The role of "celebrity" is easy to play. Selflessness and hard work are not requirements. The rules are simple. Dress well, smile for the cameras, and occasionally make an appearance at an artfully managed photo op.

(Meanwhile, here are the updated casualty figures from the latest suicide bombing—whoops, too late for that, back to Jenna:)

In some ways, the glare of fame has distracted us from the truth. As the president's daughter, Jenna isn't a celebrity. She's a symbol, and that's a far more cumbersome role.

(Yup. Being a symbol is as cumbersome as wearing seventy pounds of body armor and Kevlar helmet and carrying a machine gun through the streets of Baghdad. Britney Spears will tell you the same thing—the pressure, the pressure—the kids who volunteered for combat don’t how lucky they are compared to Jenna and Barb...)

...But the engagement is different. It is weighted with the baggage of family, tradition and America's misty-eyed habit of trying to cast the first family as a narrowly defined version of the Ideal Family -- that deeply ingrained fantasy of well-behaved kids, nurturing mother and God-fearing father.

The White House feeds that desire when it releases the president's menu for Thanksgiving dinner, for instance. (Consider the controversy if the president shunned good ol' turkey and opted for Tofurkey.) ...

(Christ, yes, that would set off a shit-storm of controversy among the soldiers who patrol Sadr City every night. Well, maybe not there, but you’d get miles of ink out of that Tofurkey thing from deep thinkers in the print media...)

...The wedding -- and everyone presumes one will follow the engagement -- would be much less complicated if Jenna could just have a celebrity blowout instead of symbolic nuptials. Celebrity weddings can be overwrought, overpriced and tacky. But just how indulgent a bride can Jenna be in wartime? Celebrity wedding dresses are assumed to be couture, not made in America. The wedding favors can be Chinese imports and no one will care...

Now this kind of coverage might seem fatuous to you, if you’re aware that there’s a war on. But Givhan’s reporting does raise a very important issue: Why does the WaPost allow Givhan regular space for this, the most stupid-ass sort of news commentary?

I mean, what we’ve got here is some kind of news analysis through the prism of “People” or “Us” magazine—politicians and their kin as pop celebrities, with focus on what they’re wearing and where they’ve been seen and how they’ve been handling the paparazzi and “what that all MEANS and why that is so very, very important to all of us.” A WaPost experiment in making politics more “fun”, more “dishy”? Won’t we get a positive response if we treat the politicians the way we treat the entertainment/fashionista people?

Well, vapidity does draw attention. And Givhans does touch on a salient, newsworthy point regarding candidates’ children, further on down the piece:

...During the campaign, if the children are old enough, they can become surrogates for the candidate. The five fresh-faced Romney boys blog for father Mitt. But they have also become Exhibit A for those who want to make an issue of whose children are serving in Iraq and whose are not...

Well, yeah, there are a lot of Americans who would want to make an issue of that—so why doesn’t the WaPost write about that, instead of this “paparazzi” crap? Why not do a regular series of eight hundred word pieces on all the candidates’ children who are of age to do military service, and have them explain why they’re not going?

Now *that* would be *dishy*; deep-dish indeed. If you want to get really *dishy.*

You won't want to miss... "The Bridges of Hennepin County"

2007-08-23T21:03:00.001-05:00

Tonight's illustration comes to us from the lovely and talented Jason Gorksi, a commercial artist who lives and works in Minnesota:

Duh: Liberals Read More Books Than Conservatives

2007-08-22T22:55:00.000-05:00

You see these books by Coulter and O'Reilly and Hannity at the top of bestseller lists sometimes and you get disgusted and scared, right? Well, it turns out that that's really all these conservatives are reading.

Which is kind of scary, I guess. But I'm willing to bet that the sales are due to the heavy promotion on conservative talk radio--free advertising that's the conservative equivalent of the Oprah Book Club...

Book Chief: Conservatives Want Slogans

Aug 21, 2:40 PM EDT
By ALAN FRAM

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Liberals read more books than conservatives. The head of the book publishing industry's trade group says she knows why - and there's little flattering about conservative readers in her explanation.

"The Karl Roves of the world have built a generation that just wants a couple slogans: 'No, don't raise my taxes, no new taxes,'" Pat Schroeder, president of the American Association of Publishers, said in a recent interview. "It's pretty hard to write a book saying, 'No new taxes, no new taxes, no new taxes' on every page."

(No it isn’t. A book with “no new taxes, no new taxes, no new taxes” on every page would be dead easy to write. Even Gertrude Stein could do it.

And it would sell pretty well; better than anything else I ever wrote. You could market it at local GOP events as a kind of novelty gift. Give it some fancy title like “The Way Things Oughta Be,” or “The Secret Of Good Government.” They’d buy it. Anyway:)

Schroeder, who as a Colorado Democrat was once one of Congress' most liberal House members, was responding to an Associated Press-Ipsos poll that found people who consider themselves liberals are more prodigious book readers than conservatives...

(Now there’s another shocker for you. Conservative books regularly appear at the top of the bestseller lists, but the conservatives who buy them hardly read anything else. Who could have predicted that?)

...The book publishing industry is predominantly liberal, though conservative books by authors like former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, R-Ga., and pundit Ann Coulter have been best sellers in recent years...

(Well, that’s because Gingrich and Coulter’s track record on giving out political, military, economic, and foreign and domestic policy advice is so good. There’s always a market for thinkers with a track record like that.)

...White House spokesman Tony Fratto said Schroeder was "confusing volume with quality" with her remarks.

(Yeah. That’s right. I pity the liberals who read some thick piece of wordy junk like “Moby Dick” or “Anna Karenina” instead of Sean Hannity’s pithy latest. You can learn more about the human condition from Bill O’Reilly’s bumper sticker hatred than all of Tolstoy, and that’s the sad truth. Of course, to learn anything from the O’Reilly and Hannity stuff you have to read it critically, and the people who buy those books flat-out refuse to do that...)

"As head of a book publishing association, she probably shouldn't malign any readers," said Mary Matalin, a GOP strategist...

(Why not? It’s not like the conservatives will ever read it.)

...Matalin (who oversees a line of books by conservative authors) said conservatives and others aren't necessarily reading less, but are getting more information online and from magazines...

(True, true...the “Why liberals hate America” Website, the “Country Club Economics on a Cocktail Napkin Update,”the “Rush O’Hannity Home Page,” the “Evolution is a Lie” Interactive Online Video Game Page, the “Official “END TIMES ARE HERE” newsletter...)

...

Among those who had read at least one book, liberals typically read nine books in the year, with half reading more than that and half less. Conservatives typically read eight...

(But four of those eight books were pop-up books, another three were by Anne Coulter, and the remaining one came with a package of crayons included. And all of the authors read by conservatives last year supported a surge in Iraq. So maybe they should stop reading altogether. Garbage in, garbage out, as Tolstoy used to say.)

House Democrat Does Mean Thing

2007-08-22T00:22:00.000-05:00

I always write nasty stuff about Republicans and conservatives here, so I'm putting up this diary to show I'm broad-minded:

Lawmaker Is Accused Of Assault At Dulles

Calif. Congressman Faces Charge in Baggage Dispute

By Jonathan Mummolo
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, August 21, 2007; Page B01

U.S. Rep. Bob Filner (D-Calif.) has been charged with misdemeanor assault and battery for allegedly pushing an airline employee at Dulles International Airport on Sunday during a dispute over baggage, authorities said.

Filner, who represents the San Diego area, "attempted to enter an area authorized for airline employees only" while in the United Airlines baggage claim office and "pushed aside the employee's outstretched arm and refused to leave the area when asked by an airline employee," according to a Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority police statement.

(I put up Filner's picture below, which ran with the news story. He looks real mean in the picture:) (continued)

(Doesn't he look mean, in that picture? "Let me by, you low-rent security flunky, I'm a damn Congressman! Here, I'll give you a good shove, that'll teach you--ooo--Ha! Gotcha. Right in the arm, too.")

The female airline employee, whom police did not identify, appeared before a Loudoun County magistrate that evening, and Filner was charged with assault and battery. If convicted, Filner faces up to 12 months in jail and up to a $2,500 fine under Virginia law.

Police said the employee did not require medical attention.

(Yeah, well...)

Filner disputed the account in a brief statement issued by his office. "Congressman Bob Filner is on his way to Iraq, visiting our troops, and will have a full statement when he returns. Suffice it to say now, that the story that has appeared in the press is factually incorrect -- and the charges are ridiculous," the statement says.

(I don't care. He still looks mean, to me. Stop picking on women, Congressman Filner.)

United Airlines also released a statement, saying: "United regrets that the customer experienced a delay in claiming his bag..."

(If only we *were* allowed to give airline employees a good hard shot in the arm when they took too long to get us our luggage. But at least the guy carries his own bags. And he's sixty-four years old. Seems like a pretty responsible guy, otherwise:)

Filner, 64, was first elected to the House in 1992 and is the chairman of the Committee on Veterans' Affairs. He has advocated for veterans' benefits for Filipinos who fought with U.S. forces in World War II. He also has introduced the Military Environmental Responsibility Act, which would require all U.S. defense-related agencies to fully comply with federal and state environmental laws.

(But he looks mean, and he was mean to an airline employee, so I guess that other stuff doesn't count now.)

Pentagon paid $1 million to ship two 19 cent washers

2007-08-20T15:26:00.000-05:00

HA! I'm back. We had a lot of stuff to do on Congresswoman Bachmann last week. But I'm back and have I got a story for YOU!:

Pentagon Paid $998,798 to Ship Two 19-Cent Washers
Tony Capaccio
Thu Aug 16, 3:16 PM ET

Aug. 16 (Bloomberg) -- A small South Carolina parts supplier collected about $20.5 million over six years from the Pentagon for fraudulent shipping costs, including $998,798 for sending two 19-cent washers to an Army base in Texas, U.S. officials said.

The company also billed and was paid $455,009 to ship three machine screws costing $1.31 each to Marines in Habbaniyah, Iraq, and $293,451 to ship an 89-cent split washer to Patrick Air Force Base in Cape Canaveral, Florida, Pentagon records show.

The owners of C&D Distributors in Lexington, South Carolina -- twin sisters -- exploited a flaw in an automated Defense Department purchasing system: bills for shipping to combat areas or U.S. bases that were labeled ``priority'' were usually paid automatically, said Cynthia Stroot, a Pentagon investigator.

(For sheer, unadulterated BALLS, I have to give this private sector contractor the prize.

C&D and two of its officials were barred in December from receiving federal contracts. Today, a federal judge in Columbia, South Carolina, accepted the guilty plea of the company and one sister, Charlene Corley, to one count of conspiracy to commit wire fraud and one count of conspiracy to launder money, Assistant U.S. Attorney Kevin McDonald said.

Corley, 46, was fined $750,000. She faces a maximum prison sentence of 20 years on each count and will be sentenced soon, McDonald said in a telephone interview from Columbia. (The Pentagon investigator) said (Corley's) sibling died last year.

(My condolences.)

Corley didn't immediately return a phone message left on her answering machine at her office in Lexington...

(She's still counting her money. "Let the damn phone ring... eighteen million and one, eighteen million and two (hums "God Bless A-mericaaaa...")

`Got More Aggressive'

C&D's fraudulent billing started in 2000, Stroot, the Defense Criminal Investigative Service's chief agent in Raleigh, North Carolina, said in an interview. ``As time went on they got more aggressive in the amounts they put in.''

(Wow! And it took 'em seven years to catch 'em. Why rob banks, when you can do this?)

The price the military paid for each item shipped rarely reached $100 and totaled just $68,000 over the six years in contrast to the $20.5 million paid for shipping, she said

.

(Twenty million dollars for shipping? That's the first thing they tell you when you bid on Ebay, "you gotta watch those shipping charges, that's how the sellers get ya." How do they rationalize shipping charges like that? "Let's see...They want this humvee evergreen air-freshener shipped "Next Day Priority Air"...Okay, that'll run ya...oh, what the hell, it Christmas, let's call it $293,000..." Where are those guys who talk up the virtues of the private sector when you need 'em?)

``The majority, if not all of these parts, were going to high-priority, conflict areas -- that's why they got paid,'' Stroot said. If the item was earmarked ``priority,'' destined for the military in Iraq, Afghanistan or certain other locations, ``there was no oversight.''

Scheme Detected

The scheme unraveled in September after a purchasing agent noticed a bill for shipping two more 19-cent washers: $969,000.

(I'd have liked to have been a fly on the wall for that moment. "Hey, what's this--$998,798? For two little metal washers? That can't be right. Must be something special about 'em...")

That order was rejected and a review turned up the $998,798 payment earlier that month for shipping two 19-cent washers to Fort Bliss, Texas, Stroot said.

("Nope, that's right...here's the exact same order from two weeks ago...and we paid it...hmmm...and it doesn't include the price of the washers themselves... which comes to (hits adding machine) thirty-eight cents, for both... Jeez, I only make thirty thou a year auditing these bills for the government...maybe I should get into this 'metal washer shipping' business thing, it must be some kind of frikkin' gold mine...")

...``C&D was a rogue contractor,'' (Pentagon investigator) Stroot said. While other questionable billing has been uncovered, nothing came close to C&D's, she said. The next-highest billing for questionable costs totaled $2 million, she said.

(That was for FedEx'ing that "Bush/Cheney" bumpersticker to Kabul.)

Stroot said the Pentagon hopes to recoup most of the $20.5 million by auctioning homes, beach property, jewelry and ``high- end automobiles'' that the sisters spent the money on.

``They took a lot of vacations,'' she said.

(Yeah, but in their defense--some of those parts are hard to get these days. I mean, $998,000 to ship two 19 cent metal washers to Texas--sure, that sounds like a lot, but the alternative is, you send some guy off the base to go out and get the part in town, and he's got carfare, you've got to buy him lunch, and then you get down to Ace Hardware and maybe they've got the washer and maybe they don't, the kid forgot to bring the cracked old washers with him and the old guy in the hardware store has to guess, kind of "eye-ball it..." And then if it's wrong, you got to send the kid back, two or three times. It's a royal pain in the ass.)

Iowa: Romney spends millions, beats a bunch of daffodils

2007-08-13T02:19:00.000-05:00

Wow! The non-binding Iowa straw poll is over. National news! And what a pressure cooker that was, ladies and gentlemen! Mitt Romney, spending like hell to beat a bunch of competitors who had absolutely no chance of defeating him. I don’t know about you, but I’d much rather the media covered a real “nail biter” like *that*, than some boring old story about America’s decaying infrastructure.

Romney Wins Iowa's GOP Poll

Victory Highlights Strategy Difference With Giuliani

By Dan Balz and Michael D. Shear
Washington Post Staff Writers
Sunday, August 12, 2007; Page A01

AMES, Iowa, Aug. 11 -- With a convincing victory in the Republican straw poll here Saturday, former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney vaulted himself into the next phase of a presidential nomination battle pitting his traditional early-state strategy against a more unorthodox approach by national front-runner Rudolph W. Giuliani...

... Romney's victory came against a relatively weak field that did not include Giuliani, Sen. John McCain of Arizona or former senator Fred D. Thompson of Tennessee, and after he heavily outspent those who did compete. Still, the result, with Romney easily outpacing his rivals with 32 percent of the vote, helps elevate him from relative obscurity six months ago to the top tier of the GOP field -- despite his relatively low standing in national polls.

Gee: it’s the Iowa straw primary and Romney’s the *only* major GOP candidate to show up, he spends a jillion everywhere in the state, and all to beat a bunch of daisies and daffodil competitors with elfin-sounding names like “Brownback” and “Huckabee.”

And he does beat them! Corking good story, there, press corps! I was on the edge of my seat the whole time. That’s the stuff to give the troops; “Romney spends millions to cut down a field of daisy opponents who never stood a chance of winning the GOP nomination; McCain, Giuliani and Thompson don’t bother to show up.”

Are there any pictures of Romney beating the hell out of a daffodil? Boy, I’d like to see that. When I think of all the money the press spent to send correspondents out to Iowa to watch this contest between Romney and this dandelion opposition...Well, it’s not a complete waste of money; there’s always the “glam” factor that a visit to Iowa represents to these young reporters and news crews...it is, after all, Iowa; they’ll always be able to say they “were there, when it happened...when no serious contender except Romney showed up, and Romney armed only with tens of millions of dollars, took on a field of daffodils, dandelions and daisies with elfin names like Brownback and Huckabee and Bilbo and Samwise—and did Romney chop those little muthafuckahs down! You should have seen him, spending that money to beat that dandelion! He was merciless! He strapped that daisy to the roof of his car and took off, top speed!”

They’ll always have their memories. So it’s not a complete waste of the public attention span.

Young Republican leader will BJ you while you sleep

2007-08-09T00:19:00.000-05:00

Dateline: Indiana

The Clark County Sheriff’s Department on Friday began investigating (Glenn Murphy, chairman of the Clark County Republican Party) for alleged criminal deviate conduct — potentially a class B felony — after speaking with a 22-year-old man who claimed that on July 31, Murphy performed an unwanted sex act on him while the man slept in a relative’s Jeffersonville home.

He was allegedly caught blowing a man in his sleep! And it's not the first time he's been accused of this!

UPDATE: Murphy resigns political posts; cooperating with police in apparent criminal investigation

Party chair says in letter resignation was for business reasons
By LARRY THOMAS
Larry.Thomas@newsandtribune.com

The chairman of the Clark County Republican Party — who last month was elected president of the Young Republican National Federation — has resigned both posts, apparently in the wake of a criminal investigation.

On Tuesday afternoon, Glenn Murphy Jr. e-mailed media outlets a letter announcing his resignation from both positions, citing an unexpected business opportunity that would prohibit him from holding a partisan political office.

(An unexpected BUSINESS OPPORTUNITY? He's gonna start doing this FOR MONEY?)

However, the Clark County Sheriff’s Department on Friday began investigating Murphy for alleged criminal deviate conduct — potentially a class B felony — after speaking with a 22-year-old man who claimed that on July 31, Murphy performed an unwanted sex act on him while the man slept in a relative’s Jeffersonville home.

Murphy, a 33-year-old Utica resident, has not been arrested nor has he been charged with a crime. A copy of the police report has been posted on an politically focused Internet site and another was provided to a reporter with The Evening News and The Tribune on Tuesday evening.

Larry Wilder, Murphy’s attorney, said Murphy is cooperating with police and Prosecutor Steve Stewart. Wilder said Murphy contends the sex act was consensual.

A reporter was unable to reach Stewart on Tuesday evening.

In 1998, a 21-year-old male filed a similar report with Clarksville police claiming Murphy attempted to perform a sex act on him while he was sleeping. Charges were never filed in that case.

(OH-HO, so this was NO ACCIDENT, eh? This is some kind of POLICY in the GOP these days, eh? "Join the GOP, the political party that blows you while you sleep." ANYTHING to rebuild the party after last year's Dem tsunami.)

My God, can you imagine waking up to that? You're over a friend's house, you're talking politics with the new president of the Young Republicans, he's talking to about some boring policy thing, making you feel all sleepy--you crash out on the couch as he sings you a lullaby...

You're dreaming about Fred Thompson beating Hillary Clinton-- "Oooo, something feels good...JESUS CHRIST! What are you DOING!" "No, no, it wasn't me, it, it was the dog! Don't call the media! This is all a part of your dream, you're getting sleepy again, verrrry sleeeepy..." "HELP! POLICE!"

GOP partisan reaction to Minneapolis bridge tragedy

2007-08-07T22:59:00.000-05:00

The national GOP’s “first response” in Congress to the Minneapolis bridge tragedy was horrible.

I looked at the roll call votes in Congress on Friday, August 3rd. I write for a local Minnesota blog; Dump Michele Bachmann. Bachmann's a conservative GOP congresswoman; we were tracking her votes on the bridge emergency. Two Minnesota GOP Congressmen—John Kline and Michele Bachmann—voted to adjourn Congress on Friday before emergency funds could be voted to their state. But Bachmann’s vote aside, I was disgusted by what I found out. It turns out that this isn’t just a local partisan problem, it’s a national partisan problem.

A bridge collapses on a busy highway in Minnesota; people are dead and missing, divers are feeling their way through the murky waters of the Mississippi looking for bodies and vehicles—and almost *all* Republicans voted to adjourn without voting on emergency funds; funds that the President had already promised.

One hundred and seventy-nine Republicans voted to adjourn. Fifteen Republicans voted not to adjourn. Eight Republicans did not vote.

Two hundred and twenty two Democrats had voted not to adjourn. One Democrat did vote to adjourn. Seven Democrats did not vote.

Here is a link to that vote, if you want to see it: http://tinyurl.com/3cos7s

The Democrats won, and the motion to adjourn at that time failed. Congress stayed in session the rest of the day and MN Rep. Oberstar (a Democrat) saw his proposal to fund the bridge recovery was finally voted on and approved.

Local Minnesota GOP bloggers were outraged—not because not because the GOP led a partisan effort to adjourn without a vote on the funds, not because local GOP congressional representatives Michele Bachmann and John Kline joined in the motion to adjourn—but because the St. Cloud Times *reported* those facts in their story on the emergency funds. (To his credit, GOP congressman Jim Ramstad did not join in his party’s vote to adjourn.)

It’s not that the GOP and our local Republicans voted against the emergency funds. They all supported the emergency funds.

The problem was that the GOP did their partisan vote to adjourn on Friday without a vote on the bridge emergency funding. The message the GOP congressmen sent to Minnesota with that vote is: “We don’t care that it’s an emergency, we don’t care that they’re still searching the river for bodies—it’s Friday, and we really hate the fact that Nancy Pelosi is making us work five days a week instead of three now, and we always have this partisan vote to adjourn. That’s what we Republicans do, American tragedy or no American tragedy. We simply must play our brainless partisan games; we don’t want to be here, emergency or no.”

And this during a week when other state politicians in both parties were doing their damnedest not to be partisan. We even had conservative “no new taxes” Governor Tim Pawlenty cooperating to Mayor Ryback. And we even see conservative “no new taxes” Governor Pawlenty supporting a Dem proposal for tax hike on gas to repair state infrastructure.

And the response of one hundred and seventy-nine Republicans in Congress are doing this pointless partisan roll call vote, mindlessly voting to adjourn without emergency funding--while the recovery and rescue effort is still under way?

Gonzales: "Duh--I guess I lied again..."

2007-08-05T17:14:00.000-05:00

Gonzales Now Says Top Aides Got Political Briefings

By Dan Eggen and Paul Kane
Washington Post Staff Writer and washingtonpost.com Staff Writer
Saturday, August 4, 2007; Page A05

Justice Department officials attended at least a dozen political briefings at the White House since 2001, including some meetings led by Karl Rove, President Bush's chief political adviser, and others that were focused on election trends prior to the 2006 midterm contest, according to documents released yesterday.

(So what. Big deal. Karl Rove was telling the nation’s chief law enforcement officials that they should prosecute Democrats and not Republicans. So what, who cares. There’s no scandal here, come on...)

Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales told the Senate Judiciary Committee last week that he did not believe that senior Justice Department officials had attended such briefings. But he clarified his testimony yesterday in a letter to Congress, emphasizing that the briefings were not held at the agency's offices...

(That’s right. They weren’t held at the Justice Department offices—they were held in the WHITE HOUSE—*very* important distinction they’re making there, very important.)

...A list of briefings for Justice officials was included with a letter sent yesterday from Gonzales to Sen. Patrick J. Leahy (D-Vt.), chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, which sought to clarify and correct parts of his testimony before the panel on July 24...

At the July 24 hearing, Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (D-Mass.) asked Gonzales whether any of "the leadership of the Department of Justice" had participated in political briefings, pointing to examples involving employees from the State Department, Peace Corps and U.S. Agency for International Development.

"Not that I'm aware of. . . . I don't believe so, sir," Gonzales said.

(Well, then that’s that, then. If Gonzales says there were no political briefings, then we know that there were no political briefings. If Al Gonzales, being investigated month after month after month for lying to Congress, says that there were no political briefings for the Justice Department by the White House, we can be sure there weren’t—because Al and everybody in his office have been going over the records of the Justice Department’s political activism for months now—so we can be sure that if Al says there were no political briefings by Rove or the White House for Justice Department officials, he’s telling the truth this time, because he doesn’t want to get caught lying again if it later comes out that there were in fact a bunch of political briefing for Justice Department officials, we know he’s telling the--)

Justice officials attended 12 political briefings at the White House, and another held at the Department of Agriculture, from 2001 to 2006, according to the list sent to Waxman. At least five were led by Rove or included presentations by him.

(Oh, SHIT! God damn. How about that. He lied again. Who would have thought? And WTF is this, a political briefing for Justice Department officials at the Department of AGRICULTURE? WTF is THAT all about? “Well, we’re not allowed to receive political briefings at the Justice Department.” “So you took the Justice officials over to the Department of *Agriculture* to get a political briefing?” “Yeah. What—is that wrong?” “You think that’s observing the law, do you?” “Well...I mean...We hopped in a car, they took us over to Agriculture...we had some fresh milk, and Rove told us that we ought to disenfranchise more voters. It’s a very nice place to have a political briefing. What are you looking at me like that for?”

The list compiled by Justice did not include many details about the kind of information presented at those briefings...

(Rove:“Okay, now, fellers, now pay attention. Now how many of you are NOT willing to help us criminalize the Democratic Party? Okay, that’s a good show of hands, good, good...And many of you want to KEEP your jobs?”)

One March 2001 meeting included a "political update" from Rove and a discussion on "how we can work together to advance the President's agenda."

(“How We Can Work Together To Advance The President’s Agenda”--That’s a much better name for the briefing than the original choice: “How We Can Use Our Office to Terrorize the Democratic Party and Disenfranchise More American Voters.”)

Political briefings by White House aides have become a political flashpoint on Capitol Hill in recent months. Waxman is investigating whether the meetings violated the Hatch Act, which prohibits federal employees from engaging in partisan political activity on federal government property.

(Boy, that guy Waxman sure has a bug up his ass, doesn’t he? (mimicking) “I’m gonna investigate whether you were engaging in partisan political activity on federal property, I’m gonna get you for violating the Hatch Act, nyeh-nyeh-nyeh, I’m gonna tell your mommies...” Why don’t you be a man, Waxman. Go fix a traffic ticket or something.)

The White House has denied that the briefings were improper, saying they were merely informational meetings for political appointees.

(Rove: “This is strictly an informational meeting, folks. So I’d like to *inform* you that any one of you who won’t play ball, is gonna be out on his or her ass. Comprendo?”)

Sara M. Taylor, the former White House political director, and J. Scott Jennings, the current deputy political director, have testified that the briefings were designed to thank such appointees for their service to the president.

(Well who could possibly object to that—all that Taylor and Jennings were doing was thanking these wonderful attorneys for--)

Other briefings given by Taylor and Jennings have included detailed PowerPoint presentations, including district-by-district analyses of critical House races.

(OH, SHIT! “Now you see, US attorneys, this race, right here, where I’m pointing with this laser pointer, is VERY important to us. What we want you to do is get some dirt on the Democrat in this election, because it’s gonna be close. So take a couple of guys off the Mafia, drug-dealing thing and put them on the Dem contender in this race here—“ “Excuse me, but isn’t that political?” “Who let that ya-hoo in here? Call security.”)

...Meanwhile, Congress has questioned the role that political considerations played inside Gonzales's Justice Department in both the firing of nine U.S. attorneys last year and in the hiring of career employees, the latter an apparent violation of civil-service laws.

(“Do you promise to support George W. Bush, the Republican Party and all its works?” “Yes, I do.” “Congratulation. Job for life, there you go.” “Great! Hey, is this legal?” “Of course it’s legal, dumbass! Why do you think they call us the JUSTICE Department. Duh!”)

Minnesota Bridge Disaster: White House denounces finger-pointing while pointing finger

2007-08-04T18:14:00.000-05:00

The White House on the Minneapolis bridge disaster: "This is not the time for finger-pointing, but if it was, we'd point the finger straight at the Minnesota state government."

Aug 3, 5:07 PM EDT
Analysis: New Try for Bush As Comforter

By TOM RAUM

WASHINGTON (AP) -- In times of disaster, presidents are expected to be comforters-in-chief, yet since Hurricane Katrina President Bush has a blemished record in that role.

He reacted quickly to the Minnesota bridge collapse by scheduling a visit, but only after an awkward initial reaction in which the White House emphasized that fixing structural deficiencies was the state's responsibility...

What in the world is the AP writer talking about here? What was the White House’s initial response to the Minneapolis disaster? To learn the answer to that, we have to go to this article, published the day after news of the disaster was broadcast on television:

Aug 2, 5:07 PM EDT
Bush Offers Help Restoring Fallen Bridge

By DEB RIECHMANN
WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Bush administration said Thursday that structural deficiencies were found two years ago in the highway bridge that collapsed in Minneapolis and it was the state's responsibility to fix them. ("Finger!" "Yes, sir?" "Point!" "Yes, sir! Right away, sir!")

...The Interstate 35W span rated 50 on a scale of 100 for structural stability and was classified as "structurally deficient," which means that there were features of the bridge that needed to be repaired or replaced.

"It doesn't mean that the bridge is unsafe," Transportation Secretary Mary Peters told The Associated Press after touring the site. (Wow! I was looking at the same bridge she was, I saw it on TV, and it looked pretty unsafe to me! I'm not the Transportation Secretary, but I think that a bridge that has cars and trucks plunging off of it into the Mississippi means the bridge is unsafe, no matter what fucking rating they gave it--so, agree to disagree, I guess.)"It could carry a rating of 50 for a number of years without getting substantially worse." (I see. So what you're saying is--we shouldn't focus so much on "that one bad day"...)

...Earlier, at the White House, press secretary Tony Snow said while the inspection didn't indicate the bridge was at risk of failing, "if an inspection report identifies deficiencies, the state is responsible for taking corrective actions..."

(See how the spin reflex at the White House kicks in instantly, even when allowing the spin reflex to engage makes them look like politicized assholes? They’re not even done pulling the bodies out and the White House sends out its first response team--and its first response is to tell the public “it’s not our fault, it’s their fault.” At the same time, media and bloggers here in Minnesota are getting yelled at for “politicizing” the disaster—as if no one in the Democratic Party had proposed significant repairs to infrastructure BEFORE that bridge collapsed.)

Ronald Reagan, king of photo ops, comes to mind. He knew how to spin a disaster; he could turn someone else’s tragedy into political gold, for his own benefit. Remember how he and Nancy comforted the families of the Challenger disaster in 1986? Just imagine if Reagan had handled that tragedy the same way the Bush White House is handling this one:

Aide: Mr. President, these are the surviving family members of the Challenger crew.
Reagan: Thank you. (to families) First—and let’s make this crystal clear from the get-go-It’s not my fault.
Widow: Mr. President—
Reagan: Are you trying to say that it IS my fault? That’s really low, you know that? Now is not the time for finger-pointing. Are you really so insensitive to this tragedy that you’re jumping right into “the blame game”?
Widow: Why, no, Mr. President, I was just going to say that—
Reagan: It was NASA's fault! NOT MINE! I don’t have anything to do with the day-to-day operations of NASA, you know as well as I do that that’s not our responsibility at the White House—
Widow: I know that—
Reagan: You better know it! We just sign the checks, I think it’s ridiculous for you to insinuate that I should have been down there on the launch platform, checking the seals on O-rings or whatever—
Widow: (crying) Please, Mr. President—I know that you don’t bear any responsibility for this awful tragedy—
Reagan: (pretending to be deaf) Come again?
Widow: I said “I know you don’t bear any responsibility for this awful disaster—“
Reagan: (to cameraman) Did you get that? Good, we’ll edit out the rest, later. (moves on, sees a young boy) Well, young man, you look awfully upset about something.
Boy: M-m-y father just died—
Reagan: And that’s my fault? That’s NASA’s department, son. It’s not a White House responsibility.
Boy: But they said you might come to the cemetery and—
Reagan: Cemetery? What are you trying to pull here, kid? Are you trying to trying to make some bizarre connection between this and my visit to Bitburg to lay a wreath on the grave of those Nazis?
Widow: You’re scaring him!
Nancy: Take it down a notch, Ronnie—
Reagan: Get off my goddam back, Mommy! I’m not gonna let some punk drag Nazis into this incident. That’s a cheap shot, saying I’m pro-Nazi. (to rest of the families) What is wrong with you people? Don’t you have any feelings? You’ve just lost your husbands and fathers and I don’t know what else, and here you are trying to spin this into some kind of anti-White House, “down with conservatives” thing!
(The families burst into sobs and uncontrollable tears.)
Reagan: That’s right, be ashamed of yourselves! You should be. I was gonna give each and every one of you a hug and say some comforting words, but these two (points to Widow and Boy) have ruined it for everyone. C’mon, Nancy, let’s go. I don’t have to stay here and take this shit. (to Aide) And you—tell the Press Secretary to announce that our official response to this disaster is “this was not our fault, it’s someone else’s fault but not ours.”

Medical Breakthrough Offers Hope For Rotten Bush Approval Ratings

2007-08-02T00:46:00.001-05:00

A new breakthrough in medical science offers a solution to the President’s “below dogshit” poll numbers:

Boston hospital offers face transplants

Mon Jul 30, 5:15 AM ET

BOSTON - Brigham and Women's Hospital has given a surgical team permission to perform partial face transplants to certain disfigured patients, a newspaper reported.

(A meeting at the White House:)

Karl: Okay, Dick. It's like this. It's a new procedure. We have limited choices. What I'm showing you today is what we can get, today.
Dick: Are you sure this is necessary, Karl?
Karl: Dick--have you seen our numbers this week? We're even starting see some Republicans saying they don't believe Saddam did 9/11 anymore. Our backs are against the wall.
Dick: It's just that I don't know if we can sell him on this--surgery...
Karl: I'll sell him on it, don't worry. I'll tell him the doctors want to look for more polyps or something. When he wakes up he'll never know what hit him.
Dick: (sighs) Okay then, let's see what the options are.
Karl: Okay. Now what I got here are a bunch of before and after shots. Before...

Dick: Oh, God, put that away, I see that every day--
Karl: I know I know, but look-- here's the "after" shot:

Dick: mmm... I don't think so...
Karl: Oh come on, how can you not like that? She's one of the most beautiful women in the world! Everybody loves her! And she's crazy about kids...
Dick: Karl--I just told him to veto health care for poor children. That's not the way we want to go. What else have you got?
Karl: Okay, okay. Here's "Before":

Dick: Yeah, I remember that one. Praying. He's saying "I am the "Pray-er," so what?
Karl: But here's "After:"

Dick: Hmm. Isn't she dead?
Karl: I don't know. Does it matter? Everybody's crazy about her. How can you get more "compassionate conservative" than this?
Dick: I don't know... the "do-rag" thing she's got on...that's kind of "Palestinian"-looking, isn't it?
Karl: Naah! It's Catholic. This one would go over real big with east coast Catholics, Dick, and we'd love to get them back--
Dick: My God, don't remind me, we're even losing pro-lifers these days. Okay, look we'll come back to that one, what else have you got?
Karl: Now this one, I'll guarantee you're gonna love. Here's the "Before" shot--

Dick: Looks like he's describing his brain.
(Laughter)
Karl: But get this, here's the "After:"

Karl: Now come on, Dick, you're not gonna tell me you don't like this one. James Bond, the Sean Connery James Bond, inspires incredible confidence, "this is the man who can get the job done." And it's the Connery Bond--not this Roger Moore, Pierce Brosnan shit--
Dick: Wouldn't this be expensive? I mean, we don't want trouble with the James Bond franchise, they got money, we already have everybody else in the world pissed at us--
Karl: It's not cheap but it's do-able. We could get him looking like Timothy Dalton or George Lazenby for peanuts, if you want to go that route--
Dick: I don't think this one will work. We get him looking like that, people are gonna start asking us to send HIM to Baghdad to fix things up--and if we do that, BINGO! We got World War III on our hands.
Karl: I guess you got a point. Too bad; Laura loved it.
Dick: I bet she did. What else...
Karl: Okay. This is our last shot. If you don't like this one, I don't know what to tell you. The "Before" picture:

Dick: Okay...
Karl: And here's "After:"

Dick: Oh my God...
Karl: Now give it a chance, Dick, don't just shoot everything down, I'm just showing you what's available.
Dick: A big white beard?
Karl: The doctors say the beard's the easiest part to do. Look, Dick--the polls show that more Americans believe in THIS guy, than believe in Bush.
Dick: That's all the choices there are?
Karl: Well--they can do him up as "Clifford the Big Red Dog," but I knew you wouldn't go for that.
Dick: Jesus H. Christ...this administration...it's killing me...alright...let's see the Mother Theresa shot again...

Bush Health Official: The Public Must NOT Learn The Facts

2007-07-30T23:55:00.000-05:00

We got yet another Michael “Brownie, you’re doin’ a heckuva job” Brown type in the Bush administration. This time it’s a never-qualified Bush political hack killing official reporting of the Surgeon General.

Bush Aide Blocked Report

By Christopher Lee and Marc Kaufman
Washington Post Staff Writers
Sunday, July 29, 2007; A01

A surgeon general's report in 2006 that called on Americans to help tackle global health problems has been kept from the public by a Bush political appointee without any background or expertise in medicine or public health, chiefly because the report did not promote the administration's policy accomplishments, according to current and former public health officials.

(Here is his picture, this is the guy without any background or expertise in medicine or public health who kept the surgeon general’s report from being released to the public:)

The report described the link between poverty and poor health, urged the U.S. government to help combat widespread diseases as a key aim of its foreign policy, and called on corporations to help improve health conditions in the countries where they operate. A copy of the report was obtained by The Washington Post.

Three people directly involved in its preparation said its publication was blocked by William R. Steiger, a specialist in education and a scholar of Latin American history whose family has long ties to President Bush and Vice President Cheney. Since 2001, Steiger has run the Office of Global Health Affairs in the Department of Health and Human Services.

(Here is how Steiger responded to the charge that he has no background at all in medicine or public health and that he got the job because he was a political hack who would suppress surgeon general reports if they didn’t puff the administration:)

...(Former Surgeon General Richard H. Carmona) told lawmakers that, as he fought to release the document, he was "called in and again admonished . . . via a senior official who said, 'You don't get it.' " He said a senior official told him that "this will be a political document, or it will not be released."

(Here is how the 37 year old Steiger looked when he told the Surgeon General that he did not "get it," that his report on health would not be released if he does not turn it into a pro-Bush political document.)

...After a long struggle that pitted top scientific and medical experts inside and outside the government against Steiger and his political bosses, Carmona refused to make the requested changes, according to the officials. Carmona engaged in similar fights over other public health reports, including an unpublished report on prison health. A few days before the end of his term as the nation's senior medical officer, he was abruptly told he would not be reappointed.

(In this picture, Steiger has just told Carmona that he will no longer be surgeon general. The press was calling Steiger for comment when this picture was being taken, but Steiger would not answer the phone. He just stared and smiled, and let the phone ring and ring and ring...)

...Steiger said that "political considerations" did not delay the report; "sloppy work, poor analysis, and lack of scientific rigor did." Asked about the report's handling, an HHS spokeswoman said Friday that it is still "under development."

("Mr. Steiger, how does your life experience and background--a Latin American studies degree-- qualify you to dismiss a serious study by the nation’s public health experts and call it “sloppy and lacking in scientific rigor?” Steiger's response:)

...The draft report itself, in language linking public health problems with violence and other social ills, says "we cannot overstate . . . that problems in remote parts of the globe can no longer be ignored. Diseases that Americans once read about as affecting people in regions . . . most of us would never visit are now capable of reaching us directly. The hunger, disease, and death resulting from poor food and nutrition create social and political instability . . . and that instability may spread to other nations as people migrate to survive."

(Here is Steiger reacting to the news that “diseases that Americans once read about as affecting people in regions . . . most of us would never visit are now capable of reaching us directly.” He looks like he’s okay with that, and even if he isn’t, he looks happy about the good job he did suppressing that finding.)

(The surgeon general’s report’s) underlying message is that disease and suffering do not respect political boundaries in an era of globalization and mass population movements.

("Mr. Steiger—don’t you think it’s important for the American people to be told that disease and suffering do not respect political boundaries in an era of globalization and mass population movements?" Steiger's response:)

...The report was compiled by government and private public-health experts from various organizations, including the National Institutes of Health, the Catholic Medical Mission Board and several universities.

("Mr. Steiger—don’t those public and private heath experts have more expertise than you do on health issues? How the hell can you, a silly little 37 year old jerkoff with a mere Latin American studies degree, dismiss the work of so many experts in the medical and public health fields as “sloppy”--and then attempt to suppress it entirely? You are not even slightly qualified for the appointment you accepted, are you, Steiger? You’re just a Bush lackey, another “Brownie,” aren’t you?" Steiger's response:)

...Richard Walling, a former career official in the HHS global health office who oversaw the draft, said Steiger was the official who blocked its release. "Steiger always had his political hat on," he said. "I don't think public health was what his vision was. As far as the international office was concerned, it was a political office of the secretary. . . . What he was looking for, and in general what he was always looking for, was, 'How do we promote the policies and the programs of the administration?' This report didn't focus on that."

("We’re not paying you to run the HHS as a publicity service for the Bush administration, Steiger, we’re paying you to get the facts out. How did you even get this job, Steiger, you fact-suppressing dick?" Steiger's response:)

...Steiger, 37, (THIRTY SEVEN YEARS OLD?) is a godson of former president George H.W. Bush and the son of a moderate Republican who represented Wisconsin in the House and hired a young Dick Cheney as an intern. The elder Bush appointed Steiger's mother to the Federal Trade Commission in 1989. A biographical sketch of her on the American Bar Association's Web site states that Steiger's parents, now deceased, were "lifelong friends" of many members of the same congressional class, including the Rumsfelds and the Bushes.

(There were about one hundred thousand people in America more qualified to do your job than you are, weren't there, Mr. Steiger? And there are about 170 million people more principled. Now get out of here, you political hack who only got the job because he had Bush family connections. And wipe that stupid fucking expression off your face, Steiger.)

Hillary responds to "Cleavage" story in Washington Post

2007-07-29T16:45:00.000-05:00

It’s time to get stupid again—real stupid, I’m talking fashion writer stupid. You may have seen this in the WaPost last week.

Hillary Clinton's Tentative Dip Into New Neckline Territory

By Robin Givhan
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, July 20, 2007; Page C01

There was cleavage on display Wednesday afternoon on C-SPAN2. It belonged to Sen. Hillary Clinton.

She was talking on the Senate floor about the burdensome cost of higher education. She was wearing a rose-colored blazer over a black top. The neckline sat low on her chest and had a subtle V-shape. The cleavage registered after only a quick glance. No scrunch-faced scrutiny was necessary. There wasn't an unseemly amount of cleavage showing, but there it was. Undeniable...

...The last time Clinton wore anything that was remotely sexy in a public setting surely must have been more than a decade ago, during Bill Clinton's first term in office when she was photographed wearing a black Donna Karan gown that revealed her shoulders. It was one of Karan's "cold-shoulder" dresses, inspired, Karan once noted, because a woman's shoulders remain sensuous and appealing regardless of her age.

...To display cleavage in a setting that does not involve cocktails and hors d'oeuvres is a provocation. It requires that a woman be utterly at ease in her skin, coolly confident about her appearance, unflinching about her sense of style. Any hint of ambivalence makes everyone uncomfortable. And in matters of style, Clinton is as noncommittal as ever.

Tonight the Clinton campaign people are on it, of course. From the NYT:

Latest Campaign Issue? One Candidate’s Neckline

By SARAH WHEATON
Published: July 28, 2007

In an e-mail message titled “Cleavage,” Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton’s presidential campaign has an eye-catching pitch for campaign contributions.

The subject line of the message refers to a July 20 article in The Washington Post about the neckline on an outfit Mrs. Clinton wore during a floor speech she gave two days earlier. It “sat low on her chest and had a subtle V-shape,” said the article, by Robin Givhan, a style writer who had watched the speech on C-Span2...

...Mrs. Clinton’s campaign, not at all happy about the article, is hoping its attack on it will prove to be a lucrative tool. “Frankly, focusing on women’s bodies instead of their ideas is insulting,” says the fund-raising e-mail message, written by the senior Clinton adviser Ann Lewis and distributed yesterday...

...In big letters, the note reads: “Clothes? Makeup? Cleavage? What’s really important in this race? Help Hillary fight for what matters.”

...Asked about the criticism, Ms. Givhan said her type of reporting had a role in election coverage.

"I do think that when people are delivering a message, the message is essentially consumed in different ways, and that depends on how it is delivered," she said. "The tone of voice, the appearance, the context, these things all come into play."

Boy, Ms. Givhan is “deep,” isn’t she? So is the Washington Post, for giving her 750 words to analyze what Clinton’s fashion choice “means.” Has Givhan written similar articles analyzing the political significance of Edwards’ haircut or Bush’s Krocs? I remember when AP journalists breathlessly reported “what Condi was wearing” when she was touring the world, failing to make peace.

That kind of “analytical journalism” fell out favor once things began “to get all serious;” by then the press had some kind of epiphany and realized that what Condi was doing or failing to do was more important than what she was wearing. Nobody ever did a piece on Secretary of State Henry Kissinger highlighting the “smart, flawlessly cut Brooks Brothers suit” he was wearing when he authorized the Christmas bombing of Hanoi—did Madeline Albright have to put up with this pointless nonsense?

We will await the Washington Post’s fashion reporting on “what the other presidential candidates are wearing.” Hillary is certainly not the only candidate wearing clothes; I hope that Givhan and her editors will be around to do more lengthy articles on the “sexual message” her male competitors are sending us via their wardrobe choices. I don’t think the WaPost reports on what Alberto Gonzales wears when he’s lying to Congress, not unless he shows up in a Mankini—that would justify a story; this doesn’t. It’s sexist bullshit to single out Hillary.

"The Cat Who IS Death" To Replace "Elephant" as symbol of GOP

2007-07-27T18:08:00.000-05:00

Have you seen the cat who is in the photograph below? You have? UH-OH...

Feline intuition

By Colin Nickerson, Globe Staff | July 25, 2007

PROVIDENCE --Oscar the cat makes his grand entrances just as life is about to leave...

..."He's a cat with an uncanny instinct for death," said Dr. David M. Dosa, assistant professor at the Brown University School of Medicine and a geriatric specialist. "He attends deaths. He's pretty insistent on it."

In the two years since Oscar was adopted into the third-floor dementia unit of the Steere House Nursing and Rehabilitation Center in Providence, he has maintained close vigil over the deaths of more than 25 patients, according to nursing staff, doctors who treat patients in the home, and an article in tomorrow's New England Journal of Medicine, written by Dosa.

When death is near, Oscar nearly always appears at the last hour or so...Animal behavior experts have no explanation for Oscar's ability to sense imminent death. They theorize that he might detect some subtle change in metabolism -- felines are as acutely sensitive to smells as dogs -- but are stumped as to why he would show interest...

Well, I can tell you why Oscar shows interest. I know something about cats. Oscar likes the way the patients feel as they “cool off”—it’s like in the hot weather and your pillow feels hotter as your head warms it and you can’t sleep. But Oscar’s “pillows” feel “cooler” the longer he sleeps next to them; it’s more comfortable, that’s why he’s so “interested.” It’s the same reason a cat is “interested” in finding a sunny spot on a window sill to sleep on.

But that is not the political point of this story. The political point is that Oscar has been seen hanging around the McCain campaign lately. Which is worrisome to the remaining six McCain supporters. Whenever McCain’s picture appears on the hospice’s TV during news programming, Oscar climbs on top of the TV and snoozes there as McCain prattles on about how he is going to reinvigorate his candidacy.

Oscar was also seen writing in his appointment diary when a news story about the most recent staff shake up in the Fred Thompson campaign was broadcast. A hospice employee said that he had been planning to vote for Thompson until he read the entry in Oscar’s scheduler. “Oscar’s penciled the Thompson campaign in for December. He doesn’t think much of any of the GOP chances next year, and he wants to be around when they “cool off.”" The employees added quickly: "He says it’s got nothing to do with Fred’s cancer or Rudy’s cancer or Tony Snow’s cancer, or anything like that, they’re all going to live a long time, so don’t write Oscar or anybody else and send angry letters and emails and stuff about that. But Oscar clearly thinks that their campaigns--their CAMPAIGNS--are moribund. And he thinks that Gingrich's is already starting to stink; they's flies around it.”

Republican politicians have responded to “The Grim Hairballer” in various ways. Some shag bricks at him and tell him to “get on outta here, ya damned feline”; others have tried to wall him up alive only to have their conscience haunted by him, causing them to have fits of insanity and tear out the wall to reveal the still living Oscar and the bodies of their murdered spouses as horrified police personnel look on.

Other Republicans welcome Oscar as a sweet release, an end to stressful and debilitating political careers that had quickly degenerated into corruption after election. Still others believe that Oscar should replace the elephant as the symbol of the Republican Party.

“He’s a much better symbol of what we’re all about,” said one GOP insider. “The GOP is a political party about death, conservatism is a political movement about death—Katrina, no health care for the working poor, sending an endless parade of American troops to their deaths in Iraq on a military mission doomed to failure. Oscar’s a much better symbol for the GOP than that elephant. He should start “visiting” with that elephant, if you know what I mean.”

Mrs. Fred Thompson Purges Thompson Campaign?

2007-07-25T21:31:00.000-05:00

They’re executing top staff at the Thompson campaign and replacing them with former Bush energy secretary Spencer Abraham. That little minx Mrs. Fred Thompson is in “one of her moods,” apparently:

Fred Thompson shakes up campaign staff

By LIBBY QUAID, Associated Press Writer 2 hours, 17 minutes ago

WASHINGTON - Republican presidential hopeful Fred Thompson is shaking up his still-unofficial campaign, replacing his top aide with a former Michigan senator and a veteran Florida strategist.

The shake-up comes amid consternation inside the campaign about the active role played by Thompson's wife, Jeri, a lawyer, media consultant and former Republican National Committee official.

(Is she really a lawyer? Wow. I mean, Wikipedia says that she worked as a political media consultant at a law firm—but she has a law degree and passed the bar? Really? I’ve looked around the Internet and can’t find a record of that, even though several news outlets have already reported that she is indeed an attorney. Anyway:)

...Thompson has a conservative Senate record and casts himself in the mold of former President Reagan. He was a reliably conservative vote against abortion, in favor of President Bush's tax cuts, for oil drilling in Alaska and against criminal background checks for gun show purchases...

...Republicans familiar with the Thompson circle said (Jerry Kehn Thompson) is an influential figure and that her role has been a cause of concern for some operatives signing on to the fledgling exploratory campaign.

She’s probably pissed at all the bad press about Fred lately. That “makes Daddy look bad,” she’s a media political consultant who thinks that “Daddy should look good.”

So is she running around firing the people who make Daddy look bad? Is that what the former Thompson staffers are referring to?

“Jeez, Ms. T, he told the Nixon White House that the Senate knew he had their conversations on tape, he told them that secretly when he was supposed to be investigating them, it’s not our fault that Fred fed them inside information when he was supposed to be investigating them—“
“I DON’T CARE! That’s not supposed to get in the papers!”
“But it’s on the record already, it’s a fact, we can’t stop the papers from printing a fact—“
“I DON’T CARE! P.U., you’re stinky! Get out! Tell him he’s fired, Freddie—“
“But sugar-lips—“
“TELL HIM HE’S FIRED!”
“Okay. (mumbles) You’re fired, son.”
“AND FIRE THAT ONE, TOO!”
“Me? For what?”
“It says in this paper that Freddie lobbied for a pro-choice group! Everybody knows that Freddie is a conservative, he’s AGAINST abortion!”
“But Ms. T, Freddie—I mean, Senator Thompson--*did* lobby for pro-choice, everybody knows he did, they’ve got the billing records—“
“AAAAAAA! I don’t want to hear it! Fire him, Freddie!”
“But angel-buns—“
“FIRE HIM!”
“Oh, okay... You’re fired too, son. I’m sorry, but I’m takin’ her home, not you...dang, she’s a cute little thing though, ain’t she? A fine, *shapely* young girl--”
“I’M SICK AND TIRED OF THIS SHIT! I WANT NEW CAMPAIGN PEOPLE! I WANT CREDIBILITY! Get me Spencer Abraham, he can black out all the bad stuff about Freddie, he blacked out the whole United States once! I WANT HIM! I WANT SPENCER ABRAHAM, NOW, FREDDIE, I WANT HIM NOW!!”

Poll: Hillary Leads Obama; GOP voters patently insane

2007-07-23T23:00:00.000-05:00

You have seen the Washington Post/ABC News poll showing that Hillary leads the field of Democratic candidates. But what do the polls tell us about the GOP contenders?

Poll Shows Clinton With Solid Lead Among Democrats

By Dan Balz and Jon Cohen
Washington Post Staff Writers
Monday, July 23, 2007; Page A07

By a wide margin, Democrats view Sen. Hillary Clinton (N.Y.) as the party's candidate best positioned to win the general election, and she holds a double-digit lead over Sen. Barack Obama (Ill.) in the race for the nomination, according to a new Washington Post-ABC News Poll.

How competitive the Democratic contest becomes could turn on the question of whether voters are significantly more interested in a fresh face or in a candidate they see as projecting strong leadership…

…This Post-ABC News poll also gauged how comfortable Americans are at the prospect of a barrier-breaking president. Large majorities said they would be comfortable with a woman, African American or Hispanic president, but fewer would be "entirely comfortable."

Eight in 10 said they would be comfortable with a female head of state; 86 percent said so of an African American, as did 74 percent of a Hispanic. But fewer said they would have no reservations: Fifty-four percent would be "entirely comfortable" with a female president, 56 percent with an African American and 44 percent with a Latino…

The prospect of a barrier-breaking president is also being entertained by Republican voters. The poll was conducted my me among a random sample of Republican voters just hanging around and bitching and has a margin of sampling error of between two and three percent.

Seventeen percent of GOP voters said they would be “entirely comfortable” voting for a self-styled conservative TV character actor who had worked as a part-time pro-choice lobbyist and had secretly fed the Nixon administration inside intelligence from the Senate Watergate committee when he was supposed to be investigating the Nixon administration, provided he promised to lower their taxes and support family values.

Nearly forty percent of GOP voters said they “somewhat comfortable” supporting a self-styled conservative who had been sitting on the political oil well of the September 11 terrorist attacks when it went off, even if he had appeared at public events with his mistress or in a gold-lame dress and wig, provided he promised to lower their taxes and support family values.

About thirty percent of Republican voters indicated that they were “okay with” a liberal Republican who claimed to have become a conservative about twenty minutes ago, provided he had access to a lot of money and could convince the religious right that he was “not really that Mormon”, and provided that he promised to lower their taxes and support family values.

But only five percent of Republican voters said that they would vote for a candidate who had spent the last two years kissing up to the religious right that he formerly denounced as a pernicious influence on American politics and had vowed to continue a bloody pointless occupation of Iraq, even if he *did* promise to lower their taxes and support family values. The support for such a candidate swells to six percent if he sings “Bomb-bomb-bomb, bomb bomb Iran” to the Beach Boys tune “Barbara Ann” at a press conference.

Support for barrier-breaking candidates is not a new phenomenon in GOP voting. Twenty-six per cent of Republican voters still indicate that they would be "entirely comfortable" with a homicidal circus clown as chief executive if he had promised to lower their taxes while actually increasing their tax burden. The same percentage said they would support a vice president that had been regularly lying to them about the progress of a foreign war for more than five years.

US Armed Forces: If you're a terrorist--let's negotiate!

2007-07-20T23:07:00.000-05:00

You know in the eighties they had all these action movies about American tough guys (usually played by Austrian Arnold Schwarzenegger) who just killed the terrorists; screw this negotiation stuff, just kill ‘em.

But now in Iraq—it’s officially become a part of the US military strategy, you CAN negotiate with terrorists.

Deals in Iraq Make Friends of Enemies
In Tactical Shift for U.S., Informal Amnesties Win Some Insurgents' Cooperation
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, July 20, 2007; Page A01

U.S. forces in Iraq are striking a variety of "handshake agreements" with Iraqi insurgents and militia groups, sometimes resulting in the release of fighters detained for attacking coalition forces, U.S. military officials said in several recent interviews.

Such informal deals mark a significant tactical shift in the Iraq war and represent a potentially risky effort to enlist former U.S. foes in the battle against hard-line militants...

Though no formal arrangement exists for granting amnesty to insurgents, the current deals amount to a kind of don't-ask-don't-tell pardon system...

...First, the leaders of the groups agree to stop attacking U.S. and Iraqi forces. Then they pledge to fight al-Qaeda in Iraq. Finally, U.S. and Iraqi officials try to get them to become part of Iraqi security forces, usually the police.

"There are no signed agreements," Odierno added. "They are . . . handshake agreements."

Well, I can tell you one thing for sure. The morons who sit at home and insists we fight on in Iraq see the world and its politics through the prism of these action movies and “shoot ‘em up” video games. They are not going to want to acknowledge that this “negotiate with terrorists” policy is a reality. And they are never going to pay to see a movie that ends with Arnold or Rambo offering a job to the bad guys who killed his best friend. “Bitte, mein friend—it looks like I blew dis game—you vant to come vork for me? I pay you gut if you shtop tryink to kill at me, hokay?” THE END.

And you are never going to see a “shoot ‘em up” video game with a walkthrough like this:

“LEVEL TEN. You immediately see three Al Qaeda as soon as you enter this level. Kill them, using the submachine gun from your inventory. As soon as you kill them, twenty more Al Qaeda terrorists appear in their place, and beginning shooting at you. There are also a hundred Shi’ite militia members who show up, and some rogue Baath’ists; they will shoot at you, too. Hide in the Green Zone until they are re-loading. Don’t shoot any of them because every time you kill one three fully armed enemy combatants will to take his place. If you’ve reached this level and its’ more than four years later and you still haven’t captured Baghdad, reach into your inventory and get out “the White Flag of Truce.”

Wave it, like you should have done three years ago. The Al Qaeda enemies won’t come over, but some of the Shi’ites and Baathist warlords will. (If they don’t, wave “cash”, which is also in your inventory.) When the Shi’ites and Baathists join you behind the table, press the “negotiate from a position of weakness” button on your console (not the “negotiate from a position of strength” button; you lost that button four years ago.)

Avoid incoming Al Qaeda fire as you “promise and beg” (by pressing R and “Negotiate” button at the same time); but be careful not to “cry”, as the enemy will see that as “weak and womanly”--if they see you cry you’ll have to kill a whole bunch of them and start over again.

If negotiations go well and these enemies agree to stop shooting you in exchange for money and inside security information about your puppet government, one of them will ask you: “How do you know you can trust us, Rambold?” To answer, press the “handshake” button. That makes the deal and temporarily stops them and their thousands of troops from trying to kill you—temporarily, remember!

The deal will break down without warning, and they will go back to try to killing you again, but this will buy you time to try to get to LEVEL ELEVEN: “Getting the Fuck Out of Iraq.” In the meantime, don’t worry about how many time they “kill you.” Remember that this is not like other video games. You aren’t restricted to losing only three “lives” before “Game Over” comes up on the screen. “Creating A Free, Peaceful and Democratic Iraq” is the only game that gives you more than 4,000 lives to lose—and hundreds of thousands of lost civilian lives don’t count against you at all! So just keep playing, year after year after year, until your term of office is over...”

Jesus: "And I Say Unto Thee--Veto Children's Health Care"

2007-07-20T00:39:00.000-05:00

Set the time machine for the GOP candidates debate in Des Moines, Iowa, December 1999:

Each candidate was asked what "philosopher or thinker" he identified with most. Bush, the third candidate to answer in the debate, said, "Christ, because he changed my heart."

Now, back to the present day:

Bush: No Deal On Children's Health Plan

President Says He Objects On Philosophical Grounds

By Christopher Lee
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, July 19, 2007; Page A03

President Bush yesterday rejected entreaties by his Republican allies that he compromise with Democrats on legislation to renew a popular program that provides health coverage to poor children, saying that expanding the program would enlarge the role of the federal government at the expense of private insurance.

The president said he objects on philosophical grounds to a bipartisan Senate proposal to boost the State Children's Health Insurance Program by $35 billion over five years...

Scene: The White House, two days ago. It is late at night. The Oval Office. Bush is pacing back and forth.

Bush: Hmm. Permit Congress to fund health care for poor children...Boy, that sure is a toughie...Hard to say no to that one. Little poor kids, needin’ health care...Me already spendin’ Seven hundred jillion-de-billion-dy dollars a year on this damn war that General Petraeus Maximus don’t think he can win...Thirty five billion to fund better health care for America’s kids seems like a little sand off a beach, when you compare to that...Don’t know what to do...

(Bush stops in his tracks suddenly. Outside the window of the Oval Office is a mysterious figure, glowing in the dark, rapping on the window to get Bush’s attention.)

Bush: (hair standing on end) JESUS!

(Bush rushes to the window, throws it open, helps Jesus climb into the room, which he does a bit clumsily. Jesus is a little chubby, he can’t manage the gown, but he’s got the long hair, crown of thorns, and he’s white, so Bush gets him in there.)

Jesus: Getting too old for this...

Bush: (brushing him off) Boy, am I glad to see you tonight, Lord—

Jesus: (slaps Bush’s hands away) Hey, hey, no touching, remember, I told you about that—

Bush: Sorry, Lord. How did you get past the secret service?

Jesus: I-I turned ‘em into frogs, or something--

(Bush bites knuckle)

Jesus: Don’t worry, I’ll turn ‘em back on the way out, I’m Jesus, remember? I think I got a Charlie horse or something getting in here--

Bush: Man, it’s amazing how you always show up just when I need you most—

Jesus: Yeah, well...that’s why I get... the big money. I’m like... Jiminy Cricket, and you’re, uh, uh (snaps fingers, trying to remember name)

Bush: Pinocchio?

Jesus: Yeah, that’s it. Look--you got a glass of water or something around here, Pinocchio? I’m dyin’ up here, my heart’s beating like a roller disco--

Bush: (pouring him a glass of water) Sure. Boy, I tell you, Lord, this SCHIP funding thing has been keeping me up tonight. I slept right through the battle of Fallujee, but this one’s got me worried, Lord...

Jesus: (drinks water) Ah...that’s better. Give me a chance to get my breath back, kid, gimme a minute here.

Bush: Sure thing. You just sit right back in that chair right there. The Dems want me to fund this children’s health care thing, and I don’t know—

Jesus: What did Dick tell you?

Bush: Well, he told me not to fund it, he said “Screw the poor kids, the poor kids don’t vote—“

Jesus: What did I tell you about doing what Dick said?

Bush: (thinks, then) You said I should always do what Dick said.

Jesus: And you find that hard to remember, do you?

Bush: But, I figured—I figured you might be *for* this kind of thing, you know, making sure kids get their vaccinations, and see doctors so they don’t get sick—

Jesus: We don’t want big government getting in there and doing it, numbnut! Let the private sector take care of it! When they get sick enough, the private sector will step in and take care of it. You gotta have a little faith, that's all. Big government is no solution.

Bush: Okay. But “No Child Left Behind” was a big government—

Jesus: That was different. This is real money we’re talking about, with this children’s health care stuff. NCLB is just about giving public schools bad report cards, that costs peanuts.

Bush: But—

Jesus: But what? You think this is a cartoon you’re talking to here? (points to Bush) Who’s you’re favorite philosopher?

Bush: Well, you are, of course—

Jesus: So who are you going to listen to—me, or a bunch of liberal Dems and RINOs?

Bush: You, sir—

Jesus: Okay, then—case closed. Remember what I said in the Bible? “Suffer the little children.” “Suffer!” I already spelled it out for everybody, remember that from Bible study?

Bush: Yeah... (goes to desk, gets out veto pen, scribbles) I’ll tell ‘em that I oppose it on philosophosockical grounds. I’ll tell ‘em you told me to—

Jesus: No! No attribution. This is strictly on background. You keep my name out of it, remember. Except when you’re speaking at a, a church or something. Now I gotta go. I got to do another wedding in Canada or Cana or wherever the hell it is, I have to be there, I’m bringing the liquor. (Starts climbing out window, begins to glow again as he reaches the darkness.) Farewell, farewell, my beloved son. (raises his hand in benediction) And always remember—(he slips and falls into the bushes outside.)

(Bush rushes to window.)

Bush: (yelling out window) Jesus! Jesus! Are you alright? (Bush turns around, aghast.) He’s gone!

(In the bushes outside the window. Two secret service men help Jesus to his feet.)

Jesus: Is he still looking? No? My God, this Jesus stuff is killing me. (he peels off beard, it’s Cheney) Where’s my glasses? I can’t do this any more, boys, we’ve got to find someone else to do this.

Secret Service man: Won’t he notice the difference if we use someone else, sir?

Cheney: I don’t care, we’ll tell him it’s a miracle, we’ll tell him it’s like “Dr. Who” or something, but I can’t make that window anymore. Where’s my pills? And I think I’m allergic to this paint, too...

Iraqi Government: "Stay in Baghdad? IN THIS HEAT?"

2007-07-17T23:17:00.000-05:00

Don't you love how Tony Snow's arguing that you can't expect the Iraqi government to stay in town for the surge because it gets too hot in Baghdad in August? Gee, it’s too bad nobody foresaw the fact that Baghdad gets hot in the summer. You’d think that the Bush guys would have seen that "big issue" coming, after we spent four years there...

US says Iraqi lawmakers to take August break
AFP
Published: Friday July 13, 2007

The White House said Friday that Iraq's parliament may take the month of August off but downplayed the impact on political reconciliation efforts seen as key to quelling deadly violence.

"My understanding is at this juncture they're going to take August off, but you know, they may change their minds," said spokesman Tony Snow, who refused to say whether there had been US efforts to dissuade them.

(“Members of the Iraqi government! This is Ryan Crocker, your new American ambassador. Look at this, a line of gorgeous girls, right here in the capital, all for you, look at them go! Kick-turn, kick-turn, kick-turn, you go, girls, look at those birqahs whirl! And wheel barrows full of Yankee cash, fabulous prizes, all the non-alcoholic champagne you can drink, why go off on vacation when everything you need is right here in amazing Baghdad, fun capital of the—“
“Forget it, yankee lackey, we’re splitting.”
“Come on guys. We’re spending a hundred and twenty-five million dollars a day over here, we got this band, and the girls... Can’t you take your vacation in December?”
“Sorry, dude. It’s a time-share thing. If we don’t go now, we eat that money. Goddam condos, you know, heh heh—“
“Can we tell the American people you might change your minds?”
“Huh? Oh, yeah... sure. Tell ‘em we might change our minds at the last minute and decide to spend the deadliest month of this year in Baghdad...heh heh heh...did you hear that one, boys? I told the Americans we might change our minds and stay...heh heh heh...is this our cooler?”
“But this really sends the wrong message about your commitment to—hey, look at this! the casino is now open, just for your exclusive use of you, the Iraqi government, right here in the middle of the Green Zone! Look at the entertainment lineup, it’s Cirque de Soleil, Wayne Newton singing the call to prayer! And how about that new twenty four hour buffet that serves breakfast any time, hey, why travel abroad now, when fabulous Baghdad is your magic carpet ride to fun, fun, fun-“
“Put some new tags on our luggage, fellows. If it gets lost during the trip we want it sent to Switzerland, not back here.”
“Couldn’t you just take a one week vacation at the beginning of August, and then the rest of the vacation later?”
“No. We lose our sick days if we do that. (to bellboy) Careful with that one! There’s gold in there!”)

"You know, it's 130 degrees (54 Celsius) in Baghdad in August..." (Tony Snow) said when a reporter asked about the impact on an Iraq progress report due by September 15.

Reminded that the heat affected the roughly 160,000 US troops in Iraq, Snow replied: "You know, that's a good point. And it's 130 degrees for the Iraqi military."

(And for everybody who’ll get killed while the Iraqi government's on vacation, right, Tony? Good point. And it's not like you can have air-conditioning in Baghdad, you know. Because if they put glass in the windows of the Green Zone government buildings to keep the air conditioning in, the glass explodes whenever the bombs go off--and then you’re talking another trip to the hospital, my friends. Or the morgue.

No, I’m not kidding about that last part. My Congresswoman, Michele Bachmann, made a one-day visit to Baghdad and met with Ambassador Ryan Crocker in his office in the Green Zone. She reported that the ambassador has no glass in the windows of his office, which was under mortar and rocket attack when she was visiting. Actually it’s a good thing that there’s no glass in the windows; that way the rockets and bombs just shoot straight through one window and out the window on the other side of the room, with any luck at all.

Anyway, Bachmann had to wear seventy pounds of body armor and a Kevlar helmet during her one day visit to the Green Zone, and she said it’s 130 degrees in Baghdad right *now*, this month. I can’t figure out why Snow thinks it matters that it’s 130 degrees in August, *too.*)

...Vice President Dick Cheney and the US ambassador, Ryan Crocker, have tried to convince the Iraqi parliament not to take such a long break at a time when US soldiers are fighting and dying and US support for the war is at a low ebb...

(“But this looks just awful, please don’t take a month off now, for Christ’s sake, you haven’t met any of the benchmarks and you’re insisting on a month long vacation, and all the time you’re on vacation our kids are fighting and dying out there to save your government —“
“So are our kids, Cheney! That’s why we’re taking *our* kids with us, on vacation. Why don’t you guys take a vacation, too? Take your kids with you. Then you have nothing to worry about, see? Oh, look the armored limos are here. (takes sip from coconut with little parasol in it, toasts) Aloha, my American friends! Tell your soldiers we’ll send a postcard to Walter Reed, eh?”)

Is that REALLY bin Laden in that new Al-Qaeda video?

2007-07-17T01:58:00.000-05:00

That can't be real, that tape of bin Laden that's out on the web, now:

Osama bin Laden Appears in 'New' Al-Qaeda Video
Sunday July 15, 2007
CityNews.ca Staff

A new videotaped message purportedly from Osama bin Laden has surfaced on a radical Islamist website...

...Bin Laden was last heard from in a July 1, 2006, audio tape in which he voiced support for the new leader of al-Qaida in Iraq and warned countries not to send troops to fight a hardline Islamic regime that had recently seized power in Somalia.

Officials are trying to verify the authenticity of the tape.

Yeah, well there are some questions about the authenticity of the tape. There are always questions about the authenticity of a bin Laden tape. The White House and Defense Department spend billions of dollars on intelligence every year, and Rumsfeld used to joke about how he didn’t know whether bin Laden was dead or alive. I didn’t think that was funny; we’re paying you to kill bin Laden, you schmuck and you’re up there joking about how you don’t know whether he’s dead or alive? Get out, you’re fired, asshole.

Anyway, the new bin Laden tape is kind of suspect. It looks more like someone’s audition tape than Islamic radicalism, but you be the judge.

(bin Laden emeges from behind flap of tent, to huge applause and music from the band. He nods, smiles, “salutes” band leader, then makes a little “cut-throat” gesture to band leader to kill the music.)

Bin Laden: Thank you. Thank you, ladies and germs, you’re very kind. And may the Bird of Paradise spread its wings in your fox-hole! (laugh track)

Seriously though, it’s fantastic to be back here again in—(thinks, then mouths silently to bandleader: “Where the hell are we?”, gets answer looks back)—“undisclosed.” (laugh track) Always a pleasure, but the weather is really something, I tell you it was cold last night, very cold...brrr...

Crowd: HOW COLD WAS IT?

Bin Laden: It was so cold that the hostages from Southern California had TWO sweaters tied around there necks. (laugh track, bin Laden tags it with:) Why do they do that? What does that MEAN, tying a sweater around your neck instead of wearing it? What is THAT all about?...(looks at crowd) Okay...that joke’s over, I guess—well, moving along...(someone applauds)...oh, thank you very much, sir. Now I finally know what it means to be loved. (laugh track) Anyway—I performed in Baghdad last week, and I have to say--I went over big with that crowd, very big, I killed ‘em, ladies and gentlemen. (pause) No, I mean—I killed ‘em! Really! (laugh track) But it’s true, I am very big in Baghdad these days. Very big, they love me there. When I got in at the airport, the Americans sent a big limo to get me. (pause) I got out of the way just in time! (laugh track, he wipes forehead, “whew!” gesture.) Well, that’s enough of this hilarity, eh? We gotta great show for you tonight, our guests are my good friend Charles Manson, the lovely and talented Winona Ryder, and George W. Bush—(snaps fingers) oh, that’s right, he can’t make it, he hasn’t been able to find his way here for six years. (laugh track) (bin Laden waves to camera) Hello, dummy, wherever you are! Anyway, we’ll be back after these messages...

(Band strikes up with theme song, applause, bin Laden blows kisses to the audience, thanks them, pantomimes pulling pin out of hand grenade with his teeth and tossing it into audience, pantomimes 747 hitting side of building, crowd goes wild, bin Laden bows.)

COMMERCIAL.

McCain Campaign Chair: "Prostitute? What? Where am I?

2007-07-14T15:18:00.000-05:00

Oh no... a day after four top officials resign from the Hindenburg—I mean, the McCain campaign--his campaign chairman in Florida gets busted for soliciting prostitution...

McCain campaign official denies soliciting for prostitution

(CNN) -- A day after four of Sen. John McCain's top political strategists stepped down, the co-chairman of his Florida campaign was arrested Wednesday for allegedly offering an undercover police officer money for a sex act, Titusville police said.

(Okay, time to do damage control. Was it a male undercover police officer, or a female? Not that there’s anything wrong with it, we just need to know for the evangelical voters in Florida...)

Rep. Bob Allen leaves the Brevard County, Florida, jail Wednesday night after his arrest.

Florida state Rep. Bob Allen faces charges of solicitation for prostitution after he was arrested in a Titusville city park that had been under surveillance, police said.

He allegedly offered an undercover police officer $20 for the unspecified act.

(Twenty dollars? Where did the McCain people come up with that kind of dough, all of a sudden?)

Allen told CNN affiliate WFTV the incident was "a very big misunderstanding."

"This is a very gross mistake, a very big mistake," he said, adding that this is what the judicial system is for.

(For busting Republicans looking for hookers??? There must be more to the judicial system than that--)

Allen said he helped build the park, and was there looking around.

I could see that happening...he was just looking around...it’s within the realm of possibility... taking a walk around the park at night, you want to see what it’s like, now that it’s completed, if the...the...design for the park you approved is working out—what the attendance is like here, in the evenings. Very nice, very nice trees... yes, there’s the swing set, just where it should be, all well and good...You see an attractive young thing—well, here’s a citizen enjoying the park in the evening, that’s very heartening. Think I’ll strike up a conversation...who knows, maybe this citizen is a McCain supporter.

“Hi! Enjoying the park? Good, good...say—Maybe we could go somewhere and I could introduce you to a little thing I call “the Straight Talk Express.” I feel that that the “surge” is working, are you interested in the “surge”? Really? How much?”

Hmm. This citizen is misunderstanding. I’ll show this citizen my campaign credentials, reach into the old pants pocket for my wallet—OH! A twenty dollar bill fell out, that’s embarrassing—I’ll just pick it up. Huh? Oh, no, I wasn’t offering YOU twenty dollars, no way, I’m a happily married man, I just happen to be out in the middle of the park at night, looking around—you’re a what? An undercover—hey, what is this—hey you guys, let go of me, Prosti-what? That’s ridiculous, I’m a state representative, I’m a Republican campaign chairman, I’m not out to screw anybody—hey, don’t handcuff me! I’m with the McCain campaign, HEY! Gimme that twenty back, we need that money—“

Music: “Bad boys, bad boys/whatcha gonna do/whatcha gonna do when they come for you” (etc.)

Now tell the truth--who among us has this NOT happened to, guys? It seems like every time I’m in a park taking a look around these days, I’m getting busted for offering an undercover police officer twenty bucks for an unspecified sex act. Total misunderstanding, happens every day.

For God’s sake, when will this madness stop? It should help McCain in Louisiana, though.

UPDATE: It has now been revealed that the "undercover cop"/prostitute Allen approached was indeed a male. This is what happens when you write to deadline. I've taken out the gender specific language, in light of these new developments.

But I will say this. Allen allegedly wanted to blow this cop, and offered him twenty bucks. That's disgusting. Senator Vitter (R-LA) was paying that DC madame $275 an hour for a female hooker. Twenty bucks to blow a cop is ridiculous; an insult to the thin blue line that protects us every day. Citizens like Allen should consider it a privilege to blow a cop; the rates should at least be competitive. What is happening to America?

GOP Presidential Contenders Fear Opening of Nixon Archive

2007-07-12T22:38:00.000-05:00

The Nixon Archives have now become public documents, and that spells BIG trouble for some GOP presidential candidates.

07 12 07 Federal Archivists Take Control of Nixon Library

By Gillian Flaccus
Associated Press
Thursday, July 12, 2007; Page C09

YORBA LINDA, Calif. -- The privately operated Richard M. Nixon Library & Birthplace was officially handed over to federal archivists yesterday, and researchers can pore over documents and tapes detailing "the good, the bad and the ugly" on the 37th president and his legacy...

...The new library director is taking some of the whitewash off the scandal resulting from the break-in at Democratic headquarters in the Watergate complex in Washington and the subsequent White House cover-up. The revised account is a precondition for receiving 42 million pages of the former president's papers and nearly 4,000 hours of tapes, which will be moved to California in several years.

Boy, get to work on that stuff fast, guys! Before next year’s elections! There’s bound to be some big bombshells in there! Stuff like this:

(Tape recording of Oval Office conversation. President Nixon meets with White House Chief of Staff H.R. “Bob” Haldeman.)

Nixon: Okay, Bob, you got five minutes. What the (expletive deleted) is so important?

Haldeman: Well, Mr. President, we’ve got to take care of some Republican problems. We’ve got some guys who need their asses covered. They’re calling in favors, sir.

Nixon: (Expletive deleted)! Why are you bothering me with this (unintelligible).

Haldeman: I don’t want to sir, but some of this affects some very promising young GOP members. We’re going to need these guys to preserve your legacy. For example—you know Fred Thompson?

Nixon: That dumb (characterization omitted) from Tennessee on the Watergate investigating committee?

Haldeman: Yes. He’s getting very jumpy. He’s been secretly feeding us all this inside information from the Committee.

Nixon: So what? That’s his job, isn’t it? He knew he’d be ratting out the investigating committee when he took the job, what’s he complaining about, the (adjective deleted) hick.

Haldeman: He’s afraid if the press finds out, he’ll get disbarred. I mean, he would be disbarred, if the Committee found out he was feeding us inside information when he was supposed to be investigating us. It would ruin his career.

Nixon: His career? Now I’ve got to take care of this Gomer’s career, too? (Expletive deleted)...Okay. Tell the little (characterization omitted) that if he keeps playing along, we’ll get him in the movies.

Haldeman: The movies?!

Nixon: Yeah, yeah... I know people in Hollywood. I’ll get him something in the movies. Don’t promise him top billing or anything. Character parts. He can play, I dunno, a principled politician or a law enforcement official. He’s good at pretending he’s principled, he’ll get work. Okay, who’s next?

Haldeman: Well, we got this guy John McCain, he’s still a P.O.W. in Nam, we got an offer to do a prisoner exchange for him--

Nixon: Is he a Republican?

Haldeman: Well, we think he’s gonna be when he gets out—and he’s very gung-ho on the idea of war—

Nixon: So is everybody in the GOP, so what?

Haldeman: Yes sir, but you know that most of our GOP guys take deferments to get out of fighting in the war—it would be really nice to have someone who actually saw combat in the GOP, once in a while. Of course, McCain’s a little more liberal than we’d like—

Nixon: (Expletive deleted) him then, let him rot with the Cong. He's not going anywhere until he becomes a conservative Republican. Tell him to flip and become conservative, then we'll talk about prisoner exchanges.

Haldeman: Well--we could bribe the Cong to let him go sir--McCain himself doesn't have much money--

Nixon: Idiots like this McCain never have any money! You call the guy thirty years from now and he STILL won't have any money. Let him rot! What else?

Haldeman: Well, I got this urgent request from George Bush—

Nixon: What does that (characterization omitted) want?

Haldeman: It seems his son’s gone AWOL from the Texas Air National Guard again.

Nixon: What am I supposed to do? Go out and look for the little (expletive deleted)?

Haldeman: Well, apparently George Junior isn’t too bright, his dad says he might be out somewhere doing coke or drunk driving or something—

Nixon: And that’s my problem, all of the sudden? Tell Bush I’m not gonna call out the FBI to find his congenital idiot coke-sniffing son for him. In fact, tell him that if we do find him we’ll shoot the little (characterization omitted) for desertion.

Haldeman: Bush senior could be a big help to you in this Watergate thing, sir.

(Silence.)

Nixon: Oh alright then. Tell the FBI to put a couple of guys on it. Tell ‘em to follow the line of white powder and empty liquor bottles until the Bush kid shows up on the other end. Tell Bush we’ll cover it up for him. But when the archives come out and the American people find out I did this—they’re gonna regret it, believe you me. (Expletive deleted.)

Pray for the blogger, Bill Prendergast

2007-07-11T00:00:00.000-05:00

How long, Oh Lord? How long?

What have I done wrong? How have I offended Thee?

Why, why hast Thou given me this political representation?

I have two homes, one is in the Sixth Congressional district of Minnesota. The other is in New Orleans.

My congresswoman in Minnesota is a fundamentalist GOP nut, Michele Bachmann--a staunch proponent of Bush, the Iraq war, and the surge. She just returned from a one day tour of Iraq, claiming the surge needs time to work, after she spent the entire day inside the US embassy in Baghdad’s Green Zone—which was under mortar attack during her visit. Four years after we “captured Baghdad,” she spent her day there wearing full body armor and a Kevlar helmet under mortar fire in what is supposed to be the most secure spot in Iraq—and she concludes that it’s too early to say whether or not Bush’s escalation is improving the security situation. (She hopped on a plane home that same day; she’s crazy, not stupid.)

In Louisiana, my Congressman is Democrat “Cold Cash” Jefferson, the guy who the feds busted with $90,000 dollars in cash stashed in Tupperware in his freezer. He was recently rated the least influential member of Congress—a definite minus for the citizens of a city depopulated and reeling from the biggest urban natural disaster in U.S. history.

And now we got my Senator, David Vitter, another GOP stalwart. Look at this:

Senator's number on escort service list

By DOUGLASS K. DANIEL, Associated Press Writer 45 minutes ago

WASHINGTON - Sen. David Vitter, R-La., apologized Monday night for "a very serious sin in my past" after his telephone number appeared among those associated with an escort service operated by the so-called "D.C. Madam."

Vitter's spokesman, Joel Digrado, confirmed the statement in an e-mail sent to The Associated Press.

"This was a very serious sin in my past for which I am, of course, completely responsible," Vitter said in the statement. "Several years ago, I asked for and received forgiveness from God and my wife in confession and marriage counseling. Out of respect for my family, I will keep my discussion of the matter there — with God and them. But I certainly offer my deep and sincere apologies to all I have disappointed and let down in any way."

He’s saying “God, forgive me for cheating on my wife with a prostitute”; just a couple of years back he was saying “God, I could really use a handjob.”

Did you catch that, in the quote? He said “several years ago, I asked for and received forgiveness from God and my wife.” Now, I can understand how you can claim, truthfully, that you “asked for and received” forgiveness from your wife. She screams, maybe punches you a few times, you say “I swear I’ll never, never do it again”, she forgives you (if you’re lucky) and bingo! You’ve asked for and received forgiveness. You’re home free, Vitter.

But how the hell can anyone claim publicly that he’s asked for and received forgiveness from God? What, did God send you a note, or something? “That’s okay, my Son, I understand, it was just a handjob, you were horny. I forgive thee, thou art representing the party of family values. But next time don’t call the escort service from thine own phone, schmuck.”

God doesn’t send out notes like that. It’s too bad He doesn’t (it would really help if you could show a note like that when you’re asking for forgiveness from the wife, too.) But He doesn’t. So Vitter can’t claim that it’s a fact that he “asked for and received God’s forgiveness,” and his wife will tell you what his word’s worth; it’s worth the same as his wedding vow.

It would be different if Vitter claimed that he had actually received a vision from God, one in which God appeared to him and forgave him in person. (My Minnesota Congresswoman, Bachmann *does* claim that she gets visions from God. Yes, she really does, we have her claiming that on tape, you can see it on YouTube.) But right now, all we have is Vitter’s word for it that God forgave him for the Dial-a-Hoe thing.

Silas Lee, a political analyst and pollster in New Orleans, spoke Monday about the possible political impact on Vitter.

"In the short term, I think the issue will dominate the discourse for a few days and weeks, and though he's up for re-election in 2010, it should dissipate by then," Lee told WWL-TV in New Orleans.

"But for some of his very conservative constituents, it might not be as easy. In their mind and eyes, they may not be able to forgive. The majority may overlook it in time depending on his job performance and how sincere voters believe he wants them to forgive him."

What, so Vitter’s career prospects are the problem here? He’s the one with the problem? How about us? What are we, the “Job” constituency, that we have to suffer through political representation like this?

And I love how this political analyst says this whole thing’s gonna blow over in a few weeks. He must be drinkin’. Are you kidding me? This is New Orleans; when you do something like Vitter did, they make a twenty-five foot float about the incident for Mardi Gras and put it in a parade! They pull it through the streets of the French Quarter all night with a team of donkeys! You can already see it: a ten-foot statue of Vitter, cell phone in hand, standing by a twenty foot motel room bed, with an eight foot prostitute putting her pantyhose back on, and a twenty foot statue of God, presiding over all, saying “I forgive you, Dave” in a Biblical font.

How long, Oh Lord... How long...

The Wall Street Journal: WE Will Fight, In Iraq

2007-07-10T00:06:00.000-05:00

Well, I’ll tell you who’s not retreating from Iraq—the editors of the Wall Street Journal, that’s who!

Republican Retreat
July 9, 2007; Page A14

The last of the brigades President Bush ordered for his military surge in Iraq only arrived in the country last month, and they have been heavily engaged with al Qaeda in the Sunni triangle around Baghdad as part of the new military strategy. So it's especially distressing that Republican Senators should decide that this is the time to separate themselves from Mr. Bush on Iraq.

(The schweinhunds!)

"I do not doubt the assessments of military commanders that there has been some progress in security," Richard Lugar, the ranking Republican on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, declared on the Senate floor late last month. But that didn't stop Mr. Lugar from concluding that its chances of success are "very limited." Why? The "short period framed by our own domestic political debate" won't allow it, he says...

(That is in fact the most horrible admission ever by the Republican party; telling the world that American troops should come home now—because if they don’t it will cost the GOP biiiiggg again in next years elections! So *that’s* what it takes to make the GOP fold up on a failed war that costs hundreds of thousands of lives and created a new kind of slaughterhouse in Iraq. “Hey, you know us, we’d keep ‘em over there forever, it’s no skin off our ass how many of our kids get killed or maimed. But this is serious now—this thing could cost us our POLITICAL CAREERS! So that’s it, the GOP is bailing out.”)

Last week, New Mexico's Pete Domenici noisily joined this bandwagon, as have several other Republican Senators, some of whom face tough re-election fights next year.

Yup. This is as low as you can go in American politics—a de facto admission that the reason you kept our troops there this long, is because you didn’t really believe it would hurt your own election chances. The GOP and the conservatives are truly bottom-feeders; sociopaths.

Now remember: the editors are speaking here of the conservative Republican leadership that they endorsed for office. The WSJ is a conservative/GOP organ: it recommended the conservatives that it is now accusing of cowardice and careerism. Why *did* you recommend this party of cowardly careerists for high public office, WSJ?

The WSJ wants to continue the war. Victory may be just around the corner, if the US is willing to commit troops for another year. Or two. Or three. Or whatever:

...as retired General Jack Keane told the New York Sun: "The tragedy of these efforts is we are on the cusp of potentially being successful in the next year in a way that we have failed in the three-plus preceding years, but because of this political pressure it looks like we intend to pull out the rug from underneath that potential success."

The promise, after four years of war, has moved from “they’ll greet us with open arms” to “it’s just a few dead enders” to “there is a claim of potential for success from a retired general.” Oh really? That’s not what the Pentagon thinks. From the Times:

Robert Gates, the defence secretary, is drawing up plans to reduce troop levels in Iraq in anticipation that General David Petraeus, the commander in Iraq, will not be able to deliver an upbeat progress report in September on the American troop surge.

The WSJ is “on drugs.” Even if we drive al Qaeda out, we still have a shitstorm of a religious and ethnic civil between Sunnis, Shi’ites and Kurds, an ethnic and religious struggle with untold oil reserves as the prize for the most genocidal—and we still have US soldiers continuing to stand at the wrong end of this shooting gallery. *That* scenario does not enter the WSJ’s calculus: even if you beat al Qaeda (and they can’t even promise that), you’ve still got a murderous civil war to “win.”

But give us more time, pleads the WSJ. And to show you they’re sincere—this is unprecedented, it’s never happened before—they are forming a new volunteer combat force to go to the area and relieve American combat troops who have already done two or more tours of duty. Can you believe it? It’s incredible, isn’t it? The editors of the Wall Street Journal are so sure of final victory and so convinced of the worthiness of the cause, that they themselves are going to leave their desks, enter basic training, and go to fight in Iraq as combat troops. That’s how sure they are that we’re going to stabilize Iraq within the next year or so, and this strategic alliance thing is going to pay off.

Yes, the editors of the WSJ want a piece of the action, before this whole Iraq thing is over. They’re not just a bunch of conservative desk jockeys who are trying to string this thing out, they’re going to put their money where their mouths are and FIGHT! Former editor Jude Wanniski is actually returning from his GRAVE to general the brigade of armed-to-the-teeth finance editors, senior reporters, trickle-down economics pundits and wannabe interns—as they conduct nightly house to house patrols in suspect terrorist havens and engage in streetfighting in Sadr City. That’s how convinced they are that victory is just around the corner, can you believe it? There’s nothing like it in the history of American journalism.

You find that hard to believe?

Well, then...would you believe...that the WSJ editors have announced that all their kids and grand kids who are eligible for combat have signed up to go and fight in Iraq for the next two years? They’re sending their own kids, would you believe it?

Okay... uhhh....

Would you believe--they're sending one very angry "supply-side" economics fan with a graph on a cocktail napkin?

Oh, forget it. They’re not fucking going, who am I kidding.

Fred Thompson: Watergate Investigator/Nixon Rat

2007-07-09T15:19:00.000-05:00

Boy, it just keeps getting worse for Fred, doesn’t it? Yesterday the media reported that Fred was once a pro-choice lobbyist (kills him with pro-lifers); today the media reveals that Fred was secretly feeding the Nixon administration inside information and pimping for the administration he was supposed to be investigating. (Kills Fred with the five or six Republican voters who are actually interested in integrity in government.)

Fred Thompson aided Nixon on Watergate

By JOAN LOWY, Associated Press Writer
Sat Jul 7, 12:24 PM ET

WASHINGTON - Fred Thompson gained an image as a tough-minded investigative counsel for the Senate Watergate committee. Yet President Nixon and his top aides viewed the fellow Republican as a willing, if not too bright, ally, according to White House tapes.

Thompson, now preparing a bid for the 2008 GOP presidential nomination, won fame in 1973 for asking a committee witness the bombshell question that revealed Nixon had installed hidden listening devices and taping equipment in the Oval Office.

(That’s good.)

...It was Thompson who tipped off the White House that the Senate committee knew about the tapes.

(That’s bad. Real bad. Prosecutor Thompson tipping off the target of the investigation that the Senate already knew about the tapes and that they were going to ask that “bombshell” question anyway, whether Thompson took credit for asking it or not. It turns out that Fred Thompson was actually Nixon’s “secret agent” on the investigating committee...When a lawyer does that, it’s considered...”unethical”, as in, “you should be disbarred” unethical...)

Nixon was disappointed with the selection of Thompson, whom he called "dumb as hell."

(I have to agree with Nixon, there.)

..."Oh shit, that kid," Nixon said when told by his chief of staff, H.R. Haldeman, of Thompson's appointment on Feb. 22, 1973.

"Well, we're stuck with him," Haldeman said.

(They were right. Nixon: prison, if Ford hadn’t pardoned him. Haldeman: prison.)

(Howard Baker, Thompson’s mentor) had secret meetings and conversations with Nixon and his top aides, while Thompson worked cooperatively with the White House and accepted coaching from Nixon's lawyer, J. Fred Buzhardt, the tapes and transcripts show.

"We've got a pretty good rapport with Fred Thompson," Buzhardt told Nixon in an Oval Office meeting on June 6, 1973. The meeting included a discussion of former White House counsel John Dean's upcoming testimony before the committee...

Nixon expressed concern that Thompson was not "very smart."

"Not extremely so," Buzhardt agreed.

"But he's friendly," Nixon said.

"But he's friendly," Buzhardt agreed. "We are hoping, though, to work with Thompson and prepare him, if Dean does appear next week, to do a very thorough cross-examination."

..."I found Thompson most cooperative, feeling more Republican every day," Buzhardt said. "Uh, perfectly prepared to assist in really doing a cross-examination."

Later in the same conversation, Buzhardt said Thompson was "willing to go, you know, pretty much the distance now. And he said he realized his responsibility was going to have be as a Republican increasingly."

(His responsibility as a Republican, which conflicted with his responsibility as an investigating attorney and as citizen of the United States.)

Thompson, who declined comment for this story ("I ain't talkin', see?), described himself in his book, "At That Point in Time," published in 1975, as a Nixon administration "loyalist" who struggled with his role as minority counsel. "I would try to walk a fine line between a good-faith pursuit of the investigation and a good-faith attempt to insure balance and fairness," Thompson wrote

.

(He left out the part where he crossed the fine line regularly to feed Nixon insider info about what was going on inside the investigating committee. We got that stuff on tape.)

...At a hearing on July 16, Thompson asked former White House aide Alexander Butterfield: "Mr. Butterfield, are you aware of the installation of any listening devices in the Oval Office of the president?"

Butterfield's confirmation of the recordings set off a cascade of events that led to Nixon's resignation 13 months later.

The question made Thompson instantly famous. His political Web site — http://www.imwithfred.com — prominently notes: "Friends in Tennessee still recall seeing the boy they'd grown up with on TV, sitting at the Senate hearing-room dais. He gained national attention for leading the line of inquiry that revealed the audio-taping system in the White House Oval Office."

What rarely is mentioned is that Thompson knew the answer to the question before he asked it. Investigators for the committee had gotten the information out of Butterfield during hours of behind-the-scenes questioning three days earlier, on July 13.

(Yes, that is rarely mentioned. Why does Fred rarely mention that?)

Thompson was not present, but a Republican investigator immediately tracked him down at the Carroll Arms Hotel bar where he was meeting with a reporter. Thompson called Buzhardt over the weekend to tip off the White House that the committee knew about the tapes.

(Secret phone call from “Mr. Integrity”/Fred to Nixon’s lawyer: “INCOMING! Dey know about da tape recordin’! What does ya want me ta do next, boss?” Fred is playing a character like Matt Damon played in “The Departed,” see—except he’s playing it in real life...)

...Scott Armstrong, a Democratic investigator for the committee who was part of the Butterfield questioning, said he was outraged by Thompson's tip-off.

"When the prosecutor discovers the smoking the gun, he's going to be shocked to find that the deputy prosecutor called the defendant and said, 'You'd better get rid of that gun,'" Armstrong said in an interview.

(It’s not shocking if you know the Republican attitude towards the law and towards ethics. Playing the Nixon rat on the investigating committee sure paid off for Fred, though, didn’t it?)

Watergate: STILL an issue for Republicans in the 2008 elections. Can't they find a conservative candidate with just a little integrity?

Fred Thompson: Pro-Abortion Lobbyist

2007-07-07T23:43:00.000-05:00

So, since the McCain campaign is so strapped for funds that they’re eating out of the same can of Beefaroni and sleeping under a blue tarp these days—the road is wide open for upstart candidate Fred Thompson of TV’s “Law and Order”? Right?

All the ducks were lined up: Thompson’s agent had a meeting with the GOP, they were cold at first—they told the agent to leave Thompson’s headshot and resume at the desk with the girl, “don’t call us, we’ll call you” bullshit...But Thompson’s agent kept calling them, he kept dipping his wick. Selling them on how absolutely right he’s be for this “Mr. President” part, starting the “buzz.” He arranged a series of public appearances at some very high profile venues—“real classy stuff, Freddy, no supermarket openings, no leg-and-fanny shots—“ “That’s good, because I’m an artist—“ “We know, baby, we know—“

And all that payed off. It culminated with Thompson’s appearance before the evangelical powerbrokers’ secret society, the Council For National Policy. This was a make or break audition for Thompson. You got to have the evangelical millionaire media in your corner; they’re make or break in the sticks. And it’s not like Freddy nailed it—he’d wanted to open with the big number from “Cats”, but thank God, his handlers talked him out of that and instead he talked to the Jesus marketers about what a raw deal Scooter Libby was getting...

What were they thinking? Freddy plays a conservative, he can do it in his sleep, and this is the audition for the Council For National Policy—the big time; this is Dobson, Pat Robertson, Tim LaHaye, the Hunts from Texas, the ex-John Birch Society nuts who are using Jesus’ name to take political power! They don’t wanna hear you play a sad song on the smallest violin in the world about Scooter Libby—they want to hear you talk about family values, how you’re gonna role back Roe v. Wade if you get in—

Still, it wasn’t a total disaster. Freddy didn’t exactly nail it, but he was still in consideration. They told him he’d have to do a screen test (which is kind of an insult to a star of Freddy’s stature) but he agreed to eat shit at least until the latest numbers on the potential candidates came in.

And Freddy’s numbers were good; he was trouncing McCain, even. You gotta understand how important this part was to Freddy—if he was to get this “President” thing, it would do for his career what playing “The Godfather” did for Brando (an artist that Freddy very much admires.) He really wanted this part bad, he’s pacin’ up and down his trailer sayin’ to himself “I hope I get this, I hope I get this—“

Then, today: disaster. I mean we’re talkin’ a real shit sandwich, delivered hot and ready for Freddy to eat. In the New York Times, yet.

Group Says It Hired Fred Thompson in Abortion Rights Bid

By JO BECKER and DAVID D. KIRKPATRICK
Published: July 7, 2007

Former Senator Fred D. Thompson, who has positioned himself as an opponent of abortion rights as he prepares to run for president, was hired as a lobbyist 16 years ago by a group on the other side of the issue, according to documents and people involved with his hiring.

(JESUS H. CHRIST!)

The group, the National Family Planning and Reproductive Health Association, hired Mr. Thompson in 1991, three years before he was elected to the Senate from Tennessee, as part of the group’s effort to overturn a ban on federally financed family planning clinics giving women information about abortion, according to the group’s board minutes and former president.

(Oh my God! THIS is why he wouldn’t do his big “abortion” number at the Council For National Policy audition!)

In the group’s board minutes of September 1991, Ms. DeSarno (of the NFPRHA) reported hiring Mr. Thompson to “aid us in discussions with the administration.” Ms. DeSarno, who provided the minutes, said in an interview that Mr. Thompson served as the group’s liaison to the White House.

A spokesman for Mr. Thompson said yesterday that Mr. Thompson had “no recollection of doing any work on behalf of this group.”

(No recollection! You fuckin’ putz, you know how much money we got sunk into promoting you for this part? You got anything else you want to tell us now, Fred? Did you ever play a gay Scoutmaster in a porn video, maybe, and you’re not “recollectin” that? We have to find out about this by readin’ it in the New York Times, for Christ’s sake?)

In a questionnaire that he answered during his successful 1994 Senate campaign in Tennessee, Mr. Thompson or his campaign staff checked a box stating that he believed abortion should be legal under any circumstance during the first three months of a pregnancy. In a televised debate the same year, Mr. Thompson appeared to tell the moderator that he personally disagreed with outlawing abortion. “Should the government come in and criminalize let’s say a young girl and her parents and her doctor?” Mr. Thompson said. “I think not.”

(Oh, my God (hits intercom) Clarisse! Where are my fuckin’ pills, get in here with my pills and a glass of water, this fucking actor is givin’ me a STROKE! How could you do this to us, Fred?)

...Ms. DeSarno said Mr. Thompson gave her regular updates by phone and that she met him on at least two occasions in person. Over dinner at the Washington restaurant Galileo one night, she said Mr. Thompson told her he had spoken with John Sununu, then the White House chief of staff, about the matter.

“Fred had a big smile and he said, how about if only the doctors can talk (about abortion) but not all these other nurses and volunteers,” Ms. DeSarno recalled, referring to a potential compromise on the ban. “It wasn’t formal. It was, ‘How about this?’ ”

("A big smile"...Oh, my God—my heart...my heart, Fred. You killin’ me, Fred, you’re killin’ me...fucking show business...)

Bush to Dems: Come on, guys, cut it out, that hurts, OW, cut it out...

2007-07-07T01:25:00.000-05:00

The White House is outraged by all these time-wasting investigations of the Justice Department and illegal wire-tapping and the Fourth Branch of government theory and stuff. "Why all the negative energy, man?" Look:

White House raps recent flurry of probes

By DEB RIECHMANN, Associated Press Writer Thu Jul 5, 5:28 PM ET

WASHINGTON - The White House on Thursday pushed back against congressional investigations of the Bush administration and said lawmakers should spend more time passing bills to solve domestic problems.

(I wish Bush had focused more on passing bills to solve domestic problems over the past seven years—instead of campaigning for Republican candidates and screwing up other countries. Wait a minute—no, I don’t wish he’d spent more time on domestic problems. I take that back. Anyway:)

In a constitutional showdown with Congress, the administration claimed executive privilege and rejected demands for White House documents about the firings of eight U.S. attorneys.

(Isn’t *that* a “domestic problem?* Trying to use the Justice Department to criminalize your political opposition and disenfranchise voters? I know it’s near the top of my list...)

The House and Senate Judiciary committees have set a deadline of 10 a.m. next Monday for the White House to explain its basis for the claim.

The administration has not said when or if it will respond.

(“We’re not *saying* how we’ll respond, how do you like them apples, smarty pants?” Oh, that's mature.)

Spokesman Scott Stanzel said Thursday the White House has received a many requests for information since Democrats took control of Congress in January and has turned over 200,000 pages of documents.

(Except for the documents that Congress wants.)

"They've launched over 300 investigations, had over 350 requests for documents and interviews and they have had over 600 oversight hearings in just about 100 days," Stanzel said.

(Well, that’s hardly their fault. Why don’t you just give ‘em what they’re asking for, then we could wrap this whole thing up and you guys could go home. Or, to prison...)

..."His numbers are as faulty as the intelligence they used to make their case for war," said Jim Manley, a spokesman for Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev.

(Ouch! A little snark there, from the old man.)

Subpoenas have been delivered to the offices of Bush, Cheney, the national security adviser and the Justice Department about the administration's warrantless wiretapping program.

(Free ride’s over, Bush boys. This is Washington, you don’t go around begging for mercy and respect for the office after the way Republicans treated the Clintons. Your guys spent more than seven years investigating Whitewater—a decades old banking scandal that turned out to be no scandal at all. The Dems have only spent a hundred days investigating crap that going on right now at the White House. This president's gonna get all the "deference and fair play" that the Republican Congress showed to Bill Clinton during the Lewinsky scandal, because this "police state" stuff's a a hell of a lot more important.)

In a letter to Congress last week, White House counsel Fred Fielding said the administration had rejected subpoenas for documents through the claim of executive privilege. That letter also made it clear that neither former presidential counsel Harriet Miers nor former White House political director Sara Taylor would testify on Capitol Hill next week, as directed by the subpoenas.

(“We refuse to testify on the grounds that it may—What we mean is, nobody’s talkin’, see? Dat’s why we sprung Scooter, see? If we let him go into da stir, dey’d all be singin’ like canary-boids, see? So nobody’s talkin’, see? M’yeah...)

That’s my “Little Caesar” imitation, for all you youngsters out there. He’s the new counsel to the Justice Department, see? M’yeah...

A-ha, So THAT'S Why Bush Poll Numbers Are So Low

2007-07-06T18:58:00.000-05:00

by Dirk Dodd

(Editor's note: Who is the author, Dirk Dodd? He's guy I grew up with in New Jersey. At school I used to beat him up and take his milk money; now he's old like me and he lives in New York City where he observes the political scene, when people are not beating him up taking his milk money. Here are Dirk's thoughts on the current Bush public relations strategy:)

George W. Bush is deliberately trying to drive his approval polling numbers down; down to where not only GOP lawmakers and the Republican party as a whole have abandoned him, but to where the Religious Right stops taking his calls, Laura moves back in with her folks, and Barney, the dog, is routinely taking chunks out of the president’s leg.

Sound crazy? Trace the behavior, pay attention to the numbers...

March 2005 - Social Security privatization. Opinion polls taken after Bush’s hard sell of the plan reveal an eye-popping plunge in approval, from 52% down to 45% according to a USA TODAY/ CNN/Gallup poll. Okay, privatization didn’t sell. What’s a seven percent drop in approval, anyway? I see ten easy every time I leave the toilet seat up. Nobody’s asking me for a divorce.

September 2005 - ‘Heckuva job’ Hurricane Katrina fumble. Bush is looking at approvals in the mid-to-low 40s. Hmmm… ‘But he’s a Republican,’ I say to myself, ‘Republicans don’t believe in federal assistance.’ Bush’s nose-thumb to hurricane victims conforms to an ideological aversion to government meddling, denying citizens their right to self-determined drowning. Doesn’t mean he’s given up trying…does it?

February 2006 - Dubai Ports deal. Bush dips to 34% in approval. Wait a sec… Did he not see the backlash coming on that? Placing our nation’s port security in the hands of Middle Easterners? Where’s your post-9/11-world common sense, man?

December 2006 - The Iraq Study Group. Yikes! Grim findings indeed on the prospects for achieving success in Iraq. But good news: the report leaves a little face-saving drawdown-of-troops strategy for the President to sign on to. A road map out of the quagmire! Beautiful! If it doesn’t work, it’s Baker’s fault! Incredibly, though, Bush re-buffs it. What? No he di-n’t! Oh, yes he di-id. And America responds by dropping Bush three more approval ratings points down, from 38% to 35% in a week’s time. ‘A lifeline’s being tossed you, dummy…grab hold!’

January 2007 - Troop ‘surge’ into Iraq. Oh, for the love of God… Another plunge, this time to the range of 35 to 33 percent. Overwhelmingly Americans want us out of Iraq; Bush ratchets up the troop strength instead some twenty thousand plus. Jack the Ripper numbers, that’s where this thing’s headed.

Now this, the latest presidential turd dropped into the punchbowl of public opinion:

July 2007 - The ‘Scooter’ Libby sentence commutation. Game over! A resounding 70 percent of Americans polled agree: the guy’s a felon, he must serve time. Bush says, “Nope… too harsh.”

There’s no other way to interpret this—he wants lower approval ratings.

And I know why. As bad as the numbers get for this president, his vice president enjoys even more dismal job approval ratings; some polls, at times, dipping down as low as into the high teens! This drives the uber Competitor-in-Chief Bush to the brink of insanity.

“He’s made every major decision of my presidency, every one…MY presidency!” sputters Bush, ramming his fist through a wall in the Oval Office. “By God, I’ll not let him out-poll me into the crapper, as well. Let me win something, will ya!? If not the presidency, then the month-to-month Least Popular Sweepstakes!”

Bad news for W. He’ll never realize his ambition of beating Cheney in the ‘Hate Derby.’ Let’s face it, even if Bush firebombed an orphanage tomorrow there’s still a diehard 20 percent of Americans who would remain steadfast as ever in their support of him…

“Those kids had it comin’ to ‘em! With their demands for porridge, and sips of water, and 10-minute breaks from the task of asbestos removal in the main dining hall—they brought it upon themselves! Anyway, all those lucky little boys and girls just got fast-tracked to Heaven, where right now they’re sitting pretty on the lap of Jesus…”

Bush’ll never make a dent in that 20% no matter what. My advice then to the President: forget Cheney, go for the history books…Worst President Ever.

Opinions vary among presidential historians, of course, but most agree the guy to beat here is James Buchanan, our 15th president…staunchly pro-slavery; failed to deal decisively with the South’s secession, prompting our nation’s bloody and divisive Civil War (some argue he fairly encouraged it…’Bring it on!’ he was once overheard saying to his Secretary of War.)

In the absence of hard polling data, but judging from newspaper opinion pieces at the time, letters-to-the-Editor, and the number of rocks and rotten eggs hurled in the direction of Buchanan’s passing presidential carriage, Buchanan today would be polling at roughly 24%.

Twenty-four percent? This President could do that standing on his pointy little head with one hand tied behind his back, right George…?

“Buchanan? Hah! Amateur! Our nation’s civil war will look like a tea party compared to Iraq when I get through there. I’m preparing a public statement right now, in fact, denigrating the prophet Mohammed that’ll light a fire in North America you’ll be able to see from outer space. Worst President Ever? That title’s as a good as MINE…!

DD

Worst White House Press Conference Ever?

2007-07-06T00:49:00.000-05:00

You could almost—(almost)—feel sorry for some of the Bush administration guys, if they hadn’t caused the deaths of so many people, so needlessly. Including our own troops.

Dana Milbank of the Washington Post chronicles what must be Tony Snow’s worst press conference, ever. (Including his first one, where he refused to take any questions about foreign policy.)

Milbank uses a somewhat overwrought Jabberwocky metaphor to highlight the fact that the administration’s statements have now degenerated into outright nonsense.

He needn’t have. Here’s the juicy bits...

Through the Looking Glass, Darkly

By Dana Milbank
Wednesday, July 4, 2007; A02

...“I'm sure that the vice president may have expressed an opinion, but the fact is, the president understands the -- and he may have recused himself; I honestly don't know.”
-- (Tony Snow) White House press briefing, yesterday.

(WTF?)

...President Bush, fielding questions yesterday after visiting wounded soldiers at Walter Reed, declared that "the jury verdict should stand" -- and then, in answer to the same question, said he was open to vacating the verdict by granting Libby a full pardon.

("I believe in the rule of law--uh, no, wait a minute, I don't.")

Logic suffered a more serious challenge when Bush press secretary Tony Snow, in his briefing, made the following points about Libby's case:

• That Bush wasn't "granting a favor to anyone" but that the case got his "special handling."

• That it was not done for "political reasons" even though "it was political."

• That it was handled "in a routine manner," yet it was also "an extraordinary case."

• That "we are not going to make comments" on the case, even though Bush had already issued a 655-word statement commenting on the case.

(Jee-zus...remember in 2004, when Bush's main argument against a Kerry presidency was that he was a flip-flopper?)

...That Snow was standing there at all was an act of courage. His hair is thinning and his frame is gaunt from his battle with cancer, and he has a port in his chest into which chemotherapy drugs are injected. And Bush has made things increasingly difficult for Snow since the press secretary took the job 15 months ago. The president's popularity has plunged into the 20s, he has lost both houses of Congress, the Iraq war is a debacle, and his vice president has attempted to remove himself from the executive branch. Richard Nixon had been the standard by which presidential failures are measured, but even Nixon was not this low this long...

(Yes, it takes courage for a man with cancer to stand up there and spout nonsense to the press. He's a sick man; why the hell can't they find someone else to stand up there and spout bullshit to the press? Is this part of the new Bush "go for the pity fuck" public relations strategy?)

...(Snow) crossed his ankles behind the lectern and established his opening position: that "the president does not look upon (the commutation of Libby's sentence) as granting a favor to anyone."

(Yeah, he looks on it as way to keep the other indictable henchmen from spilling their guts.)

"Why shouldn't it be thought of as a bestowal of a favor," asked Plante, "when there are dozens of other people who would probably make the same case that their sentences were too heavy and should have been commuted?"

"Well, I'm not sure that there are dozens of others," the spokesman ventured.

Indeed, there aren't dozens. "There are more than 3,000 current petitions for commutation," ABC's Ann Compton informed the spokesman. "Will all 3,000 of those be held to the same standard?"

Snow cut his losses. "I don't know," he demurred.

("I don't know, I just don't know..." I think he does know the answer to that one. If those 3,000 petitioners can't put the finger on Cheney, their sentences ain't gonna be commuted.)

Ken Herman of Cox News Service tried to get Snow to justify his claim that the Libby commutation was handled by the book. "How could it not be extraordinary to grant something to someone who didn't even ask for it?"

Snow ultimately surrendered to Herman with a shrug.

(Boy, that response wouldn't make the grade on "Jeopardy!", I can tell you that...)

...CNN's Ed Henry asked why Bush adviser Karl Rove, now known to have leaked Plame's identity, was not being held to Bush's promise in 2004 to fire anybody involved in the leak.

"We are not going to make comments in detail until the legal process is over," Snow parried -- only to be reminded by several reporters of Bush's two-page statement on the case from Monday, and the prosecutor's view that the case is done.

(Fire Rove? Do you know what that would do to our reputation for integrity? He sets the ethical standard for the rest of the administration. And the guy's a political genius; he was the guy who sold the country on the Iraq war...)

Read the entire article at the link above; more amazing statements. Snow sounds like he's conducting a press conference on the Hindenburg. ("Why is it blowing up? I don't know... I don't know... (shrugs)"

Libby Ain't Outta Da Woods Yet!

2007-07-03T23:45:00.001-05:00

What happens to Libby now that he don’t have to do no hard time? The soldiers fighting in Baghdad and Anbar province are probably staying up nights worrying about that one. But it’s a tough question, according to the following article:

Jul 3, 5:23 PM EDT

Legal Confusion Follows Libby Decision

WASHINGTON (AP) -- President Bush forced the CIA leak case into uncharted legal territory when he commuted the prison sentence of former White House aide I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, a federal judge said Tuesday.

Bush eliminated Libby's 2 1/2-year prison term and left in place his two years of supervised release. But supervised release - a form of probation - is only available to people who have served prison time. Without prison, it's unclear what happens next.

U.S. District Judge Reggie B. Walton posed the question to Libby's attorneys and to Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald: Does this mean Libby won't actually be required to serve supervised release? Should he just have to report to probation officials as if he spent time in prison?

I tried to find out. The first thing that should happen is that Libby should get familiar with the system, so he can’t get into trouble again. There’s an FAQ for probationers I found on line that could answer a lot of Libby’s questions:

* What should I not bring to my appointment with my Probation Officer?

You will pass through a metal detector and be searched, so you should not bring the following:

* Weapons or anything that can be used as a weapon. (We don’t want you goin’ batshit on the Probation Officer with a Blackberry or something.)
* Recording devices. (The last thing you want is a record of what you actually said, Scooter, that’ll land you back in the clink in no time.)
* Camera cell phones. (No pictures! We might have to bat you around with a phone book or something, if you try to get tough.)

Can I carry a firearm?

* No probationer may possess any firearms if on probation for a felony…

(And dat means you, Scooter. This obviously goes double for Libby, since he was Cheney’s right-hand man when he got into all that “law trouble.” No more huntin’ trips with Dick, Scooter. Yer just askin’ fer it, if ya do that.)

What do I do if I am arrested?

* If you are arrested, charged with any offense, or have any police contact, contact your Probation Officer, no later than 48 hours of it happening. You may do this in person or by telephone.

(Either that or call the President and tell him you might talk. He’ll spring ya again. That Domestic Policy Adviser of Bush’s who was ripping off Target stores didn’t have to do no time.)

“Tips for Success”

* Review and understand all of your conditions of probation.

(That’s gonna be tough, in Libby’s case. It turns out that even the judge and the prosecutor don’t understand the terms of Libby’s probation. There ain’t no precedent. This is apparently the first time in U.S. history a convicted felon was put on probation without doing any time at all. But the usual advice from a probation officer will almost certainly apply: “Keep your nose clean, Scooter. People, places and things—stay away from the old crowd, the old hang-outs, the sensitive files—we got our eye on you, Scooter, we’re right behind ya every step of the way…”)

* Think before you act. Slow yourself down and think a few steps ahead.

(Yeah. Don’t be so impulsive about repeatedly leakin’ the identity of covert operatives. Think, before you do that, next time.)

* Surround yourself with law abiding people who really want to see you do well, such as friends, family, co-workers, and formal support groups.

(That’s another tough one for Libby. Most of his “friends and co-workers” are already in some kind of jam with the law, including the Attorney General of the United States. If I were you, Scooter, I’d head straight for the “support group” option. If there ain’t one in your neighborhood, you could start one: “The Bush Officials Who Skate Because They’re Above The Law Support Group.” You could sit around the living room and drink bad coffee and talk about your feelings and tell each other how bad you feel ‘cause you never had to pay your debt to society. There may not be too many members now, but it’s sure to fill up before Bush leaves office. Say—there might be some kind of tax break you could get, too—or maybe you could form it as one of them off-shore companies and attract investors….yeeeahhh…)

* Take ownership of your probation by becoming an active participant.

(Yeah! Don’t just lay there on the couch all day and make us buzz that little bracelet around your ankle to get you to come in for your appointment. Be pro-active! Meet with at-risk kids from schools of government, do a “Scared Straight” program for ‘em. Tell ‘em not to tell outright lies to law enforcement officials, tell ‘em the correct answer is always “I ain’t got no recollection.”)

* The responsibility for making changes in your life is yours.

(Ain’t that the truth. Bush is only gonna be there two more years to keep you and your pals outta stir. After that, it’s all up to you, punks. Get a job, a real job. Become a media evangelist, like Chuck Colson. That’s where the real money is, anyway.)

Klassic Komedy from Bush and Cheney: The Scary Poll Numbers!

2007-07-02T16:02:00.000-05:00

New way to tell the same old story: Bush and Cheney are like this zany old comedy team, see—--like Abbott and Costello.

Bush is the stupid one you laugh at, see, and Cheney’s his con-man type partner who’s always slapping him around, taking advantage of him, see?

It’ll be a riot!

Show opens with the titles, and wacky comedy music, horns and kettle drum booms):
Music: YA-DA-DA-DA-DA(whoop!), DA-YA-DA-DA, DA-DA (BOOM!) etc.

Over music we see: The titles, florid fifties ‘script: “The Bush and Cheney Show!” “Starring Chick Cheney…and Junior Bush!”

Behind the titles is a film montage of funniest scenes from past shows: Bush explaining his plan for Iraq War to generals by using laser pointer to point to areas on huge map, laser pointer causes Baghdad area to burst into flames, Bush bites his knuckle and throws pitcher of water to put it out, misses, it hits a general, who is outraged, Cheney slaps Bush and starts to beat on him with his hat—cut to: New Orleans being blasted by huge hurricane, Bush looks out the window of Air Force One, starts tugging on Cheney’s sleeve to make him look, too, Cheney shrugs him off and returns to the Racing Form, Bush pushes the “Tell nation we’ve got everything under control” button on media panel, looks out window again, sees levees have breached and city is now flooding, Bush bites knuckle as Cheney slaps him and beats him with his hat, etc.

Titles for tonight’s episode: “Bush and Cheney Meet the Scary Poll Numbers, Again!”

(Scary old house of Congress. Bush and Cheney pull up in broken down old truck, wearing delivery caps, hand-painted sign on side of truck “Bush and Cheney: We deliver legislation!” Truck farts to a stop, radiator cap pops off, steam shoots out.)
Cheney: I thought I told you to fix that! (Slaps Bush in face, sound effect.)
Bush:: But, Chick, I—
Cheney: (slaps him again) Never mind, we don’t have time now. Come on, we’ve gotta get this legislation delivered.
Bush: But Chick—
Cheney: (slaps him again) “But-chick, But-chick,” what, are ya talking Yiddish now? Get a move on.
(Bush unloads a huge crate marked “SECOND TERM LEGISLATION” from the back of the truck. Cheney leans against side of truck, making no effort to help him, examining his fingernails.)
Bush: (staggering under the burden, in sheep-like voice) Gee, Chick, do I hafta go up that scary ol’ Hill wit dis legislation all by myself. I don’t wanna hafta go dat hill, please don’t make dis boy go up there alone, Chick, them poll numbers sure is scary, oh Chick, please Chick, don’t—
Cheney: (slaps him in the face again) Shaddap! What are you whining about, you wanted the job didn’t you? Look (pulls whistle out of his pocket, blows in it, it toots) See this whistle? It symbolizes our right wing media propaganda machine. You get into trouble, you blow on that, we’ll all come runnin’.
Bush: You’ll come runnin’?
Cheney: Like a shot.
Bush: Gee, you’re a pal. (to camera) He’s a real pal.
Cheney: (slaps him) Now get up that hill and don’t come back until you’ve delivered that legislation.
(Bush starts to stagger off with his burden, then Cheney calls him back, and he staggers back into frame. Cheney slaps him.)
Bush: What was that for?
Cheney: You forgot the whistle! Now get goin’!
Bush: (turning around, talking through whistle clenched in his teeth) Okay, okay, but I’m one scared boy—

(Cheney boots him in the ass, returns to reading Racing Form after he leaves. Turns over Racing Form, it says Halliburton No-Bid Profits on the back. Cheney smiles his lopsided smile.)

(Inside the House. Creaky old door opens, Bush staggers in with his huge legislative burden, sets it down behind him. Door slams shut with a bang, Bush jumps. He’s terrified. Takes whistles out of his mouth.)

Bush: B-boy, it sh-sure is sc-c-ary in here… (Sees old candelabra on table nearby, tries to light a candle, can’t strike matches. Finally gets it lit. Light comes up behind him slowly from candelabra, revealing first scary poll number: “32%”
Bush looks up at it, begins shaking uncontrollably.)

Bush: (so scared he can barely whisper:) …chick…! Ch-ch-ch—(He looks at camera, points at poll number with trembling finger, then puts hand to side of his face in horror) …oh chick…o-o-oh, ch-hi-hick!...ch-ch—

(Jump cut to Cheney, waiting by van. Looks at watch, then up at house, annoyed.)

(Back to Bush, in house. Bush, shaking like a paint-mixer, turns away from first scary poll number only to see another scary poll number that has come up behind him from the other direction: “31%”. Bush bites knuckles, his cap does a somersault on his head, kazoo sound effect. Then he remembers the whistle. He puts it in his mouth, missing a couple of times, tries to blow, but his mouth is too dry with fear. All he can manage is a kind of “b-bbfff!” sound, a dry spit-take. Finally, a third scary poll number come up beside him, takes the whistle out of his mouth and blows a clear note on it for him, hands it back to him. The third scary poll number is “26%!!!”)

Bush: (taking whistle) Th-thank y-you…(then he sees what the poll number says, screams “CHIIIIIIICK!” and runs right through closed door, leaving a “Bush” shaped hole in it.)
(Unfortunately, his suspenders are caught on the big box of legislation and he’s drawn right back into the House again, slammed against the box of legislation, menaced by the poll numbers. He runs out again at top speed, screaming “CHIIIIICK!”, and he’s snapped right back inside by the suspenders again.)

(This bit is repeated over and over again, for about the next two years.)

COMMERCIAL BREAK.

A Horrible Admission

2007-07-01T23:18:00.000-05:00

See if you can figure out what’s so horrifying about this particular Iraq story from last week. (Hint: it's what Lugar said.):

White House faces tough crowd on Iraq
By ANNE FLAHERTY, Associated Press Writer 19 minutes ago

WASHINGTON - President Bush is sending his top aide on national security affairs to Capitol Hill on Thursday to confront what has become a tough crowd on the Iraq war.

A majority of senators believe troops should start coming home within the next few months. A new House investigation concluded this week that the Iraqis have little control over an ailing security force. And House Republicans are calling to revive the independent Iraq Study Group to give the nation options.

While the White House thought they had until September to deal with political fallout on the unpopular war, officials may have forgotten another critical date: the upcoming 2008 elections.

"This is an important moment if we are still to have a bipartisan policy to deal with Iraq," Sen. Richard Lugar, R-Ind., said in an interview Wednesday.

If Congress and the White House wait until September to change course in Iraq, Lugar said "It'll be further advanced in the election cycle. It makes it more difficult for people to cooperate. ... If you ask if I have some anxiety about 2008, I do."

Did you catch that? The most horrifying part of the Iraq War turns out to be that—for the Republicans and conservatives like Lugar--the decision about whether to keep fighting in Iraq turns out to be all about the election chances of the Republican Party in 2008.

And the unspoken premise in the Lugar assessment of the war is that continuing the occupation of Iraq--or deciding to end it—really has no effect at all, either positive or negative, on the security of the United States and its people.

How do we know that? Because we know that Lugar and other Republicans bucking the President on the war would not permit a withdrawal if they really believed the war in Iraq was necessary to US security. Conservatives have been arguing for more than four years that the war in Iraq is necessary “so that we don’t have to fight the terrorists over here.” (And that is what the troops are told, too.)

But if Lugar and other Republicans in Congress are calling for withdrawal before the next round of elections—we know that even they don’t believe that argument any more, if they ever did. Why would they be calling for withdrawal from Iraq prior to the next elections, if they really believed that more successful terrorist strikes on America will ensue as a result? They obviously don’t believe that’s going to happen.

All of which means: the Republican Party has officially won the “how low can you go in American politics” contest: a public, de facto admission that 1) the war is largely useless with regard to preventing terror, 2) the Republican leadership understands and accepts that fact, 3) the conservatives in Congress continued to back the war and the escalation despite this knowledge of the war’s uselessness, and 4) the only reason they are considering an end to this policy of sending American combat volunteers to possible death and dismemberment—is that it will adversely affect their election chances in 2008.

Horrible. An admission of the moral bankruptcy of the conservative argument for the war and the Republican political philosophy. Anti-war Americans regularly charge that the rationale for the Iraq war was and is a lie; and now the thing is as much as admitted by the GOP itself. What is more, the conservative leadership is so narcissistic and has such contempt for the public, the president, and the people in uniform fighting the war—that they are announcing that their reason for ending the war sooner rather than later has nothing to do with the waste of human life. They want to end it because it will hurt their chances for re-election...

If you ever needed proof that the GOP and the conservative movement are partisan and perverse to the point of being sociopathic, you have it now: a party and movement of the maniacally self-obsessed. The mission of sane Americans is to drive people like this out of power and keep them out of power for the rest of our lifetimes.

New Bush Strategy: "I'm goin' for the pity f**k"

2007-06-30T22:37:00.000-05:00

Bush May Be Out of Chances For a Lasting Domestic Victory
By Peter Baker
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, June 29, 2007; Page A01

NEWPORT, R.I., June 28 -- He looked uncharacteristically dejected as he approached the lectern, fiddling with papers as he talked and avoiding the sort of winking eye contact he often makes with reporters. And then President Bush did something he almost never does: He admitted defeat.

"A lot of us worked hard to see if we couldn't find a common ground," he said an hour after his immigration plan died on Capitol Hill. "It didn't work."

(“Didn’t work,” he muttered again, after taking a pull from a bottle in a paper bag. He rubbed his unshaven face and stared into the middle distance. This drew sympathetic sighs from some of the GOP women in the audience.)

It was, in the end, simply a statement of reality after the Senate buried his proposal to overhaul immigration laws. But for a president who makes a point of never giving in, even when he loses, it was a striking moment, underscoring the depth of his political travails.

(Breaks down; sobs. Regains control of himself, swallows hard, wipes away tears.)

It took almost two years before Bush acknowledged, just months ago, that his effort to reshape Social Security had failed.

(“Tried to privatize it. Couldn’t.” Bush rubbed his eyes with the back of his hand.)

Now he has surrendered in what was probably his last chance of securing a legacy-making second-term domestic victory.
The desultory appearance in a college hallway here after a speech on Iraq may have marked the death of ambition in Bush's legislative agenda.

(“Yep. I’m desultory. I’m the Desultor-ator.”)

The paradigm shift that senior adviser Karl Rove saw after the 2004 election has now proved illusory. The Ownership Society that Bush promised to build in 2005 is rarely mentioned these days...

"Sand is flowing out of the hourglass," said Fred I. Greenstein, a Princeton University scholar on the presidency, who was struck by the gloomy tone of Bush's televised statement. "He looked much less like the kid on the cover of Mad magazine without a care. . . . “

(You know, for most people not looking so much like Alfred E. Neuman anymore would be considered a step *up.* But for this guy…)

(Greenstein continues his analysis of Bush:) “He looked very angry and almost having difficulty getting the sentences out…

(“I—You—They—aw, damn it all t’hell, anyhow!”)

“…That seems to me to contrast with some of the early stages" of his presidency.

(Yeah. Remember the old twinkle in his eye when he said merrily of US casualties in Iraq: “Bring ‘em on!” That inspired confidence in the troops. But these days…)

Bush emerged from reelection with four main domestic priorities for his second term, as identified by Rove and other aides: He planned to reinvent Social Security to allow investment of some funds in the stock market, overhaul the tax code from top to bottom, bring millions of illegal immigrants out of the shadows and impose tough new curbs on what he called excessive litigation. He is now almost zero-for-four.

(It ain’t over yet! He’s still got that “we’re goin’ to Mars” thing of his to pitch, ain’t he?)

Tax overhaul died when Bush took the report he commissioned and put it on a shelf because it would be too provocative.

(Shoot! I woulda love to have seen that. A report on tax cuts that HE thought was too disgusting to release publicly.)

Bush has lately sketched out a new agenda in areas such as energy and health care, and he may yet make progress on those in the 18 months he has left. But going forward, aides acknowledged, the once swaggering president will be in a defensive crouch.

(Huddled in a fetal ball behind the podium, Bush cried out: “Energy! Health care! That car I was talkin’ about for six years that runs on hydrogen! Mars!”)

His immediate domestic plans include imploring lawmakers to reauthorize his No Child Left Behind education program, while trying to stop Congress from expanding a children's health insurance program and, with it, the federal deficit.

(“Aw, come on! Continue to fund my meaningless unworkable big government program to defund public education, that’s muh only legacy, that and the meaningless unworkable war! And please don’t make me veto childrens’ health insurance before I go! Please! I implore thee!”)

…Bush said he was "encouraged" by what he called "hopeful signs" since the extra troops he sent arrived in Iraq. Yet even in this military setting, the audience responded politely and without much enthusiasm, withholding applause except for introductions until deep into the speech and posing a couple of tough questions after it was over.

(“Mr. President, how many more of our kids are you going to get killed before you admit this was a stupid, irresponsible, unnecessary war?” “I—I’m a very lonely president, you know. Muh wife doesn’t understand me any more…” Crowd: “AWWWW…”)

Aides tried to portray the defeat of the immigration legislation as a failure of Congress rather than of the president.

(Aides: (thowing a blanket over the shivering Bush) “Can’t you see the man is in PAIN? “Don’t those bastards in Congress have any FEELINGS?” “How much more has he got to suffer? He needs LOVE!”)

…White House aides bemoaned how little has been accomplished during the first six months of the Democratic Congress, noting that public approval of Congress has plummeted even lower than Bush's ratings. Unspoken in that critique was the fact that the immigration defeat was dealt largely by members of the president's party.

(“Goddamn Democrats—I mean--Republicans—I mean…Oh, I dunno what I mean…” (Breaks down, sobs. Sneaks a peek to see if anyone’s going to come up and throw their arms around him to comfort him. No one is. Sobs again.)

Fox News: Bush Immigration Reform Status Report

2007-06-30T01:24:00.000-05:00

This is a rush transcript of "Special Report With Brit Hume" from June 28, 2007.

BRIT HUME, FOX NEWS ANCHOR: Next on SPECIAL REPORT, that immigration bill goes down in a stampede of no votes, in which even some of the bill's previous backers voted no. It is now dead. ,,,
... All that right here, right now. Welcome to Washington. I'm Brit Hume. Not only did the Senate immigration bill go down today, it was swamped. It sank so deep, it's not likely to come back in this Congress or in this presidency. Congressional correspondent Major Garrett reports it's all over, including the shouting.

Hume: (continued) I mean, we’re talkin’ dead here, folks. Centerpiece bipartisan achievement of Bush’s second term? How is it, you ask? It’s dead, that’s how it is. (draws finger across his throat) Vvvip! (sticks tongue out, rolling his eyes up into his head) “Dead! Ack!” (looks back into camera) DEAD! This bill has flatlined! Eeeeeeeee... It was killed in a stampede of no votes! It’s (mouths word “dead” silently at camera). President Bush pulled out all the stops to save it, he used every ounce of his remaining political capital to lean on Republicans to put it through and—AS A RESULT!—it’s DAAAAID!

Look—what part of this “dead” thing don’t you people understand? We been watchin’ it for weeks, it hasn’t moved, it’s startin’ to stink, they’s flies around it, it’s—DEAD! Here’s British comic John Cleese to explain it to you exactly how dead it is. John?

(Cut to: John Cleese, holding microphone in front of Westminster. Graphic say: “John Cleese, reporting live from London.”)

Cleese: Thanks, Brit. President Bush’s immigration reform bill, which he claimed would be passed by Memorial Day, is now officially dead. The president has spent weeks trying to get bill passed in order to prove that he was still very much in command in Washington. Instead he was deserted by the Republican party and has proved that he is no longer relevant to his own political party or its agenda. As a result, the president’s immigration reform bill is dead. Quite dead. This immigration reform bill is no more! It has ceased to be! It's expired and gone to meet its maker! It's a stiff! Bereft of life, it rests in peace! If Bush hadn't nailed it to the perch it'd be pushing up the daisies! It’s metabolic processes are now 'istory! It's off the twig! It's kicked the bucket, it's shuffled off this mortal coil, rung down the curtain and joined the bleedin' choir invisible!! THIS IS AN EX-IMMIGRATION REFORM BILL!!

Cut back to Fox studio, Brit Hume, laying in an open coffin with lit candles all around him, "Nearer My God To Thee" plays softly on organ in background.

Hume: Look! I’m doing an imitation of Bush’s immigration reform bill! Get it?

(cut to Neil Cavuto)
Cavuto: Okay, thanks Brit, I think the folks at home get it. In other news today, the United States Supreme Court—

(Hume rushes into shot with Cavuto, yells into camera)
Hume: DEAD! DEAD!
Cavuto: Okay, Brit, okay—
(Hume keeps screaming dead until the men come and get him, again.)

Bush Last Gasp On Immigration: "Out With People!"

2007-06-29T15:31:00.000-05:00

Time Running Out for Bush on Immigration

Jun 27, 1:17 PM EDT

By BEN FELLER

WASHINGTON (AP) -- President Bush, short on political capital and time, is devoting much of what's left of his term in office to getting an immigration deal.

Starting with an April 9 speech in Arizona, in which he talked tough about border security and prodded Congress to get moving, Bush has staged a dozen immigration events. That's not counting his four radio addresses on the topic in that time, or his phone calls to lawmakers, or his bold prediction that he'd see reporters at the bill-signing for a bill that seemed dead.

And just what are these “immigration events” that Bush has been staging to keep xenophobic white conservatives and “cheap labor,” union-busting GOP businessmen from killing off his immigration policy?

Well, perhaps the most ambitious event is his proposal for “Out With People!”, an upbeat, positive traveling musical show featuring an international cast of nearly twelve million illegal immigrants now living in the USA.

The “Out With People!” plan calls for the creation of a federally-funded international troupe composed mostly of former residents of Central America, mainly from Mexico, Honduras and Guatemala. These millions will sing and perform all around the United States in an effort to convince local racists and Republicans that they are “non-threatening” and only mildly annoying.

More than two million illegal immigrants are already undergoing training at former Army bases in Southern California, Arizona, New Mexico and Texas. Trainees are taken by bus or truck to the bases, where they are issued conservative casual wear, including dress slacks and “Out With People!” sweaters. They then begin an intensive four week basic training course in singing and choreographed dancing. Since most of the cast are not native speakers of English, songs are taught phonetically. Principal numbers include “We Do Work That You White Folks Won’t!”, “We Pay Taxes, Too!”, “I Want To Make Some Money And Then Return To My Homeland,” and the inspiring “Out With People!” theme song:

Out/Out With People/
Ya meet ‘em wherever ya go/
Out/Out With People/
We’re here though our wages are low/ etc.

Initial reaction from local government officials indicates that they would welcome the idea of the huge troop visiting and performing in their communities. “Twelve million immigrants coming to our little town of four thousand, that’s a hell of customer base,” said Mayor Darryl Jennings of Skeeterville, Alabama. “I guess they’ll buy out everything we have to sell when they’re here--food, water, appliances, Slim Jims, everything we got. It’s an economic boom! Just so long as they’re outta here after the weekend’s over…”

Along with performing the show, cast members will participate in civic events and assist volunteer organizations and businesses as a way to give back to the communities that host them. “We will harvest for agribusinesses, rebuild roads and infrastructure, do all the gringos’ work for them at less than minimum wage,” claims cast member Jose Rodriguez. “And we will sing and dance as we do it!”

The official “Out With People!” tour in 2008 will feature more than twelve million troupe members, who will begin their trip around the continental United States in Texas and visit a huge circle of towns and communities, first in the South, then swinging up north through the Atlantic Seaboard and New England, and then west through the Heartland to the Pacific Northwest and finally southward through California, where they will all be dumped across the Mexican border.