... that is, the ones not made up out of thin air by the Republicans.
Barack Obama said he'd stop torture and hold those responsible accountable. Instead, he's fighting in the courts to continue indefinite imprisonment and protect Bush's military commissions,* while torture continues under his watch at Bagram in Afghanistan. He's also blocked any possible investigation, never mind trial, of those who committed torture or who authorized it, even while our allies are moving forward with their own trials in the face of American hostility.
Barack Obama said he'd pull us out of Iraq by 2010. In fact, even by the end of 2011 there is supposed to be a permanent 50,000 troop presence for purposes of "training."
Barack Obama said he'd put a stop to funding wars through off-budget supplemental bills. He lied about that one, too.
And, most recently, he promised a moratorium on the issuing of new permits to drill deep-ocean oil wells... and then kept right on issuing those permits, with not even so much as a slow-down.
Guantanamo is still open.
The PATRIOT Act and the Military Commissions Act are still law, and there is no bill even filed, much less likely to pass Congress, to repeal them.
And the Obama White House worked hard to water down both health care reform (making it into little more than a taxpayer hand-out to insurance corporations) and financial reform (so that no company Too Big to Fail would suffer).
I honestly cannot see any reason to support- or even TRUST- this man anymore.
* Take note: he nominated the lawyer who argued in favor of permanent imprisonment without due process of law to the Supreme Court.
Showing posts with label Iraq. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Iraq. Show all posts
Monday, May 24, 2010
Wednesday, January 27, 2010
2010 SotU Live-Blog
9:22 PM - Well, what did I get? A firm and definite commitment to leaving Iraq- which, in all reality, we didn't have. A call for repeal of DADT- but no hint of action on his part to stop DADT prosecutions and dismissals from the service, nor a word on gay marriage. Torture mentioned only as something "prohibited"- it's all over, nothing to see here, move along. Did call for ending Bush tax cuts on the wealthy, and select tax hikes on big business... but never said any form of the words, "raise taxes." DID back the House financial reform package, did threaten veto of empty actions, but set no standards on specifics for financial reform. Hasn't given up on health "insurance" reform- but nothing on health CARE reform, and aside from describing what the Senate bill does, no specifics on what he wants Congress to do.
Obama has NOT given up on cap and trade, but at the same time he's offered the Republicans the store on everything else energy-wise- offshore oil drilling, nuclear power, clean coal.
But far, FAR too much empty feel-good talk, far too many empty platitudes without substance, and, worst of all, an ending that emphasized bipartisanship. That's the most important thing for Obama- that he get some Republican support. He's willing to run his presidency aground on "changing the tone of American politics."
Olbermann mentions that the speech tries to serve two masters- bipartisanship and attacking Republicans. I don't see it too much- he only hit the Republicans a couple of times, only lightly, and only called them out by name once.
The Republican response is here, but I'm not interested in the least. As for Obama... he gives great speeches. He has perfect delivery. More than once I found myself forgetting what he was actually saying and falling under his spell. But for my part he did NOT demonstrate tonight any firm leadership. He reminds me of that old Indian chief in Dances With Wolves: "I believe we should talk about this some more. That is all I have to say."
The speech wasn't enough for me to completely give up on Obama, but neither did it do much of anything to restore any trust in him. We'll have to see what he does in the next year, to see if he follows up this speech with more pressure on both sides of the aisle, if he actually gets into the political system and kicks some ass.
I don't think he will. I don't think he can. I really don't think he knows how.
But he can sure give a great speech, can't he?
9:20 PM - Wrapping up with more blowing sunshine up America's collective ass. (Yes, I like that metaphor.) "I won't quit!" Yeah, well, before you quit you have to START.
9:17 PM - "I never suggested that change would be easy, or that I could do it alone." - Yes, but you could have done SOMETHING besides cover Bush's and Cheney's asses for torture. You could have done a LOT- and mostly you've sat on your ass, Mr. Obama, and let Congress do the heavy lifting. It's your fault that they keep dropping it all on their own toes.
9:12 PM - Civil rights. Points out that his administration has a civil rights division which is "actually" prosecuting. Calls for repeal of Don't Ask, Don't Tell. Immigration reform.
9:08 PM - Nuclear weapons. Arms control treaty being negotiated with Russia. Secure all existing nuclear weapons around the world within four years- yeah, tell it to North Korea, Pakistan, Israel, Iran. Mentions sanctions on North Korea; claims Iran is isolated, threatens "consequences." Improving response to bioterrorism. "Our destiny is connected to those beyond our shores... but we also do it because it is right." Mentions 10,000 Americans in Haiti helping provide aid.
9:07 PM - Veterans' Affairs. Reform of the VA in progress. Michele Obama gets another shout-out.
9:04 PM - A minute of empty talk about national security, followed by a run-down on terrorism, comma, what Obama has done. "We have prohibited torture-" BULLSHIT. Calls for protecting rights of Afghani women, ending corruption there. "We are responsibly leaving Iraq to its people... we will have all of our combat troops out of Iraq by this August." THAT is NEWS.
9:00 PM - Bipartisanship. "What frustrates the American people is a Washington where every day is an election day." "Neither party should block every single bill just because they can." Specifically slams "a few specific Senators." "I will not give up on trying to change the tone of our politics." Reminds Democrats of their "largest majority in decades." Republicans: "If you're going to insist that sixty votes in the Senate are required," then you're going to have to govern. NO, NO, NO, NO YOU IDIOT. You've just said, in essence, "We'll let you run things." Wants regular meetings with leaders of both parties.
8:58 PM - Calls out lobbyists, calls for transparency. Unfortunately, as we've seen in the past year, he doesn't walk the walk. Calls for limits on lobbyist contributions, total transparency of lobbyist activity. Speaks against Supreme Court ruling allowing unlimited corporate spending on elections- calls on Congress to "correct these problems." Earmark reform- total transparency of earmarks, posted online, before a vote. Won't happen.
8:55 PM - Calls out Republicans on "status quo" Republicans. What they want- tax cuts for the rich, spending cuts on the poor- "That's what we did for eight years. That's what helped us into this crisis... we can't do it again... it's time to try something new."
8:50 PM - Obama puts the blame for the deficit squarely on Bush and the Republicans- "All of this was before I walked in the door." Admits adding $1 trillion to national debt. Calls for the American government to tighten its belt just like American families. 2011- freeze government spending for three years, except national security and entitlements. Note: if GOP takes Congress in 2010, he'll have that ANYWAY. Eliminate Bush tax cuts on $250,000+ people, oil companies, investors. Calls again for bipartisan fiscal commission with fast-track up-down vote on proposals. Calls out Senate for blocking the bill that would have created it- he'll order it done anyway with executive power. Calls on Senate to restore pay-go budgeting.
8:46 PM - "I take my share of the blame for not explaining (healthcare) to the American people." You'd better. How about saying where you want health care reform to GO? "As temperatures cool, I want everyone to take another look" at the Senate bill. "If anyone from either party has a better idea... let me know." "Don't walk away from reform- not now, not when we're so close. Let us find a way to come together for the American people." NO SPECIFICS. Just empty talking- AGAIN.
8:43 PM - Health insurance reform- here we go. "We still need health insurance reform." Does he follow this up? Republicans stand and applaud. "Let's clear a few things up." "By now it should be obvious I didn't take on health care because it was good politics." You got that right. Interrupts the good points of the Senate health care bill to praise his wife for tackling childhood obesity- QUIT WASTING OUR TIME.
8:40 PM - Education. "The best anti-poverty program around is a first-class education." A lot of empty talk about only funding success. Renew Elementary and Secondary Education Act. Urges Senate to pass House bill "revitalizing" community colleges. Take student loan program back from banks, give tax credit for college tuition, expand Pell Grant. Cap student loan payments at 10% of total income, pay off debts if they enter public service.
8:38 PM - Exports. "We will double our exports over the next five years." Nice trick- how do you plan to get other countries to BUY double our goods? A "National Export Initiative." Basically sounds like subsidies for American businesses- especially farmers, who already get tons of subsidies, and who Obama named BEFORE businesses. Calls for strict enforcement of trade agreements- yeah, right, when has that ever happened?
8:36 PM - Calls for nuclear power plants, offshore drilling. THAT got the Republicans on their feet- twice. Biofuel, clean coal, but "energy and climate bill that will create incentives..."- that's cap and trade. Obama has NOT given up on cap and trade. Calls out climate change skeptics. "The nation that leads the clean energy economy will be the nation that leads the global economy, and America must be that nation." That DOESN'T get the Republicans standing.
8:34 PM - Financial reform- "I am not interested in punishing banks," but, "We can't allow financial institutions to take risks that threaten the whole economy." Mentions House bill- Obama threatens veto of any bill that doesn't come up to his standards, but doesn't say what those standards are.
8:31 PM - "How long should America put its future on hold?" "I do not accept second place for the United States of America." - Nice rhetoric, but what about substance?
8:30 PM - "We can't afford another 'expansion' like the one we had in the past decade- what some call the Lost Decade."
8:29 PM - Raise taxes on companies who outsource jobs. A small handful of scattered Republicans clap, but stay seated.
8:28 PM - More spending on infrastructure and clean energy. Watch for Republicans to call this as pork.
8:27 PM - $30B loan program to small business. Wish I could read John Boehner's lips- I think he just said, "Bullshit." Tax credit for businesses who hire or raise salaries- ZERO CAPITAL GAINS TAX ON SMALL BUSINESS. That IS meat.
8:25 PM - Here's the expected call for a jobs bill- or a "second stimulus." Which really does undermine the past five minutes of Obama saying that the first stimulus worked.
8:22 PM - Bullshit alert- Obama claims 2,000,000 jobs saved by stimulus package. Watch for fact-checking.
8:21 PM - Obama reminds America that half of the stimulus package was tax cuts and credits. Republicans might as well be wax figures in their seats. Obama shames them into a little response: "I thought I'd get some applause for that one."
8:19 PM - "We've recovered most of the money we gave to the banks... most, but not all." - Here we go. Some meat- he's pushing his bailout fee on the superbanks. Democrats stand and applaud; Republicans seated, hands in laps, looking constipated.
8:16 PM - "I have never been more hopeful about America's future than I am tonight." - Um, what closet have you been living in?
8:15 PM - Following up a call for bipartisanship with the predicted empty flattery of the American people. Obama, you WASTE MY TIME.
8:12 PM - The first bit is de rigeur- making it clear that the current mess is his predecessor's fault. And yet he's saying, "The worst of the storm has passed." Don't think THAT will sell.
8:06 PM - Here he comes, Mr. America.... I could do without even the minimal ritual we Americans have as regards politics and government, including Obama making his way down the aisle to the speaking podium.
7:59 PM - Almost show time- I just wish Chris Matthews would SHUT THE HELL UP.
7:50 PM - Netflix sent me two Doctor Who serials, neither of which I've seen, today. I could be watching those instead of Obama, since I'm pretty sure he's going to be a total waste of time. But, for some reason, part of me still holds out some, yes, HOPE that Obama isn't a complete tool. That Obama actually has it within him to lead rather than preside. That Obama might, just possibly, actually believe in something besides protecting torturers and strengthening an already out of control Presidency.
This is me, in essence, giving Barack Obama his last chance at winning either my trust or respect. And I honestly do not expect him to do it.
7:46 PM - Killed an hour working out on Wii Fit. Right after I showered. Dammit. Anyway, Keith Olbermann played a recording of FDR giving the Republicans utter, naked hell in 1936 and said that should be the template for Obama. Sorry, Keith- ain't a chance in He... um, so, yeah.
6:47 PM - CNN unveils a clip of the expected speech. Don't have time to type it and quote it- but it's a load of blowing sunshine up people's asses. SotU apparently goes off at 8 PM Central- I thought it was 8 PM Eastern.
6:10 PM CST - Well, I'm back after a year and a half. I've been posting my political stuff to my LiveJournal and annoying people there, since almost nobody read this blog when I was updating it.
For tonight, though, I figured I'd better revive this blog, and maybe start moving my political posts here instead. You see, tonight I intend to live-blog Obama's State of the Union address.
What am I looking for tonight?
HEALTH CARE: We know Obama will say something about "fighting for it." Will he say anything specific? Will he make any particular demands? Or will he make more empty rhetoric?
ECONOMIC STIMULUS: Will Obama call the past year a success? Or failure? Or ignore it? Will he call (as many expect) for a second stimulus package to push for jobs?
FINANCIAL REFORM: Will Obama call for strong re-regulation of the financial industry? Will he back what passed the House, or what?
WAR: Will he stick to his timetable for walking back American occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan? He's gone back on his word here before, remember. Will he acknowledge the open corruption of Afghanistan and the incipient civil war in Iraq?
TORTURE: Will he even mention it?
CIVIL RIGHTS: Gay marriage? DOMA? DADT? Any mention of any of these?
ENVIRONMENT: Cap-and-trade is already DOA. Will he propose something else? If so, what?
DEFICIT: Does he stick by his gimmick of "spending freeze"? Does he have any substantial proposals to address a budget in free-fall? Or, again, more empty rhetoric and calls on Congress to act- without marching orders?
My hopes are abysmally low at this point- since I last posted here, my opinion of Obama has gone into free-fall, and now I'm coming to despise the man I was so enthusiastic for in spring 2008. Perhaps in a few days I'll do a catch-up post to direct readers to my LiveJournal posts on why Obama has done little or nothing as a president- except, that is, for defending and extending the worst evils of the Bush administration.
Obama has NOT given up on cap and trade, but at the same time he's offered the Republicans the store on everything else energy-wise- offshore oil drilling, nuclear power, clean coal.
But far, FAR too much empty feel-good talk, far too many empty platitudes without substance, and, worst of all, an ending that emphasized bipartisanship. That's the most important thing for Obama- that he get some Republican support. He's willing to run his presidency aground on "changing the tone of American politics."
Olbermann mentions that the speech tries to serve two masters- bipartisanship and attacking Republicans. I don't see it too much- he only hit the Republicans a couple of times, only lightly, and only called them out by name once.
The Republican response is here, but I'm not interested in the least. As for Obama... he gives great speeches. He has perfect delivery. More than once I found myself forgetting what he was actually saying and falling under his spell. But for my part he did NOT demonstrate tonight any firm leadership. He reminds me of that old Indian chief in Dances With Wolves: "I believe we should talk about this some more. That is all I have to say."
The speech wasn't enough for me to completely give up on Obama, but neither did it do much of anything to restore any trust in him. We'll have to see what he does in the next year, to see if he follows up this speech with more pressure on both sides of the aisle, if he actually gets into the political system and kicks some ass.
I don't think he will. I don't think he can. I really don't think he knows how.
But he can sure give a great speech, can't he?
9:20 PM - Wrapping up with more blowing sunshine up America's collective ass. (Yes, I like that metaphor.) "I won't quit!" Yeah, well, before you quit you have to START.
9:17 PM - "I never suggested that change would be easy, or that I could do it alone." - Yes, but you could have done SOMETHING besides cover Bush's and Cheney's asses for torture. You could have done a LOT- and mostly you've sat on your ass, Mr. Obama, and let Congress do the heavy lifting. It's your fault that they keep dropping it all on their own toes.
9:12 PM - Civil rights. Points out that his administration has a civil rights division which is "actually" prosecuting. Calls for repeal of Don't Ask, Don't Tell. Immigration reform.
9:08 PM - Nuclear weapons. Arms control treaty being negotiated with Russia. Secure all existing nuclear weapons around the world within four years- yeah, tell it to North Korea, Pakistan, Israel, Iran. Mentions sanctions on North Korea; claims Iran is isolated, threatens "consequences." Improving response to bioterrorism. "Our destiny is connected to those beyond our shores... but we also do it because it is right." Mentions 10,000 Americans in Haiti helping provide aid.
9:07 PM - Veterans' Affairs. Reform of the VA in progress. Michele Obama gets another shout-out.
9:04 PM - A minute of empty talk about national security, followed by a run-down on terrorism, comma, what Obama has done. "We have prohibited torture-" BULLSHIT. Calls for protecting rights of Afghani women, ending corruption there. "We are responsibly leaving Iraq to its people... we will have all of our combat troops out of Iraq by this August." THAT is NEWS.
9:00 PM - Bipartisanship. "What frustrates the American people is a Washington where every day is an election day." "Neither party should block every single bill just because they can." Specifically slams "a few specific Senators." "I will not give up on trying to change the tone of our politics." Reminds Democrats of their "largest majority in decades." Republicans: "If you're going to insist that sixty votes in the Senate are required," then you're going to have to govern. NO, NO, NO, NO YOU IDIOT. You've just said, in essence, "We'll let you run things." Wants regular meetings with leaders of both parties.
8:58 PM - Calls out lobbyists, calls for transparency. Unfortunately, as we've seen in the past year, he doesn't walk the walk. Calls for limits on lobbyist contributions, total transparency of lobbyist activity. Speaks against Supreme Court ruling allowing unlimited corporate spending on elections- calls on Congress to "correct these problems." Earmark reform- total transparency of earmarks, posted online, before a vote. Won't happen.
8:55 PM - Calls out Republicans on "status quo" Republicans. What they want- tax cuts for the rich, spending cuts on the poor- "That's what we did for eight years. That's what helped us into this crisis... we can't do it again... it's time to try something new."
8:50 PM - Obama puts the blame for the deficit squarely on Bush and the Republicans- "All of this was before I walked in the door." Admits adding $1 trillion to national debt. Calls for the American government to tighten its belt just like American families. 2011- freeze government spending for three years, except national security and entitlements. Note: if GOP takes Congress in 2010, he'll have that ANYWAY. Eliminate Bush tax cuts on $250,000+ people, oil companies, investors. Calls again for bipartisan fiscal commission with fast-track up-down vote on proposals. Calls out Senate for blocking the bill that would have created it- he'll order it done anyway with executive power. Calls on Senate to restore pay-go budgeting.
8:46 PM - "I take my share of the blame for not explaining (healthcare) to the American people." You'd better. How about saying where you want health care reform to GO? "As temperatures cool, I want everyone to take another look" at the Senate bill. "If anyone from either party has a better idea... let me know." "Don't walk away from reform- not now, not when we're so close. Let us find a way to come together for the American people." NO SPECIFICS. Just empty talking- AGAIN.
8:43 PM - Health insurance reform- here we go. "We still need health insurance reform." Does he follow this up? Republicans stand and applaud. "Let's clear a few things up." "By now it should be obvious I didn't take on health care because it was good politics." You got that right. Interrupts the good points of the Senate health care bill to praise his wife for tackling childhood obesity- QUIT WASTING OUR TIME.
8:40 PM - Education. "The best anti-poverty program around is a first-class education." A lot of empty talk about only funding success. Renew Elementary and Secondary Education Act. Urges Senate to pass House bill "revitalizing" community colleges. Take student loan program back from banks, give tax credit for college tuition, expand Pell Grant. Cap student loan payments at 10% of total income, pay off debts if they enter public service.
8:38 PM - Exports. "We will double our exports over the next five years." Nice trick- how do you plan to get other countries to BUY double our goods? A "National Export Initiative." Basically sounds like subsidies for American businesses- especially farmers, who already get tons of subsidies, and who Obama named BEFORE businesses. Calls for strict enforcement of trade agreements- yeah, right, when has that ever happened?
8:36 PM - Calls for nuclear power plants, offshore drilling. THAT got the Republicans on their feet- twice. Biofuel, clean coal, but "energy and climate bill that will create incentives..."- that's cap and trade. Obama has NOT given up on cap and trade. Calls out climate change skeptics. "The nation that leads the clean energy economy will be the nation that leads the global economy, and America must be that nation." That DOESN'T get the Republicans standing.
8:34 PM - Financial reform- "I am not interested in punishing banks," but, "We can't allow financial institutions to take risks that threaten the whole economy." Mentions House bill- Obama threatens veto of any bill that doesn't come up to his standards, but doesn't say what those standards are.
8:31 PM - "How long should America put its future on hold?" "I do not accept second place for the United States of America." - Nice rhetoric, but what about substance?
8:30 PM - "We can't afford another 'expansion' like the one we had in the past decade- what some call the Lost Decade."
8:29 PM - Raise taxes on companies who outsource jobs. A small handful of scattered Republicans clap, but stay seated.
8:28 PM - More spending on infrastructure and clean energy. Watch for Republicans to call this as pork.
8:27 PM - $30B loan program to small business. Wish I could read John Boehner's lips- I think he just said, "Bullshit." Tax credit for businesses who hire or raise salaries- ZERO CAPITAL GAINS TAX ON SMALL BUSINESS. That IS meat.
8:25 PM - Here's the expected call for a jobs bill- or a "second stimulus." Which really does undermine the past five minutes of Obama saying that the first stimulus worked.
8:22 PM - Bullshit alert- Obama claims 2,000,000 jobs saved by stimulus package. Watch for fact-checking.
8:21 PM - Obama reminds America that half of the stimulus package was tax cuts and credits. Republicans might as well be wax figures in their seats. Obama shames them into a little response: "I thought I'd get some applause for that one."
8:19 PM - "We've recovered most of the money we gave to the banks... most, but not all." - Here we go. Some meat- he's pushing his bailout fee on the superbanks. Democrats stand and applaud; Republicans seated, hands in laps, looking constipated.
8:16 PM - "I have never been more hopeful about America's future than I am tonight." - Um, what closet have you been living in?
8:15 PM - Following up a call for bipartisanship with the predicted empty flattery of the American people. Obama, you WASTE MY TIME.
8:12 PM - The first bit is de rigeur- making it clear that the current mess is his predecessor's fault. And yet he's saying, "The worst of the storm has passed." Don't think THAT will sell.
8:06 PM - Here he comes, Mr. America.... I could do without even the minimal ritual we Americans have as regards politics and government, including Obama making his way down the aisle to the speaking podium.
7:59 PM - Almost show time- I just wish Chris Matthews would SHUT THE HELL UP.
7:50 PM - Netflix sent me two Doctor Who serials, neither of which I've seen, today. I could be watching those instead of Obama, since I'm pretty sure he's going to be a total waste of time. But, for some reason, part of me still holds out some, yes, HOPE that Obama isn't a complete tool. That Obama actually has it within him to lead rather than preside. That Obama might, just possibly, actually believe in something besides protecting torturers and strengthening an already out of control Presidency.
This is me, in essence, giving Barack Obama his last chance at winning either my trust or respect. And I honestly do not expect him to do it.
7:46 PM - Killed an hour working out on Wii Fit. Right after I showered. Dammit. Anyway, Keith Olbermann played a recording of FDR giving the Republicans utter, naked hell in 1936 and said that should be the template for Obama. Sorry, Keith- ain't a chance in He... um, so, yeah.
6:47 PM - CNN unveils a clip of the expected speech. Don't have time to type it and quote it- but it's a load of blowing sunshine up people's asses. SotU apparently goes off at 8 PM Central- I thought it was 8 PM Eastern.
6:10 PM CST - Well, I'm back after a year and a half. I've been posting my political stuff to my LiveJournal and annoying people there, since almost nobody read this blog when I was updating it.
For tonight, though, I figured I'd better revive this blog, and maybe start moving my political posts here instead. You see, tonight I intend to live-blog Obama's State of the Union address.
What am I looking for tonight?
HEALTH CARE: We know Obama will say something about "fighting for it." Will he say anything specific? Will he make any particular demands? Or will he make more empty rhetoric?
ECONOMIC STIMULUS: Will Obama call the past year a success? Or failure? Or ignore it? Will he call (as many expect) for a second stimulus package to push for jobs?
FINANCIAL REFORM: Will Obama call for strong re-regulation of the financial industry? Will he back what passed the House, or what?
WAR: Will he stick to his timetable for walking back American occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan? He's gone back on his word here before, remember. Will he acknowledge the open corruption of Afghanistan and the incipient civil war in Iraq?
TORTURE: Will he even mention it?
CIVIL RIGHTS: Gay marriage? DOMA? DADT? Any mention of any of these?
ENVIRONMENT: Cap-and-trade is already DOA. Will he propose something else? If so, what?
DEFICIT: Does he stick by his gimmick of "spending freeze"? Does he have any substantial proposals to address a budget in free-fall? Or, again, more empty rhetoric and calls on Congress to act- without marching orders?
My hopes are abysmally low at this point- since I last posted here, my opinion of Obama has gone into free-fall, and now I'm coming to despise the man I was so enthusiastic for in spring 2008. Perhaps in a few days I'll do a catch-up post to direct readers to my LiveJournal posts on why Obama has done little or nothing as a president- except, that is, for defending and extending the worst evils of the Bush administration.
Friday, February 1, 2008
Cull Day, After a Long Time
My web browser's running slow, possibly due to all the news articles I've been holding onto the past few days. Let's get rid of some of those, shall we?
First, Hillary Clinton. The last couple days Hillary has been singing John Edwards' praises, but it's worth remembering that the Clinton campaign ran negative robo-calls the day of the South Carolina primaries. Granted, I agree with the content of the calls: I'm glad as hell John "Got Rich on Malpractice Suits Using Junk Science" Edwards is out of the race. But the transcript of these calls shows more and more what kind of people the Clintons are: burn your bridges now, mend them later after the battle's won. I'm hoping that Obama represents a bridge too far...
The rump FEC commission rules that two people pooling their money to attend a political convention or do anything else constitute a PAC... and thus must file with the FEC and abide by spending and donation limits and reporting. Thank God the Democrats are blocking four replacement members of the FEC against Bush's board-packing scheme, otherwise this piece of garbage would actually act as law. As it is, this ruling would quite effectively prevent any new or small groups from getting anywhere in the political arena, while old established PACs and the two big political parties can keep trundling on. Anyone who thinks the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act was a good idea and that "public funding" of elections is a better one, beware... this is what your policies result in- the silencing of individual free speech.
You've probably heard this one again and again... Bush Administration Lied Nearly 1,000 Times About Iraq. My response: no shit, Sherlock.
Ezra Klien debunks Republican claims that the Bush years have been good for the economy. In truth, Dubya, who claims an economic record "other Presidents would envy", only beats out his father. All other Presidents back to JFK had greater economic growth in their Presidencies... even Jimmy Carter. (Shocker: Carter had the same rate of economic growth in his Presidency- four years- that Reagan had in his Presidency- eight years.)
The day after the State of the Union, the Bush administration kills the largest clean-coal experimental project. Apparent reason: the FutureGen project had chosen a site in Illinois for construction... rather than any of several proposed sites in Texas. Irony: this was done the day after Bush said, on worldwide television, that America needed to invest in new, experimental clean-coal technology. Apparently not unless those investments benefit Bush's buddies, huh?
Well, that seems to have sped up my browser. Let's look through a few of the O-L-D news bookmarks from last year and see if there's anything I can dispose of, hm?
From May of last year: Jim MacDonald writes about how the FBI and CIA actually creates domestic terror cells. Specifically, he talks about how agents act as provaceteurs and encourage nitwits to become terrorists for the promise of money. As soon as the nitwits begin botching together a plan- usually with the help of those undercover FBI agents- the Feds bust them, then brag about how they're protecting us from those evil horrible Islamo-fascists. And this helps us remain secure... how?
As was mentioned by Hillary Clinton last night- so this is still current eight months after this was written- the Pentagon has drawn up no contingency plans for leaving Iraq. They have contingency plans to invade Canada, in the event that a communist beaver regime takes over in Ottawa, but they're not even considering getting out of a nation which, more and more, is expressing its wish to be shed of us.
Jack Markowitz writes that we already have socialized medicine on the state level: the wasteful bureaucratic morass that is Medicaid. Although a ton of people are technically eligible, the paperwork requirement to prove you qualify is enormous... and yet the states, in particular Texas, have funded and expanded the program until it constitutes between a quarter and a third of all state budgets. All, according to Markowitz, in order to get votes and Federal matching funds. There may be an argument in favor of national health care, but Medicaid certainly isn't it.
One of the bad laws that passed the Texas legislature last year: now, if fifteen or more students request a bible study class, your local school district must provide it. Don't know if Perry signed it, but I don't see him not signing it, to be honest. There's no guarantee that the "religious studies" classes won't be used for Christian prosletyzing... and considering my home state, every reason to expect they WILL be used that way.
And finally... some of the richest people in the new Internet economy got that way by cyber-squatting. Have you ever typed in a URL and got, instead of what you expected, a page full of spam ads? These are the guys responsible. The leader, Kevin Ham, makes no bones about his plans: he wants to be one of a handful of people to control the Internet. It's time to drop a heavy boot on cybersquatting and misleading URLs and reopen domain name registry to the common man.
That's plenty of trouble for now...
First, Hillary Clinton. The last couple days Hillary has been singing John Edwards' praises, but it's worth remembering that the Clinton campaign ran negative robo-calls the day of the South Carolina primaries. Granted, I agree with the content of the calls: I'm glad as hell John "Got Rich on Malpractice Suits Using Junk Science" Edwards is out of the race. But the transcript of these calls shows more and more what kind of people the Clintons are: burn your bridges now, mend them later after the battle's won. I'm hoping that Obama represents a bridge too far...
The rump FEC commission rules that two people pooling their money to attend a political convention or do anything else constitute a PAC... and thus must file with the FEC and abide by spending and donation limits and reporting. Thank God the Democrats are blocking four replacement members of the FEC against Bush's board-packing scheme, otherwise this piece of garbage would actually act as law. As it is, this ruling would quite effectively prevent any new or small groups from getting anywhere in the political arena, while old established PACs and the two big political parties can keep trundling on. Anyone who thinks the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act was a good idea and that "public funding" of elections is a better one, beware... this is what your policies result in- the silencing of individual free speech.
You've probably heard this one again and again... Bush Administration Lied Nearly 1,000 Times About Iraq. My response: no shit, Sherlock.
Ezra Klien debunks Republican claims that the Bush years have been good for the economy. In truth, Dubya, who claims an economic record "other Presidents would envy", only beats out his father. All other Presidents back to JFK had greater economic growth in their Presidencies... even Jimmy Carter. (Shocker: Carter had the same rate of economic growth in his Presidency- four years- that Reagan had in his Presidency- eight years.)
The day after the State of the Union, the Bush administration kills the largest clean-coal experimental project. Apparent reason: the FutureGen project had chosen a site in Illinois for construction... rather than any of several proposed sites in Texas. Irony: this was done the day after Bush said, on worldwide television, that America needed to invest in new, experimental clean-coal technology. Apparently not unless those investments benefit Bush's buddies, huh?
Well, that seems to have sped up my browser. Let's look through a few of the O-L-D news bookmarks from last year and see if there's anything I can dispose of, hm?
From May of last year: Jim MacDonald writes about how the FBI and CIA actually creates domestic terror cells. Specifically, he talks about how agents act as provaceteurs and encourage nitwits to become terrorists for the promise of money. As soon as the nitwits begin botching together a plan- usually with the help of those undercover FBI agents- the Feds bust them, then brag about how they're protecting us from those evil horrible Islamo-fascists. And this helps us remain secure... how?
As was mentioned by Hillary Clinton last night- so this is still current eight months after this was written- the Pentagon has drawn up no contingency plans for leaving Iraq. They have contingency plans to invade Canada, in the event that a communist beaver regime takes over in Ottawa, but they're not even considering getting out of a nation which, more and more, is expressing its wish to be shed of us.
Jack Markowitz writes that we already have socialized medicine on the state level: the wasteful bureaucratic morass that is Medicaid. Although a ton of people are technically eligible, the paperwork requirement to prove you qualify is enormous... and yet the states, in particular Texas, have funded and expanded the program until it constitutes between a quarter and a third of all state budgets. All, according to Markowitz, in order to get votes and Federal matching funds. There may be an argument in favor of national health care, but Medicaid certainly isn't it.
One of the bad laws that passed the Texas legislature last year: now, if fifteen or more students request a bible study class, your local school district must provide it. Don't know if Perry signed it, but I don't see him not signing it, to be honest. There's no guarantee that the "religious studies" classes won't be used for Christian prosletyzing... and considering my home state, every reason to expect they WILL be used that way.
And finally... some of the richest people in the new Internet economy got that way by cyber-squatting. Have you ever typed in a URL and got, instead of what you expected, a page full of spam ads? These are the guys responsible. The leader, Kevin Ham, makes no bones about his plans: he wants to be one of a handful of people to control the Internet. It's time to drop a heavy boot on cybersquatting and misleading URLs and reopen domain name registry to the common man.
That's plenty of trouble for now...
Friday, December 28, 2007
Bush to Veto Defense Budget...
... because, apparently, his victory over the anti-war Democrats wasn't large enough.
Bush claims he's vetoing the bill because of a provision to allow victims of Saddam Hussein's regime to sue for damages. What those victims are supposed to do without this provision Bush doesn't say- but I personally suspect that this issue, brought up at the very last minute before the budget would become law without Bush's signature, is only an excuse.
The real issue is this: Bush wanted $180 billion for Iraq and Afghanistan, with no restrictions or oversight. After a token resistance, the Democrats allowed a budget to pass that funded the wars by only $70 billion- but with no restrictions or oversight.
For Bush, this is not enough.
Bush wants it ALL.
George W. Bush views Congress as nothing more than a rubber stamp for his elective monarchy. He, as the Great Decider, makes all the decisions; Congress has no option but to endorse them. Any resistance, even the minimal resistance of not giving him all the money he wants, is unacceptable.
Bush says he'll work with Congress to produce a new bill, one that gives troops a pay raise and fully funds the military. In the past, whenever Bush has said, "work with Congress," he's actually meant, "tell Congress what they're going to do, to hell with anyone and anything else."
Why should things be different now?
Bush claims he's vetoing the bill because of a provision to allow victims of Saddam Hussein's regime to sue for damages. What those victims are supposed to do without this provision Bush doesn't say- but I personally suspect that this issue, brought up at the very last minute before the budget would become law without Bush's signature, is only an excuse.
The real issue is this: Bush wanted $180 billion for Iraq and Afghanistan, with no restrictions or oversight. After a token resistance, the Democrats allowed a budget to pass that funded the wars by only $70 billion- but with no restrictions or oversight.
For Bush, this is not enough.
Bush wants it ALL.
George W. Bush views Congress as nothing more than a rubber stamp for his elective monarchy. He, as the Great Decider, makes all the decisions; Congress has no option but to endorse them. Any resistance, even the minimal resistance of not giving him all the money he wants, is unacceptable.
Bush says he'll work with Congress to produce a new bill, one that gives troops a pay raise and fully funds the military. In the past, whenever Bush has said, "work with Congress," he's actually meant, "tell Congress what they're going to do, to hell with anyone and anything else."
Why should things be different now?
Monday, October 29, 2007
Blackwater Gets Out of Jail Free- Thanks Condi!
US State Department Grants Immunity to Blackwater Accused
The quote that gets right to the heart of the matter:
Simply put, this means that the Blackwater guards accused of murdering 17 innocent civilians while driving the wrong way around a traffic circle will almost certainly not be held responsible for their actions, even if they are proved wholly at fault in the matter. Thus far no evidence has been brought forward to support Blackwater's claim that the guards were in a live-fire situation.
Of course, considering that the current administration relieved Scooter Libby of any accountability for destroying Valerie Plame's career, seeks to force Congress to remove accountability for any telecom corporations who helped the White House tap American phone calls since February 2001, and claims that no executive officer is accountable to anyone, including the people who elected them... it's hardly surprising that they'd extend the same blanket of immunity to their buddies at Blackwater.
Meanwhile the Iraqi government have tried- and failed- to expel Blackwater from their country. The US occupation forces simply ignored them. Prime Minister al-Maliki is going to try again, passing legislation to order the US State Department to replace Blackwater with some other security service... but more than likely that will go nowhere, too, and Blackwater will remain in place, growing fatter and fatter on taxpayer dollars, well into the next administration or even beyond.
Again I say it: the only cure is impeachment, and the American people are long past ready for it. Democrats, if you do not want to see your base disintegrate as the Republican base is doing, take action NOW.
The quote that gets right to the heart of the matter:
"Once you give immunity, you can't take it away," said a senior law enforcement official familiar with the investigation.
Simply put, this means that the Blackwater guards accused of murdering 17 innocent civilians while driving the wrong way around a traffic circle will almost certainly not be held responsible for their actions, even if they are proved wholly at fault in the matter. Thus far no evidence has been brought forward to support Blackwater's claim that the guards were in a live-fire situation.
Of course, considering that the current administration relieved Scooter Libby of any accountability for destroying Valerie Plame's career, seeks to force Congress to remove accountability for any telecom corporations who helped the White House tap American phone calls since February 2001, and claims that no executive officer is accountable to anyone, including the people who elected them... it's hardly surprising that they'd extend the same blanket of immunity to their buddies at Blackwater.
Meanwhile the Iraqi government have tried- and failed- to expel Blackwater from their country. The US occupation forces simply ignored them. Prime Minister al-Maliki is going to try again, passing legislation to order the US State Department to replace Blackwater with some other security service... but more than likely that will go nowhere, too, and Blackwater will remain in place, growing fatter and fatter on taxpayer dollars, well into the next administration or even beyond.
Again I say it: the only cure is impeachment, and the American people are long past ready for it. Democrats, if you do not want to see your base disintegrate as the Republican base is doing, take action NOW.
Sunday, October 14, 2007
How Do NeoCons Think?
Here's a good example.
The evil begins with the first two paragraphs:
This sounds like George Wallace saying that he doesn't mind blacks, so long as they don't "get uppity." So long as Muslims are on the bottom looking up, bowing and scraping to their "betters", Mr. Friedman likes them just fine. Just don't let them pretend to be equals or to have (gasp) rights.
Friedman then goes on to recap how Bush has failed in Iraq. Friedman believes the fundamental cause of failure was this: Bush did not commit to a permanent American hegemony. Friedman believes it was a mistake to try to give Iraq back to the Iraqis; instead, a heavier military presence and martial law, he claims, would have kept things secure for as long as was required. In short, Friedman regards humanity as weakness; we should have kept an iron hand on Iraq until we had a puppet government in place to take over.
Not to worry, though: Friedman has a one-shot cure to reclaim Iraq and end the insurgency there.
Bomb Iran.
Will Iran invade Iraq or close the Persian Gulf in retaliation? Stuff and nonsense, says Friedman.
Um... first off, this presumes the Iranians act rationally, which they might not. Second, it ignores the fact that the theocratic government of Iran cannot afford to let an attack go unchallenged. Third and foremost, it ignores the very basic fact that, in every single case without exception, bombing another nation has always RALLIED that nation to its government. Bombing Iran's nuclear sites would guarantee a ground war with Iran- whose ground forces outnumber ours in Iraq and Afghanistan combined by as much as six to one.
But in Friedman's happy shiny bomby world, Iran and all the other fundamentalist Muslims, rather than become more dedicated to their jihad, will cower in fear, and the Democrats will dry up and blow away, and Iraq's leaders will quit their civil war and behave, allowing the United States to:
In other words, the United States will become the largest terrorist organization on Earth. You'll never know where we're going to strike; we won't allow anyone to stop us; and we'll crush anyone who dares get in our way.
Do I even need to explain why I find this mode of thought unacceptable for people in power?
The evil begins with the first two paragraphs:
A recent story in the New York Times documented the steady proliferation of Halal food pushcarts in Midtown Manhattan, which I can attest to in my capacity as a sidewalk gourmet. These Muslim street food vendors -- mostly Middle Eastern men who can be seen praying on mats beside their carts -- are now nearly as ubiquitous, and popular, as New York's iconic hot dog stands. They deserve their success: the food is very good and it's priced right. Still, one might wonder whether this New York Jew living in a post-9/11 world finds the Big Apple's epicurean Islamicization a worrisome trend. No, honestly, I'm not nervous about it. Here's why.
When I belly up for my chicken on pita, these men invariably greet me with cheerful deference, often referring to me as "boss." That polite gratuity is a clear sign they understand their standing the melting pot can only be maintained through good citizenship and proper behavior. To put it bluntly, their instincts tell them the Muslim community isn't on top in polyglot America.
This sounds like George Wallace saying that he doesn't mind blacks, so long as they don't "get uppity." So long as Muslims are on the bottom looking up, bowing and scraping to their "betters", Mr. Friedman likes them just fine. Just don't let them pretend to be equals or to have (gasp) rights.
Friedman then goes on to recap how Bush has failed in Iraq. Friedman believes the fundamental cause of failure was this: Bush did not commit to a permanent American hegemony. Friedman believes it was a mistake to try to give Iraq back to the Iraqis; instead, a heavier military presence and martial law, he claims, would have kept things secure for as long as was required. In short, Friedman regards humanity as weakness; we should have kept an iron hand on Iraq until we had a puppet government in place to take over.
Not to worry, though: Friedman has a one-shot cure to reclaim Iraq and end the insurgency there.
Bomb Iran.
Will Iran invade Iraq or close the Persian Gulf in retaliation? Stuff and nonsense, says Friedman.
Next, the Iranians would do nothing -- bupkes. They don't attack Israel, they don't choke off the world's oil supply, they do not send hit squads to the United States, there is no "war" in the conventional sense of attack counterattack. Iran already has its hands full without inviting more trouble. Its leaders would be reeling from the initial US attack and they would know our forces are in position to strike again if Iran provokes us or our allies. They would stand before mankind with their pants around their ankles, dazed, bleeding, crying, reduced to bloviating from mosques in Teheran and pounding their fists on desks at the UN. The lifelines they throw to the Iraqi insurgents, Hezbollah and Syria would begin to dry up, as would the lifelines the double-dealing Europeans have been throwing to Iran. Maybe the Mullahs would lose control.
Um... first off, this presumes the Iranians act rationally, which they might not. Second, it ignores the fact that the theocratic government of Iran cannot afford to let an attack go unchallenged. Third and foremost, it ignores the very basic fact that, in every single case without exception, bombing another nation has always RALLIED that nation to its government. Bombing Iran's nuclear sites would guarantee a ground war with Iran- whose ground forces outnumber ours in Iraq and Afghanistan combined by as much as six to one.
But in Friedman's happy shiny bomby world, Iran and all the other fundamentalist Muslims, rather than become more dedicated to their jihad, will cower in fear, and the Democrats will dry up and blow away, and Iraq's leaders will quit their civil war and behave, allowing the United States to:
From that point on, with our arms free of the quicksand, we can fight the war on terror the way it should have been fought in the first place. Using our enormous edge in weapons, intelligence and technology, and building on it, we launch quick, lethal, ad hoc strikes wherever in the world we determine terrorists are working to harm us, shooting first and asking for permission later.
In other words, the United States will become the largest terrorist organization on Earth. You'll never know where we're going to strike; we won't allow anyone to stop us; and we'll crush anyone who dares get in our way.
Do I even need to explain why I find this mode of thought unacceptable for people in power?
Tuesday, September 11, 2007
What Bin Laden Actually Said, and Why We Should Listen
So, last week Osama bin Laden issued another video, essentially to remind us all that he's still alive and still worth worrying about.
This morning I found a transcript of his statement. Since it's a bit awkwardly worded, I think it bears translating. Go here to read the original: Italics are my translation or restatement of his words, and bold is my commentary, when I have any.
Paragraphs 1-2: Dear America:
Paragraphs 3-4: You're the biggest, baddest power on Earth, but because we got lucky with one attack six years ago, we're driving every single decision you make. This is exaggeration- I rather doubt Medicare Part D was inspired as an anti-terror expedient- but on foreign policy it's damn close to true. We're allowing a few thousand people to dictate who our friends and enemies are, what tactics we'll use, and even how we'll live our lives here at home- actions far beyond any possible threat those few thousand people pose.
Paragraph 5: Your media has gone along with Bush's propogranda for so long, and done so little to reveal the truth, that CNN, Fox, New York Times, etc. all look like PRAVDA- tools of the government. Nothing new there.
Paragraphs 5-8: Bush is lying about American actions in Iraq- lying about supporting the national government when we're backing various factions here and there- changing his policy on UN involvement- in an attempt to cover up his abject failure. Nothing new there, either.
Paragraphs 9-11: Bush and his cronies claim we're out to exterminate all non-Muslims- but look at the facts! You Americans virtually exterminated native Americans! It was Europeans who tried to exterminate the Jews- first the Spanish, then the Germans- when many Jews live peacefully in Muslim nations! Christians live in peace in Muslim nations by the millions! We do not call for your extermination. You lie because you seek OUR extermination- and we won't go down easy. Good talking points, but one glaring defect comes to my eye just on casual reading. bin Laden specifically points out Morocco as a haven for Jews and Egypt as a haven for Christians. These are two secular-governed nations. Islamic states on the bin Laden model, particularly Taliban Afghanistan- call for forced conversions and extermination of the infidel within their borders. Yes, we have done some very evil things in the past... but that doesn't make al-Qaida the good guys.
Paragraph 12: You brought democracy to Iraq- and it's turned out to be worse than the dictatorship. Well, no. What's happened is we brought the trappings of democracy to Iraq, because that's the only part of democracy Bush and his royalist buddies comprehend. Without more fundamental things like respect for the rights of the individual and limitations on government power, all we've done is set up a strong-man puppet dictator ruling over an elected but nearly powerless Parliament. As a result, the people of Iraq have turned away from the national government and towards their local leaders- clerics, tribal chieftains, and sectarian or racial figures. In the meantime, the body count keeps climbing- but probably not as high as the two-thirds-of-a-million people bin Laden chooses to quote.
Paragraphs 13-14: You Americans elected Democrats to end the war. They've voted repeatedly to CONTINUE it. Wanna know the reason why? I'm curious why -you- think so. I think the reason is that the Democrats LIED to American voters. They chose not to unite on ending the war, but to unite on gaining power for power's sake. They now have the perquisites of controlling government, but they don't agree within the party on what the government ought to do. The result is that the Republicans, staunchly united, retain power. But that's my explanation, not bin Laden's.
Paragraphs 15-17: Why are Bush and his buddies willing to tell bald-faced lies in order to make war? Remember, Rumsfeld killed two million civilians in Vietnam, and when President Kennedy tried to end the war, the corporate leaders had him killed. Obviously bin Laden is seriously confused about his American history. Rumsfeld post-dated Kennedy's assassination; in fact, his first military-related post in government came in February 1973, one month after the Paris peace accords. But wait, there's more...
Paragraphs 18-19: But even when you realized the war was a mistake, you didn't try and punish the criminals who brought the war on! Now Bush has brought those war criminals back- surely you knew that meant he was going to have a war with SOMEBODY? Don't claim to be innocent- you had warning, and yet you CHOSE to support these people. bin Laden has always regarded America as if we were a single, united people, with only one opinion about anything. I will say, though, that when Cheney was picked as Bush's running mate, we all should have been more alert. Cheney's made no secret of his belief that Nixon did nothing wrong and that the President is and should be all-powerful.
Paragraph 20: Noam Chomsky, the most prominent shaper of American public opinion, tried to warn you! The rest of the WORLD tried to warn you, with demonstrations, public outcry, protests of world leaders- but Bush did not listen! You did not listen! And now you must know the truth- Bush doesn't give a rat's ass about freedom. He only wants to rule the world. I wasn't aware that Noam Chomsky was all that influential, to tell the truth. How many hit records has he had?
Paragraph 21: And that's why the Democrats aren't stopping the war- because they're owned by the corporations, the same as the Republicans are. Your votes and your protests are useless, because democracy has failed. I've said before I see little to zero difference between Democrats and Republicans. A lot of that has to do with this very point: the ones of either party who get elected do so with corporate money and then turn around and do those corporations' bidding afterwards. bin Laden is wrong to say democracy has failed- more on that in a bit- but there's definitely a flaw in the system there.
Paragraphs 22-27: So here's the solution. First, we're going to kill even more of you than ever before. That's what we do. Second, you have to abandon democracy and capitalism, the evils which have caused global warming, corporate terror, oppression and suffering. Turn away from those man-made laws and so-called freedoms that caused Iraq and Afghanistan. Convert to Islam, adopt Shari'a law, and bend to the rule of the clerics. Because, y'see, fundamentalist Islam is his cure for everything... never mind that Iran and Taliban Afghanistan were and are easily as corrupt, evil, and unjust as any republic or democracy ever thought of being.
Paragraphs 28-37: Oh, you claim to believe in God, but you don't. If you did, you'd follow Shari'a law- without which there is no faith in God! No, you're pagans, because you've forgotten that all men should be slaves to God. We know better: we've kept our religion pure, and that's why we'll win. Ask Michael Scheuer for pointers if that confuses you. Michael who?
Paragraph 38: Don't judge us by how poor we are now- we were great once, when our leaders were pure in God. These days our leaders are corrupt, but we'll soon fix that. It's worth remembering that only five hundred years after Mohammad, in those times when bin Laden thinks the leaders were pure, the Mongols rolled over the old Caliphate like the original Juggernaut down the streets of Bombay.
Paragraphs 39-40: We brought down the Soviet empire when it invaded Afghanistan, and now we'll bring you down. Boastful, and over-simplistic in attributing to Brezhnev the entire fall of the USSR, but a definite element of truth.
Paragraphs 41-43: Your soldiers don't want to fight anymore. If they leave their bases, we kill them. If they stay, you punish them. The only things they can do are crack up or commit suicide. Definite oversell. A lot of soldiers oppose the war, but a lot of others still support it and want to keep fighting. A lot more than either side don't care either way- they just want those in command to make up their mind what the hell we're trying to DO over there.
Paragraphs 44-49: In conclusion: convert to Islam. It's your only hope for life after death. Muslims are much happier than anyone else, even when everyone's out to kill them. Under Islam there are no taxes. Corporations will dry up and blow away. Jesus was a Muslim. So was his mother. So convert to Islam... or else.
So, what is there to take home from bin Laden's message? Let's subtract the conversion message. Ditto, let's dump the direct propaganda- all the "we'll win because we're better" garbage. What remains at the core is what the Islamic world already believes about us- the belief bin Laden is using in this message to build support among Muslims.
The core message is: George W. Bush and his cronies want global domination. The Democrats, being controlled by Bush's corporate buddies, will do nothing to stop him. All the promises of peace, security and freedom the United States makes are lies told in order to build more power at home and abroad. Bush doesn't care what he says, doesn't care who gets killed, so long as he has power.
That's what the Muslim world believes- and bin Laden knows it. He's preaching to the choir there.
And, based on the available evidence, it is very very hard indeed to disprove.
If we want things to change in the Middle East, the second thing we have to do is stop promising peace, security and freedom, stop trying to spread democracy to the masses at gunpoint... in short, BRING OUR TROOPS HOME.
The first thing we have to do is get rid of George W. Bush- electing a replacement might work, provided it's not a Republican or Hilary, but impeachment would be preferable.
This morning I found a transcript of his statement. Since it's a bit awkwardly worded, I think it bears translating. Go here to read the original: Italics are my translation or restatement of his words, and bold is my commentary, when I have any.
Paragraphs 1-2: Dear America:
Paragraphs 3-4: You're the biggest, baddest power on Earth, but because we got lucky with one attack six years ago, we're driving every single decision you make. This is exaggeration- I rather doubt Medicare Part D was inspired as an anti-terror expedient- but on foreign policy it's damn close to true. We're allowing a few thousand people to dictate who our friends and enemies are, what tactics we'll use, and even how we'll live our lives here at home- actions far beyond any possible threat those few thousand people pose.
Paragraph 5: Your media has gone along with Bush's propogranda for so long, and done so little to reveal the truth, that CNN, Fox, New York Times, etc. all look like PRAVDA- tools of the government. Nothing new there.
Paragraphs 5-8: Bush is lying about American actions in Iraq- lying about supporting the national government when we're backing various factions here and there- changing his policy on UN involvement- in an attempt to cover up his abject failure. Nothing new there, either.
Paragraphs 9-11: Bush and his cronies claim we're out to exterminate all non-Muslims- but look at the facts! You Americans virtually exterminated native Americans! It was Europeans who tried to exterminate the Jews- first the Spanish, then the Germans- when many Jews live peacefully in Muslim nations! Christians live in peace in Muslim nations by the millions! We do not call for your extermination. You lie because you seek OUR extermination- and we won't go down easy. Good talking points, but one glaring defect comes to my eye just on casual reading. bin Laden specifically points out Morocco as a haven for Jews and Egypt as a haven for Christians. These are two secular-governed nations. Islamic states on the bin Laden model, particularly Taliban Afghanistan- call for forced conversions and extermination of the infidel within their borders. Yes, we have done some very evil things in the past... but that doesn't make al-Qaida the good guys.
Paragraph 12: You brought democracy to Iraq- and it's turned out to be worse than the dictatorship. Well, no. What's happened is we brought the trappings of democracy to Iraq, because that's the only part of democracy Bush and his royalist buddies comprehend. Without more fundamental things like respect for the rights of the individual and limitations on government power, all we've done is set up a strong-man puppet dictator ruling over an elected but nearly powerless Parliament. As a result, the people of Iraq have turned away from the national government and towards their local leaders- clerics, tribal chieftains, and sectarian or racial figures. In the meantime, the body count keeps climbing- but probably not as high as the two-thirds-of-a-million people bin Laden chooses to quote.
Paragraphs 13-14: You Americans elected Democrats to end the war. They've voted repeatedly to CONTINUE it. Wanna know the reason why? I'm curious why -you- think so. I think the reason is that the Democrats LIED to American voters. They chose not to unite on ending the war, but to unite on gaining power for power's sake. They now have the perquisites of controlling government, but they don't agree within the party on what the government ought to do. The result is that the Republicans, staunchly united, retain power. But that's my explanation, not bin Laden's.
Paragraphs 15-17: Why are Bush and his buddies willing to tell bald-faced lies in order to make war? Remember, Rumsfeld killed two million civilians in Vietnam, and when President Kennedy tried to end the war, the corporate leaders had him killed. Obviously bin Laden is seriously confused about his American history. Rumsfeld post-dated Kennedy's assassination; in fact, his first military-related post in government came in February 1973, one month after the Paris peace accords. But wait, there's more...
Paragraphs 18-19: But even when you realized the war was a mistake, you didn't try and punish the criminals who brought the war on! Now Bush has brought those war criminals back- surely you knew that meant he was going to have a war with SOMEBODY? Don't claim to be innocent- you had warning, and yet you CHOSE to support these people. bin Laden has always regarded America as if we were a single, united people, with only one opinion about anything. I will say, though, that when Cheney was picked as Bush's running mate, we all should have been more alert. Cheney's made no secret of his belief that Nixon did nothing wrong and that the President is and should be all-powerful.
Paragraph 20: Noam Chomsky, the most prominent shaper of American public opinion, tried to warn you! The rest of the WORLD tried to warn you, with demonstrations, public outcry, protests of world leaders- but Bush did not listen! You did not listen! And now you must know the truth- Bush doesn't give a rat's ass about freedom. He only wants to rule the world. I wasn't aware that Noam Chomsky was all that influential, to tell the truth. How many hit records has he had?
Paragraph 21: And that's why the Democrats aren't stopping the war- because they're owned by the corporations, the same as the Republicans are. Your votes and your protests are useless, because democracy has failed. I've said before I see little to zero difference between Democrats and Republicans. A lot of that has to do with this very point: the ones of either party who get elected do so with corporate money and then turn around and do those corporations' bidding afterwards. bin Laden is wrong to say democracy has failed- more on that in a bit- but there's definitely a flaw in the system there.
Paragraphs 22-27: So here's the solution. First, we're going to kill even more of you than ever before. That's what we do. Second, you have to abandon democracy and capitalism, the evils which have caused global warming, corporate terror, oppression and suffering. Turn away from those man-made laws and so-called freedoms that caused Iraq and Afghanistan. Convert to Islam, adopt Shari'a law, and bend to the rule of the clerics. Because, y'see, fundamentalist Islam is his cure for everything... never mind that Iran and Taliban Afghanistan were and are easily as corrupt, evil, and unjust as any republic or democracy ever thought of being.
Paragraphs 28-37: Oh, you claim to believe in God, but you don't. If you did, you'd follow Shari'a law- without which there is no faith in God! No, you're pagans, because you've forgotten that all men should be slaves to God. We know better: we've kept our religion pure, and that's why we'll win. Ask Michael Scheuer for pointers if that confuses you. Michael who?
Paragraph 38: Don't judge us by how poor we are now- we were great once, when our leaders were pure in God. These days our leaders are corrupt, but we'll soon fix that. It's worth remembering that only five hundred years after Mohammad, in those times when bin Laden thinks the leaders were pure, the Mongols rolled over the old Caliphate like the original Juggernaut down the streets of Bombay.
Paragraphs 39-40: We brought down the Soviet empire when it invaded Afghanistan, and now we'll bring you down. Boastful, and over-simplistic in attributing to Brezhnev the entire fall of the USSR, but a definite element of truth.
Paragraphs 41-43: Your soldiers don't want to fight anymore. If they leave their bases, we kill them. If they stay, you punish them. The only things they can do are crack up or commit suicide. Definite oversell. A lot of soldiers oppose the war, but a lot of others still support it and want to keep fighting. A lot more than either side don't care either way- they just want those in command to make up their mind what the hell we're trying to DO over there.
Paragraphs 44-49: In conclusion: convert to Islam. It's your only hope for life after death. Muslims are much happier than anyone else, even when everyone's out to kill them. Under Islam there are no taxes. Corporations will dry up and blow away. Jesus was a Muslim. So was his mother. So convert to Islam... or else.
So, what is there to take home from bin Laden's message? Let's subtract the conversion message. Ditto, let's dump the direct propaganda- all the "we'll win because we're better" garbage. What remains at the core is what the Islamic world already believes about us- the belief bin Laden is using in this message to build support among Muslims.
The core message is: George W. Bush and his cronies want global domination. The Democrats, being controlled by Bush's corporate buddies, will do nothing to stop him. All the promises of peace, security and freedom the United States makes are lies told in order to build more power at home and abroad. Bush doesn't care what he says, doesn't care who gets killed, so long as he has power.
That's what the Muslim world believes- and bin Laden knows it. He's preaching to the choir there.
And, based on the available evidence, it is very very hard indeed to disprove.
If we want things to change in the Middle East, the second thing we have to do is stop promising peace, security and freedom, stop trying to spread democracy to the masses at gunpoint... in short, BRING OUR TROOPS HOME.
The first thing we have to do is get rid of George W. Bush- electing a replacement might work, provided it's not a Republican or Hilary, but impeachment would be preferable.
Thursday, August 23, 2007
So He FINALLY Figured It Out... Wait No
It's the talk of the beltway this week: Bush compared Iraq to Vietnam.
This is a major change for Bush, who heretofore consistently denied that there was any comparison between Iraq and Vietnam. Let's examine this:
Unpopular government propped up by American arms and devoted to engaging its own corruption rather than helping the people: check.
Insurgency driven by deep and widespread hostility to both the current government and the American presence in the country: check.
Rival nation supplying the insurgency with weapons, training and other support: check.
Enemy determined to fight despite any and all setbacks and casualties until America leaves and the existing government falls: check-a-roonie.
Unwinnable war that wastes American lives and money to no good end: check.
OK, so the comparison holds up pretty well.
But what lesson should we take?
Well, here's what Bush says:
"Whatever your position in that debate, one unmistakable legacy of Vietnam is that the price of America's withdrawal was paid by millions of innocent citizens, whose agonies would add to our vocabulary new terms like 'boat people,' 're-education camps' and 'killing fields,' "
In other words, Bush thinks it was a mistake for the United States to get out of Vietnam.
Oh, wait- here's another quote:
"The militarists of Japan and the Communists in Korea and Vietnam were driven by a merciless vision for the proper ordering of humanity. They killed Americans because we stood in the way of their attempt to force this ideology on others."
Um, right on Japan and Korea, wrong on Vietnam. (And let's not forget that in Korea we fought to maintain Singman Rhee, every bit as much a dictator as Kim Il Sung, the North Korean leader.) In Vietnam the vast majority of the South Vietnamese supported Communism- and more to the point supported Vietnamese unity and nationalism, and resented a puppet dictatorship imposed on them by force of American arms. It was first the French, then the Americans, who tried to force the Vietnamese to follow their ideology- an ideology in which the Vietnamese were nothing more than pawns in a greater Cold War against the myth of monolithic Communism.
And on these grounds- not wanting to repeat the mistakes of the past- Bush wants us to stay in Iraq... indefinitely.
Until the Iraqis no longer resist our presence.
No matter how much the Iraqis, or the American people, want us out.
Well, what can you expect from a man who defended the Houston Ship Channel and rural Alabama from the Viet Cong?
This is a major change for Bush, who heretofore consistently denied that there was any comparison between Iraq and Vietnam. Let's examine this:
Unpopular government propped up by American arms and devoted to engaging its own corruption rather than helping the people: check.
Insurgency driven by deep and widespread hostility to both the current government and the American presence in the country: check.
Rival nation supplying the insurgency with weapons, training and other support: check.
Enemy determined to fight despite any and all setbacks and casualties until America leaves and the existing government falls: check-a-roonie.
Unwinnable war that wastes American lives and money to no good end: check.
OK, so the comparison holds up pretty well.
But what lesson should we take?
Well, here's what Bush says:
"Whatever your position in that debate, one unmistakable legacy of Vietnam is that the price of America's withdrawal was paid by millions of innocent citizens, whose agonies would add to our vocabulary new terms like 'boat people,' 're-education camps' and 'killing fields,' "
In other words, Bush thinks it was a mistake for the United States to get out of Vietnam.
Oh, wait- here's another quote:
"The militarists of Japan and the Communists in Korea and Vietnam were driven by a merciless vision for the proper ordering of humanity. They killed Americans because we stood in the way of their attempt to force this ideology on others."
Um, right on Japan and Korea, wrong on Vietnam. (And let's not forget that in Korea we fought to maintain Singman Rhee, every bit as much a dictator as Kim Il Sung, the North Korean leader.) In Vietnam the vast majority of the South Vietnamese supported Communism- and more to the point supported Vietnamese unity and nationalism, and resented a puppet dictatorship imposed on them by force of American arms. It was first the French, then the Americans, who tried to force the Vietnamese to follow their ideology- an ideology in which the Vietnamese were nothing more than pawns in a greater Cold War against the myth of monolithic Communism.
And on these grounds- not wanting to repeat the mistakes of the past- Bush wants us to stay in Iraq... indefinitely.
Until the Iraqis no longer resist our presence.
No matter how much the Iraqis, or the American people, want us out.
Well, what can you expect from a man who defended the Houston Ship Channel and rural Alabama from the Viet Cong?
Thursday, May 24, 2007
Just Too Much to Choose From Today...
Tomorrow's Corn Flake, barring new developments, is going to be a couple weeks old- but you've doubtless heard of him.
For today, though, I'm finding so much relevant news that I just can't pick one story to focus on. This isn't a Cull Day thing- this is just all stuff which I don't want to hold and wait until more stories come out.
For an appetizer, let's start with this story about the United States' carbon emissions dropping in 2006- the first time since 1990 they've dropped, according to preliminary numbers from the US Energy Dept.
Two points to consider, though: (1) Isn't this the same Energy Department run by some guy who used to be an Exxon executive? (2) Isn't it a bit early for George Bush to be crowing about his initiatives (none of which have been enacted that I know of) reducing carbon while emissions continue to rise in Europe... when even his puppet agency claims the reduction is primarily due to lower energy demands caused by a mild winter and summer in 2006? This story, combined with the word "preliminary"- that is, subject to wild and radical change without warning- smells like bullshit to me.
Over to the Levant for the second story: Israel arrests over thirty Hamas leaders, including members of the Palestinian Parliament. Let me get this out on the table now: I support an Israeli state in the Levant. I support its right to exist. I do NOT, however, approve in any way, shape or form of how the government of Israel acts- basically, like a little bully who knows nobody will punish him because his daddy is an even bigger bully. For years now Israel has had it both ways- blame the Palestinian Authority for not enforcing laws against terrorist groups, while at the same time sabotaging every effort the Palestinians make to police their own streets and negotiate with splinter groups to end the ongoing entefada. If Israel isn't going to treat Palestinians as equals, they might as well withdraw recognition of the Palestinian Authority and declare an end to the two-state policy. If, on the other hand, they really do want an independent Palestine, they need to stop doing dumb shit like this crackdown... this crackdown that makes Hamas, people who use Mickey Mouse look-alikes to call for the massacre of everyone who doesn't agree with them, look like the victims.
Back to the USA now: Reports surface showing that George W. Bush was warned- repeatedly- before March 2003 that taking out Saddam would create an incurable quagmire and sectarian civil war in Iraq. The most relevant paragraph: A former intelligence official, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said the decision to go to war had been made months before the 2003 papers were drafted and analysts had no delusions that they were going to head off military action. Rather, the official said, they hoped their warnings would be considered in the planning.
That's right: yet more proof that the decision to go to war in Iraq had been made months, even perhaps years in advance. More proof that George W. Bush had no intention of negotiating in good faith for weapons inspection, sanctions, or international support for ousting Saddam Hussein. Most damaging, more proof that Bush and his cronies had determined to have a war regardless of all other considerations- including the safety of American soldiers and the American people.
This story comes from an anomymous source, but keep your eyes out when the report this info comes from is released either late this week or sometime next week.
Finally, closer to home... Remember my posts about Houston's sex business ordinance, which is a direct attack on the ability of those businesses to operate at all? Well, the state legislature has squeezed through a new sin tax at the last minute before the session ends- a $5 per head tax on everyone who sets foot in a titty bar.
No, I correct myself: strip club. Even places that don't serve booze have to pony up the dough.
Prize-winning quote from the article at the end, from State Senator Dan Patrick- not the one from ESPN, but he also STILL HAS a radio talk show:
"I don't want the fact that the government is making money from them to make them harder to close. I would rather see the businesses close down," he said after the vote. "If we base our budget on a combination of sin taxes, we are kind of supporting the sin."
Mr. Patrick has forgotten the old adage: the power to tax is the power to destroy.
Mr. Patrick is also one of the supporters of efforts in this legislature to severely restrict or outright ban abortion... and to provide tax dollars to pay women to carry their child to term.
Oh- and although Mr. Patrick is a Republican, the author in the Texas House and the bill's sponsor in the Senate are both Democrats. The state House has to vote to approve Senate changes, so I don't know the final vote there, but only one state senator voted against the bill.
With both parties voting to continue the Iraq war in Washington, and both parties voting to tax people for being horny in Houston and Austin...
... does anybody still really believe Libertarians can change anything unless Libertarians get ELECTED?
For today, though, I'm finding so much relevant news that I just can't pick one story to focus on. This isn't a Cull Day thing- this is just all stuff which I don't want to hold and wait until more stories come out.
For an appetizer, let's start with this story about the United States' carbon emissions dropping in 2006- the first time since 1990 they've dropped, according to preliminary numbers from the US Energy Dept.
Two points to consider, though: (1) Isn't this the same Energy Department run by some guy who used to be an Exxon executive? (2) Isn't it a bit early for George Bush to be crowing about his initiatives (none of which have been enacted that I know of) reducing carbon while emissions continue to rise in Europe... when even his puppet agency claims the reduction is primarily due to lower energy demands caused by a mild winter and summer in 2006? This story, combined with the word "preliminary"- that is, subject to wild and radical change without warning- smells like bullshit to me.
Over to the Levant for the second story: Israel arrests over thirty Hamas leaders, including members of the Palestinian Parliament. Let me get this out on the table now: I support an Israeli state in the Levant. I support its right to exist. I do NOT, however, approve in any way, shape or form of how the government of Israel acts- basically, like a little bully who knows nobody will punish him because his daddy is an even bigger bully. For years now Israel has had it both ways- blame the Palestinian Authority for not enforcing laws against terrorist groups, while at the same time sabotaging every effort the Palestinians make to police their own streets and negotiate with splinter groups to end the ongoing entefada. If Israel isn't going to treat Palestinians as equals, they might as well withdraw recognition of the Palestinian Authority and declare an end to the two-state policy. If, on the other hand, they really do want an independent Palestine, they need to stop doing dumb shit like this crackdown... this crackdown that makes Hamas, people who use Mickey Mouse look-alikes to call for the massacre of everyone who doesn't agree with them, look like the victims.
Back to the USA now: Reports surface showing that George W. Bush was warned- repeatedly- before March 2003 that taking out Saddam would create an incurable quagmire and sectarian civil war in Iraq. The most relevant paragraph: A former intelligence official, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said the decision to go to war had been made months before the 2003 papers were drafted and analysts had no delusions that they were going to head off military action. Rather, the official said, they hoped their warnings would be considered in the planning.
That's right: yet more proof that the decision to go to war in Iraq had been made months, even perhaps years in advance. More proof that George W. Bush had no intention of negotiating in good faith for weapons inspection, sanctions, or international support for ousting Saddam Hussein. Most damaging, more proof that Bush and his cronies had determined to have a war regardless of all other considerations- including the safety of American soldiers and the American people.
This story comes from an anomymous source, but keep your eyes out when the report this info comes from is released either late this week or sometime next week.
Finally, closer to home... Remember my posts about Houston's sex business ordinance, which is a direct attack on the ability of those businesses to operate at all? Well, the state legislature has squeezed through a new sin tax at the last minute before the session ends- a $5 per head tax on everyone who sets foot in a titty bar.
No, I correct myself: strip club. Even places that don't serve booze have to pony up the dough.
Prize-winning quote from the article at the end, from State Senator Dan Patrick- not the one from ESPN, but he also STILL HAS a radio talk show:
"I don't want the fact that the government is making money from them to make them harder to close. I would rather see the businesses close down," he said after the vote. "If we base our budget on a combination of sin taxes, we are kind of supporting the sin."
Mr. Patrick has forgotten the old adage: the power to tax is the power to destroy.
Mr. Patrick is also one of the supporters of efforts in this legislature to severely restrict or outright ban abortion... and to provide tax dollars to pay women to carry their child to term.
Oh- and although Mr. Patrick is a Republican, the author in the Texas House and the bill's sponsor in the Senate are both Democrats. The state House has to vote to approve Senate changes, so I don't know the final vote there, but only one state senator voted against the bill.
With both parties voting to continue the Iraq war in Washington, and both parties voting to tax people for being horny in Houston and Austin...
... does anybody still really believe Libertarians can change anything unless Libertarians get ELECTED?
Wednesday, May 23, 2007
Cull Day: A Great Day to be Named Bush, and More
It's already been a long day, and I'm exhausted.
Unfortunately, too much is happening for me to be completely silent today. The Democrats have caved in to Bush, giving him everything he wants with absolutely zero accountability and zero movement towards ending the war. I've already said my piece on the Democrats and their lack of anti-war credibility on my personal LiveJournal. Short version: if you want to end the war, vote Libertarian or Green in 2008- not Democratic, and certainly not Republican.
George Bush has held another fortuitously timed news conference,, announcing the declassification of matters related to attempts by al-Qaida to organize a strike on the continental United States based in Iraq. (Um... is Osama bin Laden really so stupid as to make home base for a strike on the USA in a nation crawling with US troops and militias with conflicting or opposing goals to al-Qaida?)
If the timing of the declassification announcement was deliberately timed to distract from Justice Department aide Monica Goodling's testimony before Congress, it was a waste of a perfectly good propoganda tool. Aside from vague accusations that Deputy Attorney General McNulty perjured himself before Congress and an anecdote that almost, but not quite, accuses Alberto Gonzales of attempting to influence or alter Goodling's potential testimony after she was supoenaed, Goodling opened no fresh cans of worms and provided nothing of any practical use in investigating the rampant corruption in the Justice Department.
However, Keith Olbermann will have much to say on all of this tonight, especially on the failure of Democrats to stand to their guns on Iraq. I'm not going to go into great detail on that... or much of anything, for that matter. I'm tired, I'm feeling burned out for the day, which makes it a great time for the first Cull Day since the return of this blog.
So, let's check the bookmarks and see what stories are a week old or older that don't merit a larger post...
Alabama Calls Libertarians Terrorists - On the one hand, I'm outraged at how a government agency calls people who believe in individual rights terror suspects. On the other hand, I keep remembering how many militia-movement people we had in the party when I first joined in 1999, and how a large number of them were calling for an armed revolution in case of a Gore Presidency- despite the fact that that directly violated both the spirit and the letter of the LP's membership pledge against advocating violence for political change. A lot of our fellow travelers have given the rest of society good reason to be suspicious: time we recognized the fact.
Taliban Releases Kidnapped French Aid Worker - Lesson learned by terrorists (again): Terror works.
Ricky Williams Fails Drug Test... Again - I don't think marijuana should be illegal. I do think the NFL, like any private employer, has the right to set drug standards for employment. Either way, Ricky, when you were already on suspension, continuing to drink and toke and expecting to be allowed back on the playing field was JUST PLAIN STUPID. Folks, this is what wacky weed DOES to you- it makes you think dicking around the people you owe $10 million in non-performance contract clauses is a GOOD IDEA.
Cheney Promises US Will Keep Persian Gulf Open - Two points. First- does anybody believe anymore that Cheney, and Bush and the rest of 'em, are NOT trying to get us in a shooting war in Iran? Second- does anybody in the rest of the world have any respect whatever for anything ANY American government official says, especially Cheney?
Army Offering Bonuses to Retain Officers - Yeah, because, y'know, getting badly underpaid and having benefits cut right and left while being put in ever-longer action tours and ever-shorter time stateside looks SO DAMN ATTRACTIVE to folks who've seen Iraq once... twice... thrice... four times running... Tell me, how do you say, "Not for all the corn in Iowa," in Arabic?
Karl Rove: Re-Open Democrat Voter Fraud Prosecutions, Or Else - I finally got round to reading All the President's Men last week. Today I picked up a copy of the follow-up, The Final Days, detailing how Nixon was persuaded to resign. Between that and this, I'm developing newfound respect for the Washington Post.
Texas Legislature Considers Tax on Nursing Homes - This annoys me. First, a large chunk of nursing home occupants are essentially wards of the state- Medicare or Medicaid is paying for thousands of dollars per month of care they can't afford. For these people, this tax would be a tax on the government- making these programs even MORE expensive than they already are! Second, those NOT on Medicare/Medicaid are pouring their life savings into their care... and this tax would make it even more expensive. Finally, this tax is earmarked... until a future legislature votes to redirect it to the general fund... to "improve nursing home care" by handing the money right back to the nursing homes... that is, those homes approved of by the state bureaucracy. Finally, the law has a provision forbidding nursing homes from passing it on to the consumers directly or indirectly. How in the hell do they expect to prove that a rate hike isn't due to this tax? From start to end, BAD IDEA.
Texas Senate Approves Tying Marriage License Fee to Family Counseling - Speaking of dumb shit from my state legislature, here's this notion- double the cost of getting your government's permission to get married unless you agree to state-mandated, state-controlled, state-chosen pre-marital counseling class. Considering the bill is written by Warren Chisum, the biggest homophobe and anti-sex warrior in either house of the Texas Legislature... just what kind of stuff will they teach in those classes? "Wives, your only proper role is as receptacle for your husband's semen. Husbands, you are not allowed to beat your wives with any stick thicker than one inch in diameter."
Zimbabwe to Head UN Sustainable Development Commission - First Syria chairing the UN Human Rights Commission, and now this. What gets me here isn't that the UN seems determined to prove it has no moral authority whatever to tell anybody to do anything. No, what gets me is that the UN considers Syria, Zimbabwe, and others as democracies, despite their one-party rule with fixed elections and strongmen serving for life. We need to remember that the trappings of democracy, or of a republic, by no means guarantee freedom. Only strict limitations on government power, enforced by the electorate, can do that... and if we aren't careful, what we see in Syria and Zimbabwe could happen here.
$17 Million in Texas Worker's Comp Death Benefits Kept by State, Mostly Paid Back to Insurance Companies - Wow. Government corruption and insurance corporation corruption in the same story. Please note the laws that mandate this were enacted in 1991, back when Texas was still solidly in Democrat control. As much as I'd love to stick this to Bush or Perry, I'll settle for demonstrating equal opportunity graft.
Lawmakers Try to Live a Week on Food Stamps - First, I've had to live on that amount, and I didn't have the help of food stamps. Second, the Congresscritters are very right: you just plain cannot afford a healthy diet on that amount. Third, I don't know that many people on food stamps or other assistance, but: (a) how many states don't supplement the federal food stamp program with their own programs, (b) how many food stamp people don't supplement their stamps with cash, and (c) what role do private charities play in feeding these people? Libertarians need to take an active role in creating a world where (c) adds up to no more need for taxpayers to pay for (a) and/or (b). Until then, let's get past cheap but thrilling publicity stunts like this one-week diet and get some actual facts on the topic.
... wow. That's a lot of stories, and still the list is huge. It's been really thick times for government stupidity, looks like. Probably do another of these before my upcoming business trip.
Unfortunately, too much is happening for me to be completely silent today. The Democrats have caved in to Bush, giving him everything he wants with absolutely zero accountability and zero movement towards ending the war. I've already said my piece on the Democrats and their lack of anti-war credibility on my personal LiveJournal. Short version: if you want to end the war, vote Libertarian or Green in 2008- not Democratic, and certainly not Republican.
George Bush has held another fortuitously timed news conference,, announcing the declassification of matters related to attempts by al-Qaida to organize a strike on the continental United States based in Iraq. (Um... is Osama bin Laden really so stupid as to make home base for a strike on the USA in a nation crawling with US troops and militias with conflicting or opposing goals to al-Qaida?)
If the timing of the declassification announcement was deliberately timed to distract from Justice Department aide Monica Goodling's testimony before Congress, it was a waste of a perfectly good propoganda tool. Aside from vague accusations that Deputy Attorney General McNulty perjured himself before Congress and an anecdote that almost, but not quite, accuses Alberto Gonzales of attempting to influence or alter Goodling's potential testimony after she was supoenaed, Goodling opened no fresh cans of worms and provided nothing of any practical use in investigating the rampant corruption in the Justice Department.
However, Keith Olbermann will have much to say on all of this tonight, especially on the failure of Democrats to stand to their guns on Iraq. I'm not going to go into great detail on that... or much of anything, for that matter. I'm tired, I'm feeling burned out for the day, which makes it a great time for the first Cull Day since the return of this blog.
So, let's check the bookmarks and see what stories are a week old or older that don't merit a larger post...
Alabama Calls Libertarians Terrorists - On the one hand, I'm outraged at how a government agency calls people who believe in individual rights terror suspects. On the other hand, I keep remembering how many militia-movement people we had in the party when I first joined in 1999, and how a large number of them were calling for an armed revolution in case of a Gore Presidency- despite the fact that that directly violated both the spirit and the letter of the LP's membership pledge against advocating violence for political change. A lot of our fellow travelers have given the rest of society good reason to be suspicious: time we recognized the fact.
Taliban Releases Kidnapped French Aid Worker - Lesson learned by terrorists (again): Terror works.
Ricky Williams Fails Drug Test... Again - I don't think marijuana should be illegal. I do think the NFL, like any private employer, has the right to set drug standards for employment. Either way, Ricky, when you were already on suspension, continuing to drink and toke and expecting to be allowed back on the playing field was JUST PLAIN STUPID. Folks, this is what wacky weed DOES to you- it makes you think dicking around the people you owe $10 million in non-performance contract clauses is a GOOD IDEA.
Cheney Promises US Will Keep Persian Gulf Open - Two points. First- does anybody believe anymore that Cheney, and Bush and the rest of 'em, are NOT trying to get us in a shooting war in Iran? Second- does anybody in the rest of the world have any respect whatever for anything ANY American government official says, especially Cheney?
Army Offering Bonuses to Retain Officers - Yeah, because, y'know, getting badly underpaid and having benefits cut right and left while being put in ever-longer action tours and ever-shorter time stateside looks SO DAMN ATTRACTIVE to folks who've seen Iraq once... twice... thrice... four times running... Tell me, how do you say, "Not for all the corn in Iowa," in Arabic?
Karl Rove: Re-Open Democrat Voter Fraud Prosecutions, Or Else - I finally got round to reading All the President's Men last week. Today I picked up a copy of the follow-up, The Final Days, detailing how Nixon was persuaded to resign. Between that and this, I'm developing newfound respect for the Washington Post.
Texas Legislature Considers Tax on Nursing Homes - This annoys me. First, a large chunk of nursing home occupants are essentially wards of the state- Medicare or Medicaid is paying for thousands of dollars per month of care they can't afford. For these people, this tax would be a tax on the government- making these programs even MORE expensive than they already are! Second, those NOT on Medicare/Medicaid are pouring their life savings into their care... and this tax would make it even more expensive. Finally, this tax is earmarked... until a future legislature votes to redirect it to the general fund... to "improve nursing home care" by handing the money right back to the nursing homes... that is, those homes approved of by the state bureaucracy. Finally, the law has a provision forbidding nursing homes from passing it on to the consumers directly or indirectly. How in the hell do they expect to prove that a rate hike isn't due to this tax? From start to end, BAD IDEA.
Texas Senate Approves Tying Marriage License Fee to Family Counseling - Speaking of dumb shit from my state legislature, here's this notion- double the cost of getting your government's permission to get married unless you agree to state-mandated, state-controlled, state-chosen pre-marital counseling class. Considering the bill is written by Warren Chisum, the biggest homophobe and anti-sex warrior in either house of the Texas Legislature... just what kind of stuff will they teach in those classes? "Wives, your only proper role is as receptacle for your husband's semen. Husbands, you are not allowed to beat your wives with any stick thicker than one inch in diameter."
Zimbabwe to Head UN Sustainable Development Commission - First Syria chairing the UN Human Rights Commission, and now this. What gets me here isn't that the UN seems determined to prove it has no moral authority whatever to tell anybody to do anything. No, what gets me is that the UN considers Syria, Zimbabwe, and others as democracies, despite their one-party rule with fixed elections and strongmen serving for life. We need to remember that the trappings of democracy, or of a republic, by no means guarantee freedom. Only strict limitations on government power, enforced by the electorate, can do that... and if we aren't careful, what we see in Syria and Zimbabwe could happen here.
$17 Million in Texas Worker's Comp Death Benefits Kept by State, Mostly Paid Back to Insurance Companies - Wow. Government corruption and insurance corporation corruption in the same story. Please note the laws that mandate this were enacted in 1991, back when Texas was still solidly in Democrat control. As much as I'd love to stick this to Bush or Perry, I'll settle for demonstrating equal opportunity graft.
Lawmakers Try to Live a Week on Food Stamps - First, I've had to live on that amount, and I didn't have the help of food stamps. Second, the Congresscritters are very right: you just plain cannot afford a healthy diet on that amount. Third, I don't know that many people on food stamps or other assistance, but: (a) how many states don't supplement the federal food stamp program with their own programs, (b) how many food stamp people don't supplement their stamps with cash, and (c) what role do private charities play in feeding these people? Libertarians need to take an active role in creating a world where (c) adds up to no more need for taxpayers to pay for (a) and/or (b). Until then, let's get past cheap but thrilling publicity stunts like this one-week diet and get some actual facts on the topic.
... wow. That's a lot of stories, and still the list is huge. It's been really thick times for government stupidity, looks like. Probably do another of these before my upcoming business trip.
Friday, May 11, 2007
Pro-War Democrats, or Victory is MUCH More Important Than Principle
Yesterday (Thursday) the US House voted- narrowly- to give George W. Bush his requested $100 billion for "emergency" Iraq War spending, with only one condition: that Bush report to Congress in July on progress made in the war before the second half of the funding would be released. The news will continue talking about this bill until it dies in the Senate or gets its promised veto by Bush, whichever comes first.
There was another bill that the media aren't talking about, though. A bill which mandated withdrawal of all US forces from Iraq no later than nine months after passage- between February and March 2008, had it passed- failed in the House, 171-255.
What's important about this is that, although the Democratic Party ran on an end-the-war platform, although the Iraq War was the single most important issue in the 2006 election, fifty-seven Democrats voted against this bill, thereby showing that they want the war to continue indefinitely.
The official position of the Libertarian Party is for an immediate withdrawal from Iraq. As a general rule Libertarian candidates ran as anti-war candidates... but none of them even came close to winning election. Part of this, of course, is due to the fact that the Republican-Democrat duopoly is well-entrenched and defends itself against potential threats. The greater portion of the cause, though, is that voters see Libertarians as lunatics for our other positions- including calls by some of our candidates to abolish the standing army and navy altogether and revert to an all-volunteer militia in which every soldier provides his or her own weapon.
More to the point, though, the fact that Libertarians DIDN'T GET ELECTED means that, instead of our principles opposing "pre-emptive defense" and the occupation of sovereign nations being enacted, Democrats with no unifying principle split the vote and thereby demonstrated that the Iraq War will continue until January 2009 at the very least- even if Bush were impeached and removed from office.
We cannot rely on other parties to pick up anything more than our rhetoric from us; if we want our principles to be enacted, Libertarians must first get elected. That means anything which sabotages our chances of election must be ejected- and that includes income tax evasion, Federal Reserve and anti-Semitic conspiracy theory, overt racist policies, advocating the right to own thermonuclear weapons, etc. etc. etc. etc. etc.
Now I admit- 39 of the 57 pro-war Democrats had no Libertarian opponent. Had every last war Democrat seat switched to Libertarian, the bill would only have passed with 228 yea votes- only ten greater than the threshhold number for passage. Even if every Libertarian running against these Democrats had won, at best the vote would have been 189 to 237. What that means is that Libertarians, as a party, need to strengthen our organization, get on ballots for offices other than US President, and recruit more and stronger candidates- stronger than the tinfoil-beanie, zero-campaign-budget candidates we currently attract- because if we don't, the purity or lack thereof of our principles and positions won't make a drop of difference in the political ocean.
Here are the 57 pro-war Democrats, organized according to their opposition in 2006:
3 UNOPPOSED: Allen Boyd (FL), Jim Costa (CA), Robert E. (Bud) Cramer Jr. (AL)
29 OPPOSED ONLY BY REPUBLICAN: Jason Altmire (PA), John Barrow (GA), Sanford D. Bishop Jr. (GA), Dan Boren (OK), Rick Boucher (VA), Dennis A. Cardoza (CA), Christopher P. Carney (PA), Lincoln Davis (TN), Joe Donnelly (IN), Brad Ellsworth (IN), Jerry McNerney (CA), Bob Etheridge (NC), Jim Marshall (GA), David Scott (GA), Tim Holden (PA), Ron Kind (WI) , Mike McIntyre (NC), Heath Shuler (NC), Allyson Y. Schwartz (PA), Daniel Lipinski (IL), C. A. Dutch Ruppersberger (MD), Earl Pomeroy (ND), Mike Ross (AR), Zachary T. Space (OH), Charles A. Wilson (OH), Vic Snyder (AR), John M. Spratt Jr. (SC), Gene Taylor (MS), John S. Tanner (TN)
1 TWO-WAY, NO GOP or LP: House Majority Leader Steny H. Hoyer of Maryland (opposed by Green Party, Warner getting 16%)
7 THREE-WAY OR MORE, NO LIBERTARIAN: Melissa L. Bean (IL), Leonard L. Boswell (IA), Jim Cooper (TN), Bart Gordon (TN), Tim Mahoney (FL), Ciro D. Rodriguez (TX), Collin C. Peterson (MN)
2 OPPOSED BY LIBERTARIAN (TWO-WAY): Nick Lampson of Texas (Bob Smither came in third at 6% behind a Republican write-in candidate), Ben Chandler (KY) (Ard got 15% of the vote)
16 OPPOSED BY LIBERTARIAN (THREE-WAY OR MORE): Shelley Berkley (NV), Howard L. Berman (CA), Henry Cuellar (TX) , Gene Green (TX), Chet Edwards (TX), Gabrielle Giffords of Arizona (opposed by LP founder David Nolan (2%), who says at any opportunity that the mission of the LP is NOT to win elections- guess what, David, you were WRONG), Stephanie Herseth Sandlin (SD), Baron P. Hill (IN), Solomon P. Ortiz (TX), Jim Matheson (UT) (the Libertarian came in dead last in a field of 5 at under 1%), Harry E. Mitchell (AZ), Charlie Melancon (LA), Ike Skelton (MO), John T. Salazar (CO), Vic Snyder (AR), Mark Udall (CO)
There was another bill that the media aren't talking about, though. A bill which mandated withdrawal of all US forces from Iraq no later than nine months after passage- between February and March 2008, had it passed- failed in the House, 171-255.
What's important about this is that, although the Democratic Party ran on an end-the-war platform, although the Iraq War was the single most important issue in the 2006 election, fifty-seven Democrats voted against this bill, thereby showing that they want the war to continue indefinitely.
The official position of the Libertarian Party is for an immediate withdrawal from Iraq. As a general rule Libertarian candidates ran as anti-war candidates... but none of them even came close to winning election. Part of this, of course, is due to the fact that the Republican-Democrat duopoly is well-entrenched and defends itself against potential threats. The greater portion of the cause, though, is that voters see Libertarians as lunatics for our other positions- including calls by some of our candidates to abolish the standing army and navy altogether and revert to an all-volunteer militia in which every soldier provides his or her own weapon.
More to the point, though, the fact that Libertarians DIDN'T GET ELECTED means that, instead of our principles opposing "pre-emptive defense" and the occupation of sovereign nations being enacted, Democrats with no unifying principle split the vote and thereby demonstrated that the Iraq War will continue until January 2009 at the very least- even if Bush were impeached and removed from office.
We cannot rely on other parties to pick up anything more than our rhetoric from us; if we want our principles to be enacted, Libertarians must first get elected. That means anything which sabotages our chances of election must be ejected- and that includes income tax evasion, Federal Reserve and anti-Semitic conspiracy theory, overt racist policies, advocating the right to own thermonuclear weapons, etc. etc. etc. etc. etc.
Now I admit- 39 of the 57 pro-war Democrats had no Libertarian opponent. Had every last war Democrat seat switched to Libertarian, the bill would only have passed with 228 yea votes- only ten greater than the threshhold number for passage. Even if every Libertarian running against these Democrats had won, at best the vote would have been 189 to 237. What that means is that Libertarians, as a party, need to strengthen our organization, get on ballots for offices other than US President, and recruit more and stronger candidates- stronger than the tinfoil-beanie, zero-campaign-budget candidates we currently attract- because if we don't, the purity or lack thereof of our principles and positions won't make a drop of difference in the political ocean.
Here are the 57 pro-war Democrats, organized according to their opposition in 2006:
3 UNOPPOSED: Allen Boyd (FL), Jim Costa (CA), Robert E. (Bud) Cramer Jr. (AL)
29 OPPOSED ONLY BY REPUBLICAN: Jason Altmire (PA), John Barrow (GA), Sanford D. Bishop Jr. (GA), Dan Boren (OK), Rick Boucher (VA), Dennis A. Cardoza (CA), Christopher P. Carney (PA), Lincoln Davis (TN), Joe Donnelly (IN), Brad Ellsworth (IN), Jerry McNerney (CA), Bob Etheridge (NC), Jim Marshall (GA), David Scott (GA), Tim Holden (PA), Ron Kind (WI) , Mike McIntyre (NC), Heath Shuler (NC), Allyson Y. Schwartz (PA), Daniel Lipinski (IL), C. A. Dutch Ruppersberger (MD), Earl Pomeroy (ND), Mike Ross (AR), Zachary T. Space (OH), Charles A. Wilson (OH), Vic Snyder (AR), John M. Spratt Jr. (SC), Gene Taylor (MS), John S. Tanner (TN)
1 TWO-WAY, NO GOP or LP: House Majority Leader Steny H. Hoyer of Maryland (opposed by Green Party, Warner getting 16%)
7 THREE-WAY OR MORE, NO LIBERTARIAN: Melissa L. Bean (IL), Leonard L. Boswell (IA), Jim Cooper (TN), Bart Gordon (TN), Tim Mahoney (FL), Ciro D. Rodriguez (TX), Collin C. Peterson (MN)
2 OPPOSED BY LIBERTARIAN (TWO-WAY): Nick Lampson of Texas (Bob Smither came in third at 6% behind a Republican write-in candidate), Ben Chandler (KY) (Ard got 15% of the vote)
16 OPPOSED BY LIBERTARIAN (THREE-WAY OR MORE): Shelley Berkley (NV), Howard L. Berman (CA), Henry Cuellar (TX) , Gene Green (TX), Chet Edwards (TX), Gabrielle Giffords of Arizona (opposed by LP founder David Nolan (2%), who says at any opportunity that the mission of the LP is NOT to win elections- guess what, David, you were WRONG), Stephanie Herseth Sandlin (SD), Baron P. Hill (IN), Solomon P. Ortiz (TX), Jim Matheson (UT) (the Libertarian came in dead last in a field of 5 at under 1%), Harry E. Mitchell (AZ), Charlie Melancon (LA), Ike Skelton (MO), John T. Salazar (CO), Vic Snyder (AR), Mark Udall (CO)
Wednesday, December 20, 2006
Unexpected Cull Day
This morning, before driving my grandmother to doctor and shopping, I had decided to do today's post on a certain Virginian Congressman who isn't the least bit ashamed of his Islamophobia.
While out, I listened to Bush's speech today, heard him change positions on the minimum wage- he now supports it, provided tax breaks for "small business" are included- and decided to do it on that instead.
It took hours to find any mention of the minimum wage waffle online after I got home, and by the time I did, Lou "Everything Not American is Evil" Dobbs's stand-in had done a bit on it... poisoning the well, you might say.
I tried anyway, only to be locked out of this blog for over an hour. By the time I regained access, I was too tired to contemplate a long article. That means it's time for a Cull Day and a bunch of short items...
Some Opposed to Expanding Jails
Although I'm by no means a Democrat, I have to hand it to John Whitmire: sometimes a blind pig will find an acorn. Over half the people in our jails across the nation are in there for simple drug possession- not even possession with intent to distribute, just drug possession. About 3% of Americans are behind bars- the world's highest proportion, beyond even Russia and China. Prison should not be a growth industry- and our law enforcement resources would be better spent on burglary, murder, rape, etc.
E. Coli Scare Causes Doubt in Federal Food Controls
Believe it or not, there's a solution to bacterial contamination that also serves to extend the shelf life of food: irradiation. Unfortunately, paranoid "frankenfood" protesters have effectively kept it off the market... despite the fact that it is approved by the FDA. It doesn't leave residual radiation or cause mutations- it just kills bacteria. Unfortunately, the Luddites would rather have us continue using visual inspections... as if you can see a bacterium.
The Consequences of Milk Socialism
Michael Hampton tends to be much more anarchist than I'd like, which is why I prefer to go to primary sources whenever I see anything of interest on Homeland Stupidity. This article is an example of why I read it every day, though. This is a classic case of government working to squash competition. Instead of letting a small supplier provide cheaper milk, the government is forcing him to pay the big companies a huge subsidy. This is bad for everyone involved... except the big dairy corporations, that is.
Saudis to Back Sunni Militias if US Leaves Iraq
... and why was this news? Oh, right, because we only deduced that before. Now we have proof.
The problem is, the Saudis will intervene in Iraq when we leave no matter how long we wait. The Saudi royal government has backed extremist Sunni religious factions since the founding of their kingdom in the wake of World War I. They'll deny any official involvement, but most of the money behind al-Qaida was Saudi, and it's highly probable a lot of Saudi money is already getting funneled to the insurgency. Know the truly sad thing? The Saudis are our allies...
Democrats Promise Greater Oversight on War
... well, anything is greater than nothing, which is what BOTH Democrats AND Republicans have done since September 2002, when Bush first declared his intent. Unfortunately, with Pelosi still saying that impeachment is permanently off the table, I don't see the point of oversight NOW...
White House Warns Against Threats to Space Assets
Now, I personally believe weaponizing space is inevitable- and, considering threats like China's infant space program and asteroid collision, desirable. Unfortunately, the fact that Bush is the one calling for it will probably discredit the idea for the next generation.
Kevorkian Paroled
Kevorkian, in poor health, says he'll never do it again... but he's said it before. In any case, people should be free to commit suicide, and so long as the final act to suicide is done only at the hand of the victim, doctors should be free to assist if their own morals permit it. This isn't euthenasia, not by my definition anyway. Kevorkian may be dying himself, but his issue lives on. (Side note: I have NO idea what label to add to the list for this item...)
3 Indicted in Fraternity Hazing Death
Read that, then read this: Banned Frat Keeps On Partying... and now you will understand my single, three-word comment on this story:
DEATH PENALTY NOW.
The most recent development in a very rare thing indeed: US soldiers being called to account for crimes such as rape and murder. Did anyone need more proof that winning "hearts and minds" cannot be done by soldiers of an army of occupation?
And that's not even three days' worth of unused stories. I kept a couple to go with several links like them for future posts. There's a LOT I could talk about if I could spare time...
While out, I listened to Bush's speech today, heard him change positions on the minimum wage- he now supports it, provided tax breaks for "small business" are included- and decided to do it on that instead.
It took hours to find any mention of the minimum wage waffle online after I got home, and by the time I did, Lou "Everything Not American is Evil" Dobbs's stand-in had done a bit on it... poisoning the well, you might say.
I tried anyway, only to be locked out of this blog for over an hour. By the time I regained access, I was too tired to contemplate a long article. That means it's time for a Cull Day and a bunch of short items...
Some Opposed to Expanding Jails
Although I'm by no means a Democrat, I have to hand it to John Whitmire: sometimes a blind pig will find an acorn. Over half the people in our jails across the nation are in there for simple drug possession- not even possession with intent to distribute, just drug possession. About 3% of Americans are behind bars- the world's highest proportion, beyond even Russia and China. Prison should not be a growth industry- and our law enforcement resources would be better spent on burglary, murder, rape, etc.
E. Coli Scare Causes Doubt in Federal Food Controls
Believe it or not, there's a solution to bacterial contamination that also serves to extend the shelf life of food: irradiation. Unfortunately, paranoid "frankenfood" protesters have effectively kept it off the market... despite the fact that it is approved by the FDA. It doesn't leave residual radiation or cause mutations- it just kills bacteria. Unfortunately, the Luddites would rather have us continue using visual inspections... as if you can see a bacterium.
The Consequences of Milk Socialism
Michael Hampton tends to be much more anarchist than I'd like, which is why I prefer to go to primary sources whenever I see anything of interest on Homeland Stupidity. This article is an example of why I read it every day, though. This is a classic case of government working to squash competition. Instead of letting a small supplier provide cheaper milk, the government is forcing him to pay the big companies a huge subsidy. This is bad for everyone involved... except the big dairy corporations, that is.
Saudis to Back Sunni Militias if US Leaves Iraq
... and why was this news? Oh, right, because we only deduced that before. Now we have proof.
The problem is, the Saudis will intervene in Iraq when we leave no matter how long we wait. The Saudi royal government has backed extremist Sunni religious factions since the founding of their kingdom in the wake of World War I. They'll deny any official involvement, but most of the money behind al-Qaida was Saudi, and it's highly probable a lot of Saudi money is already getting funneled to the insurgency. Know the truly sad thing? The Saudis are our allies...
Democrats Promise Greater Oversight on War
... well, anything is greater than nothing, which is what BOTH Democrats AND Republicans have done since September 2002, when Bush first declared his intent. Unfortunately, with Pelosi still saying that impeachment is permanently off the table, I don't see the point of oversight NOW...
White House Warns Against Threats to Space Assets
Now, I personally believe weaponizing space is inevitable- and, considering threats like China's infant space program and asteroid collision, desirable. Unfortunately, the fact that Bush is the one calling for it will probably discredit the idea for the next generation.
Kevorkian Paroled
Kevorkian, in poor health, says he'll never do it again... but he's said it before. In any case, people should be free to commit suicide, and so long as the final act to suicide is done only at the hand of the victim, doctors should be free to assist if their own morals permit it. This isn't euthenasia, not by my definition anyway. Kevorkian may be dying himself, but his issue lives on. (Side note: I have NO idea what label to add to the list for this item...)
3 Indicted in Fraternity Hazing Death
Read that, then read this: Banned Frat Keeps On Partying... and now you will understand my single, three-word comment on this story:
DEATH PENALTY NOW.
The most recent development in a very rare thing indeed: US soldiers being called to account for crimes such as rape and murder. Did anyone need more proof that winning "hearts and minds" cannot be done by soldiers of an army of occupation?
And that's not even three days' worth of unused stories. I kept a couple to go with several links like them for future posts. There's a LOT I could talk about if I could spare time...
Sunday, December 17, 2006
It's a Cull Day - Filler Ahoy
Well, this is no doubt going to happen on occasion; I get up, look at the news, look in my queue of bookmarked stories, and find nothing I want to write about in any detail.
So, instead of a long essay on one story, today I'm going to declare a Cull Day. I'm going to go through all the stories I've bookmarked for later reference and delete the bookmarks older than a week. Today's December 17, so every bookmarked story with a byline of December 10 or earlier gets dropped in here with a short note on why it got my attention.
Boehner Offers GOP Strategy to Take Back House
Well, Boehner's memorandum is notable for deliberately avoiding any admission that Republicans abandonded the 1994 Contract with America or became corrupt in power. It's even more notable for not saying much of anything about what Republicans themselves can or should do- aside, that is, from remaining true to their core principles. Boehner deliberately shies away from the notion that Republicans- heaven forbid- were repudiated by the electorate on their merits.
More importantly, slightly more than half the article is taken up with attacking the Democrats. The Democrats, Boehner says, bring nothing new to power- they're the same corrupt group from before 1994. They lie, they bait-and-switch, they're incompetent, they're fiscally irresponsible, etc. etc. etc. Although Boehner does say, "Republicans have to offer ideas of our own," he provides none himself. Instead his strategy, as presented in the memorandum, is to attack the Democrats to the exclusion of all else.
In short: look for the 110th Congress to work out about the same as the 109th, with only the deck chairs rearranged.
Tasty Chewable Birth Control Pill Now On Market
But are they shaped like Dino or Bamm-Bamm?
Seriously, I just bookmarked this because it's nice to see a competitive market at work. Granted, competition in medicine is virtually nil for prescription items, but flavored birth control is definitely a case of the market driving change, even to a limited degree.
Of course, the question remains: will people be able to get it at all? My opponent in the 2006 elections, Texas State Representative John Otto, voted in 2005 for a bill that would allow pharmacists to refuse service to women seeking birth control. Similar laws have passed in other states, mostly concentrated in the old Confederacy, the Republican Party's new homeland. (And isn't that a sad irony?) There are so many ways a medical free market is hobbled, we don't need more- especially not obstacles based on the concept that life begins when the man takes the woman's bra off.
Iraqi President Calls Baker Report an Insult
... well, he doesn't have to worry, since Bush has rejected the Baker Group's call for troop withdrawals and Iraqi accountability, and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice has rejected any talks with Syria or Iran, effectively destroying the three main points of the Iraq Study Group report.
On the other hand, although President Talibani specifically opposes bringing former Ba'ath Party members back from exile to restore the old Iraqi bureaucracy, Prime Minister al-Maliki is rumored to be doing that very thing as part of his reconciliation efforts.
But the key quote:
No, Mr. Talibani, you're a puppet government propped up almost solely by United States military power. When that power is removed- a week, a year, a decade, a century from now- it will collapse like a house of cards under the weight of would-be dictators like al-Sadr and would-be dictatorships like al-Qaida, with Turkey, Syria, Iran and Saudi Arabia all jumping into the fray to support their preferred tyrant.
You, of course, don't dare acknowledge this, but we American citizens need to... in fact, the 2006 elections suggest that we have, and that now we must push those we elected to meet our demand and bring our boys home.
So, instead of a long essay on one story, today I'm going to declare a Cull Day. I'm going to go through all the stories I've bookmarked for later reference and delete the bookmarks older than a week. Today's December 17, so every bookmarked story with a byline of December 10 or earlier gets dropped in here with a short note on why it got my attention.
Boehner Offers GOP Strategy to Take Back House
Well, Boehner's memorandum is notable for deliberately avoiding any admission that Republicans abandonded the 1994 Contract with America or became corrupt in power. It's even more notable for not saying much of anything about what Republicans themselves can or should do- aside, that is, from remaining true to their core principles. Boehner deliberately shies away from the notion that Republicans- heaven forbid- were repudiated by the electorate on their merits.
More importantly, slightly more than half the article is taken up with attacking the Democrats. The Democrats, Boehner says, bring nothing new to power- they're the same corrupt group from before 1994. They lie, they bait-and-switch, they're incompetent, they're fiscally irresponsible, etc. etc. etc. Although Boehner does say, "Republicans have to offer ideas of our own," he provides none himself. Instead his strategy, as presented in the memorandum, is to attack the Democrats to the exclusion of all else.
In short: look for the 110th Congress to work out about the same as the 109th, with only the deck chairs rearranged.
Tasty Chewable Birth Control Pill Now On Market
But are they shaped like Dino or Bamm-Bamm?
Seriously, I just bookmarked this because it's nice to see a competitive market at work. Granted, competition in medicine is virtually nil for prescription items, but flavored birth control is definitely a case of the market driving change, even to a limited degree.
Of course, the question remains: will people be able to get it at all? My opponent in the 2006 elections, Texas State Representative John Otto, voted in 2005 for a bill that would allow pharmacists to refuse service to women seeking birth control. Similar laws have passed in other states, mostly concentrated in the old Confederacy, the Republican Party's new homeland. (And isn't that a sad irony?) There are so many ways a medical free market is hobbled, we don't need more- especially not obstacles based on the concept that life begins when the man takes the woman's bra off.
Iraqi President Calls Baker Report an Insult
... well, he doesn't have to worry, since Bush has rejected the Baker Group's call for troop withdrawals and Iraqi accountability, and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice has rejected any talks with Syria or Iran, effectively destroying the three main points of the Iraq Study Group report.
On the other hand, although President Talibani specifically opposes bringing former Ba'ath Party members back from exile to restore the old Iraqi bureaucracy, Prime Minister al-Maliki is rumored to be doing that very thing as part of his reconciliation efforts.
But the key quote:
"If you read this report, one would think that it is written for a young, small colony that they are imposing these conditions on," Talabani said. "We are a sovereign country."
No, Mr. Talibani, you're a puppet government propped up almost solely by United States military power. When that power is removed- a week, a year, a decade, a century from now- it will collapse like a house of cards under the weight of would-be dictators like al-Sadr and would-be dictatorships like al-Qaida, with Turkey, Syria, Iran and Saudi Arabia all jumping into the fray to support their preferred tyrant.
You, of course, don't dare acknowledge this, but we American citizens need to... in fact, the 2006 elections suggest that we have, and that now we must push those we elected to meet our demand and bring our boys home.
Wednesday, December 6, 2006
So the report is out at last...
... and contrary to the New York Times' pre-release "leak", it's not an endorsement of stay-the-course.
It's boiled down into three points:
(1) Change US military strategy from security to training- make the Iraqi army and police solely responsible for stopping the insurgency / civil war.
(2) Make it crystal clear to the Iraqi government that, if they do not do what is necessary to pacify the country- rebuild infrastructure, establish law, keep the peace- that the United States will withdraw support for that government.
(3) Scrap current diplomatic policies (which are essentially the total lack of diplomacy) and call together Iraq's neighbors and convince them to aid in the stabilization of Iraq.
From where I sit, these proposals have no hope whatever.
Not that it matters- Bush will reject or ignore them as much as he can. He won't budge on demarche to Syria and Iran; he won't withdraw troops; and he won't hold the Iraqi government accountable. In fact- and this is a joke- Tony Snow's first post-report press briefing has the White House claiming that it's already doing the things the report calls for.
The facts are very simple. We cannot impose peace on the Iraqis. Most of the Iraqi government we installed wants us gone and will oppose us any way it can. There is nothing more our troops can accomplish in Iraq; it's time for them to come home now.
The Baker Commission has utterly failed to recognize this... in fact, it's utterly failed, period.
It's boiled down into three points:
(1) Change US military strategy from security to training- make the Iraqi army and police solely responsible for stopping the insurgency / civil war.
PROBLEM #1: A large portion, perhaps the greater portion, of the Iraqi armed forces are also members of the same sectarian militias which seek to establish national dominance through terror and murder.
PROBLEM #2: The Iraqi constitution limits the powers of the central government, making it difficult for the central government to exercise police powers within the various districts at the best of times.
(2) Make it crystal clear to the Iraqi government that, if they do not do what is necessary to pacify the country- rebuild infrastructure, establish law, keep the peace- that the United States will withdraw support for that government.
PROBLEM #3: The Iraqi government, in large part, is composed of the leaders of the militia forces which are the main CAUSE of the violence, and as such have no interest in the government being successful unless said government is under the control of their particular faction.
PROBLEM #4: Saudi Arabia has publicly stated that, should the US pull out of Iraq, it will immediately invade to establish stability itself.
(3) Scrap current diplomatic policies (which are essentially the total lack of diplomacy) and call together Iraq's neighbors and convince them to aid in the stabilization of Iraq.
PROBLEM #5: The two leading players in such a situation here would be Syria and Iran, neither of which want a stable Iraq.
PROBLEM #6: Talking to Syria and Iran would require concessions on the part of the United States. This would essentially involve giving up a democratic Lebanon in favor of a Hezbollah regime and abandoning efforts to prevent Iran from gaining nuclear weapons capability.
PROBLEM #7: The Iraqi government has stated that it will not accept the interference of any of its neighbors in its internal affairs, nor will it support a multi-nation conference on Iraq.
From where I sit, these proposals have no hope whatever.
Not that it matters- Bush will reject or ignore them as much as he can. He won't budge on demarche to Syria and Iran; he won't withdraw troops; and he won't hold the Iraqi government accountable. In fact- and this is a joke- Tony Snow's first post-report press briefing has the White House claiming that it's already doing the things the report calls for.
The facts are very simple. We cannot impose peace on the Iraqis. Most of the Iraqi government we installed wants us gone and will oppose us any way it can. There is nothing more our troops can accomplish in Iraq; it's time for them to come home now.
The Baker Commission has utterly failed to recognize this... in fact, it's utterly failed, period.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
