Revolt Today

Soccer Ad

2010-05-21T09:38:00.001-07:00

A Coup For Junk Journalism

2007-10-13T12:37:00.000-07:00

(Updated below)

Al Gore was awarded a Nobel Peace Prize jointly with the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).

As expected, the smear attacks and indignant cries of right-wingers, global warming denialists and all assorted anti-Gore maniacs have been flooding the blogosphere.

Incidentally, the same thing is going on in numerous MSM outlets.

Just this day, I found four columns from so-called news columnists/editors - each one repeating the same barbs, same lies and same global warming denialism.

Four different columns, each one equally displaying utter junk journalism.

Let us begin with Terence Corcoran's piece in the National Post, titled "A coup for junk science". Here is the opening line of Mr. Corcoran's opus:

Global warming theory has been in political and scientific trouble for some time.

Yawn. The same type of blatant lie as the one pushed by creationists/IDists with regards to evolution. Same quack tactics - not surprisingly, because what else can deniers do in the face of an established scientific consensus among an overwhelming majority of scientists?

In any case, this opening line from Mr. Corcoran's column is quite telling of the kind of incompetent news columnist that he is.

But it gets better. Then comes the (expected) parroted barbs and sneers against the actual value of the Nobel Peace Prize:

Rescuing and rewarding the obscure and the absurd has been a Nobel sideline for some years. The award has gone to half a dozen fringe movements and futile causes (the Gameen bank, Mother Teresa, nuclear disarmament, land mine activists, peace negotiators), ineffectual United Nations agencies and personalities (including KofiAnnan and the UN itself ), occasional warmongers (Yasser Arafat), plus an international assortment of minor and woolly-headed players on the world stage (Wangari Masthai, Jimmy Carter).

From there, Mr. Corcoran goes for the jugular:

Onto this heap of forgotten causes and marginalia the Nobel has just tossed Al Gore and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the UN's official climate science group. What a blow the award must be to the IPCC, self-proclaimed home of scientific rigour, to now be lumped in with Reverend Al and his Travelling Snake Oil Road Show and Climate Terror Machine.

If history is any guide here, the IPCC is now doomed to slide into obscurity, joining the list of similarly feted UN agencies that beaver away in relative obscurity and ineffectiveness, their Nobels rotting on shelves: The International Atomic Energy Agency (2005), United Nations peacekeeping forces (1988), the UN High Commissioner for Refugees (1981), the International Labour Organization (1969) and the UN Children's Fund (1965).

The first task of the IPCC now, one would think, is to craft a statement disavowing any link with Gore, whose film and book, both titled An Inconvenient Truth, deserved a Nobel for science fiction rather than peace. Not that the IPCC is squeaky clean on the science of climate accuracy. Even the Nobel committee's statement on the IPCC captured the agency's primary role as political shaper of opinion and builder of consensus. IPCC scientific reports have "created an ever-broader informed consensus" about man-made global warming. The Nobel committee said it wanted to "contribute to a sharper focus" on climate change around the world.

This illustrates well the intellectual vapidity and dishonesty of Mr. Corcoran.

First, he casts aspertions on the IPCC for its scientific rigor because, well you know, that is all ignoramuses like Mr. Corcoran can do in order to reassure themselves that their intellectual sloth-driven "beliefs" are sound - nevermind if you have no idea what science and the scientific method are all about. Hence, in Mr. Corcoran's primitive mind, the scientists affiliated with the IPCC must be suspect in their scientific rigor and, consequently, wrong about global warming. Yeah - that's the ticket!

Second, Mr. Corcoran can't help himself but spit literally on Mr. Gore by seeking to ridicule him.

Hence, what we have here are two classic tactics of right-wing nutterers, denialists, fundamentalists and other assorted madhaters: refuse to recognize competence in, and heap ridicule upon, those who "threaten" your ignorance-based beliefs and ideologies.

Typical incompetent human behavior.

Then, of course, Mr. Corcoran perpetuates junk journalism by parroting junk journalism from elsewhere, with regards to that recent ruling by a U.K. judge concerning Al Gore's An Inconvenient Truth:

Just hours before the Nobel announcement, Gore was busy spinning his way out of a devastating United Kingdom court case that found nine substantial science errors in the film version of An Inconvenient Truth.

The nine errors, listed on Page A19 of this newspaper, are truly major. But Gore's office, in true political form, tried to turn the science disaster into victory, claiming he was "gratified" that the U.K. court had not totally banned distribution of his film in British schools. Instead, it would have to circulate like a package of cigarettes, with a warning label: Children watch this movie at peril of being politically manipulated by Al Gore into thinking what they are watching is true.

Mr. Corcoran is referring to another article in the same journal where he contributes, which in turn draws exclusively from the same misinterpretations of other (mostly) conservative-leaning newspapers from the U.S., the U.K. and Australia.

As I am fond of saying: garbage in, garbage out.

To this effect, do take the time to read the actual ruling of this U.K. judge here. You will notice this very telling passage:

In the event I was persuaded that only some of them were sufficiently persuasive to be relevant for the purposes of his argument, and it was those matters - 9 in all - upon which I invited Mr Chamberlain to concentrate. It was essential to appreciate that the hearing before me did not relate to an analysis of the scientific questions, but to an assessment of whether the 'errors' in question, set out in the context of a political film, informed the argument on ss406 and 407. All these 9 'errors' that I now address are not put in the context of the evidence of Professor Carter and the Claimant's case, but by reference to the IPCC report and the evidence of Dr Stott.

As someone else puts it: "if you noticed the quotation marks around 'error' (...) Burton is not saying that there are errors, he is just referring to the things that Downes alleged were errors".

In other words: junk journalists like Mr. Corcoran and all others of his ilk have been listing without thinking (or perhaps knowingly indeed) nine instances put forth by the plaintif which the complaint deemed "scientific errors" and yet not recognized by the U.K. judge, because the judge himself ruled that it is essential to appreciate that the hearing before him did not relate to an analysis of the scientific questions!

Hence, the judge never outlined errors in Gore's movie and never ruled them as errors!

(For more on this blatant excercize of incompetence on the part of journalists with regards to the ruling of this U.K. judge, read this excellent article).

So, once again, what we have here is another display of stenographing and amplifying outright falsehoods through MSM outlets - thanks to incompetent journalism.

But this doesn't stop Mr. Corcoran from ripping away at Al Gore, his movie (and even his 1997 climate change book as well!), leading to his conclusion:

Given his science gaffes, and his political liabilities, the Nobel may be more of a liability, not just to Gore but to the entire global warming community. The prize has elevated junk science, gross exaggeration and outright misrepresentation to high international stature, the most prestigious award in the world, discrediting all who work honestly to find the facts and do the right thing.

Actually, what we have here is another blatant excercize of junk journalism - nothing more, nothing less.

And as I mentioned at the beginning of the present article, Mr. Corcoran was not alone in displaying utter incompetence today.

Indeed, we were also graced with the "serious, thoughtful and knowledgeable" David Warren, with his piece "If only there were a Nobel prize for deception" in the Ottawa Citizen. I've already discussed Mr. Warren's utter ignorance of all things related scientific. Suffice it to say that his column of today is a mere mirror image of Mr. Corcoran's column discussed above, complete with the same displays of shameless ignorance, vapidity, inanity and parroting of falsehoods (once again, especially with regards to the ruling from the aforementioned U.K. judge). And since three's company, the "serious, thoughtful and knowledgeable" David Frum likewise penned a column on the very same subject in the National Post (again), titled "Honouring a panic-monger", filled to the brim with the same falsehoods, sneers and blatant display of intellectual sloth-driven ignorance and incompetence.

A fourth column, an editorial by The Gazette and titled "Al Gore is out of his league", proved to be somewhat of an exception today. Indeed, the editorial does not dispute global warming but could not help itself in seeking to demean the value and significance of the Nobel Peace Prize awarded to (gasp!) Al Gore while mentionning the now-robotic misinterpretations of the U.K. judge's ruling on his movie. But considering the sad and tragic current state of journalism, credit must nonetheless be given where credit is due - I therefore do so by outlining the ending of this editorial:

Despite all this, however, nobody could deny that Gore has done much to spread the word about climate change, a problem with the potential to create resource conflicts in many parts of the world.

Gore's co-winner of the Peace Prize, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, was lauded by the Nobel committee for scientific reports that have "created an ever-broader informed consensus about the connection between human activities and global warming."

Gore's crusade has helped the world understand those reports. The challenge now, for all of us, is to find sensible ways to slow down emissions and cope with those effects that are already inevitable.

Again - although this is far from constituting a call for mobilization to fight global warming, at least we do not have yet more climate change denialism on display in an MSM outlet.

All in all, and considering the offerings we were served today, I can only conclude that Mr. Gore's Nobel Peace Prize constituted an opportunity for duplicitous, mendacious, ignorance-based and/or outright sloppy journalism to rear its ugly head again.

(Where Mr. Gore and global warming are concerned - nothing new here, unfortunately)

In short: today was a veritable coup for junk journalism.

But truth be told - days like today seem increasingly like just another typical day in MSM Land.

Sadly enough.

Yet another truth laid bare - applicable anywhere.

Update: 10/14/2007 - Faux News hosts and commentators keep reacting like shrilling and sniping, utterly ignorant tweenies with regards to Mr. Gore's Nobel Peace Prize - again, not surprisingly. You can read more on the junk journalism about this subject here. On a related note, you can read another exhaustive and reality-based analysis of the U.K. judge's ruling on An Inconvenient Truth here. Enjoy.

(Cross-posted from APOV)

Coming Full Circle In Afghanistan

2007-10-08T10:08:00.000-07:00

Alternate title: Afghanistan - What Was It For, Again?

Recent developments with regards to the Afghanistan quagmire illustrate the sheer inanity of this "mission" while at the same time exposing the so-called Global War on Terror(TM) for the duplicitous scam that it has been from the very beginning.

In essence, the core-reasons for going into Afghanistan are now being disavowed in order to embark on a political salvage operation of appearances - with the price continuing to be exacted with the lives of N.A.T.O. soldiers and Afghan civilians.

Remember the mantra "we do not negotiate with terrorists"?

We heard it again back in August when South Korea made a deal with the Taliban in order to free South Korean Christian aid workers who were held hostage by Taliban militants.

Indeed, not only did U.S. President George W. Bush and Afghan President Hamid Karzai chanted the mantra, but likewise did Canadian Foreign Affairs Minister Maxime Bernier - who went as far as to add the corollary "such negotiations only lead to further acts of terrorism".

What a difference a couple of months make: over the last two weeks or so, President Karzai has been calling for negotiations between his government and the Taliban, going as far as to offer Taliban positions in the government. All with the nod of approval from the U.S. and Canada.

In order to fully appreciate the ludicrous enormity of it all, let us first go back to the core-reasons for the Afghanistan War:

At the time, President Bush justified the launching of the Afghanistan War as a response to 9-11 and the failure of the Taliban to meet his demands concerning terrorists, including delivering Osama bin Laden. Following the trauma and outrage brought by 9-11, an overwhelming majority of Americans supported the War in Afghanistan - and President Bush was believed at face value when he claimed that the replacement of the Taliban regime was a requirement for keeping the U.S.A. safe from another al-Qaeda attack.

However, and despite President Bush's "convictions", a lot did not sit well with his invasion of Afghanistan (emphasis added):

(...) there was a rather meek international support for such justifications initially, especially since: 1) the U.S.A. had turned a convenient blind eye when the backward, fundamentalist Taliban regime seized power in 1996 (after all, the U.S.A. had supported the Taliban); 2) although the Taliban was indeed characterized by its parochial, fundamentalist and theocratic-driven ruthless rule, it was never a terrorist organization to begin with; 3) the Taliban was certainly not involved in 9-11; 4) the Taliban had agreed to extradite bin Laden to Pakistan for trial (10/01/2001, but Pakistan refused); 5) the Taliban then offered to try bin Laden themselves (10/07/2001, but the offer was rejected by Bush); and 6) the Taliban thereafter offered to hand him over to the U.S., provided that proof was shown that bin Laden was responsible for 9-11 (10/14/2001, but this offer was likewise flatly rejected by Bush).

Hence, the Taliban regime was not a terrorist organization and had made a significant number of overtures to deliver Osama bin Laden - however, all such overtures were rejected.

Why? Because of the expedient desire to go to war - which happened on 10/07/2001, when American and British forces undertook an aerial bombing campaign targeting Taliban forces and al-Qaeda in Afghanistan - thus marking the beginning of the Afghanistan War.

Other U.S. allies, namely Australia and Canada, also joined in this war. By the summer of 2002, the Taliban had been removed from power and its remnants, like those of al-Qaeda, had gone into hiding. By the end of spring 2003, then-still U.S. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld declared major combat operations over. However, the Taliban and al-Qaeda, by then fully allied by necessity, had already regrouped along the Afghani-Pakistani border, recruiting heavily while training in guerrilla warfare tactics - thanks to consistent funding seemingly transiting through Pakistan. Then, the Taliban insurgency followed - which has been lasting to this day.

We all know how this has been turning out so far:

(...) faced with the reality of this war and seeking to salvage the most out of it humanitarian-wise, the United Nations Security Council authorized an International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) for Afghanistan on 12/20/2001, which not only included N.A.T.O. forces but was also to be lead by N.A.T.O. itself. The ISAF's original peacekeeping mandate was for a duration of six months - however, partly because of the Taliban insurgency and partly because the U.S. has been "too busy" with its Iraq War since it began in 03/2003, the ISAF's mandate was thereafter extended in 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, and then extended anew until 03/2008 ... with talks already in the works for a further twelve month-extension beyond this date. In between, N.A.T.O. expanded its Afghanistan mission by increasing its forces in 2005 and in 2006 (including Canadian ones) - because its peacekeeping mission had transformed into a counter-insurgency one.

(...)

Although having been successfully pushed out of power, the Taliban insurgency rages on in spite of the wishful thinking that it is weakening.

(...)

Osama bin Laden got away and is still in hiding, along with most of the al-Qaeda leadership - even if he and his organization were the prime justification for going into Afghanistan in the first place.

In other words: due to the incompetence of Bush-Cheney-Rumsfeld-Wolfowitz et al. (especially by their demonstrated incapacity to keep focused on the Afghan mission at hand and complete it soundly before moving on), N.A.T.O. had to change its peacekeeping/reconstruction mandate to full combat operations - because the Taliban and al-Qaeda were back in force (after being essentially allowed to flee to Pakistan in order to regroup), and enough to enact a significant insurgence at that. So in effect, N.A.T.O. ends up trying to finish the job the Bush administration should have completed to begin with, but instead botched - i.e. N.A.T.O. is trying to make up for the ludicrous mistakes of the demonstrated incompetence of Bush and Co..

How so? The Powell Doctrine was already established and demonstrated after Desert Storm. But then the resident incompetents in the White House (Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz et al.) tossed it aside when they went into Afghanistan - especially because, as it has been revealed, they already had their sights on Iraq. So, they went in Afghanistan without massive deployments, made those stupid deals with the Afghan Warlords and their militias, contented themselves with routing the Taliban and al-Qaeda away from Khabul (and for the life of me, I never understood why no one figured out that the remnants of al-Qaeda and the Taliban would run into Pakistan and, consequently, take strategic steps to block off the border in order to prevent this - then again, they never had enough boots on the grounds to enact such a basic strategy to begin with - but I digress), and then they asked for U.N./N.A.T.O. help because they had begun occupying themselves with Iraq.

In short: their shoddy pre-war and post-war planning, as well as their desire to rush into war with Iraq, constitute the root-cause as to why Afghanistan is a quagmire - granted, not a big one like Iraq or Vietnam, but one nonetheless.

And through it all, of course, the commanders, generals and leaders keep seeing only progress in Afghanistan.

Yes - there is progress in Afghanistan, or so we keep on hearing again and again and again. It is apparently a big success.

I want to believe this - I really do, if only because it would mean that all those U.S., Canadian and British soldiers who have died there so far, as well as all those innocent Afghan civilians, did not die for nothing.

But it is very hard for me to believe there is significant progress in Afghanistan when violence there keeps increasing significantly, when we have difficulties in winning the hearts and minds of Afghanis, when the Karzai government is mired in corruption, when Warlords keep using brute force to gain power, when not much has changed for most Afghani women with regards to equality and all that jazz, when opium/heroin Khans easily buy free passes from arrest and prosecution, when Afghan forces are unable to hold villages that have been secured against the Taliban, and so on and so forth.

It is indeed very hard for me to "believe" there is progress when Canada's Harper government will go as far as to do everything it can to discourage, belay, hamper (or even ridicule) members of the opposition from going to Afghanistan and see for themselves what progress there is. Why such blatant politicking of the Afghan War on the part of the Harper government if there is indeed significant progress there? What is there to fear from independent verification of facts, other than the potential full exposure of the harsh, not-so-rosy reality, perhaps?

A year ago, senior British military officers estimated that it would require 15 to 20 years to fully achieve success in Afghanistan. Now they are speaking of a 30-year "marathon mission" against the Taliban. Meanwhile Canada is still struggling with the question of leaving in 2009 once its "tour of duty" is done or continue on, at the same time seeking more involvement from actual U.N. peacekeeping troops.

I doubt there will be much "success" there, however poignantly convincing the arguments may be, especially when considering that Afghanistan is indeed a quagmire. One further case in point: Japan will be pulling out of the mission soon.

(Who knows? Perhaps if "blue helmets" were seen instead of U.S., Canadian or British flags, the "mission" might become more palatable to the Afghanis in general? But I digress ...)

Through it all, the Taliban and al-Qaeda have been conflated together as terrorists, especially since Taliban militants are using the same road-side bombing and suicide bombing tactics as their allies of necessity.

Consequently, six years after the beginning of the Afghan War, we have come full circle with those calls for negotiating with the "terrorist" Taliban.

Something that was rejected by the Bush administration initially. Something that has been decried over and over again: we do not negotiate with terrorists.

And yet, here we are today.

As someone else puts it:

I applaud Karzai for his attempts to end Afghanistan's nightmare through negotiation. Ultimately, a political solution is the only way out.

But at the same time, I wonder how the parents and husbands and wives and girlfriends and boyfriends of (...) soldiers killed in Afghanistan will feel if he succeeds – if (Taliban leader) Mullah Omar becomes Karzai's prime minister; if, as part of a coalition deal, more severe forms of sharia law are imposed on women; if the very few gains Afghanistan has made in the field of human rights are reversed.

Won't they wonder if the whole thing was a waste of time? Won't they suspect their lovers and sons and daughters died for nothing?

And this is not considering the fact that Osama bin Laden and al-Qaeda are still at large (no thanks in good part to Pakistan).

In essence, the core-reasons for going into Afghanistan are now being disavowed in order to embark on a political salvage operation of appearances - with the price continuing to be exacted with the lives of N.A.T.O. soldiers and Afghan civilians in the meantime.

There is indeed only one conclusion that can be drawn here: people and soldiers have been dying over the last six year for nothing more than what in the end has amounted to a needless political exercize on the part of incompetent "deciders".

Thus, to the question "Afghanistan - what was it for, again?", the blunt answer is "A big fat nothing, all across the board".

Global War on Terror(TM) my ass ...

(Cross-posted from APOV)

Welcome To Our Semi-Dark Ages

2007-09-30T10:41:00.000-07:00

Near the end of the 1990s, many spoke of the "bridge to the 21st century" - the expression evoking images of greater enlightenment, of enhanced rationality, of increased wisdom, of greater maturity and responsibility, of widespread peace, prosperity and democracy ... of a brave, new and better world awaiting all of us just around the corner, if we would but take the first, resolute step to make its promises a reality.

Instead, we decided that it was too uncertain, too much effort or not quick enough in coming - consequently, we chose instead to retreat within our self-centered selves, rejecting knowledge and reason in favor of fear, ignorance, truthiness and superstition.

Welcome to our Semi-Dark Ages.

As much as we are fortunate to live in this modern era of ours, which is defined by the continuous technological and scientific advances that are meant to increase the chasm between us and our primitive, superstitious outlook of the world and the universe, the overwhelming prevalence of ignorance and irrationality in our supposedly civilized societies leaves us mired in tribalism, intellectual sloth and the constant search for instant gratification.

Indeed, and more than ever, too many among us prefer to wallow in superstition and the super-natural in order to sustain a so-called spiritual need for guidance in life – the sustained prevalence of seers, astrologers, mediums, and other quacks, illustrates well this tragic state of affairs. The same goes with regards to the belief in ghosts, haunts and spirits. Ditto for pseudo-sciences (e.g. homeopathy, crystals, pyramids, chelation, etc.) and the quacks who keep making a fortune in selling their placebo-remedies which are supposed to be miraculous. And let us not forget about everything related to "new age" religions and religious fundamentalism (whether Christian, Muslim, or any other).

More than ever, we would rather be serviced an opinion, like being served fast-food, instead of making the effort to forge an informed one for ourselves. We prefer to wallow body and mind into reality-tv shows, infotainments, games and leisure, instead of putting the effort in exercizing our duties as citizens in our democratically-based societies.

We must have our instant gratification with minimal effort.

This in turn is the root cause for our current tabloid news and politics - a society-wide dumbing down.

That is why the overwhelming majority of politicos are often either timid, "dumb and dumber", or "uber triangulators", all the while seeking to appear as the most toughest and decisive leader-like leader-to-be - no substance, but all appearance ... which is what matters in election years, because that is what we want.

Indeed - the politicos are only responding (or trying to respond) to We The People.

We have become so superficial ourselves that we make our democratic choices based largely on appearances, not on substance.

Why else would haircuts, voice qualities, laughter-sounding acceptability, cleavages, cod-pieces, earthy tones, sighs, and other such vapid and superfluous attibutes constitute important matters in elections?

And don't you dare blame the Media Corporations - considering that they have no qualms at yanking shows that have poor ratings, why do you think they keep serving tabloid infortainment, news, reality shows, game shows and other such tripe? Because. These. Have. High. Ratings.

And who provides such profit-making ratings? We The People.

In the meantime, we - meaning those of us who actually bother to get off their tv couch and go out to vote - keep electing demagogues that "make us feel good, make us feel secure, make us feel at ease, tell us what we want to hear" while rejecting with disdain and mistrust genuine candidates that are actually knowledgeable and better qualified as leaders.

Yes indeed - we can easily blame the politicians, the media, the corporations, the lobbying groups, or anyone else, all we want ... but the painful and ever so tragic truth remains this: we have only ourselves to blame.

We have embraced fear and loathing in the face of terrorists, instead of resolutely standing our ground. We have surrendered our rights and freedoms, instead of clinging to them fiercely.

Why? Because authoritarianism-like security is the quick-fix solution as demanded by our need for instant gratification.

The same goes with the economy, health care and the environment, among others. We act like ostriches in the face of complex issues because "it is too complicated", "too discouraging", or "too unsettling".

We would rather believe the lies because these lies not only reassure us, but they also whisper along the certainty that our need for instant gratification will not be hampered - in short: we want assurances and those quick-fix (non)solutions, which only serve to postpone inevitable consequences to unsolved problems, as opposed to those sobering realistic assessments and those difficult, uneasy, actual solutions which would solve the problems at hand.

Hence, we have embraced ignorance and fear, all the while rejecting reason and rationality.

This is what I previously described as the metastizing cancer on the body democratic.

The so-called Dark Ages are often seen as a period of history characterized by ignorance, superstition and irrational thought, and therefore inhospitable to any logical reasoning or rational activity. Although such a perception of these times constitutes a somewhat popular misconception, let us take a look at what we have accepted (at least via silence) so far, since we crossed that bridge leading us from the 20th century to the 21st one:

We've witnessed attempts to censor science, to control it, to falsify it or rewrite it, to quietly hide it, to brazenly deny funding for it, to change its mission/purpose, to actually lie about it, to use spin games to deny it, to go to great lenghts to confuse people about it, to dismiss it as a matter of differing beliefs or philosophies, or to go as far as to demonize it. This is still going on with regards to global warming - better to fib about it or still seek to deny it, instead of actually accepting the factual science once and for all, along with the real solutions that are needed to solve this dire problem. And what about evolution? Seems like we are back in the 19th century - along with Creation museums and the non-stopping trend to promote the "principle" that creationism and/or ID should be taught in science classes, while firing teachers who suggest that the Bible should not be taken literally.

We've witnessed the resurgence of the politics of fear, ignorance and lies, of the use of barbarous torture (sorry - "enhanced interrogation techniques"), of the waging of wars of choice, of the commission of utter injustices, of the view of the world in a simplistic "Good Vs. Evil" proposition.

We've witnessed (and still do) the repudiation of rational voices, preferring instead to listen to (and reward) the voices of fear-mongering and war-waging, who keep promising us victory, glory, security and peace.

And like those vassals of old, we accept to be fleeced time and again for the betterment of those who already have more than plenty - piously accepting the lie that if the rich get richer, everybody else will benefit somehow in such prosperity.

Al Gore rightly calls all of these things the "assault on reason". Others, yours truly included, call this our Semi-Dark Ages.

For instead of dealing with facts and reality, of using reason and rationality, we prefer to buy the fear-mongering, the spin and the truthiness - after all, the latter require less effort on our part, especially as long as we still get to have our little instant gratifications in the process.

I've said it before, and I say it again: living in a democratic society is a right and a responsibility.

And yes, this responsibility requires effort. But which is better: having your back bent by the effort required to keep on living in a democratic society, or letting leave for complacency and find yourself one day with a back bent under a totalitarian regime - however benevolent it may be?

Therefore, we must ever remain vigilant if we are to preserve our democratic values and institutions ... just like we will have to bear the shame of having forsaken them because of intellectual sloth, ignorance, fear, selfishness and the search for instant gratification.

Granted - distilled to its pure essence, the purpose of the non-partisan and progressive blogospheres is to maintain a continual conversation and exchange of ideas based on facts and reality, not on right-wing spin, religious fundamentalist regressive dogma or fantasy-based viewing of the world. Participation in the blogosphere thus represents a redemption of sort, acting as an environment which fuels a renewed and maintained participation in our democracy-based societies.

But out of the whole population eligible to vote, what fraction does the blogosphere represents?

Not enough by far, I'm afraid.

Consequently, and to paraphrase someone else, we must strive further for the acceptance of a reality that is based on the scientific method and the primacy of rational thought.

So, let us leave these Semi-Dark Ages that we have foolishly trusted upon ourselves and instead enter at last a New Age of Enlightenment - as promised by that "bridge to the 21st century".

It is, in the end, up to us.

It has always been up to us.

(Cross-posted from APOV)

The Limits Of Ignorance

2007-09-23T14:28:00.000-07:00

Science - and the scientific method - constitute a process of fact-based and experimental demonstration-supported inquiry which allows Humanity to gain further understanding of the inner workings of the Universe, of Life and, ultimately, of ourselves - from all their complexities to the minutest of details. Such an inquiry has been taking place since the dawn of Humanity, who wondered about the growth and death of living things and of themselves, about weather phenomena (thunder, lightning, etc.), about those lights in the night skies, about sickness and health, about who they are and where they came from.

After centuries upon centuries of patient and dedicated refinement of the scientific method, allowing us to gain greater knowledge and understanding of Nature in so doing, science keeps finding itself increasingly under attack of late.

The culprits of such attacks? Primitive minds who fear to even catch a glimpse of reality which defines us, the world and the rest of the universe, and who's mysteries continue being revealed year after year of dedicated and patient scientific investigating, one tiny step at a time - all because such new and ever increasing understanding threatens their cozy, comfortable and intellectual sloth-driven ignorance and blind faith in a Creator God.

Case in point:

Today's column from one conservative Christian columnist David Warren, titled "The limits of science".

In said column, Mr. Warren endeavors to prove his conclusion that: "(...) none of the methods of empirical science are of any value at all, except by way of analogy and illustration, when we turn from the empirical realm to questions of "first causes," and the underlying conditions of human knowledge, faith and belief, that are dealt with in philosophy and, ultimately, theology."

You see, since the dawn of Humanity, the human imagination has constructed ideas to explain those mysteries which presented themselves every day and throughout every single human being's life experience. Hence, for quite a long time, paranormal "forces" explained all of what occured in the world and in the universe - spirits (mineral, vegetal, animal or human ones), phantoms (good or evil) and, of course, Gods, were behind it all. Because human beings reasoned, they automatically assumed that all things reasoned as well - but because they could not communicate with such forces or natural phenomena, it was the results and effects of the latter which defined said phenomena and their "attributed" spirits, phantoms or Gods.

We've had Wind Spirits, Sun Gods, Death Gods, Bad Luck Imps, Disease Demons, Guilty Conscience-Tormenting Ghosts, River Fairies, Sea Mermaids, Angry Thunder Gods, Good Humor (health) and Bad Humor (sickness) Sprites, Moon Goddesses, Bear Spirits, Wolf Spirits, Owl Spirits, Tree of Life, and so on and so forth.

Gradually, Gods became increasingly defined as paragons of human values, attibutes and/or dispositions, thus becoming more prevalent than spirits, ghosts and the like within the myths which were constructed to explain things like the birth of the World, the birth of Man, and other phenomena of Nature.

And when human beings began living in towns and cities, their Gods came to live with them - and thus Gods were viewed increasingly a Godly Humans who dwelled in specific, physical places.

Thus Humanity built houses (temples) to their Gods, thinking that those they worshiped as means to explain Life and the Universe would reside there - just like mortals lived in their own houses.

This was a significant evolutionary step for Gods.

Nevertheless - all those "explanations" of Life and the Universe through the actions of spirits or Gods were so far based on analogy and illustration.

Then came the "Greek Awakening", bringing us rational thinking, logic and philosophy.

This historic landmark of Humanity's road to increasing maturity was indeed most significant, because then the human imagination was not deemed enough anymore. Fantasy stories may be entertaining, especially told or written by talented and imaginative storytellers, but in the end they failed at fully explaining what was really going on all about Humanity, as well as within itself.

Hence, this was a significant step in creating the scientific method - a cornerstone event, yes ... but still not sufficient enough.

You see, logical thinking and reasoning does rely on knowledge - but when the knowledge used to base one's reasoning is wrong to begin with, then what we'll all too often get as a result is what we call today "garbage in, garbage out".

The classic example of this is the geocentric model of the Earth being at the center of the universe, whereas the Moon, the Sun and the stars revolve around our planet. This explanation was derived logically from simple visual observations and, consequently, became accepted as dogma. It was from this false knowledge that too many astronomers endeavored to logically construct models which would show how all heavenly bodies in the universe revolved around the Earth.

In other words, they would ask the question "How do the heavenly bodies move around the world?", thus assuming that they did to begin with ... because their own eyes would show this.

No one ever thought about the illusion of movement granted to one who stands on a bridge and looks down on the running waters below.

Furthermore, philosophy had similar - if not worse - inherent problems. That is why it has always been characterized by various "warring" schools of thinking who espoused specific views and concepts, all derived through reasoning and logical (but experimentally unproven) assertions, thus arguing without end and with nothing but hot air. And even when one such school would gain primacy, it did not mean at all that it held the "truth" - because of the simple reality of "garbage in, garbage out".

Hence, philosophy remained - and still does - as much a prisoner of analogy and illustration, just like theology (whether in its previous, simplistic myth-making incarnation or its current one).

That is when two other major historical landmarks occured.

One was the increasing need not just to observe and derive explanations (theories) for said observations, but for experimental demonstrations of said explanations. In other words, this gave the birth to the scientific theory, which must not only be based on observations but, if it is "right", it will predict experimental results and/or additional observations. If experimental results/observations differ from what the theory predicts, then the theory is either flawed (and needs to be reworked) or is plainly wrong (and another will take its place - only to be likewise relentlessly "tested" in turn).

The other was the subtle but quite significant change in the way questions in scientific investigations were asked: instead of asking "How", which assumes potentially false knowledge to be "true" (or as dogma - see above), investigators began asking "Why", which turns out not to assume anything to begin with. Furthermore, asking "Why" gave birth to the scientific hypothesis, which must be verified by observation and experimental results. Once a hypothesis is thus verified, it becomes an established observation or fact of reality.

Hence, a solid scientific theory will be comprised of one or numerous verified hypotheses, all backed by repeated experimental and verifiable demonstrations, in addition to offer an overall explanation of all these results underlying a phenomenon, as well as predicting the outcome of other experiments. Eventually, a scientific theory who has been proven time and time and time again to be right becomes accepted as a Law of Nature.

Therein you have the essence and purpose of the scientific method.

A classic example of these two breakthroughs in defining the scientific method begins first with Copernicus. He asked "Why do all heavenly bodies revolve around the Earth?", thus not assuming the above-mentioned geocentric model to be dogma. The result? He devised observational experiments, compiled the data and realized that only the Moon orbited around the Earth, but neither the Sun or the other heavenly bodies. And from that same data, he proposed his heliocentric hypothesis - i.e. the planets, including Earth, orbit around the Sun.

Of course, we all know the effect his discovery had on all the prevailing primitive minds of his time ... he was attacked while this newly emerging scientific method was condemned already as Godless and going against the Holy Scriptures.

Because, to paraphrase David Warren above, the only value of the scientific method is "by way of analogy and illustration" - like theology and philosophy.

Then came Galileo. Building on Copernicus' work, he not only further demonstrated the validity of the heliocentric hypothesis, he further refined it as a bona fides explanation (i.e. scientific theory), which not long after his passing became accepted as a Law of Nature - i.e. this is how our solar system is organized, and Earth is but the third planet among others which orbits around its primary star which we call the Sun.

And again, we all know what happened to Galileo, as the primitive minds reacted with renewed outrage at this "science" which dared to not only contradict the comfortable and reassuring ignorance-based Holy Dogmas, but also had the unmitigated gall to take it upon itself to demonstrate and prove its explanations - quite unlike theology and philosophy!

And therein lies the "threat" posed by science, which not only seeks to understand and explain reality, but furthermore strives to ensure the validity of its explanations.

Which means: question everything that is not supported by facts or which has not been demonstrated or proven as a fact.

Again, quite unlike theology and philosophy - who rely solely on imagination and logical argumentation or, in other words, solely on analogy and illustration.

Another shining example of the scientific method contributing in actually revealing and explaning our reality is Louis Pasteur - he not only explained the fermentation process and why we get sick - i.e. "it's the bacteria and other microorganisms, stupid!" - but he also shot down in flames once and for all, through experimental demonstration, another ignorance-based dogma called spontaneous generation - which was supported largely by the creationists of the time.

Then, of course, there is Darwin who proposed his scientific theory known as evolution.

A scientific theory which has been supported and proven and demonstrated over and over and over again - especially thanks to the modern fields of cellular biology, molecular biology and genetics.

Evolution is inching closer and closer to becoming a genuine Law of Nature - like the Law of Thermodynamics, the Law of Electricity-Magnetism, the Law of Gravity, the Law of General and Restrained Relativity, the Laws of Genetic Inheritance, etc., etc., etc..

Let us return to Mr. Warren as he demonstrates his utter ignorance and non-understanding of the crucial distinctions between science and theology/philosophy. I have picked three choice excerpts from him; first excerpt:

"(...) I have discovered that this useful word, "scientism," appears in too few English dictionaries (...) The purveyor of scientism is not necessarily an incompetent, or irresponsible, or even a mediocre scientist, in his own narrow field of specialization; always supposing he has some genuine expertise in any field at all. While he is frequently all of these things, too, they are not what define his pronouncements as "scientistic." Rather, the label "scientism" applies to all who imagine that natural science, and the methods of natural science, take precedence before, and have authority over, every other field of human reasoning and perception. To a truly "scientistic" worldview, not only philosophy and theology, but psychology, art, culture, law, and general morality, are answerable not to their own terms of reference, but to some authority in a lab coat who has bred clouds of deformed fruitflies, and killed a lot of mice."

Like the primitive mind that he is, Mr. Warren seeks to mislabel all scientists who dare to outline the fundamental differences between science and theology/philosophy, and how such difference are critical in deciding whether one accepts scientific facts as opposed to believe in religious/philosophical dogmas.

And of course, his petty intellectual sloth-driven mind makes him contemptuous and dismissive of scientists by grossly mischaracterizing and stereotyping them as "lab coats who have bred clouds of deformed fruitflies, and killed a lot of mice" and thus without any validity whatsoever. After all, how dare scientists demonstrate and prove their explanations, when theology/philosophy are incapable of even attempting the same?

Hence, science is geeky, cold, no-social-skill, lab-enclosed sillyness while religious values and myths are serious and humanly fulfilling. Science is detached from reality, unlike theology and philosophy! And those who seek to show what science is truly about and demonstrate its validity in seeking to explain the universe are guilty of "ignorance" (talk about accusing others of what one actually is!).

Nevertheless, that is essentially what those like Mr. Warren said at the time to Copernicus, Mendel, Galileo, Newton, Pasteur, Darwin and so many others. That is what Mr. Warren is saying to all current scientists - including yours truly.

Second excerpt:

"'Darwinists' - which is to say, those exponents of scientism who have elevated the general principles of Darwin's quaint Victorian evolutionary scheme to a form of religious orthodoxy, and defend it by traditional fanatical means, from heretic-hunting to the commission of pious frauds.

(...)

The philosophical position corresponding to scientism is called "Positivism," and was systematized by Auguste Comte (the man who coined the term "sociology") in the 19th century. He was building upon the revolutionary heritage of the French Enlightenment; but he was also expressing the God-like aspirations of parlour atheism in the Victorian age -- its "determinism," or faith that once everything is known, everything can be predicted. Lamarckianism, Darwinism, Marxism, Freudianism, and Phrenology were, to my mind, five other expressions of this naive determinism, that belong today in a Museum of Failed Victorian Ideas."

Here, Mr. Warren falls into the usual trap that his ignorance-based primitive mind ilk always fall into. Since they are either incapable of understanding, or refuse to understand, how the scientific method works (as I vulgarized above), they still think of science as they do of philosophy and theology - i.e. it is all about logical reasoning and what one believes it to be sound or not. Hence, those that have accepted the reality of evolution are in fact believers, in the primitive minds of Mr. Warren and his ilk, like any other kind of philosophical school of thought or any other religion.

Furthermore, ignorants like Mr. Warren always go back to the "Victorian" era, seeing science as still largely about philosophical reasoning and equating it with other "isms", all the while willfully refusing to acknowledge the actual reality of what science has become, how it works and what it does.

Hence, science is the same as philosophy and theology - again, an ignorance-based view in the little minds of Mr. Warren and his ilk.

This is, of course, the convenient way to attempt to dismiss evolution and the overwhelming and undeniable scientific support it has, as I mentioned above.

So in essence, what Mr. Warren is saying is that scientists run on faith, not on demonstration - like philosophy and theology.

Therein lies the limitations of ignorance that have always been displayed by the deniers of scientifc facts, as still displayed today by Mr. Warren and his ilk.

Science is not, and can not, by virtue of the scientific method, be a matter of faith.

Science is about acceptance of demonstrated facts which explain our reality. Period.

Having said this, let us amuse ourselves further at the expense of Mr. Warren's shameful ignorance with this third and last excerpt from his feuille de chou of a column:

"The word "science" means simply "knowledge," and in grasping that we can immediately see that the methods of science vary with the particular discipline. The kind of precision that is possible in physics and chemistry is simply not available to the student of biology and natural history. The kind of condescension that is possible in studying plants and animals, is simply not tenable in studying human beings. And so on. Those who, like the U.S. National Academy of Sciences, define "science" in a way to cross all fields, do a terrible disservice to the cause of science, by designing a straitjacket for it.

About the most that can be reasonably said is that science is "knowledge" of an especially technical kind, gleaned by empirical reasoning from testable material evidence (...)"

This is what you get from someone who has absolutely no idea what one is attempting to talk about - including a further displayed ignorance of the scientific method.

First, Mr. Warren is plainly and flatly wrong about the lack of precision in biological sciences - to this effect, I give you again cellular biology, molecular biology and genetics ... as but three examples among so many.

Then he speaks of condescension in studying animals and plants. Aside from the fact that the only condescension observed here is throughout Mr. Warren's column, he willfully refuses of course to acknowledge that human beings are but a species on this planet, an animal like all others, evolved like all others.

In essence, he is calling for the end of any scientific inquiries with regards to the human being - whether biomedical, genetic, etc.. - in other words: let us remain ignorant so that we rely only on theology and philosophy ... like we did in those ancient times.

And to say that science is "knowledge of an especially technical kind" futher illustrates Mr. Warren's severe affliction of intellectual sloth and shameful ignorance.

Knowledge has always been used by human beings to devise new technological applications, ever since the dawn of Humanity. As we further understand Life, the structure of Matter, the Universe, and Ourselves, we devise new ways from such knowledge to improve our daily living conditions, our daily activities, our health, our means of transportation, and so on and so forth.

As we undertand more, we are able to create better tools and means to improve our lives.

And in turn, we devise improved and/or new means to continue our scientific inquiries into Life, the Universe, and Ourselves.

That is how we keep maturing not only as civilizations, but also as a self-aware, abstract-thinking species.

That is what we do, it is the very essence of who and what we are.

Unless, of course, one is a primitive mind like Mr. Warren and his Christianist ilk - who keep reminding us of the infantile stage of maturation we would still be stuck into, had we chosen to remain cloistered within the cave-like confines imposed by the limits of ignorance which have ever been promulgated and espoused by primitive minds like them.

(Cross-posted from APOV)

An Announcement

2007-09-20T15:05:00.000-07:00

Another Point of View and Revolt Today are teaming up with cross-posting on each other's blog. Mentarch aka Pierre has a killer blog, but has been having trouble keeping up the postings. And me, too! I'm really honored to be joining forces in this way. Please stop by APOV and enjoy.

Another Point of View

Dems Defeated in Iraq War Vote. Again. Its Time to Turn Off the Funding Spigot. Now.

2007-09-19T17:02:00.000-07:00

Once again, the Dems failed to get to the magic number of 60. That's how many votes are needed to invoke cloture and quash any filibuster attempt.

Lindsay Graham summed up the Reep position thusly:

The idea of winning the war in Iraq is beginning to get a second look,"

That's effin' crazy talk. Winning; did he really say winning? What is winning? Some years back it was the dominoes of democracy throughout the Middle East. These days, its staving off the Al Quaeda lunatics from destroying the rest of the free world. My the goalposts have moved, eh?

Can we afford to trust the buffoons and war pigs who led us in this mess and now are forcing us to wallow in this misery called Iraq? They have been wrong each and every time since they started beating the war drums. Now, they expect us - no, check that; they are daring us - to trust them again this time. Sorry, the kool-aid is packed away, folks.

There is a way for the Dems to finally snatch victory from the vastly unpopular BushCo cretins, and to salvage some small amount of credibility with the American people (the latest poll I saw put congressional approval at 11%).

How? Simply stop funding the damn war. Its really that simple. The threat of de-funding the surge and Blackwater mercs will have BushCo crawling and groveling to the Dems finally promising bipartisanship on the war effort, after all.

Oh sure, the war pigs will fulminate and rage at first. But they will come around - if the Dems grow a spine.

War pigs win another round

No Sifting These Tea Leaves: Greenspan Knows Iraq War All About the Oil

2007-09-16T19:47:00.000-07:00

Its the oil, stupid. Color me NOT surprised.

Greenspan speaks

Fred Thompson: Clueless

2007-09-13T16:06:00.000-07:00

Republican presidential candidate Fred Thompson said Thursday he doesn't know enough about efforts by President Bush and Congress to keep Terri Schiavo alive to have an opinion on the right-to-die case that stirred national debate.

Thompson was asked in an interview for Bay News 9's "Political Connections" program if he thought Congress' intervention to save the life of the brain-dead woman two years ago was appropriate.

"I can't pass judgment on it. I know that good people were doing what they thought was best," Thompson said. "That's going back in history. I don't remember the details of it."

Put another way, Thompson is afraid to piss off the right-wing lunatic fringe. Is this supine, brainless idiot really a major presidential contender?

Fred Thompson: Stupid and useless

North Korea No Nukes

2007-09-05T08:48:00.000-07:00

Or right back to where we started from.

Condi Rice had a major foreign policy victory last week by getting a No Nukes pledge from Lil' Kim. Nice work, Condi. No really! This was the one major foreign policy blunder y'all managed to fix.

This makes me imagine a world that BushCo didn't bluster and bumble on to. Imagine if we hadn't invaded Iraq, or mismanaged Afghanistan...

Blumkin-gate

2007-08-29T17:40:00.001-07:00

Before even mentioning Larry Craig, a quick note on my absence. I really have been extremely busy the past few months. As the weeks moved on and I didn't blog - hell I haven't even been reading other blogs - I found myself not really missing it. Maybe I'm just a little burned out. Maybe I'm just so sick of blogging about Crapmaster Bush and his house of sycophants. Whatever it was, I jsut didn't have an urge to blog.

I'm really not feeling it now. But hat's off to Larry Craig for motivating me to come up with this witty title. (Reader beware: If you don't know what a blumkin is, you may not want to find out what it really means; its not for the faint of heart.)

Sadly, Blumkin-gate has once again served to take the important issues of the day off the top of the news. Iraq? Insurance for kids? Screw it! Give me Senators soliciting blumkins in public restrooms.

Work, vacations, family: I'm too damned busy to blog

2007-07-24T08:17:00.000-07:00

I'll get back into the swing of things when I have more time - not only for my own blog, but also when I have more time to get back to reading many of my favorite blogs, too.

Until then, enjoy the summer!

And ITMFA!

My Schadenfreude Meter Is Stuck on Red Line: Thanks David Vitter

2007-07-11T08:32:00.000-07:00

Thanks a lot Senator Vitter, you moral blowhard by day, freakazoid by night, I'm going to need a new schadenfreude meter. This one is busted; pushed way beyond the red line.

From the Quote Machine:

Marriage is a core institution of societies throughout the world and throughout history. It's something that has provided permanence and stability for our very social structure.

We need a U.S. Senator who will stand up for Louisiana values, not Massachusetts’s values. I am the only Senate Candidate to coauthor the Federal Marriage Amendment; the only one fighting for its passage. I am the only candidate proposing changes to the senate rules to stop liberal obstructionists from preventing an up or down vote on issues like this, judges, energy, and on and on.

[Bob Livingston's resignation is] obviously a tremendous loss for the state.... I think Livingston's stepping down makes a very powerful argument that Clinton should resign as well and move beyond this mess. [Vitter on the Clinton-Lewinsky affair and former House Speaker Bob Livingston]

I don't think David will be sleeping too well at night these days:

Vitter's wife, Wendy, said in 2000 that if her husband cheated on her, she would react like a woman who cut off her sleeping husband's penis. "I'm a lot more like Lorena Bobbitt than Hillary [Clinton]," she said. "If he does something like that, I'm walking away with one thing, and it's not alimony, trust me. I think fear is a very good motivating factor in a marriage

American Research Group Confirms What We Already Know: ITMFsA

2007-07-08T10:33:00.000-07:00

American Research Group conducted a survey recently. 45% of Americans want to begin impeachment proceedings against Dubya, and a majority want the same for Darth Cheney. As usual these days, Republicans are off babbling in a corner, while Democrats and Independents agree: ITMFsA.

ARG
ITMsFA (I added the plural.)

Commuted: Scooter Libby

2007-07-02T17:33:00.000-07:00

Unreal. How much lower can this administration sink?

President Bush is an Asshole

2007-06-21T13:31:00.001-07:00

There's no way around this conclusion. Dan Froomkin

"Congress joined the Bush Administration for a nice little barbecue on the South Lawn [Tuesday] night. The theme was Mardi Gras, so everybody could enjoy memories of New Orleans being destroyed by the Bush Administration and then pretty much left in that same condition years later....

From the transcript:

"THE PRESIDENT: Kermit Ruffins and the Barbeque Swingers, right out of New Orleans, Louisiana. (Applause.)

"MR. RUFFINS: Thank you. Thanks for having us. We're glad to be here.

"THE PRESIDENT: Proud you're here. Thanks for coming. You all enjoy yourself. Make sure you pick up all the trash after it's over. (Laughter.)"

via Wonkette

A Review of Recent US Death Trends in Iraq

2007-06-21T08:05:00.001-07:00

Most people know that more US soldiers are dying than at any previous time in the Iraq war/occupation. 2007 was the deadliest February, March and May, and the second deadliest January and April. June will surely be another grim record-setting month.

542 troops have already died in 2007. In 2006, the 542nd troop died in October. That's one surge no one wants - even the NeoCons. ICCC

This got me thinking about the causes of US deaths. My expectation was that, given the surge, we would see a lot more troops dying in combat operations as they take the fight directly to the enemies. This is what the military has had us expect.

Unfortunately, this presumption doesn't hold up to the facts on the ground. The Brookings Institute tracks the cause of US deaths into broad groups - IEDs, mortars/rockets, RPGs, helicopter losses, other hostile fire (which I presume be to mainly from enemy rifles and guns) and non-hostile causes.

Breaking this down, non-hostile deaths have generally numbered between 5 and 10 per month recently. Mortars/rockets, RPGs, and helicopter losses are very small contributors - one percent or less of total troop losses. (Note that deaths from each of these categories have come way down over time.)

This leaves two categories - IEDs and other hostile fire. Here's the breakdown for the entire war and for the time period from March 1 through June 10.

Percent of US troop fatalities from:

IEDs: Entire War = 39%; March-June 10, 2007: 63%
Other hostile fire: Entire War = 31%; March-June 10, 2007: 28% Brookings

Even through the percent of deaths from non hostile file is slightly down recently, more soldiers are dying from this cause because, well, more soldiers are dying, period. I presume these soldiers are mostly dying fighting the enemy - a point the military brass have been making. I never want to say any death is acceptable, but the point is merely made that these men and women are dying fighting.

On the other hand, the huge increase in IED fatalities is simply unacceptable to me. These soldiers are simply sitting ducks, dying as the drive the roads of Iraq. This is an incredibly tragic outgrowth of the occupation, and I presume, the surge. And it is yet another example of why the surge is failing.

Thinking Blogger Award

2007-06-20T09:41:00.000-07:00

I Wish I were in Paris hit me with a Thinking Blogger Award. I am really amazed to have gotten this award since there are literally thousands of excellent sites out there. Even in my little blogging world there are literally dozens and dozens of great sites to choose from. Thanks Paris, I am really honored.

Thinking Blogger has a great idea that has proved to be very popular. Here are the rules that I blatantly copied:

1. If, and only if you get tagged, write a post with links to 5 blogs that make you think.

2. Link to this post so that people can easily find the exact origin of the meme.

3. Optional: Proudly display the 'Thinking Blogger Award' with a link to the post that you wrote (here is an alternative silver version if gold doesn't fit your blog).

Okay, that was the easy part. Now on to the hard part. The five blogs that I have chosen that make me think are:

1. Informed Consent. Professor of Middle East History, Juan Cole is one of the first blogs I read every morning. If you really want insights on the war on Iraq, Sunnis, Shia, Palestinians, Israel, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, anything on the Middle East, then this is an absolute must-read. Dr. Cole also translates many Arabic newspaper articles - essential for understanding different points of view in this most volatile land.

2. Another Point of View is blog I highly recommend - just be sure to have had your morning coffee and be prepared to concentrate. Mentarch's posts have many relevant links and references to back up his assertions. He has a typically excellent post today on contrasting priorities of PTSD problems for state department officials in Iraq/Afghanistan and our troops on the ground.

3. Suzie-Q (and the Justice Blog Team) is a prodigious source of politicking punditry. Because there are multiple contributors, they cover a lot of territory. Whether its the mess in Iraq, Big Brother, or jut another rotten CEO, Suzie-Q is on it like stink on BushCo. The site is really well done with a great mix of graphics and pictures. Still, I just can't figure out if the pic of Suzie is real or not. That mystery only adds to the allure.

4. I would be remiss to exclude the newly remodeled Reconstitution 2.0 site. There's always something new and good there. Yesterday's post on the possible collapsing credit bubble still has me thinking. And worrying.

5. Finally, I'm going to give a shout-out to my buddy TomCat at Politics Plus. I first became aware of TomCat about the time we were in on an April Fool's gag with a number of other bloggers. Since then, I try to visit his site every time I'm blogging. TomCat's posts are always interesting and often provocative. He usually has multiple posts every day on a variety of topics near and dear to my heart - bashing BushCo and the vile NeoCons, helping me understand what it means to be a religious liberal (God-hating liberals would be advised to read his posts on this topic - they are real eye-openers), as well as a variety of domestics and international issues. Don't miss his twice-monthly poll.

There are so many other sites I really enjoy, and that's not just some smarmy BS. But the rules say five. Please click on any and all of the links I've blogrolled. I've reviewed each of them multiple times and they all share one thing in common - they are all great!

Hopes for a Political Solution in Iraq Continue to Fade

2007-06-20T08:42:00.001-07:00

From the esteemed Juan Cole today:

There is also heavy fighting between Mahdi Army forces and Iraqi government troops in Nasiriya in the south, with British troops allegedly giving some support to the government side. Typically the 'Iraqi government' forces are actually drawn from the Badr Corps and so this is in a way two Shiite militias fighting one another. These clashes have reinforced the determination of the Sadr Movement MPs to suspend their participation in the parliament, which probably therefore lacks a quorum for the rest of the summer. The Sadrists say an agreement has been reached with the governor of Nasiriyah to end the fighing.

At what point do the warmongers say, enough? When does it get so bad to them that the current situation is worse than what the fear might happen?

Two Stories in The Battle for Iraq

2007-06-20T08:18:00.000-07:00

Two articles on the battle for Iraq - one from Baquba, the other from the Emerald City. Both are troubling.

1. From the NYT on new tactics being deployed to stop the insurgents - AKA Operation No More Whack-a-Mole:

In more than four years in Iraq, American forces have been confounded by insurgents who have often slipped away only to fight another day. The war in Iraq has been likened to the arcade game of whack-a-mole, where as soon as you knock down one mole another pops up. ...

So the planners of this latest operation are attempting to plug the holes that have allowed the insurgents to escape in the past. The goal is not merely to reclaim western Baquba from insurgent control, but to capture or kill the estimated 300 fighters to 500 fighters who are believed to be based in that part of the city. ...

The problem of collaring the Qaeda fighters is challenging in several respects. Unlike Falluja, where most of the population fled in advance of the battle, thousands of civilians remain in the western section of the city.

I'm no military planner, but waging a pitched battle with civilians present seems to me a recipe for disaster. But I will say, the military is at least trying something different here.

2. The second is a report on the near-daily attacks on the Emerald City. The problem is these attacks are coming from mobile launchers from residential neighborhoods. Security forces are stymied in trying to stop these attacks.

The U.S. military acknowledged ``an increasing pattern of attacks'' against the Green Zone, a day after a mortar barrage against the heavily fortified area sent soldiers and contractors scrambling for cover. ...

Rear Adm. Mark Fox, a U.S. military spokesman in Baghdad, declined to provide details on the number of attacks against the Green Zone, which is also known as the International Zone, but said they were increasing.

``It's clear that there is an attempt to get lucky shots, and there is unquestionably an increasing pattern of attacks here against the International Zone. There's no doubt about that,'' Fox said at a joint news conference with Iraqi military spokesman Qassim al-Moussawi.

Well, Admiral Fox, those "lucky" shots are occurring nearly every day, forcing everyone to run around with flack jackets and helmets. Doesn't seem like things are going particularly well at all

Play the BushCo Anti-Missle Defense Game

2007-06-19T11:00:00.001-07:00

Enjoy the game

Here

My Small Thoughts on the English-Only Movement

2007-06-18T12:10:00.000-07:00

Given the anti-immigrant hysteria sweeping the right wing, its no surprise the English-only canard is being played again - big time. Now at a certain level, I can understand why folks might want to declare English our national language. Fine, I have no real problem with that. My problem is the racists and bozos who want to declare war on Mexican Americans.

Its time for these dolts to get real and live with fact that lots of people haven't mastered English - particularly adults moving to the US for whom English isn't their primary language. Its really not a big deal to have ballots in Spanish, or health warnings in Vietnamese.

On the other hand, I do have a pet peeve in our schools. I want to say first that I think its fine to have public schools where the instruction is in another language (often Spanish) so long as that foreign language isn't also your primary language.

However, I strongly believe that children who have limited English skills should not be bundled off to classes taught in their native languages. Why? Because more often than not, these classes are taught by someone proficient in a particularly language, but not in the subject(s) being taught. Second, for someone to have real success in this country, you need to learn to speak English well.

The solution: English immersion. For the first six months to a year in American schools, these kids must be put in English immersion classes to master English first. Then they need to be mainstreamed into regular classes - as quickly as possible.

That's my small solution to a rather large problem. I'd be interested to hear other points of view.

Howard Kurtz on Media Critics

2007-06-18T10:31:00.001-07:00

Howard Kurtz of the Washington Post and CNN writes today on media critics. I thought this might be an excellent opportunity for some introspection on the torrent of criticism buffeting the MSM today.

Nah, his examples of media critics were Tony Blair, OJ Simpson and Paris Hilton. The article is an introspection-free zone. Too bad; Kurtz has the bully pulpit, but apparently not the chops to take this topic head-on - without the snark.

Iraq: We Aren't Number One Failed State

2007-06-18T10:20:00.001-07:00

That dubious honor belongs to the Sudan. Iraq is the number two failed state. FP

There's a Surge in Baghdad Plus a Curfew

2007-06-15T11:10:00.000-07:00

But mortars still explode in the Emerald City. here

A most interesting GDP Map of the US

2007-06-15T10:43:00.000-07:00

Compares the GDP of each state to a comparable nation. Check it out here

The Day in Sports

2007-06-14T08:55:00.000-07:00

In Salt Lake City:

Several Real Salt Lake fans say their right to free speech was violated when stadium and team officials kicked out fans who had refused to stop waving Tibetan flags during Thursday's exhibition game against the Chinese National Team.......The controversy began shortly after halftime, when Chinese players complained about fans displaying Taiwanese and Tibetan flags and a sign that said "6-4," written in Chinese. That sign referred to June 4, 1989, the date of the Chinese government's attack on protesters in Tiananmen Square in Beijing.

Members of the Chinese National Team stepped off the field and refused to continue playing unless the flags were put away.

Nice. So much for free speech in this country. And what's with the ultra-sensitive Chinese players? Accounts I've read say the protests were entirely respectful. After all, its not like the US National team playing in Mexico and having to put up with Osama! Osama! chants.

Time and again, baseball proves to be the biggest bunch of assholes in any sport. Of course, there is the insufferable Barry Bonds. Its amazing to me that people even care about home run records anymore.

But the story that irritates me the most in baseball these days is the Bug Selig gonna suspend Jason Giambi unless he talks to George Mitchell saga. Selig is understandably upset that major leaguers have put down the cone of silence around the Mitchell investigation, foiling attempts to understand just how pervasive doping is in baseball. Giambi basically fessed up to using steroids before MLB banned them. Yes, there is a problem, but Selig's solution is patently unfair.

Cycling, The Tour De France - I used to look forward to this event every year. However, this sport is more infested with doping than even baseball (if that's possible). Its a sad spectacle, and I just don't know what to think about Lance Armstrong anymore.

Michael Vick - if the allegations are true, he should be suspended from the NFL for years and thrown in jail. While giving him some benefit of the doubt, does he even begin to understand (or care) just how villainous he appears - especially with his comments in public? This is a guy who was recently considered the next big thing, the sports savior of the City of Atlanta.

But Clinton Portis, what were you thinking about? Me thinks you've taken way too many knocks to the head. He didn't quite stoop the level of Devil Rays outfielder Elijah Dukes, but he's certainly on the same staircase to hell.

I used to like sports as an entertaining break from every day troubles and politics. Now, the sports page all too often reads like the front page.

On the good news front, the college football season is only a few months away. Rutgers is my team. For years, Rutgers was an absolute joke, the worst of the worst, and a constant source of ribbing from my buddies. Now Rutgers is a beast in the East. While this makes for great Saturdays, I do worry about the problems that big-time college sports bring - particularly high-profile successful teams. So far, Coach Shiano has done a great job of recruiting kids who are equally good citizens as they are football players. I hope that recent tradition continues.

2008 Presidential Race: Who's Hot and Who's Not

2007-06-12T09:16:00.001-07:00

Hot:

Fred Thompson. A pair of polls have the Fred Dalton Thompson campaign doing a Tennessee Waltz. A new Rasumssen poll has Thompson neck-and-neck with Giuliani at 24%. Normally, I might discount a single Ramussen polls (why? here here). However, the latest LAT/Bloomberg poll out also has Thompson over 20% and in second place. And he's not even officially in the race. Yet.

Not

John McCain. McCain's is down to the pre-teens in both polls. Ouch. He might be doing far better in a general election where his independence would be valued. But not in a Reep primary; McCain went after BushCo when it was the King, and then oddly supported BushCo as it become more and more radioactive.

Today's lessons in politics. Not having a recent track record certainly helps. This is especially true for Senators. Or so it seems. It also helps to appear to not be going senile.

The Bees are Back Plus Other Odds and Ends

2007-06-11T12:53:00.000-07:00

The bees are back in my yard - big time. They seem a happy lot, too, buzzing all about and doing that pollinating voodoo they do. Its nice, except for the sting my boy got. Here's hoping the bees are back everywhere else, too.

Am I the only person really irritated by Drudge's continued use of the term 'global warming?' Can't he just say 'climate change?' No, that wouldn't be pejorative.

What's it with BushCo and their spokeshead Dubya? I mean, does everything they do automatically have to turn to a wet mushy turd wedged into the sole of your work boots? The latest huge loss for BushCo was on the immigration compromise. Instead of trying elevate the debate, BushCo went and swift-boated their own. The conservatives acted in a way I wish the Dems would do more often - they dug in and returned fusillade for fusillade. (Note to Dems: This is how you fight back. Take a note of it, and try it sometime after recovering from the spinal replacement surgery.)

If its Iraq, then its more mayhem and destruction. Aside from the grisly murders and horrific jihaddi bombers (I am so sick of these fucking nihilists), the insurgents continue their tactics of death to USA by a thousand cuts. Another bridge was taken out. Sadly, three US troops died in the attack. RIP. Anyone else ready to put down the kool-aid and admit the Surge ain't working?

Behind the charismatic veneer, I knew that Mike Huckabee was just another right wing wacko. His comment that most prisoners would prefer to be in Gitmo capped it. Yeah Mikey, I'll just bet these guys just can't wait for some more enhanced interrogation techniques. Plus, the great medical care. Makes their day.

Joe Klein: Nobody Loves Me But My Mother

2007-06-07T09:11:00.000-07:00

Joe Klein is feeling a little mopey. The big bad lefty blogosphere has been attacking Joe and he's quite sad. The latest row started when he spoke with Congresswoman Jane Harman about the vote she would be casting on the Iraq War funding bill. Harman was going vote for the bill, but later decided to vote against. Klein spoke with her before she changed her mind and reported she was going to vote for the measure. For that, Klein caught some stick from lefty bloggers.

Klein:

[B]logging ... [is] a brilliant format for keeping readers up to date on the things I care about—and for exchanging information with them. ... But the smart stuff is being drowned out by a fierce, bullying, often witless tone of intolerance that has overtaken the left-wing sector of the blogosphere. ...

[Politicians like Jane Harmon, Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama] allowed themselves to be bullied into a more simplistic, more extreme position. Why? Partly because they fear the power of the bloggers to set the debate and raise money against them. They may be right—in the short (primary election) term; Harman faced a challenge from the left in 2006. In the long term, however, kowtowing to extremists is exactly the opposite of what this country is looking for after the lethal radicalism of the Bush Administration.

Klein also equated left wing bloggers with Rush Limbaugh and right-wing hate-talk radio. One one hand, it's a reasonable admonishment; We surely don't want to debase ourselves to the level of our enemies. And Joe does have a point on his writing on Harmon; he probably didn't deserve to be intensely attacked.

For the most part however, the lefty blogs I visit are long on reason and facts - with large dollops of sarcasm and anger. There is an essential difference between the lefty blogs and dolts like Limbaugh - we are infuriated by the lies and manipulations of the Bush Administration and idiot neocons, theocons, paleocons, racists, money-grubbing rip-off artists and all-around protectors of the rich and powerful. Limbaugh, OTOH, asks what color toilet paper and wipes their asses.

Klein knows this difference, or he should know it. I will give Klein the point that we bloggers can be too angry at times (myself included). And with the power of the blogosphere, it may seem like an angry wasp attack.

The rest of Klein's sad story is one big glass of red whine; alas, poor Joe Klein. Klein's problem is his first instinct is to be a stenographer to power. That's okay, except when you are a key writer for a major news weekly. We want facts and investigative reporting, not cocktail party chatter.

Okay, that's maybe too hard on Klein. In some ways, his heart is in the right place. He has come out recently smoking on BushCo. But you know what? So has Limbaugh. So has Peggy Noonan. So has anyone with an IQ north of 50. Klein joined the Bush-bashing party at the same time as the rest of the MSM - and many right wingers, too.

Joe, you are going to continue to take the slings and arrows from the left. You should have been doing gumshoe journalism not cocktail party stenography all along. And I don't give a rat's ass if that offends you. Feel free to hit the ignore button on me and my ilk all the time. The fact of the matter is the elephant in the living room is the MSM's stenography to power.

The elites of MSM are shocked and chagrined to get heaps of criticism from the wasps of the blogosphere. Y''all are simply going to have to get used to it. There's a new sheriff in town and his name is Accountability.

See my post two months ago on Klein.

2008 Presidential contender mojo ratings: June 6, 2007 edition

2007-06-06T09:05:00.000-07:00

After three Reep and two Dem debates, its time again to rate the contenders.

Democrats:

Barack Obama 6.6
Hillary Clinton 6.1

According to the latest USA Today/Gallup polling, Hillary and Barack are in a dead-heat. However, the mojo is clearly with Barack.

John Edwards 3.2

I don't see how Edwards is going to close the gap. The right-wing slime machine has jumped all over Edwards (the big house, the haircut, etc), forcing him into playing some defense - and that's always deadly in a political race. The good news for Edwards is there is still a lot of time for him to rebound.

Bill Richardson 0.9

Two chances to elevate himself into the top tier, but didn't do it. He's campaigning for a another cabinet position. Again, there is still time, but the clock is ticking loudly.

Dennis Kucinich 0.8

The darling of many liberals, and understandably so. However, he suffers from something similar that afflicted Howard Dean - his demeanor. It isn't the lack of gravitas, its not even his height or anything like that. I'm having trouble putting my finger on it exactly. Dean was kind of irritating to watch in debate, Kucinch isn't irritating. Maybe its the sense that a Kucinch presidency wouldn't get anything done because he's too idealistic to actually compromise. Maybe its the realization he isn't really trying to win.

Mike Gravel 0.7

Strong on Iraq, but has no base, no way, no shot, no how, never.

Joe Biden 0.4

One word - why? I just don't get the Biden bid at all. Joe, you want secretary of defense in the next administration, you got it. Now, shut up and go away.

Chris Dodd 0.2

His bid is meaningless. I know he's ticked about not getting enough air time in the debate, but no one really cares.

Wild Card - Al Gore 4.9

There's the Tennessee Two that aren't in the race - at least not yet. Tennessee Thompson is all but in, but Big Al Gore is playing coy. Maybe he's in, maybe not. The intrigue is interesting and attractive (what do you mean you might not want to be president?) The difference to me between Al and Fred is that Gore can still manage a big pop if he enters, whereas Fred Dalton (I believe) is at his apex.

I think a Clinton-Obama-Gore-Edwards tussle would be a dream for the dems. I'd like Richardson to still be in the mix due to his resume. Kick the rest out, and let these five barnstorm the country in debate of the issues.

Republicans:

Rudy Giuliani 5.2

Rudy G. continues to hold a strong double digit lead over McCain and Romney. However, he generally tops out around 33% in the polls (McCain and Romney are in the high teens and low teens, respectively). My question is - where does Rudy pick up support when other contenders drop out? Rudy is so far to the left of the other candidates on most social issues, its like he's in another room altogether. The base is getting antsy in a big way over Rudy. I just don't see much more upside for him.

John McCain 3.6

Dead man walking. Disses BushCo when BushCo was at the height of popularity, and latches onto BushCo's butt cheeks as BushCo is circling the toilet. McCain is not only married to BushCo, but to Iraq and the immigration bill. Now, he's cussing a lot. Cue Don Merideth, The party's over.

Mitt Romney 3.1

It would interesting if Romney and Edwards both won the nomination. The could have a coiffe-off debate - winner gets to give a haircut to the loser. Romney is telegenic and bright and has a strong resume (except for foreign policy expertise).

Mike Huckabee 0.9

Mike has a folksy down-to-Earth demeanor that might elevate him past the top three (or four or five (more on Tennessee Jed, er Fred and Newt below). The base is clamoring for something different - a second coming of Dubya without the baggage and hubris. Huckabee could fit the bill.

Ron Paul 0.9

Vive la difference! One has to like Paul because he sets himself so far apart from the rest of the pack. Unfortunately, he suffers from a similar problem that befuddles Kucinch - its that electability thing. Its hard to finger, but there it is. Paul has no hope, we know and he knows it.

Sam Brownback 0.4

Brownback proves true why Senators should not run for president. I believe he's been lapped by Huckabee in the race to vault from second tier to first tier.

Duncan Hunter 0.3

Hunter has no chance and he knows it. The question remains: What is driving this guy. Ego?

Jim Gilmore 0.2

This guy is not impressive. The Reeps would be well-serve to eliminate Gilmore from future debates, if only to give the other candidates some more time.

Tom Tancredo 0.2

Its just too hard to out-hate your opponents in a Republican battle for president. Tancredo is not quite ready for prime-time.

Tommy Thompson 0.1

Simply terrible. He's had three debate opportunities and hasn't shown presidential timber. This guy is meat.

Wild Card - Fred Thompson 3.5

Fred will enter the race slightly ahead of Mitt Romney. He adds some flair to the race, as I expect him to be strong in debate due to his long acting career (I don't mean that in a cynical way; its just that he's had lots of opportunity to hone his speaking skills.) Thompson will run as a limited government Reaganite, a pretty good place to land. He has some potential upside - maybe a lot of upside. We just won't know until until after a few debates and policy speeches as an official candidate.

Wild Card - Newt Gingrich 2.8

Newt may join the race, or maybe he won't. Newt claims he wants to elevate the debate. That's all fine, but Gingrich carries some heavy political baggage. His recent row with Tom DeLay certainly doesn't tag Gingrich as the great uniter of the party. I would be interested to have Gingrich on the stage with six other Reeps - Giuliani, McCain, Romney, Fred Thompson, Huckabee and Paul (I only add Paul because he brings such a different point of view than all of the other candidates). That might be a bit crowded.

Revolt's Crystal Ball - Looking to January 1, 2008

I anticipate some candidates dropping out due to a combination of fatigue, realization they can't win, lack of funds and being excluded from debates. By the end of the year, the top three dems will still be in. Kucinich is in because he's running on issues, not to win. I would love to see Al Gore enter the race, if only to energize the debates.

On the Reep side, things are more complicated. Giuliani will be in for a long time because he can compete in the big states. I think either McCain or Romney drops out. From there it gets messy. Does Gingrich stay in all the way to the convention with his five to ten percent support? Can the minor candidates stick around? Will Fred Thompson blast off like a rocket. My crystal ball says that Giuliani, Romney, Fred Thompson, Newt, Huckabee, Paul and Tancredo are still standing January 1st, and the rest are with the dead armadillos.

Maybe the Polls Might Help the Dems Grow a Spine

2007-06-05T09:18:00.000-07:00

From a recent WaPo/ABC national survey, as reported by Mystery Pollster on Pollster.com:

35% approve of the way President Bush is handling his job; 62% disapprove.

39% approve of the way Congress is doing its job; 53% disapprove.

Approval of the Democrats in Congress has dropped from 54% to 44% since April -- "with the decline occurring almost exclusively among strong opponents of the Iraq War."

From the poll results (formatted for readability):

[Do you think the war with Iraq was worth fighting, or not?

Worth Fighting
Strongly - 24
Somewhat - 12

Not Worth Fighting
Somewhat - 12
Strongly - 50

Do you think the number of U.S. military forces in Iraq should be (increased), (decreased), or kept about the same?

Increased - 19
Decreased - All/Immediately - 15
Decreased - Not All/Not Immediately - 40
Kept About the Same - 23

Do you think the United States is or is not making significant progress toward restoring civil order in Iraq?

Is - 32
Is Not - 64

Do you think [the recent] increase of U.S. forces [to Iraq] will or will not improve the security situation there over the next few months?

Will - 39
Will not - 58

Do you think (the United States must win the war in Iraq in order for the broader war on terrorism to be a success), or do you think (the war on terrorism can be a success without the United States winning the war in Iraq?)

US must win war in Iraq - 37
Can be a success without US winning war in Iraq - 56

Overall, do you feel that you can or cannot trust the Bush administration to honestly and accurately report intelligence about security threats facing the United States?

Can - 38
Cannot - 60

How is the Baghdad Surge Doing - Three Months In?

2007-06-05T08:51:00.000-07:00

Not well. IHT

[An internal] American [military] assessment, completed in late May, found that American and Iraqi forces were able to "protect the population" and "maintain physical influence over" only 146 of the 457 Baghdad neighborhoods.

In the remaining 311 neighborhoods, troops have either not begun operations aimed at rooting out insurgents or still face "resistance," according to the one-page assessment, which was provided to The New York Times and summarized reports from brigade and battalion commanders in Baghdad.

At what point does accountability get factored into the occupation equation?

Iraq Today: Over Four Million Displaced

2007-06-05T08:38:00.000-07:00

This is an amazingly depressing statistic - the UN estimates that over four million Iraqis have been displaced since the US invasion - two million within Iraq, and an even greater number to neighboring states. Even despicable and depraved Saddam Hussein could only bring about a fraction of this carnage. At what point does BushCo finally give in to their pride and admit the cure is worse than the disease? United Nations

According to government figures, some 1.4 million Iraqis are now displaced in Syria, up to 750,000 in Jordan, 80,000 in Egypt and some 200,000 in the Gulf region. Syria alone receives a minimum of 30,000 Iraqis a month.

If you are wondering how many displaced Iraqis the US is bringing in, the answer is not much (around 7,000).

WaPo

Peggy Noonan - Where's All the Love Gone?

2007-06-03T11:17:00.000-07:00

Peggy Noonan ripped into BushCo and Dubya big time on the Wall Street Journal's Opinion Journal recently. I was really shocked as the WSJOJ has consistently fellated BushCo for the last six years (oops, that's a bud pun - the kind that might get a guy impeached). She wrote June 1, 2007:

What political conservatives and on-the-ground Republicans must understand at this point is that they are not breaking with the White House on immigration. They are not resisting, fighting and thereby setting down a historical marker--"At this point the break became final." That's not what's happening. What conservatives and Republicans must recognize is that the White House has broken with them. ...

For almost three years, arguably longer, conservative Bush supporters have felt like sufferers of battered wife syndrome. You don't like endless gushing spending, the kind that assumes a high and unstoppable affluence will always exist, and the tax receipts will always flow in? Too bad! You don't like expanding governmental authority and power? Too bad. You think the war was wrong or is wrong? Too bad.

But on immigration it has changed from "Too bad" to "You're bad."

Wow, them's some harsh words. Let's play the way back machine to see what Peggy's been saying over the years. January 31, 2002:

In the old days elite opinion held that Mr. Bush was a scripted trust-fund dullard whose rise was greased by luck and birth. Those were the days. Those of us who stood with Mr. Bush then were a small and hardy band of criticized contrarians. It was fun. We had secret handshakes and everything. Now everyone's in on the act. ...

[T]hose who once dismissed Mr. Bush and now praise him are demonstrating an honesty and high mindedness that is wonderful to behold after the sapping, sour 1990s. It really is refreshing--literally refreshing--to have a president people admire and can follow cleanly again.

January 30, 2003 (Commenting on the SOTU):

Mr. Bush seems uniquely resolved to be as courageous as the times require and as helpful as they allow. There is a profound authenticity to him, and a fearlessness too.

A steady hand on the helm in high seas, a knowledge of where we must go and why, a resolve to achieve safe harbor. More and more this presidency is feeling like a gift.

November 4, 2004 (Commenting on Dubya's re-election; I would have substituted
'millionaires' for 'than a million', but what the heck):

The leaders of the Bush effort see it this way: A ragtag band of more than a million Republican volunteers who fought like Washington's troops at Valley Forge beat the paid Hessians of King George III's army. Savor.

By 2006, the strains had become more obvious February 2, 2006:

The president's State of the Union Address will be little noted and not long remembered. There was a sense that he was talking at, not to, the country. ... [The speech wasn't] precisely a pudding without a theme, but a thin porridge.

You can see the wheels start to come off in the Spring of last year May 18, 2006:

I continue to believe the administration's problem is not that the base lately doesn't like it, but that the White House has decided it actually doesn't like the base. That's a worse problem. It's hard to fire a base. Hard to get a new one.

Thus, we see the full evolution of Peggy Noonan's views. By the way, don't cry for her; she's gone back to fellating the corpse of the Gipper. But I would ask her, Peggy, how could you be so fucking wrong?

The Way Back Quote Machine Goes to .... November 2006

2007-06-01T08:34:00.000-07:00

Iraq Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki:

I can say that Iraqi forces will be ready, fully ready to receive this command and to command its own forces, and I can tell you that by next June [2007] our forces will be ready[.]

Right out of the BushCo playbook. Make a statement, and figure no one is going to look back and hold your to it.

Do You Think Joe Lieberman Got a Good Price?

2007-05-31T17:42:00.000-07:00

Just askin'.

Joe Lieberman Goes Shopping in Baghdad

2007-05-31T08:42:00.000-07:00

He bought some sunglasses and is dressed to kill. Think Progress

A New War to Peace in Iraq

2007-05-31T08:21:00.000-07:00

It seems to me the US has been largely beating its head against a brick wall when it comes to Iraq. The only solution has been to add troops, step up security. Many have seen the folly and have advocated withdrawals of US troops - either from the front lines, or from Iraq altogether. No proposed solution has seemed satisfactory.

So, how about a cease fire? Seems like a good idea to me.

U.S. military commanders are talking with Iraqi militants about cease- fires and other arrangements to try to stop the violence, the No. 2 American commander said Thursday.

Lt. Gen. Raymond Odierno said he has authorized commanders to reach out to militants, tribes, religious leaders and others in the country that has been gripped by violence from a range of fronts including insurgents, sectarian rivals and common criminals.

"We are talking about cease-fires, and maybe signing some things that say they won't conduct operations against the government of Iraq or against coalition forces.," Odierno told Pentagon reporters in a video conference from Baghdad.

Its a brief article, but surely the US must be offering things in return - like not conducting operations in insurgent strongholds. I'm merely speculating.

However, this does provide the opportunity for some breathing space, an chance for ordinary Iraqis to go about their daily lives. Significantly, it also provides a new opportunity for a national reconciliation.

Will the cease-fire work? Who knows, probably not. But, I'm giving a big thumbs up to giving a try at something new, something that involves less killing.

Is Turkey About to Invade Iraq?

2007-05-30T10:23:00.000-07:00

Fears of a regional war could be coming true. I expect BushCo to blame Bill Clinton for this mess.

Turkey has sent large contingents of reinforcement soldiers, tanks and armored personnel carriers to its border with Iraq as debate heated up over whether to stage a cross-border offensive to hit Kurdish rebel bases.

Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan on Tuesday urged the United States and Iraq to destroy bases of the Kurdistan Workers Party, or PKK, in northern Iraq as Turkish military deployed more tanks and soldiers on the border.

A New Job for Wolfowitz?

2007-05-30T10:18:00.000-07:00

Freedom Fries Congressman suggests Wolfie become the new mayor of Baghdad. I think its a boffo idea.

Note that Walter Jones has recanted his past support for the War on Iraq, and was one of only two Reep congressmen to vote in favor of the Dem proposal to bring home our troops by September 2008.

Bush's Alternate Reality

2007-05-29T17:01:00.000-07:00

Dan Froomkin has a great synopsis on Dubya's weird point-of-view on Iraq:

I often wonder why more news stories don't start: "President Bush yesterday again denied reality. . . . "

And then along comes this delightful surprise from Jennifer Loven of the Associated Press: "Confronted with strong opposition to his Iraq policies, President Bush decides to interpret public opinion his own way. Actually, he says, people agree with him.

"Democrats view the November elections that gave them control of Congress as a mandate to bring U.S. troops home from Iraq. ...

"The president says Democrats have it all wrong: the public doesn't want the troops pulled out -- they want to give the military more support in its mission.

"'Last November, the American people said they were frustrated and wanted a change in our strategy in Iraq,' he said April 24, ahead of a veto showdown with congressional Democrats over their desire to legislation a troop withdrawal timeline. 'I listened. Today, General David Petraeus is carrying out a strategy that is dramatically different from our previous course.'

"Increasingly isolated on a war that is going badly, Bush has presented his alternative reality in other ways, too. He expresses understanding for the public's dismay over the unrelenting sectarian violence and American losses that have passed 3,400, but then asserts that the public's solution matches his.

"'A lot of Americans want to know, you know, when?' he said at a Rose Garden news conference Thursday. 'When are you going to win?'

"Also in that session, Bush said: 'I recognize there are a handful there, or some, who just say, "Get out, you know, it's just not worth it. Let's just leave." I strongly disagree with that attitude. Most Americans do as well.'

"In fact, polls show Americans do not disagree, and that leaving -- not winning -- is their main goal. . . .

"Bush aides say poll questions are asked so many ways, and often so imprecisely, that it is impossible to conclude that most Americans really want to get out. Failure, Bush says, is not what the public wants -- they just don't fully understand that that is just what they will get if troops are pulled out before the Iraqi government is capable of keeping the country stable on its own. . . .

"Independent pollster Andrew Kohut said of the White House view: 'I don't see what they're talking about.'"

Cindy Sheehan: You Will Be Missed

2007-05-29T09:06:00.000-07:00

Cindy Sheehan is hanging up her peace signs and retiring from the peace movement. I can't even begin to imagine the emotional baggage she carries over losing her son and then becoming the national face of the US peace movement - along with the right-wing smear campaign against her. Cindy is human, and therefore not without fault. However, America - and the world - owes Cindy Sheehan a huge debt of gratitude.

The Bloom is off the Surge

2007-05-26T10:17:00.001-07:00

A new U.S. public opinion survey shows a deepening pessimism over the situation in Iraq. I believe this is noteworthy because opinion polls from two months ago showed a significant uptick in optimism over the occupation efforts. That was because the much-ballyhooed Surge + PR campaign made some people think that things were changing for the better in Iraq. Gotcha! Again!

I wonder how many times folks will be fooled again on Iraq. After the first round of elections, then the second, things would get better. Once we offed the dead-enders, things would get better. After the insurgents would finally realize their tactics wouldn't work over the long term, and (my favorite) the situation will really turn around in the next six months.

Its been a steady spiral downwards, with a couple of dead-cat bounces along the way. I believe a major reason why there is such pessimism over Iraq is the gap between the obvious realities in Iraq just don't jive with what BushCo, the NeoCons, Fox News and Pentagon are saying. We are all used to the lies from public officials; its rarer to have those lies be so obviously and outrageously exposed on a weekly and even daily basis.

This brings us to the key September report from Pope, er, General Petraeus. A lot of lefties in the blogosphere see hand-writing in the wall where the Good General reports progress, the conventional wisdom says give us another Freidman, and the cycle of insanity continues. Its a very plausible scenario.

I'm not buying into that - at least not yet. A sunny speech from General Petraeus won't mean anything without some huge initiative on our part or from the Iraqis themselves. I don't see that happening. The Iraqi government is in full-on disarray. I see dissolution of the government as far more likely than any meaningful reconciliation.

On the US front, the Reeps are slowly realizing they could go the way of the Whigs if the status quo continues. The Dems are craven and cowardly for sure, but the Reeps are most certainly walking the plank. There's also another surge, though this time without the PR campaign, going on right now that is stretching the troops even more.

This new surge won't matter, either. The policy has completely failed. The end is near to the status quo; a presidential election is coming up. Change is in the air and enough sensually-challenged Reeps smell it.

Oh yes, some will accuse of wanting the US to lose, that we hate America, and all that. We you know what? Those idiots can take a flying fuck to the moon. These villians don't even need to be responded to in any meaningful way, other than to be slapped in the face. They are thoroughly corrupted and evil. Not standing up to them means more will die, more children suffer. The NeoCons and the liars are on the run. The folly of Iraq should keep them on their heels for a generation - once this has reached its bitter conclusion. Its a bitter-sweet conclusion - the death of NeoConjobism.

Back to the near-term, I believe that when September comes, the US will begin the exit in earnest. That's no reason for optimism as 500 troops will probably die between now end then. That's just the reality of the situation - it won't be politically expedient to get our young soldiers out of harm's way before then.

(For anyone interested, I've made a number of references without citations - too little time for that right now. Drop a comment on any comment and I will gladly provide a reference in a day or so.)

Who is in the Axis of Evil Club?

2007-05-25T08:19:00.000-07:00

Dubya's Axis of Evil: Iraq, Iran, North Korea

Sadr's Evil Trio: US, Britain, Israel

Mitt Romney Can't Keep Track of Right Wing Zealots

2007-05-24T11:19:00.000-07:00

Its tough to run for Prez, you have to remember all sorts of folks, but this was pretty embarrassing. From AJC:

At the fund-raiser for Mitt Romney at the posh 1818 Club on Friday, the candidate was making the introductions to the room.

Romney gestured to Ralph Reed and said, “Why it’s good to see Gary Bauer here.” (For the detached, Bauer is a former presidential candidate with ties, like Reed, to the Religious Right.)

Romney then caught himself. “Oh, I’m a little mixed up here,” he said. But Romney still couldn’t place Reed’s face — and had to move on.

D'oh! So, let's give the Mittster a helping hand.

Reed, the former head of the Christian Coalition (Pat Roberston's group), vote rigger, high-school plagiarizer, and chairman of the Georgia Republican Party. He had a meteoric rise in the Republican Party as a champion of the religious right, and even ran for Lt. Governor of Georgia. His future looked bright, until his dealings with Jack Abramoff came to light.

Reed was named in the scandal arising from lobbying work performed by Jack Abramoff on behalf of Indian gambling tribes. Emails released by federal investigators in June 2005 suggest that Reed secretly accepted payments from Abramoff to lobby against Indian casino gambling and oppose an Alabama education lottery while Abramoff was being paid to promote Indian casino gambling. Additional emails released in November 2005 show that Reed also worked for another Abramoff client seeking to block a congressional ban on Internet gambling. These cases are being investigated by multiple federal and state grand juries and by the U.S. Senate Committee on Indian Affairs. Abramoff pled guilty to three felony counts in federal court.

He lost the election and is just another disgraced ex-pol. At least he didn't stick his dick where it didn't belong, so who knows? Could a resurrection be in the cards for Ralph Reed?

Gary Bauer is another right wing religious zealot, probably best known for falling of the stage trying to catch pancakes while running for the presidency. (Does chutzpah know no bounds?) Gary, as expected, is anti-woman's choice, but is pro-death penalty. He had some bizarre run-ins with Dan (Santorum, ITMFA) Savage. Bauer has joined the ranks of right wing ranters by hosting a radio talk show program.

More Political Gridlock in Iraq

2007-05-24T08:48:00.000-07:00

On the angle that no-news is still news, nothing's happening on the political front. This is axiomatic to the continued security and military troubles (which are growing worse, not better). From Iraqslogger:

Aljazeera.net reported that Kirkuk may become a “region” –- unaffiliated with Kurdistan or the rest of Iraq -– for the next half-decade until a decision is made on its final status ... Kirkuk is one of the main issues preventing the Iraqi legislature from reaching an agreement over a proposed bundle of constitutional revisions.

On a related front, al-Hayat reported that the Iraqi parliament remains unable to move forward on the proposed constitutional amendments. Many consider the amendments to be the last chance to salvage the “political process” in Iraq. Broadly speaking, the potential revisions to the constitution seek to widen political representation and resolve some of the issues that have been paralyzing the Iraqi political scene for the last years.

Oil, de-ba'thification, the identity of Iraq, and Kirkuk are some of the more heated topics that are being currently negotiated by the political elite. The political pressure on Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki, al-Hayat said, is two-fold: on the one hand, Iraqi parties remain uncompromising over the vital issues under discussion, and negotiations are at a stalemate; at the same time, the US is heavily pressuring the Maliki government to hasten the passage of the amendments, the newspaper said.

Al-Mada and Az-Zaman reported over the last few days that [former Prime Minister Iyad] 'Allawi’s plan is to announce the creation of a new major alliance in the Iraqi parliament (seeking to topple al-Maliki’s cabinet) in parallel with his coalition’s withdrawal from al-Maliki’s government.

Al-Mada claimed that a plan by Iyad 'Allawi to withdraw his bloc’s ministers from the government was botched when he learned that the ministers in question will refuse to leave their cabinet seats.

Even the new "major alliance" is plagued by incompetence. The situation is damn close to hopeless.

The Latest In Iraq - Food Shortages at US Embassy, Elsewhere

2007-05-23T17:01:00.000-07:00

Another sign that we've lost - we can't even properly feed the fat-cats. Mr. Ambassador, your MRE is served.

From IraqSlogger

The Pope is a Dope

2007-05-23T14:12:00.000-07:00

And with apologies to David Peel, he might be smoking dope, too.

In a speech to Latin American and Caribbean bishops at the end of a visit to ... Brazil, the Pope said the Church had not imposed itself on the indigenous peoples of the Americas.

Dear Pope, put down that crack pipe. I suggest tying out Richard Mann's highly readable 1491 to get a clearer view of just what the Spanish conquistadors did when they visited and, uh, conquered, the new world.

The pope was really trying to bring a message that the gap between the rich and poor is wrong, and he also just had to stick his nose in Hugo Chavez's grill. Now Chavez may deserved the criticism - or at least some of it. However, the dopey Pope's remarks put Chavez squarely on the side of the native Latin Americans. So much for the Pope making inroads in public sentiments.

This dust-up is oddly similar to the bloviatings of BushCo in their attempts to isolate and even overthrow Chavez. Some of the reasons might be correct (NOT counting the coup attempts), but the actions have pushed Chavez ever more into a dictatorial role. How's that for a sel-fulfilling prophesy? Plus, as sky-high gas prices benefiting the oil barons, Chavez also reaps the windfall.

So the next time the Pope - or BushCo - wants to take on Chavez, they ought to make damned sure they are keeping their own asses clean. And read up on local history.

Baghdad - Less Violence?

2007-05-22T08:35:00.001-07:00

From Iraq the Model, a blogger in Iraq, on Monday:

There hasn’t been any major security incidents in Baghdad since the attacks on three bridges in both its northern and southern suburbs on Friday May 11, more than a week ago. This doesn’t mean Baghdad is essentially calm: there are episodes -albeit minor and limited- still happening from time to time.

From Iraq Today, security incidents in Baghdad on Tuesday:

Baghdad:
#1: A parked car bomb ripped through a crowded outdoor market in southwestern Baghdad on Tuesday, killing 25 people despite a 3-month-old security crackdown meant to reduce violence in the capital. At least 60 people were wounded in the 10 a.m. blast in the Shiite-dominated neighborhood of Amil. Nearby buildings were badly damaged and set ablaze, while others were reduced to rubble.

#2: gunmen in two cars drove through the nearby Khadra neighborhood and ambushed a civilian car carrying three plainclothes police officers from the major crimes unit, killing two and wounding the third, police said.

#3: Another police officer was killed when a roadside bomb exploded next to a police patrol driving through an eastern Baghdad neighborhood about 9 a.m., police said. Three other officers were wounded in the attack.

#4: Later Tuesday, two mortar shells slammed into a teacher's college affiliated with Baghdad University, killing three students and injuring seven, police said.

#5: In the Baghdad neighborhood of Dora, a sniper shot two civilians, killing one and wounding the other, police said.

#6: In central Baghdad, around seven people were killed and tens were wounded when an explosives-laden car was detonated.

#7: five Iraqis were wounded in a separate incident in al-Mansour district, western Baghdad, where a similar explosive charge was used.

#8: Separately, the cousin of the speaker of the Iraqi parliament was freed from his captors, also on Tuesday, the Iraqi military said while denying reports that he had been killed.

#9: In Zaytouna, eastern Baghdad, an explosive device blew up, killing a civilian and wounding three others.

#10: At least four college students were killed and 25 wounded in a mortar attack at Ibn al-Haitham college in Adhamiya district in northern Baghdad, police said.

#11: Iraqi security forces killed four gunmen, arrested 30 people and detained nine others in several areas of Baghdad during the past 24 hours as part of the security crackdown launched by the Iraqi government in mid-February 2007, the Baghdad operations command said on Tuesday.

#12: Iraqi forces also managed to defuse a bomb car in al-Rasheed district in southern Baghdad, in addition to eight explosive devices in several areas in Baghdad, the statement added. Explaining the losses to Iraqi security forces over the past 24 hours, the statement indicated that five Iraqi soldiers were killed and four others were wounded in a combat operation.

Monday incidents in Baghdad:

#1: Meanwhile, a roadside bomb detonated near a group of Iraqi soldiers patrolling the Sunni-dominated Adil neighborhood in western Baghdad, killing three of the soldiers and injuring two others.

#2: the Iraqi newspaper Azzaman reported Monday that one of its reporters, Ali Khalil, 22, was kidnapped while leaving a relative's house in the increasingly volatile Baiyaa neighborhood of Baghdad and found dead several hours later. Khalil was survived by his wife and 1-week-old baby, the newspaper said.

#3: A mortar shell struck the roof of Iraq's parliament inside Baghdad's heavily protected Green Zone Monday, shaking the building but causing no casualties. Sheikh Sabah Saadi, an MP from the Shiite Fadhila Party, said the rocket landed on the roof of the parliament right above the speaker's office. "There are no casualties but there is slight damage to the office," he told France's AFP news agency.

#4: Four Iraqi policemen were wounded when a roadside bomb exploded near their patrol in Wazirya district in central Baghdad, police said.

#5: The office of Adnan al-Dulaimi, the head of the biggest Sunni group in parliament, said that the Iraqi army had opened fire on his motorcade in Adil district in western Baghdad. There were no casualties

#6: The Iraqi army killed two insurgents and detained 69 others in Baghdad during the past 24 hours, the Defence Ministry said. Another 26 insurgents were detained in other parts of Iraq

#7: (yesterdays update) 24 dead bodies were found all over Baghdad : 19 bodies were in the west bank (Kharkh) -- 5 in Bayaa, 4 in Amel, 2 in Mansour, 2 in Doura, 2 in Jihad, 2 in Saidiya, 1 in I'laam and 1 in Hurriya. 5 bodies were found in the east bank (Rusafa) -- 2 in Kasra Watash, 2 in Kahira (Cairo neighborhood) and 1 in Sadr City.

#8: At least three people were wounded when two mortar rounds hit central Baghdad, police said.

#9: A roadside bomb exploded near a U.S patrol, wounding seven people in eastern Baghdad, police said

#10: Around 5:30 p.m. Two mortar shells landed in central Baghdad in Kahramana square. The shelling caused injuries to 3 civilians, damaged 2 cars and near by shops.

#11: Around 6:00 p.m. a mortar shell landed in Shurta Rabiaa neighborhood, 2 residents were killed and 12 were injured.

#12: Around 8:15 p.m. a parked car bomb exploded in Al Iskan neighborhood near the pediatric hospital Al Tifl Al Markazi. 5 civilians were injured.

#13: Police found 24 dead bodies in Baghdad. the following is the number of corpses found in neighborhoods of Baghdad: 6 in Bayaa, 5 in Amil, 2 in Ghazaliyah, 2 in Sileikh, 1 Adhamiya, 1 Husseiniya, 2 Karrada, 2 New Baghdad, 2 Sadr, 1 Waziriyah.

I guess this is what passes for improvement in Iraq these days.

Al Gore: You Da Man!

2007-05-21T18:23:00.000-07:00

From Al's new book:

Gore stops short of flatly calling for the impeachment of Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney, he certainly gives the impression that in his view such a move would be well deserved. He calls the president a lawbreaker, a liar and a man with the blood of thousands of innocent lives on his hands.

Most of Gore's ire stems from, not surprisingly, the war in Iraq, a war that Gore opposed from the beginning. Bush, he writes, "has exposed Americans abroad and Americans in every U.S. town and city to a greater danger of attack because of his arrogance and willfulness."

"History will surely judge America's decision to invade and occupy (Iraq)…as a decision that was not only tragic but absurd," Gore writes.

Al goes on to make the argument about the Iraq War that I've been making for years. BushCo is either lied about the reasons for war or is genuinely incompetent. In either case, at least IMO, BushCo deserves nothing short of impeachment and hard time in the slammer.

Can Someone Make Jerry Falwell Seem Sympathetic?

2007-05-19T09:16:00.000-07:00

Amazingly, the answer is yes - in the form of Fred Phelps and the Westboro Baptist Church. These are the idiots who go around protesting at soldiers' funerals, saying our tolerance of gays is the reason they got ripped apart by IEDs.

Well, this doesn't really make Falwell sympathetic; However, one soldier's family was spared the WPC treatment because of Falwell's death.

Information on the funeral of [Anthony] Bradshaw, a 21-year-old Army specialist killed by a roadside bomb in Baqouba, Iraq, was recently posted on the [Westboro Baptist Church's] Web site.

But the protesters were a no-show in New Braunfels on Wednesday because they chose to travel to Virginia in preparation for demonstrating at Falwell's funeral, said member Shirley Phelps-Roper, who is also an attorney for the church.

"There are dead soldiers everywhere," Phelps-Roper said. "You don't have a very high-profile, cowardly, lying false prophet like Falwell dying every day."

One useful thing from this is Falwell supporters are getting back some of what they've dished out over the years. The Fred Phelps gang's protest is a bit of karmic revenge for the support of segregation and South Africa's Apartheid Regime, and all the other sad spectacles perpetrated by Falwell under the name of baby Jesus.

So, I'll bet you're wondering why WBC hates Falwell. The easy thing to say is they hate on everyone. But for Falwell they have a special emnity:

WBC will preach at the memorial service of the corpulent false prophet Jerry Falwell, who spent his entire life prophesying lies and false doctrines like "God loves everyone".

There is little doubt that Falwell split Hell wide open the instant he died. The evidence is compelling, overwhelming, and irrefragable. To wit:

1. Falwell was a true Calvinistic Baptist when he was a young preacher in Springfield, Missouri, and sold his soul to Free-Willism (Arminianism) for lucre.

2. Falwell bitterly and viciously attacked WBC because of WBC's faithful Bible preaching -- thereby committing the unpardonable sin -- otherwise known as the sin against the Holy Ghost.

3. Falwell warmly praised Christ-rejecting Jews, pedophile-condoning Catholics, money-grubbing compromisers, practicing fags like Mel White, and backsliders like Billy Graham and Robert Schuler, etc. All for lucre -- making him guilty of their sins.

So there you have it.

Republican Debate Part Deux

2007-05-16T07:44:00.000-07:00

Here's what others are saying:

Political Realm declares McCain the big winner of last night's debate. PR also gives a thumbs up to Giuliani, but questions Romney's performance. Of the lesser candidates, Tancredo and Huckabee had strong performances.

Blog For Brains gives the nod to Ron Paul. Paul had the temerity to say that US meddling the Middle East created blow-back that helped cause 9-11. B4B went on to lament the lockstep "consistent conservatism" espoused by the other candidates.

All Spin Zone hits on one hypothetical question asked of the candidates - namely, what they would do under a hypothetical where three terrorists bombings had already occurred, and how far they would go to avoid a fourth. On that question, ASZ gives it to McCain for taking a principled stand, while ripping Rudy's response.

TomCat tallies how many of the questions were answered and how many were ducked. The results:

Candidate Answered/Ducked

Brownback 3/2
Gilmore 3/3
Giuliani 4/3
Huckabee 6/0
McCain 4/4
Paul 4/1
Romney 3/4
Tancredo 2/3
Thompson 2/2

TomCat's take is similar to Blog4Brains - Paul stood out and the other candidates all stood together.

Taegan Goddard declares the debate feisty, noting in particular exchanges between Paul and Giuliani and between McCain and Romney. He offers some quotes from the State and NYT.

RCP gives the right wing view of the world.

Rich Lowry blogging on NRO's The Corner gives it to Rudy. Of course, Rich just loved, loved, loved the red-meat Hillary-bashing.

Funky Town Fighter calls the candidates a bunch of candy-assed hypocrites. Okay, she didn't actually write that, but I really hope she does one of the rants that only FTF can do on the debate.

Drudge and HuffPost have nothing - at least not that I could easily find.

Edit: I found an additional post on the debate, and taking nothing from the above the blogs, Monkey Muck has THE best take. I won't spoil it, just give the link a click and enjoy!

Edit Part Deux: Chuq gives to Paul and Romney. Of the top runners, he had Giuliani and McCain even.

Jerry Falwell is Dead, Dead, Dead

2007-05-15T15:03:00.000-07:00

I don't normally go out my way to criticize dead people, but Jerry Fallwell is an exception.

Christians, like slaves and soldiers, ask no questions.

AIDS is not just God's punishment for homosexuals; it is God's punishment for the society that tolerates homosexuals.

The idea that religion and politics don't mix was invented by the Devil to keep Christians from running their own country.

One People's Project has a bio on JF:

Growing up in the South, Falwell says there were certain negative traits that he carried with him. "Well, as a Southerner, I grew up as a segregationalist[.]" ...

[Falwell's] autobiography states that in 1964 he was still a staunch segregationalist, and some sources even say he spoke at segregationalist rallies. In the fifties, Falwell used the Bible to claim the 1954 Supreme Court integration decision in Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka was a satanic plot and this went on until 1967 when he started a racially segregated "Christian" school to avoid public school desegregation...

Falwell ... was also one of the supporters of the apartheid government of South Africa. When the late, unlamented Prime Minister P.W. Botha was inaugurated in 1984, he said that the white-minority rule of that country was "part of God's great design." That got Falwell's attention. In the Summer of 1985, Falwell visited the country, and in an effort to get Americans to support that regime urged Christians to purchase Krugerrands, South African gold coins. The visit backfired on him. He even went so far as to attack Nobel Peace Prize winner Bishop Desmond Tutu. The Los Angeles Times reported that Falwell capped off his visit to South Africa by saying, "If Bishop Tutu maintains that he speaks for the black people of South Africa, he is a phony."

Finally, Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson on 9-11:

JERRY FALWELL: And I agree totally with you that the Lord has protected us so wonderfully these 225 years. And since 1812, this is the first time that we've been attacked on our soil and by far the worst results. And I fear, as Donald Rumsfeld, the Secretary of Defense, said yesterday, that this is only the beginning. And with biological warfare available to these monsters -- the Husseins, the Bin Ladens, the Arafats -- what we saw on Tuesday, as terrible as it is, could be miniscule if, in fact -- if, in fact -- God continues to lift the curtain and allow the enemies of America to give us probably what we deserve.

PAT ROBERTSON: Jerry, that's my feeling. I think we've just seen the antechamber to terror. We haven't even begun to see what they can do to the major population.

JERRY FALWELL: The ACLU's got to take a lot of blame for this.

PAT ROBERTSON: Well yes.

If Hell does exist, I expect he is being eternally buggered by the Devil himself. Pat, you're on deck!

George Bush: A Really Bad Week

2007-05-13T17:15:00.000-07:00

Alas, poor George. Life it tough, the bubble got burst, and the news of the week is worse. There are the typical stories of the week; these will be covered. But the more important part is the subtext of an ever-increasing view this is a failed presidency, the legacy is lost, and the Republican Party is doomed for a decade or more.

The Week's News

Retired Generals who served in Dubya's War are now airing commercials opposing the war in contested congressional districts - aimed at getting some wishy-washy reeps to shit or get off the pot on Iraq. The ads are hard-hitting, and mark the first time that generals who served in the war are going after BushCo and Neocons.

Meanwhile, the commander of U.S. forces in northern Iraq is not a happy camper. The problem is the Baghdad surge has pushed insurgents and mini-Saddams into neighboring provinces. Operation Whack-a-Mode continues unabated.

Army Maj. Gen. Benjamin R. "Randy" Mixon also said that the Iraqi government had failed to help the situation in the restive [Diyala] province and that it has been a hindrance at times by failing to support local army and police forces. Diyala borders Baghdad on the east, and violence in the province has grown as U.S. troop levels have been bolstered in the capital. ... The local government is "nonfunctional" and the central government is "ineffective," he said.

...

It is rare for an officer of Mixon's rank to publicly call for more troops. When Donald H. Rumsfeld was secretary of Defense, there was intense pressure on officers to not make such requests, even privately, according to officers who served in Iraq.

Mixon was withering in his criticism of the Iraqi government, saying it was hamstrung by bureaucracy and compromised by corruption and sectarian discord, making it unable to assist U.S. forces in Diyala.

Its easy to see why Mixon is pissed. While he was talking about local and provincial pols, the Iraqi Parliament is resisting BushCo's energy plan, went against BushCo on the security wall intended to separate Sunnis and Shias, is about to go on a two-month break, and had one session cut short this week when two Sunni lawmakers started throwing haymakers at each. Call it dysfunction junction.

On top of this, an active duty Lt. Colonel publicly criticized the brass in the running of the war. (That criticism didn't occur this week - his article was published three weeks ago - but these incidents only add to the fact that Dubya isn't listening to his generals. If Dubya was listening to his generals, he might actually feel some level of confusion and nuance about how to proceed with the war. No, Dubya is resting happy inside his little bubble.

Back in the capitol, a remarkable meeting occurred Tuesday.

The [Tuesday][T]he meeting between 11 House Republicans, Bush, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates, White House political adviser Karl Rove and presidential press secretary Tony Snow was perhaps the clearest sign yet that patience in the party is running out. The meeting, organized by Rep. Charlie Dent (Pa.), one of the co-chairs of the moderate "Tuesday Group," included Reps. Thomas M. Davis III (Va.), Michael N. Castle (Del.), Todd R. Platts (Pa.), Jim Ramstad (Minn.) and Jo Ann Emerson (Mo.).

"It was a very remarkable, candid conversation," Davis said. "People are always saying President Bush is in a bubble. Well, this was our chance, and we took it."

That's really quite amazing, a reep congressman talking to the Washington Post about the "Bush Bubble." And it really appears that bubble was burst - at least for a time. After all, Cheney was in Baghadad - he couldn't protect poor, poor sensitive Dubya.

A number of reeps are now talking about reassessing the Iraq situation in September. That's when General Petraeus gives an assessment. Moderate reeps and other reeps scared shitless about the 2008 elections could start jumping off BushCo's ship. That's less than a Friedman from now.

As for the democrats, they are heaping on the pressure. The odds of Dubya getting a "clean" war spending bill appear dimmer by the day. Senator Clinton is taking a run at de-authorizing congressional approval for the war. The dems likely won't win any specific battle since BushCo does wield the veto pen. However, the dems can skillfully makes the reeps pay a price with a painful series of votes on the war. As the war continues to go down the toilet, the votes will be harder and harder and harder.

As for other news in the capitol, there really isn't any. The Iraq War has completely sucked the oxygen out of any domestic initiatives. The only domestic activity I can see is the continued drip, drip, drip of Republican corruption in Congress and the White House.

Bush's poodle - Tony Blair - is just about history. This can't mean good things for Britain's continued involvement in the war, held together almost completely by the force of Blair's will alone.

Finally, BushCo got a kick in the balls today when the big Central Asian natural gas pipeline will go through Russia - and through Central Asia as BushCo had fervently hoped. This is yet another example where BushCo's ham-handed attempts to increase influence and power drive others away - running.

Maybe this week will be better for BushCo, but I wouldn't put any money on it. Its probably safe to say that BushCo hasn't won a single week politically since the week Dubya put the plan to privatize Social Security on the table.

Did John Doolittle Really Get Sold Down the River by Abu Gonzales?

2007-05-10T20:39:00.000-07:00

Doolittle thinks so, but then he's got the FBI hanging out inside his colon. Under these circumstances, I might go a little batty myself.

Doolittle has served as US congressman, representing California's Gold Country (East of Sacramento) since 1990. Doolittle is a staunchly conservative Republican in one of California's most conservative districts. No, check that; Doolittle is an outright loon.

Here are some Doolittle quotes:

A liberal front is underway to find God and all things pertaining to him unconstitutional.

He's honest, ... And he is a member's member

--Talking about Tom DeLay.

I do not subscribe to the theory of global warming. Liberals like to use pseudo-science.

You get the idea. But its not Doolittle's lunacy that got him in trouble. No, Doolittle has a bigger problem. He's a crook. Although the FBI didn't find bundles of cash in his freezer, Doolittle was elected under a taint in much the same way that William Jefferson was reelected. Both ran on similar platforms - playing the victim card.

Doolittle's house was raided by the FBI three weeks ago. So, what did Doolittle do? He blamed Abu Gonzalez for his problems, accusing Gonzales of having Doolittle get raided by the FBI to deflect attention from Gonzales' own considerable problems.

If true, then Gonzales is even more pathetic than I can even imagine. After all, Doolittle has been one of the most fiercely loyal BushCo sycophants in all of congress. Even though I think BushCo would flush one of their own down the toilet in a heartbeat just to save their own skin, I don't think Gonzo is behind this.

No, plain and simple Doolittle is a crook. Consider this article from the Washington Post:

The Justice Department's wide-ranging investigation of former lobbyist Jack Abramoff has entered a highly active phase as prosecutors are beginning to move on evidence pointing to possible corruption in Congress and executive branch agencies, lawyers involved in the case said.

Doolittle's wife, Julie, owned a consulting firm that was hired by Abramoff and his firm, Greenberg Traurig, to do fundraising for a charity he founded.

Julie Doolittle's attorney, William L. Stauffer Jr., said Sierra Dominion Financial was hired by Greenberg Traurig to provide "event planning, marketing and related services, as requested by Mr. Abramoff" for Abramoff's Capital Athletic Foundation and his Signatures restaurant.
Abramoff frequently used the athletic foundation as a pass-through organization to run lobbying efforts and to pay for expenses, records show. Julie Doolittle was hired to put on a fundraiser for the foundation at the International Spy Museum, but the event was canceled because it had been scheduled to take place just at the Iraq war was commencing, Stauffer said.

"Sierra Dominion primarily performed public relations and other event planning services for the Spy Museum event," Stauffer said in an e-mail reply to questions. "This included responding to all individuals calling the Capital Athletic Foundation concerning the Spy Museum event, identifying (and contacting) possible attendees for the event, and assisting in fund raising strategy and letters."

That article dates back to 2005. Doolittle is a crook and he's going down. I'm only angry with the FBI for not throwing him in jail well before the November 2006 elections. Its taken a lot longer than expected to put this guy away. But no matter; it will be all the sweeter when he does go.

Along the way, he's throwing an anchor to Abu Gonzales. How sweet is that?

Iraq Parliament to US: Go Home

2007-05-09T18:24:00.000-07:00

Here I've been carping on the lazy, stupid Iraq Parliament, and they go off and do something really significant (AlterNet):

On Tuesday, without note in the U.S. media, more than half of the members of Iraq's parliament rejected the continuing occupation of their country. 144 lawmakers signed onto a legislative petition calling on the United States to set a timetable for withdrawal, according to Nassar Al-Rubaie, a spokesman for the Al Sadr movement, the nationalist Shia group that sponsored the petition.

It's a hugely significant development. Lawmakers demanding an end to the occupation now have the upper hand in the Iraqi legislature for the first time; previous attempts at a similar resolution fell just short of the 138 votes needed to pass (there are 275 members of the Iraqi parliament, but many have fled the country's civil conflict, and at times it's been difficult to arrive at a quorum).

Way to go! Most Americans want us to go home, The Iraqi Parliament wants us out. Where's the problem?

A huge shout-out to The "Bush"-Whacked Administration for spotting this.

I just Googled the News Link for "Iraq Parliament". Apparently the Parliament doesn't like Al Jazeera any more than BushCo does (AJ dissed Al Sistani, a big no-no) ... Lots of bitching about the two-month holiday ... power blackout keeps Parliament from doing nothing ... My favorite headline (CBS) has Cheney Iraq and reconciliation in the same title - I'm still laughing. ...

There is just the one single AlterNet article. Amazing and pathetic.

And Another Example of Why We Are Not Winning in Iraq

2007-05-09T16:46:00.000-07:00

Remember, this is happening while the surge is surging (WaPo):

A sharp increase in mortar attacks on the Green Zone _ the one-time oasis of security in Iraq's turbulent capital _ has prompted the U.S. Embassy to issue a strict new order telling all employees to wear flak vests and helmets while in unprotected buildings or whenever they are outside.

Credit to: Editorials from Hell's Daily Leading Newspaper.

Pelosi Threatens Bush Administation on Signing Statements

2007-05-09T10:46:00.000-07:00

Well, here's some clarity from the dems on signing statements (The Hill):

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) is threatening to take President Bush to court if he issues a signing statement as a way of sidestepping a carefully crafted compromise Iraq war spending bill.

Pelosi recently told a group of liberal bloggers, “We can take the president to court” if he issues a signing statement, according to Kid Oakland, a blogger who covered Pelosi’s remarks for the liberal website dailykos.com.

Also answered is my question on why individual members of congress haven't already sued BushCo on this:

Bruce Fein, who was a Justice Department official under President Reagan, said Democrats seeking to challenge a signing statement would have to try to give themselves standing before filing a lawsuit.

“You’d need an authorizing resolution in the House and Senate … to seek a declaratory judgment from the federal district court that the president, by issuing a signing statement, is denying Congress’s obligation to [hold a veto override vote],” Fein said.

Sen. Arlen Specter (R-Pa.) introduced legislation to that end last year, but the idea of a lawsuit has yet to gain traction in Congress.

I really hope that the dem leaders can convince their members to sue BushCo on this. I find the signing statement concept outrageous (and none more outrageous than Dubya's SS on the anti-torture bill) - even if Bubba did issue a few himself. Signing statements are not permitted in the constitution - if I understand this correctly.

This Just In: Obama Still Black

2007-05-08T13:49:00.000-07:00

The Washington Post has a rather lengthy article on Obama and race and the race for the presidency.

In separate interviews, 10 white supporters who attended the Tampa fundraising rally talked about their perceptions of the dicey realm of race and its impact on Obama's electability. Though they admire his character, achievements, charisma and political philosophy, many expressed fear that racial prejudice might stymie his campaign.

Okay, that's an interesting topic. The article goes on with this finding that makes me somewhat optimistic on race relations in this country:

Once, polls in races between a white and black candidate were wildly unreliable. White voters have had a history of telling pollsters they will vote along their party lines when faced with a black candidate; then, in the privacy of the booth, they cross party lines to vote for the white candidate.

...

[T]he phenomenon seems to be fading, according to a Pew Research Center paper, "Can You Trust What Polls Say About Obama's Electoral Prospects?"

In 2006, when white Republican Bob Corker beat black Democrat Harold Ford Jr. to represent Tennessee in the Senate, Corker's lead was overstated in the polls. Whites voted for Ford in largely the numbers they had told pollsters they would.

Mystery Pollster picks up a recent survey conducted by Quinnipiac University:

[B]elieve it or not, not all Americans know that Obama is black. Here is the result released just last Friday from a national sample of adults surveyed by Quinnipiac University (Q33):

What race do you consider Barack Obama?

2% White
45% Black
0% Asian
7% Mixed/other
9% Mixed Black and White
37% Don't know

Aside from the mixed up mixed race responses (the question was open-ended), the news is in. Barack Obama is sill Black.

Quinnipiac Poll here

In other news, Generalissimo Francisco Franco is still dead.

Another Example of Not Winning In Iraq

2007-05-08T08:36:00.000-07:00

Christians are being purged from Baghdad:

An exodus of Christians is under way in the southern district of Dora after groups affiliated to al-Qa'eda issued a threat of "convert or be killed".

Most have fled to Kurdish northern Iraq, where the village of Ankawa has grown into an overcrowded "city of Christ", while others leave for Syria or Jordan.

Priests claim that half Baghdad's pre-2003 Christian population - estimated in the hundreds of thousands - has fled or been killed. They also claim that the Iraqi government is failing to protect them.

And even the surge can't save them.

Republican Debate: Who Won?

2007-05-04T08:44:00.000-07:00

I missed the dang debate because I had to work late. No problems though, as the Blogosphere is out in force with insights and analysis.

Starting with Justin L at Blog4Brains:

Most of the candidates were for militarism/aggressive foreign policy, and definitely very afraid of being too harsh on Bush... I was very surprised and a little worried about how they tip-toed around the Bush administration, even going as far as hesitating about Karl Rove, as if they didn’t want to speak out against another fellow Republican even though they need to separate themselves from the current administration.

Politcal Realm also analyzes the debate. PR leads with:

Much like the Democratic debate last week, the candidates preferred to make safe statements and avoid confrontation, leaving no clear victor. As we suggested, Ronald Reagan's name was invoked early and often--at least nineteen times directly--typically in broad fashion. Chris Matthews did a better job than Brian Williams did to follow questions and keep the candidates on topic, though his Bill Clinton question at the end was out of place.

TomCat at Politics Plus riffs:

If there was a winner, I would say that Mitt Romney appeared most Presidential in his bearing. If there was a loser, I would say that Rudy Giuliani appeared indecisive and weak. John McCain presented himself well but I think by hitching his star to Bush's war for oil and conquest, he defeated himself before he began.

From Reconstitution:

So I watched the Republican debate last night and was, of course, sadly disappointed by the bunch on stage. Apparently, I was not alone. According to the MSNBC interactive, this is how they did:

With 18,518 voting:

Brownback 49% negative, 41% neutral, 10% positive.
Gilmore 45% negative, 47% neutral, 8% positive.
Giuliani 46% negative, 33% neutral, 21% positive.
Huckabee 39% negative, 45% neutral, 16% positive.
Hunter 46% negative, 45% neutral, 9% positive.
McCain 47% negative, 35% neutral, 18% positive.
Paul 27% negative, 32% neutral, 41% positive.
Romney 37% negative, 31% neutral, 32% positive.
Tancredo 48% negative, 41% neutral, 11% positive.
Thompson 48% negative, 42% neutral, 10% positive.

Wow, that's downright fugly. I'm starting to think I'm glad I missed it.

Riddle Me This

2007-05-03T09:22:00.000-07:00

Why didn't BushCo simply order Dubya to sign the Iraq spending bill - and the issue a signing statement? Its happened before. Dubya issued a signing statement on the anti-torture bill, and on over 750 other bills.

Republican Debate Night

2007-05-03T08:07:00.000-07:00

Tonight's the night for the reeps. Is it me, or has this debate gotten far less publicity than the recent dem debate? I went to Drudge, and he's more keyed up that Time took Dubya off its list of the 100 most influential Americans.

Over at NRO's the Corner, the talk is more of Romney's hair than the debate.

Romney said, as he has before, that he pays $50 for a hair cut including the tip. Then he quipped: "You know I think John Edwards was right. There are two Americas. There is the America where people pay $400 for a haircut and then there is everybody else."

The closest Glenn Reynolds comes to tonight's debate is this:

NOT RUNNING LOOKS LIKE A GOOD STRATEGY, as Fred Thompson moves up in the polls. His support seems to be coming out of Rudy Giuliani's hide.

The only big blog I found that covers the debate is HuffPost - and all they do is link to a NYT article. (Upshot: The candidates don't know what do with Dubya. My suggestion: Sell.)

Political Realm has lots of excellent coverage of the candidates. PR has a profile of Tom Tancredo up today.

The latest NBC/WSJ poll has Guiliani out in front (33%), McCain (22%), Fred Thompson (17%), Romney (12%), Huckabee (2%), and others at 1% or less.

Pew has mostly similar results, except Newt is included at 9%, ahead of Romney but behind Fred Thompson. Polling Report has the details.

Finally, today's debate in Los Angeles doesn't even rate front web page coverage on the LA Times. There are articles on how the reeps are nervously shifting their stance on Iraq (we support benchmarks!), and on Fred Thompson presumably jumping into the fray.

Oh well. I look forward to the post-debate analysis.

Thomas Sowell: You Old Coot!

2007-05-02T17:08:00.000-07:00

Someone forgot his Geritol:

When I see the worsening degeneracy in our politicians, our media, our educators, and our intelligentsia, I can’t help wondering if the day may yet come when the only thing that can save this country is a military coup.

I post this as a reminder of just how deranged American conservatism has become. Notice its the media, educators, etc., not the president who led us in a quagmire of a war based on lies. The saving grace is the curmudgeons are dying off at a rapid rate.

Success in Iraq: Move Those Goalposts in Some More

2007-05-02T16:38:00.000-07:00

Dubya and Tony Snow know what success looks like (less violence), but can't define it. How's that for lowering the expectations? We've spend $500bn, lost 3,500 American lives, hundreds of thousands of Iraqis have died, 2 million are displaced, we destroyed the economy, a religious-based civil war is underway, the threat of a regional war has significantly increased, and we've created an environment in which terrorism is thriving and growing.

So, what we can now expect is "Sectarian violence down. Success is not, no violence." That's the new definition of success, biatch.

Thanks, BushCo, for the gift that may never stop giving.

Iraq: Oil and Gas Bill

2007-05-02T08:45:00.000-07:00

Further sinking of possible political reconciliation. Now, the Kurds are opposed to the proposed oil law (Iraqslogger).

Kurdish MPs have reversed their position on the US-backed draft legislation that would regulate Iraq’s oil and gas industries, Reuters reports.

On Monday, Kurdish spokesman Khalid Saleh said that Kurdish lawmakers would oppose the bill on the basis of a provision added since February, when the Kurdish bloc said it would support the draft legislation.

This plain sucks. The oil law is one of the key pieces of legislation the Iraqi Parliament needs to pass. Iraq remains FUBAR within an enigma.

Update: Fox News

2007-05-02T08:21:00.000-07:00

A mea culpa on my recent post on Fox News (here). I referenced a World Public Opinion report about how Fox News viewers had more misperceptions about the Iraq War than did consumers of other news sources. What I didn't realize then that I know now is that report was prepared in 2003 - not 2007 as I had originally posted.

This fact doesn't change the substance of my post, except for the assertion that the World Public Opinion analysis and Pew Poll were published in the same week.

Thanks to A Big Fat Slob for spotting the error.

What's Happening In Iraq

2007-05-01T08:06:00.000-07:00

On the anniversary of 'Mission Accomplished," let's look at the major factors that will determine how Iraq is faring - economy, politics and security.

The Economy

The U.S. Inspector General for Iraq issued a report that evaluated a sampling of U.S. reconstruction efforts. From Yahoo News:

If these projects are typical of the quality and effectiveness of operations and maintenance performance on transitioned projects, the value of the U.S. investment in Iraq reconstruction will be at risk,'' Inspector General Stuart Bowen said in the report.

The audit also said that Iraqi officials continued to report to the inspector general that ``significant amounts'' of Iraqi funds ``have been subject to improper diversion.'' The country's Commission on Public Integrity estimated Iraqis have lost about $5 billion to corruption each year, a figure that Bowen said is ``difficult to confirm.''

From Global Policy Forum:

Iraq’s broad economy has virtually collapsed and many factories and warehouses have been sacked and gutted. In the absence of security, neither Iraqis nor foreigners are interested in investing, while the no-bid Pentagon reconstruction contracts have achieved remarkably little. Faced with resistance threats, many foreign contracting firms have left and international development NGOs have withdrawn from Iraq as well. Little foreign aid has arrived, as skeptical donor governments keep their distance.

From the Brookings Institute :

Iraq's economy remains mediocre at best. ... [F]ederal coffers are in good shape. But even if there is money to spend, it is not being spent, and certainly not being spent well. A combination of violence, corruption, and federal interference in the efficient flow of some funds straight to provincial governments is impeding progress. ... Schools are not functioning well and health infrastructure is in even worse shape. Unemployment remains mired in the 30+ percent range. None of this is surprising in light of the security picture, but it is disheartening nonetheless.

Political Stability

Again, from Brookings:

Iraqi political compromise remains very limited. ... While the hydrocarbon law that would ensure fair sharing of oil revenues among all Iraqis has made some progress in its journey through parliament, little has happened over the last month, and the bill is still far from becoming law. Other areas where reconciliation and compromise are needed, such as reforming the de-Baathification process to allow lower-level Baathists to rejoin public life and compete again for jobs, are not showing much progress.

From a recent wire report:

U.S. House Armed Service Committee Chairman Ike Skelton Monday urged the Iraqi parliament to cancel its planned summer recess.

Skelton, D-Mo., said he is concerned the recess "will show the world that their determination is not as strong as those who are fighting and dying to support their efforts." Skelton noted a number of key legislative items have yet to be addressed in Iraq.

And, finally from BBC News, via Raw Story:

Democracy is failing in Iraq, a new BBC News video report surmises.

"Four years after President Bush declared an end to major combat operations in Iraq, the country's parliamentary democracy is barely functioning," says the BBC's George Alagiah. "Members of the 275-member Iraqi parliament face constant threats; no substantive legislation has been passed."

I didn't even bother posting on the renegade Sadr MPs or Sunni MPs who are threatening to quit the government.

Security/Military

War News Today provides the grim recountings of recent (like in the past 48 hours) Iraqi security incidents.

Baghdad:

A Multi-National Division – Baghdad Soldiers Soldier was killed when a combat patrol was attacked with small arms fire in an eastern section of Baghdad April 28.

The roadside bomb killed three Multi-National Division-Baghdad soldiers and wounded another while they were on a combat patrol Sunday in eastern Baghdad, the military said. An Iraqi interpreter also was killed in the attack.

In violence Monday, a suicide car bomber apparently targeting an Interior Ministry convoy struck an Iraqi checkpoint near a busy square in the predominantly Sunni area of Harthiyah in western Baghdad, killing four people and wounding 10, police said. The bomber detonated his payload, causing part of the road to buckle, as he emerged from an underpass and was heading toward the checkpoint being manned by Interior Ministry commandos. Those killed included two commandos and two civilians.

Three roadside bombs went off in and south of the capital on Monday morning, killing a civilian and wounding four others, a well-informed police source said. A roadside bomb detonated at about 8:00 a.m. (0400 GMT) in the commercial street of Bayaa neighborhood in southern Baghdad, killing a civilian and injuring two more, the source told Xinhua on condition of anonymity.

In separate incident, a roadside bomb went off in the Abu al- Tayyara Street in Baghdad's southern district of Doura, wounding two civilians, the source added.

Gunmen killed three street cleaners on Sunday in the Adhamiya district of northern Baghdad, police said.

Eight gunmen were killed in a U.S.-Iraqi operation in Baghdad on Sunday, the U.S. military said, in what some witnesses described as a clash with the Mehdi Army militia loyal to Shi'ite cleric Moqtada al-Sadr. The U.S. military said in a statement one Iraqi soldier was killed in the incident in the Shi'ite Kadhimiya district.

At least two people were killed and 15 wounded when a bus bomb exploded in a tunnel targeting a police check point, police said. The explosion badly damaged the tunnel, which is on a main artery in western Baghdad.

In Baghdad, a suicide bomber blew up a vehicle outside a police headquarters in a western district, killing five people and wounding 12, a security official said.

Elsewhere in the capital, a former brigadier general in Saddam Hussein's army was shot dead in the volatile Dura neighborhood

The bodies of another three people killed in a gunfight in the capital were brought to Al-Yarmuk hospital in west Baghdad, the hospital said

A series of explosions rocked central Baghdad Monday night and witnesses reported seeing smoke rising from the heavily fortified Green Zone. The U.S. military said it had no immediate information on the blasts. About a dozen blasts began about 10 p.m. and lasted about five minutes. Iraqi police said several mortar shells landed in the Green Zone[.]

A roadside bomb killed a person and wounded six others in eastern Baghdad, police said.

A car bomb killed one person and wounded six others when it exploded on a main street in southern Baghdad's Bayaa district, police said.

Mortar rounds killed one civilian and wounded six when they landed on a residential area of northern Baghdad's mainly Shi'ite district, police said.

Around 11 am, a roadside bomb exploded when an American convoy passed by in Yusifiya neighborhood ( south of Baghdad ) without knowing the casualties.

Around 3.30 p.m. A suicide car exploded in Hay Al-Ja'mia neighborhood near Mula Huaish mosque injuring 4 civilians.

Around 4:50 p.m. A parked car bomb exploded in Al Baia neighborhood (street 13) killing 2 civilians and injured 8.

Around 5 p.m. A mortar shell landed in Al Husseiniya neighborhood killing 2 residents.

Around 5 p.m. A mortar shell landed in Albu Etha area killing one and injuring 1.

Around 6 p.m. Gunmen killed [an] interior ministry officer LC Alaa Mahmoud Mohamed in Al Ghadeer neighborhood.

Around 7 p.m. A mortar shell landed in Abu Disheer neighborhood. 2 residents were killed and 5 were injured.

Around 9 p.m. A mortar shell landed in Al Baia neighborhood damaging one house at least and started a fire in the house.

Police found 27 corpses throughout Baghdad in the following neighborhoods: 2 in New Baghdad, 2 in Sileikh, 1 in Shaab, 2 in Binouk, 2 in Qahira, 2 in Sadr, 1 in Shalchia, 5 in Abu Ghreib, 2 in Doura, 2 in Amel, 2 in Jihad, 2 in Baia, 2 in Shuala (one of the two corpses belongs to an Egyptian citizen his name is Hamoudi Hashim)

Mortar bombs killed six people and wounded eight in the northern Shi'ite Baghdad neighbourhood of Hussainiya, police said

Diyala Prv:

A suicide bomber wearing an explosive belt blew himself up inside a funeral tent in a Shiite enclave in a volatile province north of Baghdad, killing at least 20 people and wounding 30, officials said. The attack occurred at 6:30 p.m. as a Shiite family was holding a funeral in Khalis, a flashpoint Shiite city in Diyala province, where U.S.-Iraqi forces have seen fierce fighting with Sunni and Shiite militants.

A suicide bomber wearing a vest packed with explosives killed 32 people when he blew himself up among mourners at a Shi'ite funeral in the town of Khalis, north of Baghdad. The attack took place inside a crowded mourning tent. More than 52 people had been wounded, police said.

Around 1.45 pm, two female students were killed in a car which was supposed to take them home coming from Diyala university to Al-Sadda neighborhood near Bald Rouz ( 45 km east of Baquba) when gunmen opened their fire against them.

Around 1.45 pm, two female students were killed in a car which was supposed to take them home coming from Diyala university to Al-Sadda neighborhood near Bald Rouz ( 45 km east of Baquba) when gunmen opened their fire against them.

Today morning a road side bomb exploded in central Baqouba injuring 7 civilians including 3 children.

Police found 2 corpses in Al Khalis city carries multiple shots.

Chairman of Diala provincial council on Monday survived unharmed an attempt on his life when a bomb exploded near his motorcade in central Baaquba, capital city of Diala province, 57 km northeast of Baghdad, a security source said.

Kut:

Authorities found six corpses, two of them decapitated, in an area north of the southern city of Kut.

Yousifiyah:

He, meanwhile, reported a third roadside bombing targeting a U. S. patrol in the Yousifiyah town, some 25 km south of the capital, but failed to give the U.S. casualties as they immediately cordoned off the area. The U.S. military did not confirm the information from the town yet.

Gunmen killed two people, including an Iraqi contractor, when they carried out a drive-by shooting in the town of Yusufiya, just south of Baghdad, police said.

Suwayra:

The bodies of six people were retrieved from two rivers in Suwayra, 40 km (25 miles) south of Baghdad, police said.

Basra:

In the southern city of Basra, some five people were killed in an explosion Sunday. Iraqi police initially reported that it was a car bomb, but the British military said it appeared that the blast accidentally occurred while explosives and weapons were being moved.

Two British bases in Basra came under shelling attacks on Sunday night and Monday morning but no casualties were reported, a military spokeswoman said. "The British bases in the former presidential palaces and Basra International Airport came under attacks but these caused no casualties," Capt. Katie Brown, the spokeswoman for the Multi-National Force in southern Iraq, said in a statement received by the independent news agency Voices of Iraq

1 gunman was killed and other 4 gunmen were injured and one passing by civilian as they were attacking a military aircraft (according to eye witnesses) and the aircraft responded. The attack occurred in Al Hussein area western Basra.

Senior official of Sadr’s office captured in Basra by US army. Basra provincial council condemned the arrest.

Baiji:

An Iraqi police brigadier was kidnapped while returning home from work in the district of Baiji, said a source from the Sunni Salah al-Din province police.

Early this morning, a roadside bomb exploded when an American convoy passed near the check point of Biji refinery damaging one Humvee vehicle without knowing casualties.

Mosul:

In northern Iraq, a parked car bomb struck a police patrol in the Raas al-Jada, a mainly Sunni Arab area in the northern city of Mosul, killing one policeman and wounding two others, police Brig. Gen. Mohammed Idan al-Jubouri said. The attack occurred at 8 a.m.
About four hours after some 50 gunmen attacked a police station in the same area, prompting a firefight and clashes as police chased the gunmen through the narrow streets. Four of the gunmen were killed and two others detained, while one policeman was wounded, police said.

Police also cordoned off the area and blocked five bridges after four mortar rounds landed on the police command headquarters elsewhere in Mosul, causing no damages, said Brig. Saeed Ahmed al-Jubouri, the media director for the provincial police.

Two members of Iraqi Kurdistan Region President Massoud Barazani's Kurdistan Democratic Party (KDP) were killed by gunmen in two separate incidents in the city of Mosul, KDP sources said.

Al Anbar Prv:

One Marine assigned to Multi National Force-West was killed April 29 while conducting combat operations in Al Anbar Province.

A tanker laden with chlorine gas exploded near a restaurant west of the Iraqi city of Ramadi, killing up to six people and wounding 10, police and hospital sources said

A U.S. base on Monday came under a mortar attack in the western Iraqi city of Falluja, a police source said.

Four Years Ago Today: Mission Accomplished

2007-05-01T07:56:00.000-07:00

Indeed. Dubya has been told by his pupeeteers to veto the Iraq/Afghanistan (plus pork) spending bill because it contains a voluntary timeline for withdrawl from Iraq. The veto will be issued four years to the day after Dubya declared major combat operations in Iraq had ended. Nice work, BushCo.

Blue Monday

2007-04-30T07:29:00.000-07:00

A government commission's war probe accused of "severe failure," saying the nation was led hastily into conflict without a comprehensive plan. The Bush Administration? Nope - Ehud Olmert of Israel and their foolish war on Lebanon was the target of the scathing report. Though it should be noted that BushCo and the neocons cheered Olmert on.

If anyone hasn't heard about it yet, the destroyed Oakland freeway ramp is pretty damned scary. The closure will also be really inconvenient for a lot of folks until its fixed (probably a couple of months). On a personal note, I rarely use that facility, but there's a good chance the mess will reverberate to other adjacent ramps and highways. Its a miracle no one was hurt, not even the driver.

Tony Snow is back to work today as chief lie spinner for BushCo. While I certainly wish him improved health and a long life, this man should hang his head in shame.

Tragically, over 100 US soldiers have died in vain in Iraq this month.

I've noted the lack of political reconciliation in Iraq dooms the surge to failure. The lack of economic progress has the same effect in mooting the surge. This is why Iraq is the Stupid Pointless War.

Fox News: Dumbing Down the Bias

2007-04-29T10:13:00.000-07:00

We all know the allegations - Fox News is biased towards the right, and dumbs down the news. Are these allegations correct? Certainly the democratic candidates for president thought so when they snubbed Fox News for their first debate. And we all know that Dick Cheney appears almost exclusively on Fox (except when he's rolling Tim Russert, but I digress).

Let's take a look a what researchers and others have found. First, World Public Opinion completed a year-long analysis of news sources. Their key finding:

[T]he frequency of [Iraq War] misperceptions varies significantly according to individuals’ primary source of news. Those who primarily watch Fox News are significantly more likely to have misperceptions [about the Iraq War], while those who primarily listen to NPR or watch PBS are significantly less likely.

This comes on the heels of a recent Pew Center poll showing that Fox News viewers are among the least informed on current events.

In addition, researchers Ethan Kaplan and Stefano DellaVigna analyzed the question of Fox News bias by looking at the impact of Fox News on voting patterns. From the National Bureau of Economic Research:

[Kaplan and Della Vigna] found that the introduction of Fox News had a small but statistically significant effect on the vote share in Presidential elections between 1996 and 2000. Republicans gained an estimate of between 0.4 and 0.7 percentage points in the towns that broadcast Fox News. They also find that Fox News had a significant effect on Senate vote share and on voter turnout. Their estimates imply that Fox News convinced 3 to 8 percent of its viewers to vote Republican according to a first audience measure, and 11 to 28 percent according to a second, more restrictive audience measure.

Here's some other info on the Fox New Bias:

Media Matters reviews a series of internal Fox memos.
A documentary on Fox News - Outfoxed.
Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting covers Brit Hume (from the way back machine - pre 9/11).
Journalists have found Fox News to be, far and away, the most conservative news source.
The public outing of terrorist who, unfortunately, wasn't really a terrorist.
Osama, oops I meant Obama, attended a Madrassa, as reported by Fox. Nice.

Iraq Political (Non) Progress

2007-04-28T16:21:00.001-07:00

As horrific and tragic the daily atrocities in Iraq are, I find the lack of any progress towards political stability the most distressing. As many are saying, until real progress on political reconciliation and economic opportunity are present - along with enhanced security, Iraq (as we know it) is not salvageable. I would go as far to say that winning is not only NOT possible, but it cannot even be envisioned. I ask you in all seriousness, what conditions would allow us bring our troops home? Put simply, what constitutes a win in Iraq? I honestly don't know.

Ten weeks into the Baghdad crackdown, seen as a last effort to avert Iraq from sliding into civil war, there are few signs parliament will pass the laws before it recesses in July.

But Iraqi politicians complain that U.S. domestic politics are dictating Iraq's political progress and said many of the laws that Washington wants to see sail through parliament face deep mistrust among Shi'ites, Sunni Arabs and ethnic Kurds.

"If a law is not acceptable to our constituents there may be a backlash. We have to do what we want, not what Washington wants," said Haider Ibadi, a lawmaker from Maliki's Dawa party.

Ibadi cited as an example a plan to allow thousands of former members of Saddam's party to return to public life.

The plan is a longtime demand of once-dominant Sunni Arabs, now the backbone of the insurgency. But some of Maliki's Shi'ite allies, whose community was oppressed under Saddam, are fiercely opposed to having Sunnis back in government and military posts.

"We can't pass a law that gives pensions to ex-Baathists while those who were oppressed (under Saddam) have not received compensation. That is subject to a huge problem," Ibadi said.

A law to share Iraq's oil wealth hit a major hurdle after oil-rich Kurdistan said it objected to its annexes as unconstitutional and threatened to pass its own measure.

So there you have it. The more things stay the same in Iraq, the more they stay the same.

Golbal War on Terror: Can Someone Tell Me What Winning Looks Like?

2007-04-28T16:05:00.000-07:00

Color me confused. We invade Iraq to clamp down on terrorists (never mind there were no Saddam connections to terrorists interested in destroying the USA, nor any connection between Saddam and the 9/11 hijackers), yet terrorism is way up.

A State Department report on terrorism due out next week will show a nearly 30 percent increase in terrorist attacks worldwide in 2006 to more than 14,000, almost all of the boost due to growing violence in Iraq and Afghanistan, U.S. officials said Friday.

Remember back when BushCo told us sweet lies that a free Iraq was going to be a shining city on a hill whereby democracies would sprout and flower throughout the Middle East? A veritable dominoes of freedom would topple the despots and sheikdoms. Now we are told by the same that leaving Iraq will cause a chain-reaction of wars and civil strife all over the Middle East.

Never mind that Lebanon and the Palestinian Authority are about as close to chaos as one could reasonably imagine...

Friday Sexscapades

2007-04-27T19:51:00.000-07:00

Its Freaky Friday, folks. Randall Tobias, a top State Department official, resigned today after 'fessing up to being a client of the infamous D.C. Madam, Deborah Palfrey. No word yet on Tobias' freaky turn-ons. We may jut have to wait for Palfrey's tell-all. My hunch is a lot of DC big wigs are freaked out big time. After all, its okay to engage in a ruinous war, just as long as the little guy doesn't do too much thinking for the big guy. Don't forget, leg-pressing Pat Robertson will be looking over your shoulder.

Speaking of the little guy doing too much of the thinking, Richard Gere apologized for going Joe Namath on the Bollywood star Shilpa Shetty. I can't figure out what's more irritating, India's Prude Police issuing an arrest warrant to both Gere and Shetty, or Gere's Ugly American act. At least Gere apologized. So there you are.

No news is good news for Paul Wolfowitz. As of this writing, he's still clinging to his job as head of the World Bank. Media Lizzy will probably disagree with me, but as we used to say in New Jersey, comb-licking, holey-stockings Wolfowitz is seriously scheevy.

An American Idol contestant is going to become a porn star. Who wudda thunk? Gauging the popularity of the show, I'll bet she sells a lot of videos. Her name? Who knows? I don't care; I can't even be bothered to look up her picture. Why is this in the news?

And finally, in the goods news department:

A settlement in a Portland, Oregon court means victims of childhood sex abuse in the Catholic Church will be compensated with millions of dollars, and secret files relating to pedophile priests in the Portland Archdiocese that span half a century will be publicly disclosed.

Proving that sometimes justice does prevail.

George Tenet: Insta-Swift Boat Victim

2007-04-27T08:10:00.000-07:00

Well, that didn't take long for BushCo to Swift Boat ex-Cia Director George Tenet.

[S]enior White House counselor [Dan Bartlett] on Friday dismissed former CIA Director's George Tenet portrait of a Bush administration that rushed to war in Iraq without serious debate. "The president did wrestle with those very serious questions[.]"

...Bartlett ... suggested [Tenet] might have been unaware of the breadth of the prewar debate that led Bush to dismiss other options, such as diplomatic means, for reining in Saddam Hussein.

On one hand, I love seeing Tenet get the Swift Boat treatment; Its richly deserved. OTOH, its instructive yet again to see another former apologist/sycophant grow a conscience.

Update: Tenet already has a retort, as published in today's NYT:

Mr. Tenet described with sarcasm watching an episode of “Meet the Press” last September in which Mr. Cheney twice referred to Mr. Tenet’s “slam dunk” remark as the basis for the decision to go to war.

“I remember watching and thinking, ‘As if you needed me to say ‘slam dunk’ to convince you to go to war with Iraq,’ ” Mr. Tenet writes.

Preview of Tenet Interview on 60 Minutes

2007-04-26T14:19:00.000-07:00

I found this at First Draft:

CBS has a preview of Tenet's interview on 60 Minutes this coming Sunday....

Tenet says what bothers him most is that senior administration officials like Vice President Dick Cheney and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice continue using "slam dunk" as a talking point.

"And the hardest part of all this has been just listening to this for almost three years, listening to the vice president go on 'Meet the Press' on the fifth year [anniversary] of 9/11 and say, 'Well, George Tenet said slam dunk' as if he needed me to say 'slam dunk' to go to war with Iraq," he tells Pelley. "And you listen to that and they never let it go. I mean, I became campaign talk. I was a talking point. 'Look at the idiot [who] told us and we decided to go to war.' Well, let's not be so disingenuous … Let's everybody just get up and tell the truth. Tell the American people what really happened."

CBS link - here

The Thursday Skinny

2007-04-26T08:18:00.000-07:00

Who would be so mean and nasty as to suggest that the numbers of deaths in Iraq are being purposely underestimated? Of course, the big bad United Nations just wants to make Dubya look bad.

Speaking of making Dubya look bad, the Senate is voting today on a non-binding resolution to bring the troops home - as part the latest emergency mis-spending bill to fund the surge. We do know Dubya is going to veto the bill. Thankfully, the spinach and sugar subsidies were removed.

Paul Wolfowitz wants more time to avoid being summarily shit-canned from the World Bank. He recently hired noted crisis lawyer Robert Bennett. Bennett previously represented Bill Clinton in his battle against Penthouse Model Paula Jones.

John McCain formerly announced his candidacy today up in New Hampshire. 200 people showed up for the event. Okay, it was raining, but are the odds of him winning the reep nomination? Maybe two percent? 200 people. Thats just sad.

Congressman Rick Renzi, crook, reep, Arizona, is going down. Did I mention he's a crook? I hope its a slow, slow fall for Renzi; like a slow-mo train wreck. Dems always face an uphill battle in Arizona, but I think the dems can win this state in 2008. At the very least, the reeps will have to spend big bucks to defend the state.

The military, accepting some blame for making Pat Tillman and Jessica Leach into Captain America and Wonder Woman, took a shot at the media, too. That's like blaming the pit bull after you sicced him on the mailman. Nice way to deflect attention. I want to know when Rummy knew. Oh he knew. He knew.

Finally, Riverbend finally has a new post up. As always, its a must-read.

Lets All Laugh At President Bush

2007-04-25T09:27:00.000-07:00

Bush told [a group seniors] there is great pressure in Washington to change principles for the sake of political popularity, but he said he would not.

"It's a struggle for some. It's not for me," he said.

[Bush] showed the group a portrait of Abraham Lincoln. He said Lincoln was unpopular during the Civil War but maintained his belief that all men are created equal.

"Look what would have happened to history" if Lincoln had abandoned that principle, Bush said.

Sleep well, Dubbie. Dream of chicken pluckers and remember the rug.

Iraq is a Broken Stool

2007-04-25T08:38:00.000-07:00

Barry McCaffrey was in Kansas City for a speech yesterday. Here's some of what he had to say:

What sort of evolution do you see to the war in Iraq?

We’re in trouble.

The American people walked away from the war. I don’t think they’re coming back. Iraq’s neighbors are bearing no good will toward a favorable outcome in Iraq.

The Iraqi government in power is dysfunctional. There is essentially no province in Iraq where the central government holds sway. It’s not true in the Kurdish areas. … It’s not true in Basra, where there’s a struggle for power among the Shiites, it’s essentially not true in any part of the country.

As has been said, to achieve success in Iraq, a three-legged strategy of increased security, economic progress and political stability must be pursued. I've seen no evidence of any real economic progress or political stability.

Here are some previous comments by McCaffrey:

July 2005:

Iraq rebel attacks will peak in six months and US troops can begin withdrawing in a year, retired US general Barry McCaffrey told Congress Monday.

"January through September 2006 will be the peak period of the insurgency and the bottom rung of the new Iraq," McCaffrey told the Senate foreign relations committee.

December 2006:

Our objective should be a large-scale U.S. military withdrawal within the next 36 months, leaving in place an Iraqi government in a stable and mostly peaceful country that does not threaten its six neighboring states and does not intend to possess weapons of mass destruction.

A Sign of the Coming Apocalypse?

2007-04-25T08:32:00.000-07:00

I can't even write about it. Read it here.

Tuesday Tidbits

2007-04-24T19:01:00.000-07:00

Pew has a new poll out; headlines the Va Tech massacre hasn't boosted support for gun control. An alternate headline would have read, support for gun control still solid. But hey, that's me. Of note, is there is NO consensus on the cause of these types of shootings.

You saw where the Newster blamed the Va Tech massacre on liberalism. Now Giuliani says we will have another 9/11 if the Dems take the White House. Way to elevate the discussion, guys. Fuckers.

Note to Karl Rove: Karl, you aren't paranoid when people really are out to get you. So, you should be really, really concerned when Scott Bloch wants to hang out inside your colon. Who is Scott Bloch? Merely a Dubya-appointed lawyer with the U.S. Office of Special Counsel. Mr. Bloch is investigating the latest Rove shenanigan. Will it stick to Rove this time? Surely his odds are getting leaner each passing controversy.

Well maybe not. Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) is NOT happy about the Bloch investigation. Not one little bit.

Bloch has come under widespread criticism for his gross mismanagement and politicization of the office. Bloch is currently under investigation by the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) for his mistreatment of career appointees, who have alleged the exact kind of retaliation that OSC is designed to investigate. OSC employees have alleged that Bloch has tossed out legitimate whistleblower cases to reduce the office backlog.

How very, very BushCo. BushCo really must believe we are THAT stupid.

A list of BushCo scoundrels

2007-04-24T09:54:00.000-07:00

From AP:

A rundown of Bush appointees who left under a cloud or face conflict-of-interest allegations

•Scooter Libby, former chief of staff to Vice President Dick Cheney, was convicted of perjury and obstruction of justice in a grand jury investigation into the outing of CIA operative Valerie Plame. His trial also implicated top political adviser Karl Rove and Cheney in a campaign to discredit her husband, Iraq war critic and retired ambassador Joe Wilson (news, bio, voting record). Libby, who plans an appeal, is awaiting a June 5 sentencing.

• Attorney General Alberto Gonzales is fighting to hold onto his job in the face of congressional investigations into his role in the firing of eight U.S. attorneys. Two top aides have resigned in the investigation into whether the firings were politically motivated. Emails and other evidence released by the Justice Deparment suggest that Rove played a part in the process. Other e-mails, sent on Republican party accounts, either have disappeared or were erased.

• Paul Wolfowitz, president of the World Bank and a former deputy defense secretary, acknowledged he helped arrange a large pay raise for his female companion when she was transferred to the State Department but remained on the bank payroll. The incident intensified calls at the bank for his resignation.

• J. Steven Griles, an oil and gas lobbyist who became deputy Interior Secretary J., last month became the highest-ranking Bush administration official convicted in the Jack Abramoff influence-peddling scandal, pleading guilty to obstructing justice by lying to a Senate committee about his relationship with the convicted lobbyist. Abramoff repeatedly sought Griles' intervention at Interior on behalf of Indian tribal clients.

• Former White House aide, David H. Safavian, was convicted last year of lying to government investigators about his ties to Abramoff and faces a 180-month prison sentence.

• Roger Stillwell, a former Interior Department official, pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor charge for not reporting tickets he received from Abramoff.

• Sue Ellen Wooldridge, the top Justice Department prosecutor in the environmental division until January, bought a $980,000 beach house in South Carolina with ConocoPhillips lobbyist Donald R. Duncan and oil and gas lobbyist Griles. Soon thereafter, she signed an agreement giving the oil company more time to clean up air pollution at some of its refineries. Congressional Democrats have denounced the arrangement.

• Matteo Fontana, a Department of Education official who oversaw the student loan industry, was put on leave last week after disclosure that he owned at least $100,000 worth of stock in a student loan company.

• Claude Allen, who had been Bush's domestic policy adviser, pleaded guilty to theft in making phony returns at discount department stores while working at the White house. He was sentenced to two years of supervised probation and fined $500.

• Philip Cooney, a former American Petroleum Institute lobbyist who became chief of staff for the White House Council on Environmental Quality, acknowledged in congressional testimony earlier this year that he changed three government reports to eliminate or downplay links between greenhouse gases and global warming. He left in 2005 to work for Exxon Mobil Corp.

• Darleen Druyun, a former Air Force procurement officer, served nine months in prison in 2005 for violating federal conflict-of-interest rules in a deal to lease Boeing refueling tankers for $23 billion, despite Pentagon studies showing the tankers were unnecessary. After making the deal, she quit the government and joined Boeing.

• Eric Keroack, Bush's choice to oversee the federal family planning program, resigned from the post suddenly last month after the Massachusetts Medicaid office launched an investigation into his private practice. He had been medical director of an organization that opposes premarital sex and contraception.

• Lurita Doan, head of the General Services Administration, attended a luncheon at the agency earlier this year with other top GSA political appointees at which Scott Jennings, a top Rove aide, gave a PowerPoint demonstration on how to help Republican candidates in 2008. A congressional committee is investigating whether the remarks violated a federal law that restricts executive-branch employees from using their positions for political purposes.

• Robert W. Cobb, NASA's inspector general is under investigation on charges of ignoring safety violations in the space program. An internal administration review said he routinely tipped off department officials to internal investigations and quashed a report related to the Columbia shuttle explosion to avoid embarrassing the agency. He remains on the job. Only Bush can fire him.

• Julie MacDonald, who oversees the Fish and Wildlife Service but has no academic background in biology, overrode recommendations of agency scientists about how to protect endangered species and improperly leaked internal information to private groups, the Interior Department inspector general said.

Monday catch-up

2007-04-23T16:02:00.000-07:00

Just getting back from a short vacation in Tucson to see the folks. Tucson is an interesting place. On one hand it is the liberal epicenter of an otherwise libertarian-to-conservative state. On the other hand, Tucson is a sprawling mess, destined to become another Phoenix. For the uninitiated, Phoenix makes Los Angeles seem positively urban and transit-oriented.

Perhaps I'm not being clear enough, dear reader. Phoenix is mostly an awful shithole. I'm really saddened to see Tucson traipse down the same route. Well, that's life in a state where developers rule the roost.

I can't see how Arizona's growth patterns are sustainable. The largely empty expanse between Phoenix and Tucson is slated to grow by a million or more persons over the next 20 years, making the swath from Phoenix to Tucson - and down to Nogales (Green Valley is also growing rapidly) one ginormous suburban wall of sprawl.

The development patterns are really a shame because Arizona's geography is second to none, and it has a unique culture centered on its desert environs. However, that unique culture is easily missed amidst the national retail chain store heaven that is Arizona today. What's amazing to me is the 48th state will not be celebrating its centennial for another five years.

A link here to a news analysis largely debunking the flypaper strategy. The flypaper strategy supports the idea that all the foreign nuthead jihaddis would converge on Iraq for the big showdown against the big bad U.S. of A. The problems is - for the USA - is they forgot to bring their tanks. The second is there are only 250 or so foreign fighters in Iraq. In either case, the flypaper strategy is as stupid as it is cynical. After all, the US presence in Iraq has displaced over two million Iraqis.

Watch out Sheryl Crow. After taking on Karl Rove at the Washington Press Sycophants Dinner, the reeps slime machine will go after her like O'Reilly on a falafel. Already Drudge links to an article on Crow's view that we should be limited to one toilet paper square per person per visit. Nice way to misrepresent Drudgie; Crow was simply trying to discuss wasteful consumption.

Our space cadet president has "increased confidence" in Gonzo after Friday's hearing. Almost too strange for words.

And finally, CBS radio suspended a pair of shock jocks for making fun of Chinese on-air. Maybe CBS would have done so anyway, but I have to think that the Imus debacle has now limited what constitutes acceptable speech these days. In general I consider myself fairly libertarian on free speech issues; I would never say idiots JV and Elvis don't have a right to say pretty much what they want. However, I also don't like having to listen to asshats like this on the public airwaves. Hat's off to CBS for suspending these two idiots. Simply getting dolts like this off the airwaves elevates the public discourse.

I am hopeful the Imus affair has finally cast a light on what goes on on AM radio these days. Is it possible to be compelling without resorting to ethnic and racial slurs and blatant misogyny? I sure hope so. And I can't wait for the day when the real demons of the airwaves - hatemongers like Michael Savage and Rush Limbaugh - get their comeuppance.

If you are a Republican, what has you most worried?

2007-04-19T22:12:00.000-07:00

Is it:

A. Dubya's wacko speech about polls that go poof, chicken plucking and rug remembering?

B. Daily congressional FBI raids

C. Gonzo's grilling

D. Iraq: FUBAR within Enigma

E. BushCo pissing off seniors by threatening a veto over prescription drug plan

F. Wolfowitz on the hot seat

G. No heir-in-waiting for POTUS nomination

H. Emailgate

Karl Rove and the Big Lie

2007-04-19T12:56:00.000-07:00

We usually associate Dick Cheney with the Big Lie; that is, the Saddam-OBL-9/11 connection. Karl Rove also likes telling the big lie. He gave a speech in Akron yesterday. The was a Q/A afterwards:

Rove was asked whose idea it was to start a pre-emptive war in Iraq.

"I think it was Osama bin Laden's", Rove replied.

Every single rationale for war - except that Saddam was a bad, bad man - was proved false time and again. Yet, Rove still spouts the big lie, and the kool-aid drinkers swig it down.

John McCain is insane in the membrain

2007-04-19T07:46:00.000-07:00

Johnny Mac was in South Carolina yesterday. From Drudge:

At the campaign rally, McCain was asked if an attack on Iran is in the works, the GEORGETOWN TIMES reports.

McCain began his answer by changing the words to a popular BEACH BOYS song.

“Bomb bomb bomb, bomb bomb Iran,” he sang to the tune of Barbara Ann.

I guess this is the kind of rhetoric (lyric?) that one needs to get reep primary votes in the South. OTOH, this is completely demented. I really think that McCain is losing it.

Iraq is getting worse - not better

2007-04-18T09:09:00.000-07:00

Hard as it is to imagine. Over 100 dead today. Numerous bombings and incidents and atrocities. Saddam was overthrown and executed. A 1,000 mini-Saddams sprouted in his place.

For details go here.

Also, BBC has an excellent (but disturbing) interactive map of Baghdad violence.

Richard Perle on Crossroads/PBS: WTF?

2007-04-18T08:53:00.000-07:00

What the hell was PBS thinking by giving Richard Perle an infomercial last night?

More on the gun control conversation

2007-04-17T13:33:00.000-07:00

Yesterday, I posted that the horrible tragedy at VaTech represented an opportunity to discuss control. It appears the right wants nothing to do with such a conversation; they think gun control sucks and want to keep the dirty gummint off our gun racks.

Here are a pair of comments I got when I posted on Digg yesterday.

Perhaps if the gun control movement wasn't a pack of blatantly dishonest demagogues leading masses of ignorant, emotion driven dupes threatening (and often acting on the threat) of destroying liberty and persecuting the tens of millions of law-abiding, gun-owning, Americans, we could have a civil conversation. But I doubt that.

And this pithy reply

Sure, but it'll be short. The first time you disagree with me, I'll pull out my 9mm and blow you away.

Instapundit blames gun control laws. If only professors and students were packing, so many people would be alive.

I somehow think these are mainstream right wing views. Because it gets even loonier:

Early details about the horrific school shooting at Virginia Tech strongly indicate that these events represent a Columbine-style black-op that will be exploited in the coming days to push for mass gun control and further turning our schools into prisons.

So, like I said its time for a conversation. My POV is hunt your little ass off with rifles. OTOH, I don't like or see the need for handguns in our society. However, with - what is the number? - 100,000,000 guns in circulation, it will be tough to really do much of anything. At least until there is political will to do so.

Did I mention political will? That's something the dems have in short order right now when it comes to gun control. This cowardly stance seems odd. Polls show strong majorities - or pluralities favor tougher restrictions on guns. Look at the numbers - sentiment on gun control is consistent over time.

The problem is gun owners care more about keeping their guns than gun control advocates do about limiting the supply of guns and ammo. Gun owners are widely credited with many big electoral wins over the years, such as when George Deukmejian upset Tom Bradley for the California governorship in 1982.

Again, I'm trying to start a responsible conversation here. The right wingers seem to care only for polemics. Its really too bad.

George Tenet's book is coming

2007-04-17T09:29:00.000-07:00

And the word is BushCo won't be pleased. From Al Kamen at WaPo:

The drums have begun sounding for the long-awaited book by former CIA director George Tenet, in which he gives his take on pre-9/11 days and on Saddam's huge cache of weapons of mass destruction.

And the drums are saying that Tenet is not going to get too many Christmas cards from Vice President Cheney's office after they read "At the Center of the Storm." Folks from down the river at the Pentagon, including former deputy secretary of defense Paul Wolfowitz-- a guy who's already going through a rough patch -- and former defense undersecretary Douglas Feith, might also get some heartburn.

Former secretary of state Colin Powell comes out fine. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, who was President Bush's key adviser in engineering the Iraq invasion, doesn't come out so fine. Not fine at all.

I'm looking forward to the April 29 60 Minutes spot.

Pew Poll on Knowledge of Public Affairs

2007-04-16T15:27:00.000-07:00

Click on image to view

A typically fascinating poll was released by the Pew Center over the weekend, this one covering knowledge of public affairs. An interesting result is Daily Show viewers are far more knowledgeable of pubic affairs than are viewers of, oh say, FOX. Everyone surprised by that can stop reading now.

Some demographic differences are understandable - more educated people are more informed, as are richer folks. Older people are generally more informed than younger people. I didn't know how much more men consume news than women, though.

I'm not surprised that Northerners are more informed than Southerners.

Here's the analysis.

Here's the questionnaire.

Take the quiz.

Can we at least have a conversation about gun control?

2007-04-16T13:06:00.000-07:00

In light of today's horrible massacre at Va Tech.

After all, there was a major US circuit court ruling recently that finally, finally sets the stage for the big SCOTUS showdown.

My complete sympathies go out to everyone on campus, their loved ones and the entire State of Virginia.

However, BushCo spokeshead comments today made me want to retch. While expressing sorrow over the events at Virginia Tech, Dana Perino noted:

The president believes that there is a right for people to bear arms, but that all laws must be followed.

As always, BushCo has their priorities screwed on exactly wrong. This IS the time to at least have a discussion about gun control. I'm not interested in a polemic, and I want to honor those killed and injured today. However, there is surely something good that might come out of this. Randomly, increased safety training, better registration of guns and ammo, our violent society should at least be discussed.

Surely, there is something to be learned - more than the idiotic and cold-hearted comments from the administration.

Death of the neocons: Part 2 (continued)

2007-04-16T08:23:00.000-07:00

Richard Perle and Wolf square off on CNN. See the clip for yourself here at Raw Story. My take: Perle is shameless; may he rot in hell.

General John Sheehan: I don't want to be no stinking war czar

2007-04-16T08:10:00.000-07:00

Recently, Dubya decided he needed a war czar to oversee both Afghanistan and Iraq, ostensibly called the White House implementation manager. Three high-ranking generals were offered the position and said thanks, but uh, no thanks.

John J. Sheehan, USMC ret., explains why in a WaPo editorial today. He writes:

The [most important] strategy [in Iraq] takes a larger view of the region and the desired end state. Simply put, where does Iraq fit in a larger regional context? The United States has and will continue to have strategic interests in the greater Middle East well after the Iraq crisis is resolved and, as a matter of national interest, will maintain forces in the region in some form. The Iraq invasion has created a real and existential crisis for nearly all Middle Eastern countries and created divisions among our traditional European allies, making cooperation on other issues more difficult. In the case of Iran, we have allowed Tehran to develop more policy options and tools than it had a few years ago. Iran is an ideological and destabilizing threat to its neighbors and, more important, to U.S. interests.

Of the three strategies in play, the third is the most important but, unfortunately, is the least developed and articulated by this administration.

So there you have it. General Sheehan doesn't believe the administration has a plan for winning in Iraq. I believe him because I frankly have no idea what a win in Iraq will look like.

Iraq: 289 dead in one day

2007-04-15T10:11:00.000-07:00

From the Sac Bee:

Two months into the U.S.-led Baghdad Security Plan, at least 289 people were killed and injured across Iraq on Saturday, including 36 dead in a car bomb attack in the holy Shiite city of Karbala.

And the powers to be have decreed we have to wait another Friedman* to determine whether the surge has succeeded or failed.

*Freidmans are defined here.

Neocon deathwatch: part 2

2007-04-14T18:58:00.000-07:00

Part 2 on the individuals of a dead school of political thought - the neocons.

Richard "The Prince of Darkness" Perle. This guy really screwed the pooch. He was a major cheerleader for war, and now points his finger directly back at BushCo after they turned Iraq into a steaming mess. In 2002, Perle infamously predicted only 40,000 troops would be needed to overthrow Saddam.

Perle's hubris hit a high water mark right before the invasion, when he wrote:

Saddam Hussein's reign of terror is about to end. He will go quickly, but not alone: in a parting irony, he will take the UN down with him.

Perle served in the administration on the Defense Policy Board, when he tendered his resignation in 2004.

"We are now approaching a long presidential election campaign, in the course of which issues on which I have strong views will be widely discussed and debated," Perle wrote. "I would not wish those views to be attributed to you or the president at any time, and especially not during a presidential campaign."

Perle didn't return a telephone call seeking comment on his resignation, and a Pentagon spokesman would confirm only that he had resigned.

By 2006, Perle was ripping BushCo on the job in Iraq in a famous Vanity Fair article.

Perle and I [writer David Rose] [met] at his home outside Washington, D.C. ... Perle is unrecognizable as the confident hawk who, as chairman of the Pentagon's Defense Policy Board Advisory Committee, had invited the exiled Iraqi dissident Ahmad Chalabi to its first meeting after 9/11. "The levels of brutality that we've seen are truly horrifying, and I have to say, I underestimated the depravity[.]" ...

According to Perle, who left the Defense Policy Board in 2004, this unfolding catastrophe has a central cause: devastating dysfunction within the administration of President George W. Bush. Perle says, "The decisions did not get made that should have been. They didn't get made in a timely fashion, and the differences were argued out endlessly.… At the end of the day, you have to hold the president responsible.… I don't think he realized the extent of the opposition within his own administration, and the disloyalty."

Perle followed up on that with a NewsMax interview in February of this year. I've highlighted a few items - the interview is longish - but telling about the dark soul of this man.

[P]erhaps folks would better appreciate Richard Perle ... discussing how we got where we are in Iraq with the best and brightest leading the way.

Perle: We just don't have the best and the brightest. I think Colin Powell was a disaster. He never liked the president's policies. He did almost nothing to get them implemented. Condi [former head of the National Security Council and now Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice] was in way over her head from the beginning, and the president gave much too much weight to her views. The administration was full of people even in the White House at the National Security Council who were hostile to the president's policies.

NewsMax: On the subject of your "America at a Crossroads" segment for PBS: In one of your filmed confrontations with protestors on the National Mall, you tell a woman, "I'm sorry for your loss, but I'm not the president." You're saying to her that you are not the architect of the war and you didn't make the decisions. But you were a powerhouse on the Defense Policy Board.

Perle: As a matter of fact, I was not at all happy with the conduct of the board. Now people can differ about what approach would have been more effective. I think we got ourselves, unfortunately, into an occupation [of Iraq] that we could have avoided. We could have avoided it by turning things over to the Iraqis more or less immediately, which is what I was arguing for.

NewsMax: How do you see it playing out on Capitol Hill?

Perle: The House and the Democratic leadership have decided to make Iraq a partisan political issue. They are using it to rally Democrats, and it seems to me that they have lost all sight of the national interest.

NewsMax: Now that Al Franken has declared for the U.S. Senate...

Perle: ...Franken was hung up on the fact that we didn't find stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction, and that whole thing gets a little tedious after a while.

The president didn't create [the intelligence organizations]. He made the mistake of keeping [former CIA chief George] Tenet in place, but that is another matter.

So, in the end, Perle is one of the key architects of the war, yets minimizes his own role - certainly after Iraq turns into one hell of a FUBAR wrapped in an enigma. And not only is he saddled with the burden of his gross mistakes, he turns around and blames BushCo for the problems.

I suppose that Perle really believes that the Iraq war - if run competently - could have turned out far better than it has. What a terrible misreading of the situation. But these kinds of misreadings are why the NeoCons are consigned to the kitty litter box of history.

Perle Status: Richard Perle is dead to George Dubya Bush.

Iraq: Tallies of the dead since the surge

2007-04-14T18:49:00.000-07:00

AP reports that civilian deaths in Baghdad are way down since the surge began.

Figures compiled by the AP from Iraqi police reports show that 1,586 civilians were killed in Baghdad between the start of the offensive and Thursday.

That represents a sharp drop from the 2,871 civilians who died violently in the capital during the two months that preceded the security crackdown.

Outside the capital, 1,504 civilians were killed between Feb. 14 and Thursday and 1,009 were killed during the two previous months, the AP figures show.

In addition, deaths to US military forces are up substantially.

War supporters are painting this as good news in the sense that ALL of the news is not bad. However, I'm hard pressed to find any examples of real good news in Iraq recently. Over 3,000 civilians have died since the surge began. I would call that only somewhat less catastrophic.

Wolf, Is Anna still dead?

2007-04-13T16:51:00.000-07:00

Let's ask Wolf...

Neocon deathwatch: Part 1

2007-04-13T09:33:00.000-07:00

Reading the news these days is to read of the political deaths of a whole caste within the political class - the neocons.

Let's go through the list. I won't make any claims of being comprehensive, so this list will be updated semi-regularly. Send me your tips on other neocon political cadavers. I'll be sure to credit you when I add to the list.

Karl "the cat" Rove. Karl is on political death watch once again, but he previously escaped the claws of prosecutor Fitzgerald in the Plamegate case, and he may lube up and slip out once again.

The latest is Rove's deleted emails. Dan Froomkin covers the story. This is from Rove's lawyer today:

Karl Rove's lawyer on Friday dismissed the notion that President Bush's chief political adviser intentionally deleted his own e-mails from a Republican-sponsored server, saying Rove believed the communications were being preserved in accordance with the law.

Rove status: In the hospital, Doctor-induced coma.

Paul "comb-licker" Wolfowitz. Architect of the failed Bush Doctrine, and huge supporter of the Iraq War. Wolfowitz testified at the House Budget Committee on February 27, 2003:

There has been a good deal of comment - some of it quite outlandish - about what our postwar requirements might be in Iraq. Some of the higher end predictions we have been hearing recently, such as the notion that it will take several hundred thousand U.S. troops to provide stability in post-Saddam Iraq, are wildly off the mark. It is hard to conceive that it would take more forces to provide stability in post-Saddam Iraq than it would take to conduct the war itself and to secure the surrender of Saddam's security forces and his army - hard to imagine.

Wolfie parlayed that spectacular error that cost the US hundreds of billions of dollars, untold deaths, massive destruction, general mayhem, and the rise of a 1,000 mini-Saddams into the World Bank presidency (huh?). However, Wolfie is in trouble:

Staff at the World Bank have demanded the resignation of Paul Wolfowitz, the bank's president, after he admitted authorising large pay rises for his Libyan-born partner that took her salary to $200,000.

Wolfowitz status: In the hospital, on life support.

This series will be updated regularly.