October 30, 2006
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
BUSH IS A PATHOLOGICAL LIAR
There are lies and then there are lies. Lies that get people killed, lies that get people tortured, lies that gut the financial security of working people, lies that deny health care to people who need it, lies that claim there is no global climate change, somehow go beyond the usual lie. The George W. Bush presidency has established some pretty unsavory history. He's the president who knowingly and willingly lied the country into a war that has resulted in the deaths of hundreds of thousands of civilians. He's the president who shamelessly lied to get tax cuts for his fat cat friends and created an economic system that shafts the middle class and the poor. He's the president who piously claims to be a Christian so he can deny funding for stem cell research that would give people who suffer from hideous diseases hope of a cure. This article by Robert Parry is at www.consortiumnews.com:
While Bush says Democrats don’t want to try terrorist, their real complaint about his Military Commissions Act of 2006 comes from its denial of habeas corpus for non-citizens and its vague wording that could apply its draconian provisions to American citizens as well. [See Consortiumnews.com’s “Who Is ‘Any Person’ in Tribunal Law?”]
Bush’s defenders may argue that the President was just using some oratorical license in the Indiana stump speech. But all the points he made to the crowd, he also has expressed in more formal settings.
The distortions also fit with Bush’s long pattern of slanting the truth or engaging in outright lies when describing his adversaries, both foreign and domestic.
Yet Bush is almost never held to account by a U.S. news media that seems almost as cowed today as it was when Bush misled the nation into the Iraq War or – after the invasion – when he lied repeatedly, claiming that he had no choice but to invade because Saddam Hussein had barred U.N. weapons inspectors from Iraq. [See Consortiumnews.com’s “Bush & His Dangerous Delusions.”]
POP GOES THE ECONOMY
New York Times columnist Paul Krugman has been warning for some time now about the housing bubble bursting. It appears his forecast is coming true. The housing market has sustained the U. S. economy during the Bush years. As jobs have been outsourced and middle class wages have stagnated or declined, about the only money to be had has been in housing. Interest rates were kept low and people refinanced or took out home equity loans. They used that cash to buy things. But the Federal Reserve has been increasing interest rates, and those higher interest rates translate into higher payments for people with adjustable rate mortgages. Now there is a glut of unsold houses. This article by Jeremy W. Peters is at www.iht.com/articles/2006/10/27/business/usecon.php:
The U.S. economy grew more slowly in the third quarter than at any time since early 2003, held back by a deflating housing market, the Commerce Department reported Friday,
The total output of goods and services in the United States expanded at an annual rate of just 1.6 percent in the three months ended Sept. 30. That preliminary estimate compares with a revised rate of 2.6 percent in the second quarter and the robust 5.6 percent rate recorded in the first. The figures are seasonally adjusted.
Sunday, October 29, 2006
October 29, 2006
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
LIMBAUGH'S WORLD
Rush Limbaugh is pompous, egocentric, self-righteous, and cruel. He easily mocks people less fortunate than he is every day because he doesn't have to live in the real world. He stays insulated in his sound proof radio booth. In the meantime, he stirs up hatred of gays, women, racial minorities, and even people who have Parkinsons disease. Maybe it's time people like Limbaugh and the fat cat Republicans he supports to live like the people they oppress. This article by William Saletan is at www.washingtonpost.com:
Here we have two completely different notions of reality. Fox's job is to portray characters in movies and on television. For him, Parkinson's was an invasion of the fake world by the real one. The medication, designed to hide this from the audience, became part of the fiction. In going off his meds, he was dropping the act.
Limbaugh's life story has gone the other way. His job is to explain politics, a branch of nonfiction. But for him, the fake world has overtaken the real one. He thinks "Boston Legal" is reality. Anything that doesn't match this must be "acting." If you go off your meds, you're not revealing your symptoms. You're "portraying" them.
Radio, television and the Internet greased Limbaugh's descent into fantasy. Years ago, a profile described him "holed up in his New York apartment with Chinese takeout and a stack of rented movies." In another profile, he "complained that he has virtually no social life." Click the video links on his Web site, and you can peer into his world. He sits in a soundproof studio. He never has to go outside.
BUSH'S IMMORAL WAR
This columnist points out that most of the debate and criticism of Bush's war on Iraq has centered on incompetence. Even if the war had been waged competently, however, that doesn't alter the fact it was an illegal and immoral venture from the very start. Aggressive war is a crime against humanity and it should be framed in that light. This column by Linda McQuaig is at www.thestar.com:
But incompetence is a side issue. The real problem is, and always has been, that it is illegal — not to mention immoral — for a country to invade another country, in other words, to wage a war of aggression.
The fact that Iraq is the last unharvested oil bonanza on earth, in an era of increasingly fierce global competition for dwindling oil reserves, only makes U.S. motives all the more suspect.
As the Nuremberg Tribunal concluded after World War II: "War is essentially an evil thing ... To initiate a war of aggression, therefore, is not only an international crime, it is the supreme international crime differing only from other war crimes in that it contains within itself the accumulated evil of the whole."
If the U.S. had a genuinely open media, there would be a ferocious debate raging about how to deal with the fact that Washington initiated a war of aggression that has resulted in the deaths of tens of thousands — possibly hundreds of thousands — of Iraqis, and almost 3,000 Americans.
U.S. troops should be removed now.
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
LIMBAUGH'S WORLD
Rush Limbaugh is pompous, egocentric, self-righteous, and cruel. He easily mocks people less fortunate than he is every day because he doesn't have to live in the real world. He stays insulated in his sound proof radio booth. In the meantime, he stirs up hatred of gays, women, racial minorities, and even people who have Parkinsons disease. Maybe it's time people like Limbaugh and the fat cat Republicans he supports to live like the people they oppress. This article by William Saletan is at www.washingtonpost.com:
Here we have two completely different notions of reality. Fox's job is to portray characters in movies and on television. For him, Parkinson's was an invasion of the fake world by the real one. The medication, designed to hide this from the audience, became part of the fiction. In going off his meds, he was dropping the act.
Limbaugh's life story has gone the other way. His job is to explain politics, a branch of nonfiction. But for him, the fake world has overtaken the real one. He thinks "Boston Legal" is reality. Anything that doesn't match this must be "acting." If you go off your meds, you're not revealing your symptoms. You're "portraying" them.
Radio, television and the Internet greased Limbaugh's descent into fantasy. Years ago, a profile described him "holed up in his New York apartment with Chinese takeout and a stack of rented movies." In another profile, he "complained that he has virtually no social life." Click the video links on his Web site, and you can peer into his world. He sits in a soundproof studio. He never has to go outside.
BUSH'S IMMORAL WAR
This columnist points out that most of the debate and criticism of Bush's war on Iraq has centered on incompetence. Even if the war had been waged competently, however, that doesn't alter the fact it was an illegal and immoral venture from the very start. Aggressive war is a crime against humanity and it should be framed in that light. This column by Linda McQuaig is at www.thestar.com:
But incompetence is a side issue. The real problem is, and always has been, that it is illegal — not to mention immoral — for a country to invade another country, in other words, to wage a war of aggression.
The fact that Iraq is the last unharvested oil bonanza on earth, in an era of increasingly fierce global competition for dwindling oil reserves, only makes U.S. motives all the more suspect.
As the Nuremberg Tribunal concluded after World War II: "War is essentially an evil thing ... To initiate a war of aggression, therefore, is not only an international crime, it is the supreme international crime differing only from other war crimes in that it contains within itself the accumulated evil of the whole."
If the U.S. had a genuinely open media, there would be a ferocious debate raging about how to deal with the fact that Washington initiated a war of aggression that has resulted in the deaths of tens of thousands — possibly hundreds of thousands — of Iraqis, and almost 3,000 Americans.
U.S. troops should be removed now.
Saturday, October 28, 2006
October 28, 2006
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
LIKE DESERTING RATS
The pundit class in this country has been enabling George W. Bush and his hideous policies since he stole his way into the White House. Now right-wing pundits, who were only to happy to act as an echo chamber for Bush, suddenly are seeking higher ground while Bush's administration crashes. This column by Glenn Greenwald is at glenngreenwald.blogspot.com:
There is nothing wrong with acknowledging one's errors and changing one's mind. When it is genuine, that is a commendable attribute which ought to be encouraged. But that isn't what is happening with the Peggy Noonans of the world (including the serious, moderate Beltway pundits who spent the last five years lecturing all of us on the importance of Supporting the President). They aren't admitting anything. To the contrary, they are pretending to be something that they are not -- namely, wise, objective, insightful analysts who all along have long seen the flaws in the President that have caused his presidency to collapse.
They are not analysts who have changed their minds or bravely recognized their errors. They are just self-serving, deceitful rats jumping a sinking ship that they long helped to keep afloat. Worse, they are doing so while pretending that they were never really on board (Noonan: "it's clear now to everyone in the Republican Party that Mr. Bush has changed the modern governing definition of 'conservative.' He did this without asking. He did it even without explaining"). If Bush's popularity skyrocketed tomorrow, their gushing praise would instantaneously return.
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
LIKE DESERTING RATS
The pundit class in this country has been enabling George W. Bush and his hideous policies since he stole his way into the White House. Now right-wing pundits, who were only to happy to act as an echo chamber for Bush, suddenly are seeking higher ground while Bush's administration crashes. This column by Glenn Greenwald is at glenngreenwald.blogspot.com:
There is nothing wrong with acknowledging one's errors and changing one's mind. When it is genuine, that is a commendable attribute which ought to be encouraged. But that isn't what is happening with the Peggy Noonans of the world (including the serious, moderate Beltway pundits who spent the last five years lecturing all of us on the importance of Supporting the President). They aren't admitting anything. To the contrary, they are pretending to be something that they are not -- namely, wise, objective, insightful analysts who all along have long seen the flaws in the President that have caused his presidency to collapse.
They are not analysts who have changed their minds or bravely recognized their errors. They are just self-serving, deceitful rats jumping a sinking ship that they long helped to keep afloat. Worse, they are doing so while pretending that they were never really on board (Noonan: "it's clear now to everyone in the Republican Party that Mr. Bush has changed the modern governing definition of 'conservative.' He did this without asking. He did it even without explaining"). If Bush's popularity skyrocketed tomorrow, their gushing praise would instantaneously return.
Thursday, October 26, 2006
October 26, 2006
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
BIRDS OF A FEATHER
The cliche says that birds of feather will flock together, so it's illustrative to see who pigs like Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity support. Limbaugh finds ways to go lower than low. During the Clinton years he compared Chelsea Clinton, a child, to a dog. He has made numerous racist statements on the air. He mocks the poor. He has said drug abusers should go to prison, although he evidently exempts himself from that fate. Now he has attacked Michael J. Fox, a victim of Parkinson's disease. The Republican party has been only too happy to have Limbaugh and his ilk represent them on the air. This article by Molly Ivins is at www.workingforchange.com:
It's a race to the bottom. For misinformation and cruelty, not to mention plain old dreadful manners, it is so hard to beat Rush Limbaugh. We can only measure the Great Blowhard against himself.
Even by Limbaugh standards, his recent attack on Michael J. Fox, the actor, is several levels lower than tacky. Fox, who has Parkinson's disease, has done some political ads favoring candidates who in turn support stem cell research.
"He is exaggerating the effects of the disease," Limbaugh told his listeners. "He is moving all around and shaking, and it's purely an act. This is really shameless of Michael J. Fox. Either he didn't take his medication or he's acting. This is the only time I've ever seen Michael J. Fox portray any of the symptoms of the disease he has."
The reaction from Parkinson's experts was swift and angry. "It's a shameless statement," said John Rogers of Parkinson's Action Network. "It's insulting. It's appallingly sad, at best."
THE ASSAULT ON WORKING PEOPLE
In my lifetime I've heard lots of talk about war. There was the war on poverty and the war on drugs. The past few years it's been the alleged "war on terror." But a war that hasn't been quite so attention grabbing has been the war on the majority on us who are working class. Since the Nixon years we've seen wages stagnate or fall while the richest people in this country get even richer. The trend has been far more pronounced since Bush grabbed the White House in 2000. Bush had the audacity to talk about gay marriage being a threat to American families. His economic policies are a far greater threat than any gay union. This article by Caryl Rivers is at www.alternet.org:
The low-wage/high-work world and the two-earner world are with us for the foreseeable future. As is the rapidly growing world of shift work, with mom working one shift and dad another. American families are facing enormous stress, and a reasonable society would be looking at ways to shore up the family with something other than platitudes. After all, it is the crucible of future generations, the matrix of our tomorrows.
The degree to which we are not doing this is astonishing, according to Harvard's Global Working Families project:
* 37 countries guarantee parents some type of paid leave when children fall ill. The U.S. does not.
* 163 countries offer paid maternity leave. The U.S. does not.
* All industrialized countries except Australia offer paid family and medical leave. The U.S. does not. And Australia guarantees a full year of unpaid leave, while the U.S. offers only 12 weeks.
* 45 countries offer paternity leave. The U.S. does not.
* 96 countries mandate paid annual leave. The U.S. does not.
* 84 countries limit the maximum work week employers can require. The U.S. has no limit on mandatory work.
* 40 countries have mandated evening and night wage premiums. The U.S. does not.
* The U.S. is tied for 39th with Ecuador and Surinam for enrollment in early childhood education for 3- to 5-year-olds, and tied for 91st out of 151 countries in preprimary student-to-staff ratios.
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
BIRDS OF A FEATHER
The cliche says that birds of feather will flock together, so it's illustrative to see who pigs like Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity support. Limbaugh finds ways to go lower than low. During the Clinton years he compared Chelsea Clinton, a child, to a dog. He has made numerous racist statements on the air. He mocks the poor. He has said drug abusers should go to prison, although he evidently exempts himself from that fate. Now he has attacked Michael J. Fox, a victim of Parkinson's disease. The Republican party has been only too happy to have Limbaugh and his ilk represent them on the air. This article by Molly Ivins is at www.workingforchange.com:
It's a race to the bottom. For misinformation and cruelty, not to mention plain old dreadful manners, it is so hard to beat Rush Limbaugh. We can only measure the Great Blowhard against himself.
Even by Limbaugh standards, his recent attack on Michael J. Fox, the actor, is several levels lower than tacky. Fox, who has Parkinson's disease, has done some political ads favoring candidates who in turn support stem cell research.
"He is exaggerating the effects of the disease," Limbaugh told his listeners. "He is moving all around and shaking, and it's purely an act. This is really shameless of Michael J. Fox. Either he didn't take his medication or he's acting. This is the only time I've ever seen Michael J. Fox portray any of the symptoms of the disease he has."
The reaction from Parkinson's experts was swift and angry. "It's a shameless statement," said John Rogers of Parkinson's Action Network. "It's insulting. It's appallingly sad, at best."
THE ASSAULT ON WORKING PEOPLE
In my lifetime I've heard lots of talk about war. There was the war on poverty and the war on drugs. The past few years it's been the alleged "war on terror." But a war that hasn't been quite so attention grabbing has been the war on the majority on us who are working class. Since the Nixon years we've seen wages stagnate or fall while the richest people in this country get even richer. The trend has been far more pronounced since Bush grabbed the White House in 2000. Bush had the audacity to talk about gay marriage being a threat to American families. His economic policies are a far greater threat than any gay union. This article by Caryl Rivers is at www.alternet.org:
The low-wage/high-work world and the two-earner world are with us for the foreseeable future. As is the rapidly growing world of shift work, with mom working one shift and dad another. American families are facing enormous stress, and a reasonable society would be looking at ways to shore up the family with something other than platitudes. After all, it is the crucible of future generations, the matrix of our tomorrows.
The degree to which we are not doing this is astonishing, according to Harvard's Global Working Families project:
* 37 countries guarantee parents some type of paid leave when children fall ill. The U.S. does not.
* 163 countries offer paid maternity leave. The U.S. does not.
* All industrialized countries except Australia offer paid family and medical leave. The U.S. does not. And Australia guarantees a full year of unpaid leave, while the U.S. offers only 12 weeks.
* 45 countries offer paternity leave. The U.S. does not.
* 96 countries mandate paid annual leave. The U.S. does not.
* 84 countries limit the maximum work week employers can require. The U.S. has no limit on mandatory work.
* 40 countries have mandated evening and night wage premiums. The U.S. does not.
* The U.S. is tied for 39th with Ecuador and Surinam for enrollment in early childhood education for 3- to 5-year-olds, and tied for 91st out of 151 countries in preprimary student-to-staff ratios.
Wednesday, October 25, 2006
October 25, 2006
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
CONFLICTS OF INTEREST ABOUND
There is no one more contemptible than a war profiteer. Someone who makes money by causing the mutilation and death of other human beings is more akin to a ghoul than a human being. It's really no surprise to find war profiteers in the Bush administration and in the Bush family. War against Iraq was a good money-making opportunity for these jackals. This article by Heather Wokusch is at www.commondreams.org:
Very good certainly for Vice President Dick Cheney, who resigned from Halliburton in 2000 with a $33.7 million retirement package (not bad for roughly four years of work). In a stunning conflict of interest, Cheney still holds more than 400,000 stock options in the company. Why pursue diplomacy when you can rake in a personal fortune from war?
Yet Cheney isn't the only one who has benefited from the Bush administration's destructive policies. The Bush family has done quite nicely too. Just a few examples:
Bush Sr.: Bush's dad has strong connections to the Carlyle Group, a massive private equity investment firm whose Chairman Emeritus is Frank Carlucci, a former college roommate of Donald Rumsfeld's and former Defense Secretary under Ronald Reagan. Imagine the pull Carlucci has with today's White House.
But Carlucci has another secret weapon - Bush Sr. Amid conflict-of-interest allegations, the elder Bush resigned from the Carlyle Group in 2003, but reportedly remains on retainer, opening doors to lucrative profits in the Middle East and elsewhere. Bush Sr.'s specialty is Saudi Arabia; in fact, he was at a Carlyle investment conference with Osama bin Laden's estranged brother, Shafiq bin Laden, when the 9/11 attacks took place.
Carlyle specializes in military and security investments, and with Bush Jr. in office, the company's profits have soared; it received $677 million in contracts in 2002, then a whopping $2.1 billion in 2003. Carlyle's investors currently enjoy an equity capital pool of over 44 billion dollars.
LET JUSTICE BEGIN WITH IMPEACHMENT
Nancy Pelosi, the minority leader in the House, has suggested that impeachment would not be a priority if Democrats recapture the House. I strongly disagree. The impeachment of Bill Clinton was clearly political and nothing more. George W. Bush has committed real crimes against Americans, against Iraqis, and against the Constitution. He and Dick Cheney have run the U. S. government like a Mafia family, but with less integrity. As this article points out, we also need to think about the precedents now being established. If Bush gets away with his crimes, what check is there on future presidents? The article by Dave Lindorff is at www.smirkingchimp.com:
Rep. Pelosi must know most of the president's crimes are not partisan at all. They are crimes against Americans of all stripes, and against liberty and the Constitution.
Just take the president's order to the National Security Administration to spy on Americans without first seeking a warrant. A federal judge in Detroit has already found that the president violated the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act--a felony--and the Fourth Amendment. That is an impeachable act, and one which Democrats and Republicans alike would punish if they understood the implications of what the president has done. Given that the secret FISA court has only rejected a handful of warrant requests out of over 70,000 made since 1978, the only reason Bush could have decided to violate the law is that he is doing something so outrageous he knew the hand-picked, top-security-cleared FISA judges would have rejected it out of hand.
Or take the signing statements. This president has used so-called "signing statements" to render inoperative over 800 laws or parts of laws passed by Congress, claiming that he has the authority to do so because he is a commander in chief in time of war (the so-called "War" on Terror). Rep. Pelosi claims that if she becomes House leader, Democrats will want to pursue a positive, progressive political agenda, yet this will be clearly impossible if the president is allowed to simply continue issuing signing statements invalidating any laws passed by a Democratic Congress. Signing statements cannot be overridden, and if Democrats were to attempt to pass legislation outlawing them, Bush could veto that legislation--or render it inoperative with another signing statement. The only way to stop this unconstitutional usurpation of the founding principle of tripartite government is to impeach the president for blatant abuse of power.
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
CONFLICTS OF INTEREST ABOUND
There is no one more contemptible than a war profiteer. Someone who makes money by causing the mutilation and death of other human beings is more akin to a ghoul than a human being. It's really no surprise to find war profiteers in the Bush administration and in the Bush family. War against Iraq was a good money-making opportunity for these jackals. This article by Heather Wokusch is at www.commondreams.org:
Very good certainly for Vice President Dick Cheney, who resigned from Halliburton in 2000 with a $33.7 million retirement package (not bad for roughly four years of work). In a stunning conflict of interest, Cheney still holds more than 400,000 stock options in the company. Why pursue diplomacy when you can rake in a personal fortune from war?
Yet Cheney isn't the only one who has benefited from the Bush administration's destructive policies. The Bush family has done quite nicely too. Just a few examples:
Bush Sr.: Bush's dad has strong connections to the Carlyle Group, a massive private equity investment firm whose Chairman Emeritus is Frank Carlucci, a former college roommate of Donald Rumsfeld's and former Defense Secretary under Ronald Reagan. Imagine the pull Carlucci has with today's White House.
But Carlucci has another secret weapon - Bush Sr. Amid conflict-of-interest allegations, the elder Bush resigned from the Carlyle Group in 2003, but reportedly remains on retainer, opening doors to lucrative profits in the Middle East and elsewhere. Bush Sr.'s specialty is Saudi Arabia; in fact, he was at a Carlyle investment conference with Osama bin Laden's estranged brother, Shafiq bin Laden, when the 9/11 attacks took place.
Carlyle specializes in military and security investments, and with Bush Jr. in office, the company's profits have soared; it received $677 million in contracts in 2002, then a whopping $2.1 billion in 2003. Carlyle's investors currently enjoy an equity capital pool of over 44 billion dollars.
LET JUSTICE BEGIN WITH IMPEACHMENT
Nancy Pelosi, the minority leader in the House, has suggested that impeachment would not be a priority if Democrats recapture the House. I strongly disagree. The impeachment of Bill Clinton was clearly political and nothing more. George W. Bush has committed real crimes against Americans, against Iraqis, and against the Constitution. He and Dick Cheney have run the U. S. government like a Mafia family, but with less integrity. As this article points out, we also need to think about the precedents now being established. If Bush gets away with his crimes, what check is there on future presidents? The article by Dave Lindorff is at www.smirkingchimp.com:
Rep. Pelosi must know most of the president's crimes are not partisan at all. They are crimes against Americans of all stripes, and against liberty and the Constitution.
Just take the president's order to the National Security Administration to spy on Americans without first seeking a warrant. A federal judge in Detroit has already found that the president violated the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act--a felony--and the Fourth Amendment. That is an impeachable act, and one which Democrats and Republicans alike would punish if they understood the implications of what the president has done. Given that the secret FISA court has only rejected a handful of warrant requests out of over 70,000 made since 1978, the only reason Bush could have decided to violate the law is that he is doing something so outrageous he knew the hand-picked, top-security-cleared FISA judges would have rejected it out of hand.
Or take the signing statements. This president has used so-called "signing statements" to render inoperative over 800 laws or parts of laws passed by Congress, claiming that he has the authority to do so because he is a commander in chief in time of war (the so-called "War" on Terror). Rep. Pelosi claims that if she becomes House leader, Democrats will want to pursue a positive, progressive political agenda, yet this will be clearly impossible if the president is allowed to simply continue issuing signing statements invalidating any laws passed by a Democratic Congress. Signing statements cannot be overridden, and if Democrats were to attempt to pass legislation outlawing them, Bush could veto that legislation--or render it inoperative with another signing statement. The only way to stop this unconstitutional usurpation of the founding principle of tripartite government is to impeach the president for blatant abuse of power.
Tuesday, October 24, 2006
October 24, 2006
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
BUSH'S FUZZY MATH
In one of his debates with Al Gore candidate George W. Bush used the phrase "fuzzy math" to describe Gore's criticisms of Bush's insane economic policies. All Bush offered then and all he offers now is the trickle down economics that we saw during the Reagan-Bush administration. Trickle down is a nice name for make the rich richer and give the shaft to everyone else. Just check your annual Social Security earnings statement. Are you getting ahead? This column by Molly Ivins is at www.truthdig.com:
I just love listening to the Bushies play with numbers. When Bush took over in 2001, he predicted a surplus of $516 billion for fiscal year 2006. Last week, the administration announced a 2006 deficit of $248 billion, missing its projection for this year by $764 billion. Bush said the numbers are “proof that pro-growth economic policies work” and are “an example of sound fiscal policies here in Washington.”
This is highly reminiscent of Dick Cheney’s recent observation about the Iraqi government, “If you look at the general, overall situation, they’re doing remarkably well.”
Bush’s main talking point on the budget is that he “cut the deficit in half”—that would be from 2004, the year the White House inflated the projected deficit for political reasons. Even conservatives disagree. Brian Riedl of the Heritage Foundation said, “The White House has a track record of projecting budget numbers to be a lot worse than they end up, which therefore helps them defeat the gloomy expectations and declare victory.” If Bush does manage to make the tax cuts permanent, he will add more than $3 trillion to the deficit over the next 10 years. The federal budget would be virtually in balance if there had been no tax cuts.
MORE ON TRICKLE DOWN
Among the many ludicrous claims made by right-wingers is that cutting taxes causes tax revenues to rise. Supposedly, the tax cuts stimulate the economy so much that more economic activity sends more revenue to the treasury. The historical record shows how absurd that claim is. Bill Clinton raised taxes on the richest people in the economy, the economy prospered, and we even had a budget surplus. Bush has cut taxes for the rich and we have gargantuan deficits, and an economy that creeps along. This column by Jonathan Chait is at www.latimes.com:
Except in certain extreme theoretical conditions, tax cuts cause revenues to fall, and tax hikes cause them to rise. The economy also can affect revenues. During an expansion, revenues can rise unusually fast, and during a recession, they can drop unusually fast.
The latter is what happened following the first Bush tax cut. When Bush took office, tax revenues accounted for 19.8% of gross domestic product. After the tax cut, they collapsed to a low point of 16.3% — far lower than even the most pessimistic projection.
Yes, revenues have risen from that low level, but they still haven't recovered. The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities found that revenues currently lag $200 billion behind the revenue growth you would normally find during a recovery.
Now, Bush's reply to that is to say that if it weren't for his tax cuts, we would still be in a recession. Indeed, in the same Oct. 11 speech, he asserted, "I'm convinced that if we had raised taxes, it would cause there to be an economic decline, which would make it harder to balance the budget over the years."
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
BUSH'S FUZZY MATH
In one of his debates with Al Gore candidate George W. Bush used the phrase "fuzzy math" to describe Gore's criticisms of Bush's insane economic policies. All Bush offered then and all he offers now is the trickle down economics that we saw during the Reagan-Bush administration. Trickle down is a nice name for make the rich richer and give the shaft to everyone else. Just check your annual Social Security earnings statement. Are you getting ahead? This column by Molly Ivins is at www.truthdig.com:
I just love listening to the Bushies play with numbers. When Bush took over in 2001, he predicted a surplus of $516 billion for fiscal year 2006. Last week, the administration announced a 2006 deficit of $248 billion, missing its projection for this year by $764 billion. Bush said the numbers are “proof that pro-growth economic policies work” and are “an example of sound fiscal policies here in Washington.”
This is highly reminiscent of Dick Cheney’s recent observation about the Iraqi government, “If you look at the general, overall situation, they’re doing remarkably well.”
Bush’s main talking point on the budget is that he “cut the deficit in half”—that would be from 2004, the year the White House inflated the projected deficit for political reasons. Even conservatives disagree. Brian Riedl of the Heritage Foundation said, “The White House has a track record of projecting budget numbers to be a lot worse than they end up, which therefore helps them defeat the gloomy expectations and declare victory.” If Bush does manage to make the tax cuts permanent, he will add more than $3 trillion to the deficit over the next 10 years. The federal budget would be virtually in balance if there had been no tax cuts.
MORE ON TRICKLE DOWN
Among the many ludicrous claims made by right-wingers is that cutting taxes causes tax revenues to rise. Supposedly, the tax cuts stimulate the economy so much that more economic activity sends more revenue to the treasury. The historical record shows how absurd that claim is. Bill Clinton raised taxes on the richest people in the economy, the economy prospered, and we even had a budget surplus. Bush has cut taxes for the rich and we have gargantuan deficits, and an economy that creeps along. This column by Jonathan Chait is at www.latimes.com:
Except in certain extreme theoretical conditions, tax cuts cause revenues to fall, and tax hikes cause them to rise. The economy also can affect revenues. During an expansion, revenues can rise unusually fast, and during a recession, they can drop unusually fast.
The latter is what happened following the first Bush tax cut. When Bush took office, tax revenues accounted for 19.8% of gross domestic product. After the tax cut, they collapsed to a low point of 16.3% — far lower than even the most pessimistic projection.
Yes, revenues have risen from that low level, but they still haven't recovered. The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities found that revenues currently lag $200 billion behind the revenue growth you would normally find during a recovery.
Now, Bush's reply to that is to say that if it weren't for his tax cuts, we would still be in a recession. Indeed, in the same Oct. 11 speech, he asserted, "I'm convinced that if we had raised taxes, it would cause there to be an economic decline, which would make it harder to balance the budget over the years."
Monday, October 23, 2006
October 23, 2006
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
NO CONCESSIONS TO REPUBLICANS
If Democrats take Congress back in November, the way I hope they will, I hope we don't get a lot of hot air about bipartisanship. It's not just because I detest the Republican party and their lies and bullying since taking Congress in 1994. It's because bipartisanship Republican style is not in the interests of most of us in this country. Congress should do what we want, and if that means steamrolling Republicans so be it. This column by Paul Krugman is at www.welcome-to-pottersville.blogspot.com:
There are those who say that a confrontational stance will backfire politically on the Democrats. These are by and large the same people who told Democrats that attacking the Bush administration over Iraq would backfire in the midterm elections. Enough said.
Political considerations aside, American voters deserve to have their views represented in Congress. And according to opinion polls, most Americans are actually to the left of Congressional Democrats on issues such as health care.
In particular, the public wants politicians to stand up to corporate interests. This is clear from the latest Newsweek poll, which shows overwhelming public support for the agenda Nancy Pelosi has laid out for her first 100 hours if she becomes House speaker. The strongest support is for her plan to have Medicare negotiate with drug companies for lower prices, which is supported by 74 percent of Americans — and by 70 percent of Republicans!
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
NO CONCESSIONS TO REPUBLICANS
If Democrats take Congress back in November, the way I hope they will, I hope we don't get a lot of hot air about bipartisanship. It's not just because I detest the Republican party and their lies and bullying since taking Congress in 1994. It's because bipartisanship Republican style is not in the interests of most of us in this country. Congress should do what we want, and if that means steamrolling Republicans so be it. This column by Paul Krugman is at www.welcome-to-pottersville.blogspot.com:
There are those who say that a confrontational stance will backfire politically on the Democrats. These are by and large the same people who told Democrats that attacking the Bush administration over Iraq would backfire in the midterm elections. Enough said.
Political considerations aside, American voters deserve to have their views represented in Congress. And according to opinion polls, most Americans are actually to the left of Congressional Democrats on issues such as health care.
In particular, the public wants politicians to stand up to corporate interests. This is clear from the latest Newsweek poll, which shows overwhelming public support for the agenda Nancy Pelosi has laid out for her first 100 hours if she becomes House speaker. The strongest support is for her plan to have Medicare negotiate with drug companies for lower prices, which is supported by 74 percent of Americans — and by 70 percent of Republicans!
Sunday, October 22, 2006
October 22, 2006
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
TOTAL IGNORANCE
George W. Bush and his neocons had grandiose plans to take out Saddam Hussein and establish American hegemony in the Middle East. We would march in, take over the country, be greeted as liberators, control the oil, and have a compliant puppet state in the Middle East. It hasn't worked out that way. Even if you put aside all the lies and incompetence that have led to this occupation, you can't ignore the disaster that Iraq has become since Bush launched his war. Now Christians in Iraq are persecuted, which has to be a true example of irony. In this column Colbert King looks at the Iraq that Bush has created. The column is at www.washingtonpost.com:
Christians are being targeted in Iraq. It's not because they are one of the dominant groups vying to run the country. They aren't. Their clerics also are not part of Iraq's religious elite, although Christianity has deep roots in that country.
As the New York Times reported this week, since the Bush administration launched the invasion of Iraq 3 1/2 years ago, church bombings, assassinations, kidnappings and threats have become a daily part of Christian life. And the persecution of Christians began even before Pope Benedict XVI called attention to the words of a 14th-century Byzantine emperor who had some unkind things to say about Islam. Many churches in Baghdad have been forced to cancel services, the Times reports, and some have not met since.
WAL-MART'S LOUSY HEALTH CARE
It's a sad commentary on our society that a company like Wal-Mart has risen to be the top retailer. Wal-Mart is like corrosive acid. It's anti-union and has terrible benefits for its employees. It has dramatically increased the trade deficit with China by importing cheap Chinese goods. It destroys small businesses, supposedly the American ideal, everywhere it goes. This article talks about the latest Wal-Mart tactic of offering health insurance to its employees that really isn't worth much at all. The article by Cindy Zeldin is at www.alternet.org:
Wal-Mart's health insurance options for 2007, dubbed the "value plan" and the "freedom plan," feature deductibles reaching as high as $6,000 for family coverage under the "freedom plan" -- meaning that a Wal-Mart employee selecting that plan would have to fork over $6,000 before insurance started covering their family's medical bills. That's a lot of money for a cashier earning Wal-Mart wages, and it begs some serious questions about how a deductible that high can be met without going into debt.
According to an analysis by Wake-Up Wal-Mart, which supplied the internal corporate memo to the media, a full-time Wal-Mart worker could spend as much as 60 percent of his or her income on family health expenses before reaching the out-of-pocket maximum. Of course, most workers will be relatively healthy most of the time and won't incur health expenses quite so high in any given year. As a result, while serious financial hardship will occur among some Wal-Mart workers who become ill, it won't be the norm. And for Wal-Mart, that fact is the key to their cost-cutting benefits strategy.
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
TOTAL IGNORANCE
George W. Bush and his neocons had grandiose plans to take out Saddam Hussein and establish American hegemony in the Middle East. We would march in, take over the country, be greeted as liberators, control the oil, and have a compliant puppet state in the Middle East. It hasn't worked out that way. Even if you put aside all the lies and incompetence that have led to this occupation, you can't ignore the disaster that Iraq has become since Bush launched his war. Now Christians in Iraq are persecuted, which has to be a true example of irony. In this column Colbert King looks at the Iraq that Bush has created. The column is at www.washingtonpost.com:
Christians are being targeted in Iraq. It's not because they are one of the dominant groups vying to run the country. They aren't. Their clerics also are not part of Iraq's religious elite, although Christianity has deep roots in that country.
As the New York Times reported this week, since the Bush administration launched the invasion of Iraq 3 1/2 years ago, church bombings, assassinations, kidnappings and threats have become a daily part of Christian life. And the persecution of Christians began even before Pope Benedict XVI called attention to the words of a 14th-century Byzantine emperor who had some unkind things to say about Islam. Many churches in Baghdad have been forced to cancel services, the Times reports, and some have not met since.
WAL-MART'S LOUSY HEALTH CARE
It's a sad commentary on our society that a company like Wal-Mart has risen to be the top retailer. Wal-Mart is like corrosive acid. It's anti-union and has terrible benefits for its employees. It has dramatically increased the trade deficit with China by importing cheap Chinese goods. It destroys small businesses, supposedly the American ideal, everywhere it goes. This article talks about the latest Wal-Mart tactic of offering health insurance to its employees that really isn't worth much at all. The article by Cindy Zeldin is at www.alternet.org:
Wal-Mart's health insurance options for 2007, dubbed the "value plan" and the "freedom plan," feature deductibles reaching as high as $6,000 for family coverage under the "freedom plan" -- meaning that a Wal-Mart employee selecting that plan would have to fork over $6,000 before insurance started covering their family's medical bills. That's a lot of money for a cashier earning Wal-Mart wages, and it begs some serious questions about how a deductible that high can be met without going into debt.
According to an analysis by Wake-Up Wal-Mart, which supplied the internal corporate memo to the media, a full-time Wal-Mart worker could spend as much as 60 percent of his or her income on family health expenses before reaching the out-of-pocket maximum. Of course, most workers will be relatively healthy most of the time and won't incur health expenses quite so high in any given year. As a result, while serious financial hardship will occur among some Wal-Mart workers who become ill, it won't be the norm. And for Wal-Mart, that fact is the key to their cost-cutting benefits strategy.
Saturday, October 21, 2006
October 21, 2006
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
AN AGENDA
The old cliche says not to count your chickens until they're hatched, so I'm not assuming anything yet. But the prospects of Democrats recapturing the Congress look good at this point. If that happens, which I fervently hope it does, then these are some of the things I think should be on the agenda. Bush and his Republican cohorts have been guilty of so many crimes and so much incompetence it's hard to know where to begin. So these are not necessarily in order of importance:
1. Set forth a definite plan for withdrawing from Iraq, preferably within a year.
2. Join the global community in taking action to stop global climate change.
3. Raise the federal minimum wage.
4. Introduce Articles of Impeachment to impeach Bush and Cheney.
5. Take action to stop Bush from using "signing statements" to subvert the law.
6. Restore the fairness doctrine to media.
7. Take action to insure that all votes are counted, and that no voters are denied their right to vote.
8. Rescind Bush's tax cuts for the rich.
9. Rescind the law giving Bush the right to torture and deny habeas corpus.
10. Develop a plan for a national health care system.
11. Insure the integrity of the Social Security system.
12. Protect the Alaska National Wildfire Reserve from oil developers.
13. Push for a Constitutinal amendment to protect a woman's right to an abortion.
14. Get rid of Bush's "faith based" initiatives.
15. Throw out plans to build a wall between the United States and Mexico. We need a fair and humane immigration policy, and walls aren't the way to achieve that.
16. Investigate the crony capitalism that has occurred during this administration for the benefit of companies like Halliburton.
17. Throw out Bush's prescription drug plan that has been a major boondoggle for drug companies.
18. Rescind the bankruptcy law that was just a gift for predatory lenders.
19. Push for a comprehensive plan to stop using fossil fuels. It should be akin to the project to put a man on the moon in the 1960's.
20. Make certain that all members of the military are properly equipped, have decent food and water, and that they receive all the medical care they need and deserve.
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
AN AGENDA
The old cliche says not to count your chickens until they're hatched, so I'm not assuming anything yet. But the prospects of Democrats recapturing the Congress look good at this point. If that happens, which I fervently hope it does, then these are some of the things I think should be on the agenda. Bush and his Republican cohorts have been guilty of so many crimes and so much incompetence it's hard to know where to begin. So these are not necessarily in order of importance:
1. Set forth a definite plan for withdrawing from Iraq, preferably within a year.
2. Join the global community in taking action to stop global climate change.
3. Raise the federal minimum wage.
4. Introduce Articles of Impeachment to impeach Bush and Cheney.
5. Take action to stop Bush from using "signing statements" to subvert the law.
6. Restore the fairness doctrine to media.
7. Take action to insure that all votes are counted, and that no voters are denied their right to vote.
8. Rescind Bush's tax cuts for the rich.
9. Rescind the law giving Bush the right to torture and deny habeas corpus.
10. Develop a plan for a national health care system.
11. Insure the integrity of the Social Security system.
12. Protect the Alaska National Wildfire Reserve from oil developers.
13. Push for a Constitutinal amendment to protect a woman's right to an abortion.
14. Get rid of Bush's "faith based" initiatives.
15. Throw out plans to build a wall between the United States and Mexico. We need a fair and humane immigration policy, and walls aren't the way to achieve that.
16. Investigate the crony capitalism that has occurred during this administration for the benefit of companies like Halliburton.
17. Throw out Bush's prescription drug plan that has been a major boondoggle for drug companies.
18. Rescind the bankruptcy law that was just a gift for predatory lenders.
19. Push for a comprehensive plan to stop using fossil fuels. It should be akin to the project to put a man on the moon in the 1960's.
20. Make certain that all members of the military are properly equipped, have decent food and water, and that they receive all the medical care they need and deserve.
Friday, October 20, 2006
October 20, 2006
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
THIS AWFUL REPUBLICAN CONGRESS
You don't have to be partisan to be appalled at the performance of this Republican Congress. It's a Congress that just oozes with corruption and perversion. It's the Congress that can deny an increase in the disgracefully low minimum wage while granting itself handsome raises. It's the Congress that gives all kinds of money to companies with no bid contracts because the companies are friendly to Republicans. It's the Congress that apparently thinks civil liberties are so old hat and that torture has its place in 21st century America. It's a Congress that neglects its own citizens on the Gulf Coast when they are ravaged by killer hurricanes. This article by Matt Taibbi is at www.makethemaccountable.com:
There is very little that sums up the record of the US Congress in the Bush years better than a half-mad boy-addict put in charge of a federal commission on child exploitation. After all, if a hairy-necked, raincoat-clad freak like Rep. Mark Foley can get himself named co-chairman of the House Caucus on Missing and Exploited Children, one can only wonder: What the hell else is going on in the corridors of Capitol Hill these days?
These past six years were more than just the most shameful, corrupt and incompetent period in the history of the American legislative branch. These were the years when the US parliament became a historical punch line, a political obscenity on par with the court of Nero or Caligula - a stable of thieves and perverts who committed crimes rolling out of bed in the morning and did their very best to turn the mighty American empire into a debt-laden, despotic backwater, a Burkina Faso with cable…
The end result is a Congress that has hijacked the national treasury, frantically ceded power to the executive, and sold off the federal government in a private auction. It all happened before our very eyes. In case you missed it, here’s how they did it - in five easy steps:
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
THIS AWFUL REPUBLICAN CONGRESS
You don't have to be partisan to be appalled at the performance of this Republican Congress. It's a Congress that just oozes with corruption and perversion. It's the Congress that can deny an increase in the disgracefully low minimum wage while granting itself handsome raises. It's the Congress that gives all kinds of money to companies with no bid contracts because the companies are friendly to Republicans. It's the Congress that apparently thinks civil liberties are so old hat and that torture has its place in 21st century America. It's a Congress that neglects its own citizens on the Gulf Coast when they are ravaged by killer hurricanes. This article by Matt Taibbi is at www.makethemaccountable.com:
There is very little that sums up the record of the US Congress in the Bush years better than a half-mad boy-addict put in charge of a federal commission on child exploitation. After all, if a hairy-necked, raincoat-clad freak like Rep. Mark Foley can get himself named co-chairman of the House Caucus on Missing and Exploited Children, one can only wonder: What the hell else is going on in the corridors of Capitol Hill these days?
These past six years were more than just the most shameful, corrupt and incompetent period in the history of the American legislative branch. These were the years when the US parliament became a historical punch line, a political obscenity on par with the court of Nero or Caligula - a stable of thieves and perverts who committed crimes rolling out of bed in the morning and did their very best to turn the mighty American empire into a debt-laden, despotic backwater, a Burkina Faso with cable…
The end result is a Congress that has hijacked the national treasury, frantically ceded power to the executive, and sold off the federal government in a private auction. It all happened before our very eyes. In case you missed it, here’s how they did it - in five easy steps:
Thursday, October 19, 2006
October 19, 2006
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
RESULTS OF COMPASSIONATE CONSERVATISM
I have this quaint notion that my life is just as important as the life of someone with a big bank account. As President Kennedy once said in a different context, we're all mortal. We all breathe the same air. Having more money doesn't make a person better or superior to other human beings. But right-wingers feel differently. They feel we should genuflect religiously in front of anyone with the big bucks. Not only that, we should burden the rest of society so the very rich can accrue even more wealth. In this article John Podesta talks about the realities of "compassionate conservatism." The article is at think progress.org:
Today, the Center for American Progress is hosting a conference called “Securing the Common Good.” Featuring President Bill Clinton as the keynote speaker, the conference is an effort to forcefully articulate an alternative to “compassionate conservatism,” a progressive philosophy of governing. (Read more about the conference in this AP article.)
John Podesta, CAP’s president, delivered the opening remarks. First, he outlined the failures of the right’s governing philosophy:
They have put forward a philosophy, focused on individualism, in which people theoretically have more choices and assume more risk in nearly every part of their lives. In theory, the result of this approach is that people will save more, own more, rely less on the government and become greater stakeholders in the future of our country…
This is the theory.
But let’s look at the results:
– Over 46 million of our fellow citizens do not have health insurance;
– Poverty rates are climbing and personal savings rates are plummeting;
– The richest 1 percent of households already owns more wealth than the bottom 90 percent combined;
– Oil companies are taking in record profits while global warming advances at a record pace; and
– College tuition rates continue to skyrocket while wages stagnate.
Cutting through the rhetoric, the facts show that in this “ownership society,” most Americans have been left to fend for themselves: they are owners of more burdens and fewer opportunities.
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
RESULTS OF COMPASSIONATE CONSERVATISM
I have this quaint notion that my life is just as important as the life of someone with a big bank account. As President Kennedy once said in a different context, we're all mortal. We all breathe the same air. Having more money doesn't make a person better or superior to other human beings. But right-wingers feel differently. They feel we should genuflect religiously in front of anyone with the big bucks. Not only that, we should burden the rest of society so the very rich can accrue even more wealth. In this article John Podesta talks about the realities of "compassionate conservatism." The article is at think progress.org:
Today, the Center for American Progress is hosting a conference called “Securing the Common Good.” Featuring President Bill Clinton as the keynote speaker, the conference is an effort to forcefully articulate an alternative to “compassionate conservatism,” a progressive philosophy of governing. (Read more about the conference in this AP article.)
John Podesta, CAP’s president, delivered the opening remarks. First, he outlined the failures of the right’s governing philosophy:
They have put forward a philosophy, focused on individualism, in which people theoretically have more choices and assume more risk in nearly every part of their lives. In theory, the result of this approach is that people will save more, own more, rely less on the government and become greater stakeholders in the future of our country…
This is the theory.
But let’s look at the results:
– Over 46 million of our fellow citizens do not have health insurance;
– Poverty rates are climbing and personal savings rates are plummeting;
– The richest 1 percent of households already owns more wealth than the bottom 90 percent combined;
– Oil companies are taking in record profits while global warming advances at a record pace; and
– College tuition rates continue to skyrocket while wages stagnate.
Cutting through the rhetoric, the facts show that in this “ownership society,” most Americans have been left to fend for themselves: they are owners of more burdens and fewer opportunities.
Wednesday, October 18, 2006
October 18, 2006
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
BUSH'S STAR CHAMBER
It is supremely ironic that right-wingers, always stamping their feet about "big government," have supported George W. Bush, who personifies the worst aspects of big government. Under Bush the government has expanded enormously. The powers of the executive branch have also expanded thanks to a milquetoast Congress. Bush has now signed into law a provision that allows him to declare anyone an enemy combatant, to arrest them, and to throw them in prison forever. This is all--to use an oxymoron--to keep us "free." This article by Robert Parry is at www.consortiumnews.com:
“It is a rare occasion when a President can sign a bill he knows will save American lives,” Bush said. “I have that privilege this morning.”
But the new law does much more. In effect, it creates a parallel “star chamber” system of criminal justice for anyone, including an American citizen, who is suspected of engaging in, contributing to or acting in support of violent acts directed against the U.S. government or its allies anywhere on earth.
The law strips “unlawful combatants” and their alleged fellow-travelers of the fundamental right of habeas corpus, meaning that they can’t challenge their imprisonment in civilian courts, at least not until after they are brought before a military tribunal, tried under special secrecy rules and then sentenced.
One of the catches, however, is that with habeas corpus suspended these suspects have no guarantee of a swift trial and can theoretically be jailed indefinitely at the President’s discretion. Given the endless nature of the “global war on terror,” suspects could disappear forever into the dark hole of unlimited executive authority, their fate hidden even from their families.
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
BUSH'S STAR CHAMBER
It is supremely ironic that right-wingers, always stamping their feet about "big government," have supported George W. Bush, who personifies the worst aspects of big government. Under Bush the government has expanded enormously. The powers of the executive branch have also expanded thanks to a milquetoast Congress. Bush has now signed into law a provision that allows him to declare anyone an enemy combatant, to arrest them, and to throw them in prison forever. This is all--to use an oxymoron--to keep us "free." This article by Robert Parry is at www.consortiumnews.com:
“It is a rare occasion when a President can sign a bill he knows will save American lives,” Bush said. “I have that privilege this morning.”
But the new law does much more. In effect, it creates a parallel “star chamber” system of criminal justice for anyone, including an American citizen, who is suspected of engaging in, contributing to or acting in support of violent acts directed against the U.S. government or its allies anywhere on earth.
The law strips “unlawful combatants” and their alleged fellow-travelers of the fundamental right of habeas corpus, meaning that they can’t challenge their imprisonment in civilian courts, at least not until after they are brought before a military tribunal, tried under special secrecy rules and then sentenced.
One of the catches, however, is that with habeas corpus suspended these suspects have no guarantee of a swift trial and can theoretically be jailed indefinitely at the President’s discretion. Given the endless nature of the “global war on terror,” suspects could disappear forever into the dark hole of unlimited executive authority, their fate hidden even from their families.
Tuesday, October 17, 2006
October 17, 2006
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
JAMES MADISON ON CHURCH-STATE SEPARATION
The Framer more responsible for our Constitution than any other is James Madison. If anyone understood the "original intent" of the Constitution it was Madison. Madison was explicit in his statements supporting a separation of church and state. He would be appalled at the mixing of church and state we see under the Bush administration's "faith based initiatives." This comes from a column by Brooke Allen is at www.latimes.com:
The people who really did build this nation most definitely did not define "religious freedom" as the right of churches or other religious groups to benefit from taxpayer dollars. In fact, James Madison, the thinker who probably contributed more than any other to the legal foundations of our nation and who is frequently referred to as the father of the Constitution, was unambiguous on the subject.
First of all, he thought the idea of a church — any church — acquiring property and wealth to be directly contradictory to the principles of the Constitution. In his "Detached Memoranda," a collection of private reflections, Madison warned against "the danger of a direct mixture of Religion & civil Government" as well as "an evil which ought to be guarded ag[ain]st in the indefinite accumulation of property from the capacity of holding it in perpetuity by ecclesiastical corporations…. Are the U.S. duly awake to the tendency of the precedents they are establishing, in the multiplied incorporations of Religious Congregations with the faculty of acquiring & holding property real as well as personal?"
NEVER MORE
When Republican President Herbert Hoover presided over the beginning of the Great Depression it stayed in the minds of Americans for decades. People who lived during that time learned a lesson in Republican economics and the havoc it causes. Hoover seems great in comparison to the Bush administration. At least Hoover didn't launch an immoral war and cause the deaths of countless innocent people. Hoover didn't trample all over civil liberties and torture people. The crimes and incompetence of the Bush crowd should be seared into the memories of all Americans and it should be engraved into our history: Don't take this road again. This article by Andrew Bard Schmookler is at www.smirkingchimp.com:
what is important here is not just that this particular regime be overcome, but that the patterns expressing themselves through the regime be exposed and discredited. The contempt for law. The lust for power. The constant strategy of dividing people and creating enmity. The arrogance and bullying. The unbridled greed. The lust for domination. The self-righteousness. And above all, the lies upon lies upon lies so that the foundations of the democratic process were eaten up by the acid of deception.
The fall of these Bushites should not be a time for indulging in revenge. But it should be a time to imprint upon the consciousness of the American people just what it is that evil looks like when it comes to America to seduce the American people. For that smiling face of evil --with its false righteousness and sense of entitlement-- affords a look into the dark places in the American soul. A look into the forces that, though they may always linger in this nation, should "Never again" be allowed to rule its destiny.
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
JAMES MADISON ON CHURCH-STATE SEPARATION
The Framer more responsible for our Constitution than any other is James Madison. If anyone understood the "original intent" of the Constitution it was Madison. Madison was explicit in his statements supporting a separation of church and state. He would be appalled at the mixing of church and state we see under the Bush administration's "faith based initiatives." This comes from a column by Brooke Allen is at www.latimes.com:
The people who really did build this nation most definitely did not define "religious freedom" as the right of churches or other religious groups to benefit from taxpayer dollars. In fact, James Madison, the thinker who probably contributed more than any other to the legal foundations of our nation and who is frequently referred to as the father of the Constitution, was unambiguous on the subject.
First of all, he thought the idea of a church — any church — acquiring property and wealth to be directly contradictory to the principles of the Constitution. In his "Detached Memoranda," a collection of private reflections, Madison warned against "the danger of a direct mixture of Religion & civil Government" as well as "an evil which ought to be guarded ag[ain]st in the indefinite accumulation of property from the capacity of holding it in perpetuity by ecclesiastical corporations…. Are the U.S. duly awake to the tendency of the precedents they are establishing, in the multiplied incorporations of Religious Congregations with the faculty of acquiring & holding property real as well as personal?"
NEVER MORE
When Republican President Herbert Hoover presided over the beginning of the Great Depression it stayed in the minds of Americans for decades. People who lived during that time learned a lesson in Republican economics and the havoc it causes. Hoover seems great in comparison to the Bush administration. At least Hoover didn't launch an immoral war and cause the deaths of countless innocent people. Hoover didn't trample all over civil liberties and torture people. The crimes and incompetence of the Bush crowd should be seared into the memories of all Americans and it should be engraved into our history: Don't take this road again. This article by Andrew Bard Schmookler is at www.smirkingchimp.com:
what is important here is not just that this particular regime be overcome, but that the patterns expressing themselves through the regime be exposed and discredited. The contempt for law. The lust for power. The constant strategy of dividing people and creating enmity. The arrogance and bullying. The unbridled greed. The lust for domination. The self-righteousness. And above all, the lies upon lies upon lies so that the foundations of the democratic process were eaten up by the acid of deception.
The fall of these Bushites should not be a time for indulging in revenge. But it should be a time to imprint upon the consciousness of the American people just what it is that evil looks like when it comes to America to seduce the American people. For that smiling face of evil --with its false righteousness and sense of entitlement-- affords a look into the dark places in the American soul. A look into the forces that, though they may always linger in this nation, should "Never again" be allowed to rule its destiny.
Monday, October 16, 2006
October 16, 2006
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
POPULAR VOTE FOR PRESIDENT
The 2000 presidential election was ample proof that the Electoral College system designed by the Founding Fathers should be discarded. The Electoral College allows the candidate with fewer votes to win the presidency, which is an outrage in a democracy. The Electoral College has its defenders, such as conservative columnist George Will, but we're in the twenty-first century and we should bring our presidential elections into contemporary times. This column by Jonathan Chait is at www.latimes.com:
Most people instinctively, and correctly, believe that the candidate who gets the most votes should win the election. The majoritarian principle may not be so strong that it overrides any other consideration imaginable, but it's pretty strong. If you're going to have a system that allows the candidate who finishes second in the voting to win the election, you ought to have some pretty strong reasons for doing it.
So why should we occasionally let the second-place vote-getter win? Speaking against the popular-vote bill last month, California Senate Minority Leader Dick Ackerman (R-Irvine) warned that if we had a popular vote, "every candidate would be camped in L.A. and New York City, and they'd forget about the rest of the country."
BUSH IGNORED NORTH KOREA
When George W. Bush started his "axis of evil" rhetoric he put particular emphasis on Iraq. Saddam Hussein was dangerous, you see, because he had or was going to acquire weapons of mass destruction. That was the major rationale for attacking Iraq. We know now that the intelligence was fixed and Iraq never presented a threat to the United States. But North Korea, threatened by Bush, has proceeded with development of a nuclear weapons program. In this column Cenk Uygur argues that North Korea is damning proof that weapons of mass destruction was never an issue. The column is at www.smirkingchimp.com:
North Korea is proof positive that the Bush administration never cared about weapons of mass destruction. If that was really their main concern, clearly North Korea would have been their top priority. As it was, North Korea was so low on the priority list that we paid almost no attention to them for six years while they built and tested nuclear weapons.
Meanwhile, we invaded a country that had no biological or chemical weapons, let alone even a hint of a nuclear weapons program. Cheney and the rest of the administration looked so far and so wide to find any evidence, questionable or otherwise, to link Iraq to WMD. If they were so concerned about WMD, why didn't they obsess about far, far clearer evidence of WMD in North Korea?
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
POPULAR VOTE FOR PRESIDENT
The 2000 presidential election was ample proof that the Electoral College system designed by the Founding Fathers should be discarded. The Electoral College allows the candidate with fewer votes to win the presidency, which is an outrage in a democracy. The Electoral College has its defenders, such as conservative columnist George Will, but we're in the twenty-first century and we should bring our presidential elections into contemporary times. This column by Jonathan Chait is at www.latimes.com:
Most people instinctively, and correctly, believe that the candidate who gets the most votes should win the election. The majoritarian principle may not be so strong that it overrides any other consideration imaginable, but it's pretty strong. If you're going to have a system that allows the candidate who finishes second in the voting to win the election, you ought to have some pretty strong reasons for doing it.
So why should we occasionally let the second-place vote-getter win? Speaking against the popular-vote bill last month, California Senate Minority Leader Dick Ackerman (R-Irvine) warned that if we had a popular vote, "every candidate would be camped in L.A. and New York City, and they'd forget about the rest of the country."
BUSH IGNORED NORTH KOREA
When George W. Bush started his "axis of evil" rhetoric he put particular emphasis on Iraq. Saddam Hussein was dangerous, you see, because he had or was going to acquire weapons of mass destruction. That was the major rationale for attacking Iraq. We know now that the intelligence was fixed and Iraq never presented a threat to the United States. But North Korea, threatened by Bush, has proceeded with development of a nuclear weapons program. In this column Cenk Uygur argues that North Korea is damning proof that weapons of mass destruction was never an issue. The column is at www.smirkingchimp.com:
North Korea is proof positive that the Bush administration never cared about weapons of mass destruction. If that was really their main concern, clearly North Korea would have been their top priority. As it was, North Korea was so low on the priority list that we paid almost no attention to them for six years while they built and tested nuclear weapons.
Meanwhile, we invaded a country that had no biological or chemical weapons, let alone even a hint of a nuclear weapons program. Cheney and the rest of the administration looked so far and so wide to find any evidence, questionable or otherwise, to link Iraq to WMD. If they were so concerned about WMD, why didn't they obsess about far, far clearer evidence of WMD in North Korea?
Sunday, October 15, 2006
October 15, 2006
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
THE CORROSIVE IMPACT OF REPUBLICANS
Republicans have represented themselves as the party of fiscal responsibility, as strong on foreign policy, and of "moral values." We see the absolute absurdity of all those claims. Bush and company have exploded the federal deficit. We are deeply in hock to other countries. This was after Bush inherited a surplus from Bill Clinton. Bush's arrogant and reckless foreign policy led us into the disaster that is Iraq. First, Bush failed to prevent the attacks on 9/11 and since then his policies have made countless enemies of the United States and endangered us all. Now North Korea may have nuclear weapons. Then the "moral values" question really shows the hypocrisy of Republicans. This column by Andrew Rawnsley is at www.guardian.uk.co:
President Bush has again tried to use national security as his trump card in this election. The terror of terror worked for the Republicans in 2002 and again in 2004. It is not working this time. The opinion polls all agree: a majority of Americans now feel that Iraq is getting worse, and that the war was a mistake which has left them less secure.
They still see Bush as a 'War President'. The difference now is that they see him losing his wars. The United States has invaded Iraq and not found any weapons of mass destruction while North Korea is acquiring the nuclear bombs which George Bush once pledged he'd prevent them from having. At a news conference at the White House, the President talked big about Kim Jong-Il but carried a small stick. The world's soi-disant hyperpower is reduced to suggesting that China should do something about it.
What is most alarming people, including senior members of Bush's own administration, is how the crisis over North Korea plays into the threat of a nuclear-tipped Iran. The more helpless that America looks in relation to North Korea, the more emboldened the Iranians will feel about defiantly pursuing their ambitions to join the nuclear club. The Bush presidency has expended squillions of dollars on warfare and military hardware. So much treasure and so much blood and Americans are left with a growing dread that they have ended up weaker in the world.
BUSH AND PREDATORY LENDERS
George Bush's "compassionate conservatism" is compassionate for military contractors, for the top one percent of the economic elite, and for predatory lenders. Bush signed an onerous and despicable bankruptcy law. It's no coincidence that companies like credit card giant MBNA and mortgage lender Ameriquest were big campaign contributors. In this piece former Senator John Edwards writes about the crying need to deal with predatory lenders. The column is at www.thinkprogress.org:
We need strong legislation against predatory lending — preventing mortgage lenders from charging excessive fees, forbidding loan “flipping” where lenders rack up fees by refinancing mortgages without benefiting borrowers, and limiting pre-payment penalties.
Predatory lending isn’t the only problem for families that are working hard, paying their bills, and still struggling to get by. Short-term payday loans with excessive interest rates can quickly turn into a crushing long-term debt. Congress recently passed protections for our military men and women, but why not all families?
It’s well past time to install leaders who care about issues like predatory lending, rising mortgage foreclosure rates, increasing the minimum wage, and helping middle and low-income families. Americans deserve leaders that have the backbone to stand up and do something about their concerns. I’ve said it before, but I’ll say it again until it’s a reality — we need a government that works for all of its people, especially the most vulnerable among us.
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
THE CORROSIVE IMPACT OF REPUBLICANS
Republicans have represented themselves as the party of fiscal responsibility, as strong on foreign policy, and of "moral values." We see the absolute absurdity of all those claims. Bush and company have exploded the federal deficit. We are deeply in hock to other countries. This was after Bush inherited a surplus from Bill Clinton. Bush's arrogant and reckless foreign policy led us into the disaster that is Iraq. First, Bush failed to prevent the attacks on 9/11 and since then his policies have made countless enemies of the United States and endangered us all. Now North Korea may have nuclear weapons. Then the "moral values" question really shows the hypocrisy of Republicans. This column by Andrew Rawnsley is at www.guardian.uk.co:
President Bush has again tried to use national security as his trump card in this election. The terror of terror worked for the Republicans in 2002 and again in 2004. It is not working this time. The opinion polls all agree: a majority of Americans now feel that Iraq is getting worse, and that the war was a mistake which has left them less secure.
They still see Bush as a 'War President'. The difference now is that they see him losing his wars. The United States has invaded Iraq and not found any weapons of mass destruction while North Korea is acquiring the nuclear bombs which George Bush once pledged he'd prevent them from having. At a news conference at the White House, the President talked big about Kim Jong-Il but carried a small stick. The world's soi-disant hyperpower is reduced to suggesting that China should do something about it.
What is most alarming people, including senior members of Bush's own administration, is how the crisis over North Korea plays into the threat of a nuclear-tipped Iran. The more helpless that America looks in relation to North Korea, the more emboldened the Iranians will feel about defiantly pursuing their ambitions to join the nuclear club. The Bush presidency has expended squillions of dollars on warfare and military hardware. So much treasure and so much blood and Americans are left with a growing dread that they have ended up weaker in the world.
BUSH AND PREDATORY LENDERS
George Bush's "compassionate conservatism" is compassionate for military contractors, for the top one percent of the economic elite, and for predatory lenders. Bush signed an onerous and despicable bankruptcy law. It's no coincidence that companies like credit card giant MBNA and mortgage lender Ameriquest were big campaign contributors. In this piece former Senator John Edwards writes about the crying need to deal with predatory lenders. The column is at www.thinkprogress.org:
We need strong legislation against predatory lending — preventing mortgage lenders from charging excessive fees, forbidding loan “flipping” where lenders rack up fees by refinancing mortgages without benefiting borrowers, and limiting pre-payment penalties.
Predatory lending isn’t the only problem for families that are working hard, paying their bills, and still struggling to get by. Short-term payday loans with excessive interest rates can quickly turn into a crushing long-term debt. Congress recently passed protections for our military men and women, but why not all families?
It’s well past time to install leaders who care about issues like predatory lending, rising mortgage foreclosure rates, increasing the minimum wage, and helping middle and low-income families. Americans deserve leaders that have the backbone to stand up and do something about their concerns. I’ve said it before, but I’ll say it again until it’s a reality — we need a government that works for all of its people, especially the most vulnerable among us.
Saturday, October 14, 2006
October 14, 2006
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
FRESNO'S MORONIC POLICE DEPARTMENT
I went to the Big Fresno Fair for the first time in probably decades last night. It didn't take long to remember why I don't go to the Fair. This year was special because I wanted to see Merle Haggard, my favorite singer, and I haven't seen Hag in person in a long time.
The parking was nightmarish and so were the crowds. But the most annoying part of the evening was dealing with a rude obnoxious member of the Fresno PD. He was hassling my elderly stepfather because of a small knife my stepfather had attached to his keychain (not exactly Crocodile Dundee material). I had a little Swiss army knife, so I couldn't proceed either.
After 9/11 I can understand proper security precautions. But there is such a thing as absurdity. A small Swiss army knife is like a nail file. You'd be lucky to scratch someone, much less commit a terrorist act. And I'm tired of the arrogant, macho obnoxious behavior of Fresno cops. "Fresno's finest"? I hope not.
REPUBLICAN "MORALS" FROM BIZARRO WORLD
Republicans have been in truly high dudgeon about the peccadilloes of other people. We've heard lots of hot air about abortion, premarital sex, and gay marriage. But Republicans have presented us with a whole litany of characters whose crimes feature wife beating, adultery, and pedophilia. This article by A. Alexander is at www.progressivedailybeacon.com:
It appears then that wife-cheating, mistress-beating, racists, and pedophiles are perfectly acceptable to Republicans. Their high standard of "morals and values" will not tolerate any other kind of abhorrent or illegal behavior. They firmly draw the line at wife-cheating, mistress-beating, racism, and child-stalking. That's it! Republicans have set the "morals and values" bar high and they will not waffle, waver, or lower that standard at all, ever!
Okay, Republicans might be willing to permit the president several hundred personal visits from the convicted felon, Jack Abramoff. And, too, they'll allow DeLay, Doolittle, Pombo, Burns, and Representative Ney to accept bribes from Abramoff...but that is it! Wife-cheating, mistress-beating, racism, child-stalking, and bribe-taking are all acceptable, but Republicans will not stomach any other illegal or immoral behavior by members of their Party. They firmly, steadfastly, and absolutely draw the line at wife-cheating, mistress-beating, racism, child-stalking, and bribery.
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
FRESNO'S MORONIC POLICE DEPARTMENT
I went to the Big Fresno Fair for the first time in probably decades last night. It didn't take long to remember why I don't go to the Fair. This year was special because I wanted to see Merle Haggard, my favorite singer, and I haven't seen Hag in person in a long time.
The parking was nightmarish and so were the crowds. But the most annoying part of the evening was dealing with a rude obnoxious member of the Fresno PD. He was hassling my elderly stepfather because of a small knife my stepfather had attached to his keychain (not exactly Crocodile Dundee material). I had a little Swiss army knife, so I couldn't proceed either.
After 9/11 I can understand proper security precautions. But there is such a thing as absurdity. A small Swiss army knife is like a nail file. You'd be lucky to scratch someone, much less commit a terrorist act. And I'm tired of the arrogant, macho obnoxious behavior of Fresno cops. "Fresno's finest"? I hope not.
REPUBLICAN "MORALS" FROM BIZARRO WORLD
Republicans have been in truly high dudgeon about the peccadilloes of other people. We've heard lots of hot air about abortion, premarital sex, and gay marriage. But Republicans have presented us with a whole litany of characters whose crimes feature wife beating, adultery, and pedophilia. This article by A. Alexander is at www.progressivedailybeacon.com:
It appears then that wife-cheating, mistress-beating, racists, and pedophiles are perfectly acceptable to Republicans. Their high standard of "morals and values" will not tolerate any other kind of abhorrent or illegal behavior. They firmly draw the line at wife-cheating, mistress-beating, racism, and child-stalking. That's it! Republicans have set the "morals and values" bar high and they will not waffle, waver, or lower that standard at all, ever!
Okay, Republicans might be willing to permit the president several hundred personal visits from the convicted felon, Jack Abramoff. And, too, they'll allow DeLay, Doolittle, Pombo, Burns, and Representative Ney to accept bribes from Abramoff...but that is it! Wife-cheating, mistress-beating, racism, child-stalking, and bribe-taking are all acceptable, but Republicans will not stomach any other illegal or immoral behavior by members of their Party. They firmly, steadfastly, and absolutely draw the line at wife-cheating, mistress-beating, racism, child-stalking, and bribery.
Wednesday, October 11, 2006
October 11, 2006
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
BUSH AS GRIM REAPER
Since George W. Bush likes to play dress up, maybe he should don clothes fitting to his personality. He should wear a black robe and carry a sickle and assume the classic pose of the Grim Reaper. According to a new study, Bush may be responsible for the deaths of 654,000 Iraqis since launching his unnecessary war to find non-existent weapons of mass destruction. An earlier study placed the number at 100,000 Iraqis. Bush claims that the number is 30,000. Even if that number were true, which seems unlikely, that would be ten times the number killed in the attacks on 9/11. This article by Jonathan Bor is at www.commondreams.org:
In an update of a two-year-old survey that sparked wide disagreement, Johns Hopkins researchers now estimate that more than a half-million Iraqis have died as a result of the U.S.-led invasion and its bloody aftermath.
Reporting this week in the online edition of The Lancet, a leading British medical journal, the researchers estimated that 654,000 more Iraqis died of various causes after the invasion than would have died in a comparable period before.
The scientists attributed 600,000 of those deaths to acts of violence.
Gunshots emerged as the leading cause of death, accounting for 56 percent of the total. Airstrikes, car bombs and other explosions each accounted for 13 percent to 14 percent. Almost 60 percent of the deaths were among males 15 to 44.
"In this conflict, like all other recent conflicts, it's the population that bears the consequences," said Dr. Gilbert Burnham, lead author and co-director of the Center for Refugee and Disaster Response at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health.
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
BUSH AS GRIM REAPER
Since George W. Bush likes to play dress up, maybe he should don clothes fitting to his personality. He should wear a black robe and carry a sickle and assume the classic pose of the Grim Reaper. According to a new study, Bush may be responsible for the deaths of 654,000 Iraqis since launching his unnecessary war to find non-existent weapons of mass destruction. An earlier study placed the number at 100,000 Iraqis. Bush claims that the number is 30,000. Even if that number were true, which seems unlikely, that would be ten times the number killed in the attacks on 9/11. This article by Jonathan Bor is at www.commondreams.org:
In an update of a two-year-old survey that sparked wide disagreement, Johns Hopkins researchers now estimate that more than a half-million Iraqis have died as a result of the U.S.-led invasion and its bloody aftermath.
Reporting this week in the online edition of The Lancet, a leading British medical journal, the researchers estimated that 654,000 more Iraqis died of various causes after the invasion than would have died in a comparable period before.
The scientists attributed 600,000 of those deaths to acts of violence.
Gunshots emerged as the leading cause of death, accounting for 56 percent of the total. Airstrikes, car bombs and other explosions each accounted for 13 percent to 14 percent. Almost 60 percent of the deaths were among males 15 to 44.
"In this conflict, like all other recent conflicts, it's the population that bears the consequences," said Dr. Gilbert Burnham, lead author and co-director of the Center for Refugee and Disaster Response at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health.
Tuesday, October 10, 2006
October 10, 2006
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
A MERCENARY ARMY
Neocons claim that private business can do anything and everything better than government. If you've ever hassled with a corporate bureaucracy, you know that corporations can be just as bloated, just as infuriating, and just as inefficient as any government operation. Corporations look out for the bottom line. If they can shaft you and get a few more cents, that's just what they will do. If they can cut corners, possibly endangering life and safety, they will do that too. In the Bush era we're seeing private corporations even getting into the military business. Mercenaries aren't restrained in the same way the military is restrained, and that creates real dangers to our democracy. Thom Hartmann writes about it in this article at www.opednews.com:
As anybody who's been in the military can tell you, the old cliche is true that the job of an army is to "blow things up and kill people." The nature of an army includes licensing people to kill other people. This license to kill is governed by national laws and by international treaties.
Private corporations, however, are under few such constraints when they act as a mercenary army on behalf of a government. While the government pays the corporation, the same laws and treaties do not govern it as they would an army of the government. A private corporation is not answerable to We the People. To the contrary, laws and Supreme Court precedents say that private corporations can hide things behind the secrecy of "corporate personhood," claiming Fourth, Fifth, and Fourteenth Amendment "human rights" in ways that governments never could.
When you combine that lack of oversight with the profit motive, you get situations like the horrendous torture at Abu Ghraib, a process that, according to people who were there, was heavily influenced by the presence of and the orders from "private contractors." At least a thirty-strong team of interrogators at the prison, for example, were employed by CACI International, which is based in Virginia. According to the grunts who were convicted, private contractors told them to come in and do many of the things for which they went to jail: private contractors were in charge of many of the interrogations.
BUSH'S TOTALLY INEPT FOREIGN POLICY
George W. Bush has taken the "my way or the highway" approach to foreign policy just as he has in domestic affairs. If he doesn't like a law, he doesn't veto it. He just issues a "signing statement" saying that he won't comply with the law. If he doesn't like anti-wiretapping legislation, he just wiretaps anyway. If he has no evidence that a country presents a threat to the United States, he attacks that country anyway. Now, with North Korea possibly acquiring nuclear weapons technology, we're seeing the bitter fruits of Bush's bellicose and arrogant foreign policy. Robert Parry writes about it in this article at www.consortiumnews.com:
After the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks, Bush got tougher still, vowing to “rid the world of evil” and listing North Korea as part of the “axis of evil.”
More substantively, Bush sent to Congress a “nuclear posture review,” which laid out future U.S. strategy for deploying nuclear weapons. Leaked in 2002, the so-called NPR put North Korea on a list of potential targets for U.S. nuclear weapons.
The Bush administration also discussed lowering the threshold for the use of U.S. nuclear weapons by making low-yield tactical nukes available for some battlefield situations.
By putting North Korea on the nuclear target list, Bush reversed President Clinton’s commitment against targeting non-nuclear states with nuclear weapons. Clinton’s idea was that a U.S. promise not to nuke non-nuclear states would reduce their incentives for joining the nuclear club.
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
A MERCENARY ARMY
Neocons claim that private business can do anything and everything better than government. If you've ever hassled with a corporate bureaucracy, you know that corporations can be just as bloated, just as infuriating, and just as inefficient as any government operation. Corporations look out for the bottom line. If they can shaft you and get a few more cents, that's just what they will do. If they can cut corners, possibly endangering life and safety, they will do that too. In the Bush era we're seeing private corporations even getting into the military business. Mercenaries aren't restrained in the same way the military is restrained, and that creates real dangers to our democracy. Thom Hartmann writes about it in this article at www.opednews.com:
As anybody who's been in the military can tell you, the old cliche is true that the job of an army is to "blow things up and kill people." The nature of an army includes licensing people to kill other people. This license to kill is governed by national laws and by international treaties.
Private corporations, however, are under few such constraints when they act as a mercenary army on behalf of a government. While the government pays the corporation, the same laws and treaties do not govern it as they would an army of the government. A private corporation is not answerable to We the People. To the contrary, laws and Supreme Court precedents say that private corporations can hide things behind the secrecy of "corporate personhood," claiming Fourth, Fifth, and Fourteenth Amendment "human rights" in ways that governments never could.
When you combine that lack of oversight with the profit motive, you get situations like the horrendous torture at Abu Ghraib, a process that, according to people who were there, was heavily influenced by the presence of and the orders from "private contractors." At least a thirty-strong team of interrogators at the prison, for example, were employed by CACI International, which is based in Virginia. According to the grunts who were convicted, private contractors told them to come in and do many of the things for which they went to jail: private contractors were in charge of many of the interrogations.
BUSH'S TOTALLY INEPT FOREIGN POLICY
George W. Bush has taken the "my way or the highway" approach to foreign policy just as he has in domestic affairs. If he doesn't like a law, he doesn't veto it. He just issues a "signing statement" saying that he won't comply with the law. If he doesn't like anti-wiretapping legislation, he just wiretaps anyway. If he has no evidence that a country presents a threat to the United States, he attacks that country anyway. Now, with North Korea possibly acquiring nuclear weapons technology, we're seeing the bitter fruits of Bush's bellicose and arrogant foreign policy. Robert Parry writes about it in this article at www.consortiumnews.com:
After the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks, Bush got tougher still, vowing to “rid the world of evil” and listing North Korea as part of the “axis of evil.”
More substantively, Bush sent to Congress a “nuclear posture review,” which laid out future U.S. strategy for deploying nuclear weapons. Leaked in 2002, the so-called NPR put North Korea on a list of potential targets for U.S. nuclear weapons.
The Bush administration also discussed lowering the threshold for the use of U.S. nuclear weapons by making low-yield tactical nukes available for some battlefield situations.
By putting North Korea on the nuclear target list, Bush reversed President Clinton’s commitment against targeting non-nuclear states with nuclear weapons. Clinton’s idea was that a U.S. promise not to nuke non-nuclear states would reduce their incentives for joining the nuclear club.
Sunday, October 08, 2006
October 08, 2006
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
THE TAX EXEMPT RACKET FOR RELIGION
Right-wingers like to whine that Christians in this country are "persecuted." It's hard to see that when you look around at all the churches, all the church programming on the media, all the attention paid to religion by the major media, and the disgusting array of tax breaks enjoyed by religion. Those of us who work have to pay more in taxes because churches get exempted. I think the "wall of separation" between church and religion that Thomas Jefferson wrote about should include taxes. Since Bush seized power, the government subsidizing of religion has only gotten worse. This article is from The New York Times at www.nytimes.com/2006/10/08/business/08religious.html?_r=1&hp&ex=1160280000&en=1b166af956151524&ei=5094&partner=homepage&oref=slogin:
An analysis by The New York Times of laws passed since 1989 shows that more than 200 special arrangements, protections or exemptions for religious groups or their adherents were tucked into Congressional legislation, covering topics ranging from pensions to immigration to land use. New breaks have also been provided by a host of pivotal court decisions at the state and federal level, and by numerous rule changes in almost every department and agency of the executive branch.
The special breaks amount to “a sort of religious affirmative action program,” said John Witte Jr., director of the Center for the Study of Law and Religion at the Emory University law school.
Professor Witte added: “Separation of church and state was certainly part of American law when many of today’s public opinion makers were in school. But separation of church and state is no longer the law of the land.”
LOOKING BEYOND FOLEY
The Mark Foley scandal reveals a great deal about the Republican leadership in Congress, and it certainly reveals the massive hypocrisy by right-wing pundits. They have gone into contortions trying to place the blame for Foley on Democrats. But the Foley scandal is just part of a far larger, more massive list of Republican crimes and ineptitude. Republicans lied us into a war. War profiteers have done well while our military gets slaughtered. Iraqi civilians have died needlessly. The United States has stooped to torture and war crimes. The economy has been ransacked by Bush and his gang. Millions of us are sliding into poverty despite impressive productivity. This column by Jonathan Chait is at www.latimes.com:
If you look at the actual issues related to terrorism, it's hard to imagine why anybody would vote Republican. Just last week, Bob Woodward (whose last book, it should be noted, was eagerly promoted by the GOP for its flattering portrayal of Bush) revealed that then National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice was warned by CIA Director George Tenet in July 2001 of an imminent Al Qaeda attack and did nothing. It was yet another devastating indictment of the administration's failure to act on what by late summer 2001 had become massive evidence of an imminent threat. Alas, this news item was mostly drowned out by the Foley scandal. So yes, by all means, let's have a "clear reading" on the issues.
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
THE TAX EXEMPT RACKET FOR RELIGION
Right-wingers like to whine that Christians in this country are "persecuted." It's hard to see that when you look around at all the churches, all the church programming on the media, all the attention paid to religion by the major media, and the disgusting array of tax breaks enjoyed by religion. Those of us who work have to pay more in taxes because churches get exempted. I think the "wall of separation" between church and religion that Thomas Jefferson wrote about should include taxes. Since Bush seized power, the government subsidizing of religion has only gotten worse. This article is from The New York Times at www.nytimes.com/2006/10/08/business/08religious.html?_r=1&hp&ex=1160280000&en=1b166af956151524&ei=5094&partner=homepage&oref=slogin:
An analysis by The New York Times of laws passed since 1989 shows that more than 200 special arrangements, protections or exemptions for religious groups or their adherents were tucked into Congressional legislation, covering topics ranging from pensions to immigration to land use. New breaks have also been provided by a host of pivotal court decisions at the state and federal level, and by numerous rule changes in almost every department and agency of the executive branch.
The special breaks amount to “a sort of religious affirmative action program,” said John Witte Jr., director of the Center for the Study of Law and Religion at the Emory University law school.
Professor Witte added: “Separation of church and state was certainly part of American law when many of today’s public opinion makers were in school. But separation of church and state is no longer the law of the land.”
LOOKING BEYOND FOLEY
The Mark Foley scandal reveals a great deal about the Republican leadership in Congress, and it certainly reveals the massive hypocrisy by right-wing pundits. They have gone into contortions trying to place the blame for Foley on Democrats. But the Foley scandal is just part of a far larger, more massive list of Republican crimes and ineptitude. Republicans lied us into a war. War profiteers have done well while our military gets slaughtered. Iraqi civilians have died needlessly. The United States has stooped to torture and war crimes. The economy has been ransacked by Bush and his gang. Millions of us are sliding into poverty despite impressive productivity. This column by Jonathan Chait is at www.latimes.com:
If you look at the actual issues related to terrorism, it's hard to imagine why anybody would vote Republican. Just last week, Bob Woodward (whose last book, it should be noted, was eagerly promoted by the GOP for its flattering portrayal of Bush) revealed that then National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice was warned by CIA Director George Tenet in July 2001 of an imminent Al Qaeda attack and did nothing. It was yet another devastating indictment of the administration's failure to act on what by late summer 2001 had become massive evidence of an imminent threat. Alas, this news item was mostly drowned out by the Foley scandal. So yes, by all means, let's have a "clear reading" on the issues.
Friday, October 06, 2006
October 06, 2006
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
REPUBLICAN CAPITALISM IN ACTION
Today I got an email from Rubber Stamp Radanovich talking about our "booming" economy. Maybe in Radanovich's world things are great. Down here in the working class world it's not so sanguine. In this article Paul Krugman writes about the war on wages. Wal-Mart is the prime example of Republican labor and economic policies in action. It's a company that already pays lousy wages and has lousy benefits. But the greedheads who run the company aren't satisfied. They want to increase their part-time labor force and enact policies that make senior empl0yees leave. It's a great case for not doing business with Wal-Mart and for getting rid of Republicans. The article is at economistsview.typepad.com/economistsview/2006/10/paul_krugman_th_1.html:
C]onsider the latest news from Wal-Mart. Wal-Mart already has a well-deserved reputation for paying low wages and offering few benefits...; last year, an internal Wal-Mart memo conceded that 46 percent of its workers’ children were either on Medicaid or lacked health insurance. Nonetheless, the memo expressed concern that wages and benefits were rising, in part “because we pay an associate more in salary and benefits as his or her tenure increases.”
The problem from the company’s point of view, then, is that its workers are too loyal; ... not enough workers quit before acquiring the right to higher wages and benefits. Among the policy changes the memo suggested to deal with this problem was a shift to hiring more part-time workers...
And the strategy is being put into effect. ... Wal-Mart ... wants to transform its work force to 40 percent part-time from 20 percent.” Another leaked Wal-Mart memo describes a plan to impose wage caps, so that long-term employees won’t get raises. And the company is taking other steps to keep workers from staying too long: in some stores, according to workers, “managers have suddenly barred older employees with back or leg problems from sitting on stools.”
RIGHT-WING FRAMING
Today's Fresno Bee has a letter from a right-winger attacking someone who complained that Rubber Stamp Radanovich didn't answer a letter. The right-winger used a familiar tactic. He uses name calling to start, referring to a "wacky left wing" group. Right-wingers should look at the militia groups who parade around with Nazi flags, the Christian fundamentalists who pray for Armageddon, and the ill-informed people who think Saddam Hussein was responsible for 9/11 before they call anyone else "wacky." They're all good little Republicans.
This guy thinks that single payer health care is a bad idea, although we have millions of uninsured in this country. We also have the most expensive health care among the industrialized nations. If right-wingers are so concerned about small business, they would welcome single payer health care.
Our pundit also thinks that staying in Iraq is a swell idea, although it's clearly a fiasco. And, of course, there was a reference to "higher taxes." Where have Bush's tax cuts for the rich left us? We have record deficits and our economic security is in peril because of all the debt we have with China and other countries. In the meantime, critical funding isn't available for anything. Really, who is "wacky"?
IRAQ IS ALREADY LOST
Every assumption and pronouncement by the Bush administration about Iraq has been either wrong or an outright lie. The administration had grandiose plans to take out Saddam Hussein and occupy the country to a reception by the Iraqis of roses and chocolates. Instead, the United States has been met by a fierce insurgency. Why is that a surprise? When do people ever welcome invaders? Staying in Iraq is only going to bleed the United States dry, keeping us from addressing all the other major problems confronting us, and uniting the Moslem world against us. We need a change in course. We need some reality. This article by Robert Parry is at www.consortiumnews.com:
Our March 30, 2003, article said, “Without doubt, the Bush administration misjudged the biggest question of the war: ‘Would the Iraqis fight?’ Happy visions of rose petals and cheers have given way to a grim reality of ambushes and suicide bombs.”
The article added: “But the Bush pattern of miscalculation continues unabated. Bush seems to have cut himself off from internal dissent at the CIA and the Pentagon, where intelligence analysts and field generals warned against the wishful thinking that is proving lethal on the Iraqi battlefields. …
“Instead of recognizing their initial errors and rethinking their war strategy, Bush and his team are pressing forward confidently into what looks like a dreamscape of their own propaganda,” refusing to turn back “no matter how bloody or ghastly their future course might be.”
The article – though unpopular amid the heady war fever of March 2003 – looks almost prescient 3 ½ years later. Indeed, in the wake of recent bleak U.S. intelligence estimates on the Iraq War and Bob Woodward’s book, State of Denial, our dire analysis may even have become Washington’s “conventional wisdom.”
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
REPUBLICAN CAPITALISM IN ACTION
Today I got an email from Rubber Stamp Radanovich talking about our "booming" economy. Maybe in Radanovich's world things are great. Down here in the working class world it's not so sanguine. In this article Paul Krugman writes about the war on wages. Wal-Mart is the prime example of Republican labor and economic policies in action. It's a company that already pays lousy wages and has lousy benefits. But the greedheads who run the company aren't satisfied. They want to increase their part-time labor force and enact policies that make senior empl0yees leave. It's a great case for not doing business with Wal-Mart and for getting rid of Republicans. The article is at economistsview.typepad.com/economistsview/2006/10/paul_krugman_th_1.html:
C]onsider the latest news from Wal-Mart. Wal-Mart already has a well-deserved reputation for paying low wages and offering few benefits...; last year, an internal Wal-Mart memo conceded that 46 percent of its workers’ children were either on Medicaid or lacked health insurance. Nonetheless, the memo expressed concern that wages and benefits were rising, in part “because we pay an associate more in salary and benefits as his or her tenure increases.”
The problem from the company’s point of view, then, is that its workers are too loyal; ... not enough workers quit before acquiring the right to higher wages and benefits. Among the policy changes the memo suggested to deal with this problem was a shift to hiring more part-time workers...
And the strategy is being put into effect. ... Wal-Mart ... wants to transform its work force to 40 percent part-time from 20 percent.” Another leaked Wal-Mart memo describes a plan to impose wage caps, so that long-term employees won’t get raises. And the company is taking other steps to keep workers from staying too long: in some stores, according to workers, “managers have suddenly barred older employees with back or leg problems from sitting on stools.”
RIGHT-WING FRAMING
Today's Fresno Bee has a letter from a right-winger attacking someone who complained that Rubber Stamp Radanovich didn't answer a letter. The right-winger used a familiar tactic. He uses name calling to start, referring to a "wacky left wing" group. Right-wingers should look at the militia groups who parade around with Nazi flags, the Christian fundamentalists who pray for Armageddon, and the ill-informed people who think Saddam Hussein was responsible for 9/11 before they call anyone else "wacky." They're all good little Republicans.
This guy thinks that single payer health care is a bad idea, although we have millions of uninsured in this country. We also have the most expensive health care among the industrialized nations. If right-wingers are so concerned about small business, they would welcome single payer health care.
Our pundit also thinks that staying in Iraq is a swell idea, although it's clearly a fiasco. And, of course, there was a reference to "higher taxes." Where have Bush's tax cuts for the rich left us? We have record deficits and our economic security is in peril because of all the debt we have with China and other countries. In the meantime, critical funding isn't available for anything. Really, who is "wacky"?
IRAQ IS ALREADY LOST
Every assumption and pronouncement by the Bush administration about Iraq has been either wrong or an outright lie. The administration had grandiose plans to take out Saddam Hussein and occupy the country to a reception by the Iraqis of roses and chocolates. Instead, the United States has been met by a fierce insurgency. Why is that a surprise? When do people ever welcome invaders? Staying in Iraq is only going to bleed the United States dry, keeping us from addressing all the other major problems confronting us, and uniting the Moslem world against us. We need a change in course. We need some reality. This article by Robert Parry is at www.consortiumnews.com:
Our March 30, 2003, article said, “Without doubt, the Bush administration misjudged the biggest question of the war: ‘Would the Iraqis fight?’ Happy visions of rose petals and cheers have given way to a grim reality of ambushes and suicide bombs.”
The article added: “But the Bush pattern of miscalculation continues unabated. Bush seems to have cut himself off from internal dissent at the CIA and the Pentagon, where intelligence analysts and field generals warned against the wishful thinking that is proving lethal on the Iraqi battlefields. …
“Instead of recognizing their initial errors and rethinking their war strategy, Bush and his team are pressing forward confidently into what looks like a dreamscape of their own propaganda,” refusing to turn back “no matter how bloody or ghastly their future course might be.”
The article – though unpopular amid the heady war fever of March 2003 – looks almost prescient 3 ½ years later. Indeed, in the wake of recent bleak U.S. intelligence estimates on the Iraq War and Bob Woodward’s book, State of Denial, our dire analysis may even have become Washington’s “conventional wisdom.”
Wednesday, October 04, 2006
October 04, 2006
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
EVEN WORSE THAN FOLEY
If there is ever a competition for the world's greatest hypocrites, the Republican party has to be a leading contender. Since the days of Danny Boy Quayle we've heard about "family values." The Christian Coalition has been closely aligned with Republicans, denouncing abortion, gay rights, and almost anything else that can be turned into a Republican spin point. The apparent coverup for Congressman Mark Foley and his stalking of teenage Congressional pages shows Republicans are all talk and no action. But even worse than the Foley affair is the failure of the Bush administration to stop the attacks on 9/11. Bob Woodward's new book provides evidence that Condoleezza Rice, who was national security adviser, got clear warnings that we were going to be attacked. She, like her boss George W. Bush, evidently had better things to do than stop a terrorist attack. The list of crimes and bungles by this administration is longer than your arm now. It's time for them to be voted out of office and prosecuted. This article by Robert Scheer is at www.commondreams.org:
They are such liars. And no, I am not speaking only of the dissembling GOP House leaders led by Speaker Dennis Hastert who, out of naked political calculation, covered up for one of their own in the sordid teen stalking case of Rep. Mark Foley.
Call me old school, but I am still more concerned with the Republicans molesting Lady Liberty while pretending to be guarding the nation’s security, an assignment which they have totally botched. The news about the Foley coverup, while important as yet another example of extreme hypocrisy on the part of the Republican virtues police, should not be allowed to obscure the latest evidence of administration deceit as to its egregious ineptness in protecting the nation.
On Monday, a State Department spokesman conceded that then-National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice had indeed been briefed in July 2001 by George Tenet, then-director of the CIA, about the alarming potential for an Al Qaeda attack, as Bob Woodward has reported in his aptly named new book, “State of Denial.”
“I don’t remember a so-called emergency meeting,” Rice had said only hours earlier, apparently still suffering from some sort of post-9/11 amnesia that seemed to afflict her during her forced testimony to the 9/11 Commission. The omission of this meeting from the final commission report is another example of how the Bush administration undermined the bipartisan investigation that the president had tried to prevent. Surely lying under oath in what was arguably the most important official investigation in the nation’s history should be treated more seriously than the evasiveness in the Paula Jones case that got President Bill Clinton impeached. Nor is it just Rice who should be challenged, for Tenet seems to have provided Woodward with details concerning the administration’s indifference to the terrorist threat that he did not share with the 9/11 Commission.
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
EVEN WORSE THAN FOLEY
If there is ever a competition for the world's greatest hypocrites, the Republican party has to be a leading contender. Since the days of Danny Boy Quayle we've heard about "family values." The Christian Coalition has been closely aligned with Republicans, denouncing abortion, gay rights, and almost anything else that can be turned into a Republican spin point. The apparent coverup for Congressman Mark Foley and his stalking of teenage Congressional pages shows Republicans are all talk and no action. But even worse than the Foley affair is the failure of the Bush administration to stop the attacks on 9/11. Bob Woodward's new book provides evidence that Condoleezza Rice, who was national security adviser, got clear warnings that we were going to be attacked. She, like her boss George W. Bush, evidently had better things to do than stop a terrorist attack. The list of crimes and bungles by this administration is longer than your arm now. It's time for them to be voted out of office and prosecuted. This article by Robert Scheer is at www.commondreams.org:
They are such liars. And no, I am not speaking only of the dissembling GOP House leaders led by Speaker Dennis Hastert who, out of naked political calculation, covered up for one of their own in the sordid teen stalking case of Rep. Mark Foley.
Call me old school, but I am still more concerned with the Republicans molesting Lady Liberty while pretending to be guarding the nation’s security, an assignment which they have totally botched. The news about the Foley coverup, while important as yet another example of extreme hypocrisy on the part of the Republican virtues police, should not be allowed to obscure the latest evidence of administration deceit as to its egregious ineptness in protecting the nation.
On Monday, a State Department spokesman conceded that then-National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice had indeed been briefed in July 2001 by George Tenet, then-director of the CIA, about the alarming potential for an Al Qaeda attack, as Bob Woodward has reported in his aptly named new book, “State of Denial.”
“I don’t remember a so-called emergency meeting,” Rice had said only hours earlier, apparently still suffering from some sort of post-9/11 amnesia that seemed to afflict her during her forced testimony to the 9/11 Commission. The omission of this meeting from the final commission report is another example of how the Bush administration undermined the bipartisan investigation that the president had tried to prevent. Surely lying under oath in what was arguably the most important official investigation in the nation’s history should be treated more seriously than the evasiveness in the Paula Jones case that got President Bill Clinton impeached. Nor is it just Rice who should be challenged, for Tenet seems to have provided Woodward with details concerning the administration’s indifference to the terrorist threat that he did not share with the 9/11 Commission.
Tuesday, October 03, 2006
October 03, 2006
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
THE WISDOM OF CUT AND RUN
George W. Bush and his cohorts like the phrase "cut and run" these days. They apply the phrase to Democrats and others who think it might be a good idea to get out of the quagmire in Iraq. Bush reminds me of a Three Stooges routine where they point to each other and proclaim, "I'll fight to the last drop of his blood." Historical examples show there are times it's good to "cut and run." Custer should have, Napoleon should have. The British retreat at Dunkirk saved the British army to fight another day. This article by Stephen Pizzo is at www.smirkingchimp.com:
You don't have to be a coward to cut and run from a battle. Even a casual study of military history shows that cut and run comes in more flavors than the cowardly rout. Sometimes cutting and running is simply strategic or tactical retreat.
Strategic retreat: a partial solution to the bitter-end problem. When confronted with a losing situation, the losing party accepts defeat in a way which allows them to preserve as much of their resources, (both moral and physical) as possible.
Tactical retreat: not a bad response to a surprise assault. First you survive. Then you choose your own ground for response and/or counterattack.
The North Vietnamese and their VietCong insurgent allies in the south were masters of both the tactical retreat. By retreating “to live and fight another day,” they wore down superior US fire power.
Of course, George W. Bush and Dick Cheney wouldn't know anything about that, since both successfully avoided fighting in Vietnam. But, had they spent a few months chasing the “cut and run” Viet Cong through the jungle they'd have more respect for cut and run as a tool of war.
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
THE WISDOM OF CUT AND RUN
George W. Bush and his cohorts like the phrase "cut and run" these days. They apply the phrase to Democrats and others who think it might be a good idea to get out of the quagmire in Iraq. Bush reminds me of a Three Stooges routine where they point to each other and proclaim, "I'll fight to the last drop of his blood." Historical examples show there are times it's good to "cut and run." Custer should have, Napoleon should have. The British retreat at Dunkirk saved the British army to fight another day. This article by Stephen Pizzo is at www.smirkingchimp.com:
You don't have to be a coward to cut and run from a battle. Even a casual study of military history shows that cut and run comes in more flavors than the cowardly rout. Sometimes cutting and running is simply strategic or tactical retreat.
Strategic retreat: a partial solution to the bitter-end problem. When confronted with a losing situation, the losing party accepts defeat in a way which allows them to preserve as much of their resources, (both moral and physical) as possible.
Tactical retreat: not a bad response to a surprise assault. First you survive. Then you choose your own ground for response and/or counterattack.
The North Vietnamese and their VietCong insurgent allies in the south were masters of both the tactical retreat. By retreating “to live and fight another day,” they wore down superior US fire power.
Of course, George W. Bush and Dick Cheney wouldn't know anything about that, since both successfully avoided fighting in Vietnam. But, had they spent a few months chasing the “cut and run” Viet Cong through the jungle they'd have more respect for cut and run as a tool of war.
Monday, October 02, 2006
October 02, 2006
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
THE GREAT UNRAVELING
When you follow politics for a while you learn that logic is not the driving force in how people vote. Emotion and mythology play a big part. Conservatives have been able to exploit those factors very well since the days of Ronald Reagan. Most working people are frustrated. Most of us work at jobs we tolerate at best, and probably hate. We get paid far less than the people we work for, although we do most of the work. And the thought that someone is getting a free ride somewhere at our expense is enraging. Reagan was able to use mythical "welfare queens" to attract working class voters. Most people in this country believe in God or in religion. They feel very threatened when their religious beliefs come into question, and Republicans have been able to exploit that fear. But now we are seeing the right-wing power structure in this country beginning to fracture. They have always been bad for the country, and now things are bad on so many fronts people are putting aside their fears and myths. This article by Paul Krugman is at welcome-to-pottersville.blogspot.com:
At its core, the political axis that currently controls Congress and the White House is an alliance between the preachers and the plutocrats — between the religious right, which hates gays, abortion and the theory of evolution, and the economic right, which hates Social Security, Medicare and taxes on rich people. Surrounding this core is a large periphery of politicians and lobbyists who joined the movement not out of conviction, but to share in the spoils.
Together, these groups formed a seemingly invincible political coalition, in which the religious right supplied the passion and the economic right supplied the money.
The coalition has, however, always been more vulnerable than it seemed, because it was an alliance based not on shared goals, but on each group’s belief that it could use the other to get what it wants. Bring that belief into question, and the whole thing falls apart.
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
THE GREAT UNRAVELING
When you follow politics for a while you learn that logic is not the driving force in how people vote. Emotion and mythology play a big part. Conservatives have been able to exploit those factors very well since the days of Ronald Reagan. Most working people are frustrated. Most of us work at jobs we tolerate at best, and probably hate. We get paid far less than the people we work for, although we do most of the work. And the thought that someone is getting a free ride somewhere at our expense is enraging. Reagan was able to use mythical "welfare queens" to attract working class voters. Most people in this country believe in God or in religion. They feel very threatened when their religious beliefs come into question, and Republicans have been able to exploit that fear. But now we are seeing the right-wing power structure in this country beginning to fracture. They have always been bad for the country, and now things are bad on so many fronts people are putting aside their fears and myths. This article by Paul Krugman is at welcome-to-pottersville.blogspot.com:
At its core, the political axis that currently controls Congress and the White House is an alliance between the preachers and the plutocrats — between the religious right, which hates gays, abortion and the theory of evolution, and the economic right, which hates Social Security, Medicare and taxes on rich people. Surrounding this core is a large periphery of politicians and lobbyists who joined the movement not out of conviction, but to share in the spoils.
Together, these groups formed a seemingly invincible political coalition, in which the religious right supplied the passion and the economic right supplied the money.
The coalition has, however, always been more vulnerable than it seemed, because it was an alliance based not on shared goals, but on each group’s belief that it could use the other to get what it wants. Bring that belief into question, and the whole thing falls apart.
Sunday, October 01, 2006
October 01, 2006
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
RICE IGNORED URGENT 9/11 WARNINGS
According to the new book by investigative reporter Bob Woodward, Condoleezza Rice, then National Security Adviser, ignored warnings of an impending terrorist attack against the United States. CIA Director George Tenet tried desperately to get Rice to take the threat of an attack seriously, but felt he was given the brushoff. The pattern is clear: the Bush administration had numerous warnings of an attack, but chose to ignore them. On the day of the attack itself the administration was paralyzed and failed to stop a second airliner from crashing into the World Trade Center. Now the Bush administration would have you believe they're the ones who can protect us from a terrorist attack. This article by Ron Brynaert is at www.rawstory.com:
According to a new book written by Washington Post investigative reporter Bob Woodward, two months before the September 11 attacks, then National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice gave the "brush-off" to an "impending terrorist attack" warning by former C.I.A. director George J. Tenet and his counterterrorism coordinator.
An article in Friday's New York Times first mentioned the warning, and a front page book review of Woodward's State of Denial in Saturday's edition provides more details.
"On July 10, 2001, the book says, Mr. Tenet and his counterterrorism chief, J. Cofer Black, met with Ms. Rice at the White House to impress upon her the seriousness of the intelligence the agency was collecting about an impending attack," David E. Sanger reported on Friday. "But both men came away from the meeting feeling that Ms. Rice had not taken the warnings seriously."
LESSONS FROM HISTORY
In the autumn of 68 B. C. the Roman port of Ostia was attacked by the ancient world's version of terrorists. The port was set on fire, the war fleet was destroyed, and two senators were kidnapped. It set in motion Rome's version of the "war on terrorism" that eventually led to the destruction of their constitutional form of government and the establishment of a dictatorship. This article by Robert Harris is at www.commondreams.org:
In the autumn of 68 B.C. the world’s only military superpower was dealt a profound psychological blow by a daring terrorist attack on its very heart. Rome’s port at Ostia was set on fire, the consular war fleet destroyed, and two prominent senators, together with their bodyguards and staff, kidnapped.
The incident, dramatic though it was, has not attracted much attention from modern historians. But history is mutable. An event that was merely a footnote five years ago has now, in our post-9/11 world, assumed a fresh and ominous significance. For in the panicky aftermath of the attack, the Roman people made decisions that set them on the path to the destruction of their Constitution, their democracy and their liberty. One cannot help wondering if history is repeating itself.
Consider the parallels. The perpetrators of this spectacular assault were not in the pay of any foreign power: no nation would have dared to attack Rome so provocatively. They were, rather, the disaffected of the earth: “The ruined men of all nations,” in the words of the great 19th-century German historian Theodor Mommsen, “a piratical state with a peculiar esprit de corps.”
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
RICE IGNORED URGENT 9/11 WARNINGS
According to the new book by investigative reporter Bob Woodward, Condoleezza Rice, then National Security Adviser, ignored warnings of an impending terrorist attack against the United States. CIA Director George Tenet tried desperately to get Rice to take the threat of an attack seriously, but felt he was given the brushoff. The pattern is clear: the Bush administration had numerous warnings of an attack, but chose to ignore them. On the day of the attack itself the administration was paralyzed and failed to stop a second airliner from crashing into the World Trade Center. Now the Bush administration would have you believe they're the ones who can protect us from a terrorist attack. This article by Ron Brynaert is at www.rawstory.com:
According to a new book written by Washington Post investigative reporter Bob Woodward, two months before the September 11 attacks, then National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice gave the "brush-off" to an "impending terrorist attack" warning by former C.I.A. director George J. Tenet and his counterterrorism coordinator.
An article in Friday's New York Times first mentioned the warning, and a front page book review of Woodward's State of Denial in Saturday's edition provides more details.
"On July 10, 2001, the book says, Mr. Tenet and his counterterrorism chief, J. Cofer Black, met with Ms. Rice at the White House to impress upon her the seriousness of the intelligence the agency was collecting about an impending attack," David E. Sanger reported on Friday. "But both men came away from the meeting feeling that Ms. Rice had not taken the warnings seriously."
LESSONS FROM HISTORY
In the autumn of 68 B. C. the Roman port of Ostia was attacked by the ancient world's version of terrorists. The port was set on fire, the war fleet was destroyed, and two senators were kidnapped. It set in motion Rome's version of the "war on terrorism" that eventually led to the destruction of their constitutional form of government and the establishment of a dictatorship. This article by Robert Harris is at www.commondreams.org:
In the autumn of 68 B.C. the world’s only military superpower was dealt a profound psychological blow by a daring terrorist attack on its very heart. Rome’s port at Ostia was set on fire, the consular war fleet destroyed, and two prominent senators, together with their bodyguards and staff, kidnapped.
The incident, dramatic though it was, has not attracted much attention from modern historians. But history is mutable. An event that was merely a footnote five years ago has now, in our post-9/11 world, assumed a fresh and ominous significance. For in the panicky aftermath of the attack, the Roman people made decisions that set them on the path to the destruction of their Constitution, their democracy and their liberty. One cannot help wondering if history is repeating itself.
Consider the parallels. The perpetrators of this spectacular assault were not in the pay of any foreign power: no nation would have dared to attack Rome so provocatively. They were, rather, the disaffected of the earth: “The ruined men of all nations,” in the words of the great 19th-century German historian Theodor Mommsen, “a piratical state with a peculiar esprit de corps.”
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)