The New President

The New American President will spend months of each year, maybe even three or four, overseas, each year. Like it or not, the power of the American President can impact much of the world. Yet billions of non-voting constituents never get a visit. In 1900, this would have been absurd. How could a President communicate? Such an overseas adventure would lead to fair charges of domestic neglect. But today, with the kind of communication/conferencing equipment available within the White House budget, nothing of the sort need happen. Air Force One has served as a communication center for decades, but once it lands, it is as immobile as a building.

Can the Republicans Win Wihout The Union

In 2000, the President only won 5 States of the 21 State Union that President Lincoln had with him in the Civil War. New Hampshire is unlikely to vote for the President again. Ohio and West Virginia, which the President won in close races in 2000, were originally the beneficiaries of political-minded steel tariffs, tariffs which have since been repealed. Missouri barely went for the President, and Indiana, home of the 1915 incarnation of the Ku Klux Klan, is unlikely to swing to the Democrats. Where is the heart of this white supremacy? I can hear it. I would stop it.

Bush, Corruption

Who purged the Florida voters? Who removed 10s of thousands of innocent people from the Florida voting rolls before the 2000 election, while only managing to remove a few hundred actual felons (a 95% failure rate)? Why, ChoicePoint, of Alpharetta. Who did the President decided in his infitinite wisdom to put in charge of the background checks for the 10s of thousands of new Transport Security Agency screeners? Why, ChoicePoint, of Alpharetta. Who allowed almost 2,000 people with bad records to get hired for airline security? Why, sleazeball, shit-eaters ChoicePoint, of Alpharetta. Thanks to C-SPAN for mentiong the AJC article on Choice Point. I'm rarely kind to Pedro, I doubt that will ever change, but he did alert me to that story. The best way to say this is that the same people the Bush's hired to disallow innocent people from voting was used to allow criminals to do airport security. Fucking Fun With Safety!

C-SPAN this morning

Democrat State Senator from South Carolina deftly handles a racist argument from a committed Republican. Scott Ritter, he is still right, and being attacked. Wes Pruden, shamelessly twice repeats a lie, taking his shit-filled mouth and attempting to form words that Scott Ritter would utter.

Paul, Matt, Brad, and Eugene

First, someone on the Volokh Conspiracy blog makes this absurd statement that Bush is "liberal." The fundamental problem here of course is priorities. I can't say Clinton cut the military budget brilliantly, but Bush has certainly inflated it uncontrollably. Claims somehow that Bush's foreign policy, if you can swallow this, is "Wilsonian." Wilson, you might remember, founded the League of Nations. Bush sent international war criminal (by association) John Negroponte of Iran/Contra fame to be our representative to the United Nations. Bush tends to act like international law does not exist. Certainly Bush's execution of foreign nationals (both Canadian and Mexican) in Texas, violating their rights under the U.S. ratified Vienna Consular Convention of 1968. What was Bush's excuse for being an international murderer? He said Texas hadn't signed that Treaty. Why didn't the press excoriate him, telling this (expletive never inserted) Bush that Texas didn't have to sign the treaty, because it is part of the United States of America. Clinton wasn't famous for clumsy protectionism or massive budget expansion. Compared to the straw man Democrat of Republican imagination, Bush is a great Democrat. I would make the argument that Dean is a great Republican. Against wars based on lies, fiscally sensible and self-constrained, not tied to to any special interests (watch his AG). It is almost absurd that Matt Yglesias would respond to this claim. Paul Krugman says that so far the President hasn't rolled back any of the the New Deal yet. Where has Paul been? What about Gramm-Leach-Bliley and the repeal of most of Glass-Steagal? What about the gutting of PUHCA? These are fundamental building blocks of the New Deal, not just OAS/DI. According to Eisenhower, the people who wanted to repeal the New Deal were a bunch of "stupid" Texas Oil Millionaires and Haroldson Lafayette Hunt (first oil Billionaire, also of Texas). All tending to extremist religious views (heck, their money comes straight from god, right? no work, no sweat, just cash). I like Ike. At least I agree with most of Brad's commenters, who ascribe Matt's seeming naivete to youth. Matt, if Bush is re-elected, we get another war. Think about it. Wouldn't take him even 49% of the vote to think we had endorsed his new plans.

Corporate Fascist Future

I just had a picture of it, helped along by this article from Afrika,No Basically, in the future the UN, or its replacement, will have a force drawn largely from poor nations enforcing the will of the rich ones.

More Lying From The RNC

Ed Gillespie actually said Bush's efforts in Iraq brought Libya to the table. Will the shameless lying ever end? If you read this blog you already know that's a fucking lie. Ed Gillespie is a militarist apologist. But his attacks on Senator Kerry are outrageous. However, they will be used in the campaign. Don't vote for Kerry, he has too much of a record.

Bush Plays Politics With Your Life

Hezbollah, a group that played a central role in ejecting Isreali troops from Lebanon, has set up schools and hospitals in Southern Lebanon. If there has been a single Hezbollah attack against Israel proper, I would be surprised to learn of it. Hezbollah started with a lot of support from Shi'a Iran. Iran, please note, is really the only center of Shi'a Islam in the world. Despite these long-established facts, and despite the fact that Hezbollah has never threatened nor attacked any U.S. Interests,yet the new counter-terrorism organizatoin chart gives Iran/Hezbollah it's own special set/group/section/division. How come the Department of Justice is failing so miserably at terrorism. Haven't they had two or three years, like me, in the wake of 9/11, to re-analyze what threats exist to Americans? The Bush Administration is playing with your lives. Look under "International Terrorism Operations Section II" under "Deputy Assistant Director Counter-Terrorism(CT) Operations Branch"

Goldman's Fed Prediction

Goldman has predicted that the Fed won't raise rates till 2005. Makes sense to me. Greenspan raised rates 6 times right before the 2000 election, cut rates 13 times after the President was elected, and would certainly never raise rates going into another Bush election. A great story that the press completely fell down on is how politicized Greenspan's Fed has been of late. However, on the other hand, there is an off chance that Greenspan, a libertarian and long-time friend of O'Neill, will actually decide to fuck Bush before the election by raising rates in August.

Hope

Blair being let off the hook by Lord Hutton is, on the surface, very good for for the President of the US. Perhaps some of Lord Hutton and Alistair Campbell's most out-fucking-rageous claims, that the Intelligence services never disagreed with the 45 minute claim, will send a few more US intelligence people, in the know, into paroxysms. Maybe someone with power actually cares about Americans. Certainly not the fucking President.

Intelligence Failure?

Success of Stupid

Scott Ritter

Scott Ritter, USMC, was right about everything. Yet still the press tries to pretend he doesn't exist. Why? It is very inconvenient! Here is a person that was speaking the truth, and yet they pretty much all treated him like dogshit, lending credence with unrelated images to false claims by scurrilous Presidents. Dear Mr. President, It is not legitimate to start a war for any reason relating to your person. Ex-Presidents, fathers though they may be, do not rate the protection of an all out war against a Sovereign Power. Sorry no one explained that to you before, but personal reasons are not to be used in your Office. Sincerely, Joshua Narins

"Imminent" Red Herring

True, Bush never said imminent. He never said antiestablishmentmentarianism, either. But the law that was passed to 'legalize' the invasion of Iraq said that Iraq was an existing threat, not an imminent one. Imminent means it might come soon. Existing means it is already here. So FUCKING what the President didn't call it imminent. The Congress voted, and the President signed a law saying it was far worse than imminent. Don't like my reasoning? Explain yourself. But even without that, we still have the fact that the President was telling Senators that Saddam Hussein HAD the capability to send unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) armed with biological or chemical(nuclear?) weapons, launched from ships nearby the U.S. coastline. That's what the President was scaring the Senate with. Fear-mongers are tyrants, FYI. That's what Bush was lying about to the people that counted. That's not an imminent threat? That's not an outright fabrication? Wake up, Mr. President.

Questions that should be asked

If Saddam did not intend to co-operate with the United Nations fully, why, on the eve of the promised war, would he destroy all of his best missiles? No fucking explanation, is there? That didn't stop any fucking idiot asswipe warmongers, did it? No, they scrambled a bit, then a bit more, then pretended it never happened. There was no television media discussion, at the time, that the missiles, in fact, had been on the table during UNSCOM. That, in fact, Saddam did not have any secrets related to the Al-Samoud II.

Why This Election Must Be A Referendum On Iraq

What Democrats don't understand is that if we don't make the election a referendum on Iraq, we are going to get beat. Iraq is an issue which crosses lines. Lots of Republicans are going to vote for Dean because Dean balances budgets, Bush and Kerry don't. Dean was against the war, Bush and Kerry were for it. Please, Democrats! Please!

Tony Blair, Fucking Ass

I just, in a controlled manner, screamed Fuck You, in two series of three times, to Tony Blair on TV, as he announced that anyone who suggested that he or his government had manipulated intelligence was a liar. He knows what happened, doesn't he? He just thinks we can't prove it, and considering the way things are going, I am so sad.

Rating the Senators

This is a table of who picked at the truth from David Kay the best.

Senator	Grade (ABCDF)	commentary
Senator H. Clinton (D-NY)	C-	a good question on why he left
Senator J. Warner (R-VA)	F	sigh, Chairman
Senator C. Levin (D-MI)	C
Senator J. McCain (R-AZ)	F	pretends Saddam was a threat because he harbored the desire to do ill
Senator E. Kennedy (D-MA)	A	almost perfect, should have mentioned OSP
Senator M. Pryor (D-AR)	B	fair
Senator J. McCain (R-AZ)	F	pretends Saddam was a threat because he harbored the desire to do ill
Senator S. Collins (R-ME)	F	balmed it on Intel, when it was OSP which overrode Intel
Senator P. Roberts (R-KS)	F	some people are still, apparently, brown nosing Bush.
Senator J?. Inhofe (R-OK)	F	pathetic, questions befitting an ignoramus or a fascist, asks to explain why Saddam didn't prove he didn't have weapons, when in fact he did everything he could to do so, but he had originally destroyed things in secret
Senator W. Allard (R-CO)	C+	nothing + a little grandstanding (1)
Senator B. Nelson (D-NE)	C	got some good answers to "what are wmd related acts". syria bashing?
Senator J. Cornyn (R-TX)	F	nothing wrong here, move along
Senator W. Nelson (D-FL)	A	discussing what he was told. WMD+UAV+ship-to-shore against U.S. cities. Claims he was told it was a fact, but is now told that the intelligence community was actually split. Direct administration implication

(1) Senator Allard found out, or was told, that Iraq had once bought uranium from Africa. When? the 1980s. Where? Niger. Guess what? I'd bet anything that this is interesting. I bet that the Niger deal, before, only happened, could only have happened, with U.S. or (former)U.S.S.R approval.

Non Stop Needling

And no substantive response. The press corps picks and picks at David Kay's claims on WMD. Scott McClellan, in the unenviable position of reading from a tight script, has tried numerous techniques. Suggesting that the word "imminent" comes from the media, rather than written law (In order to begin the world's imminent slide into Anarchy, the President has declared that there is no international law. He did this repeatedly at a recent press conference, when he joked "International Law? I'm going to have to talk to a lawyer about that," using the tone to suggest someone had just asked about molepeople under the Earth's skin. Suggesting that Saddam "had the ability" without ever saying what he had the ability to do. (Change of sentence midstream.) Suggesting Saddam had abilities, not just potentialities.

Dean and History

Do I think Bush knows much history? Not particularly. But Howard Dean said that Theodore Roosevelt busted the trusts. Did he? Or did he just bust the trusts that weren't owned by J.P. Morgan. And then he said he liked Truman for integrating the military? I've heard that he just did it for the votes, and that it was Eisenhower who went around and kicked the ass of every shitbird Colonel who wasn't actually doing it.

The Oddest Thing

Sure I want the nomination to be decided. It's almost a form of "chaos" without it. But, for a second, think about it. For the Press: longer nomination process equals more ratings (and other things, it is a story with targets that are trying to get on camera) For the Public: more info on politics, which can get boring, but you might catch a bunch of people who aren't normally into it. For the Democrats: more press coverage for "our" people than anytime in the last three years. Think about it, the most powerful Democrat in Washington is Tom Daschle. He's a real nice guy. Would you say it is working? So, as long as Dean wins in the end, I'm happy with any course that keeps the Democrats travelling in the same river, and hopefully removing my least favorite.

Corporate Fascist Power!

The Fascists have sent Powell to whine at Russia that its elections aren't fair enough. Not nearly enough black voters were disenfranchised, I guess he means, not quite fucking sure about that. Anyway, the corporate sector in Russia is very wealthy and oil-related... in other words, the massive sell-off of Russia's state assets to a handful of cronyistic neo-fascists have gotten President Moron's ear and convinced him to pressure Putin to lay of Khadovorsky. Considering that Bush has already sent Powell to play patty-cake with the murderous dictators of many nations, but not least importantly President Bongo of Gabon, I honestly hope President Putin greeted Powell with bleach-cream, so he could wipe the last of the black out.

Iranian breakdown

Well, first, in case you didn't know, this is a list of Iranian bloggers. Iran's government is almost exactly like President, Executive, Judiciary of America, with a 4th branch, the Clerical/Religious. Their power is a veto over legislation in case it violates their Constitution or the Koran/Sharia. Iran in 2000, with almost no positive press for it, had their Congress change party control from "conservative/clerical" to "liberal." Iranian President Khatami is a "reformer" who has been in power since 1997. Don't read me wrong, Khatami is no saint, but compared to the conservatives, I think he is definitely great. The problem... The Guardian Council has "qualified" 5,000 people to run in the upcoming election, but have not qualified 100s of liberal party candidates. This from Reuters shows that the Guardian Council is not acting nearly quickly enough to qualify the full list of liberal candidates (unless they are handling the tough cases first, which we doubt)

The Guardian Council says it is reviewing more than 3,000 appeals lodged by disqualified candidates and has so far reinstated around 400. It has until January 30 to complete its review of the appeals.

The last NH debate

Kucinich and Edwards gave decent speeches, but it almost seemed out of place, as the other candidates talked more directly with the audiences. The real story for me was General Clark, who was shaking his fist, raising his voice, and sounded off in a real angry way. But the news keeps calling Dean angry, what a bunch of craven, assholes? No, they just aren't paying attention.

The Essential Nature of Foreign Policy, vis-a-vis Dictators, FDR, and Saddam Hussein

Firstly, just to clear up any misapprehensions, FDR died while Saddam was still a boy. What was the "Good Neighbor Policy?" Simply put, it was a euphimism for cozying up to despots to maintain stability. It was born, in my mind, from America's (then) historical isolationism, and it was strong in both main parties when FDR was elected. World War II, naturally, ended this for a time. Then came the Cold War, where each side could obliterate the other, and yet could not protect itself. When this happens, and its actually quite normal for competing regional (alien humor) interests, the USSR(CCCP) and USA made the "battlefield" the outside their own borders, in converting third party nations to their cause. One of these proxies, who may well have worked for the CIA as early as 1959, but certainly no later than 1963, a young Saddam was an enthusiastic and efficient killer in joint Ba'athist-Nationalist anti-communist hit squads. Most people at the time of the 1963 which briefly brought the Ba'athists to power as CIA-inspired. A long list of the most recent Presidents kept up the reindeer games with his Evilness, up to and including the current President's father. The great, potentially species-ending conflict of an all-out nuclear war (and at least one thing President Eisenhower did could easily have started a small nuclear war, see Bamford's "Body of Secrets" and the polar flyover section) led the United States that we must have as many allies as possible, no matter how savory, not even avoiding the world's worst post world war two dictator). What does this mean? Did America, in stooping so low, lose its moral right to provide an example to the world? The essential nature of foreign policy in the new world is that we no longer have this justification, and, in fact, we undermine oursleves by recent actions to prop up (seemingly) a dozen new dictators to help take down one. Just because we can afford to cozy up to these despots less, hardly means we need then reverse our course and become their conquerors. Stability is in the interests of all of the wealthy people on Earth, wouldn't you guess?

There has been a change

Until further notice, and for reasons outside my direct control, this blog is going to be as polite as possible, attemping, if any criticism is offered, to make it constructive, avoiding my traditional 50-foot 20-gallon venom lob of words. Maybe it is permanent. I'm going to start by writing a short, nice letter to RIchard Cheney.

Hey, Christians!

I'm reading right now "The DaVinci Code" which purports to explain a secret society from the time of Christ until today. It would have read a lot better to me if the author hadn't engaged in blatant chicanery. Reminded me a lot of Wilson's "The Illuminatus Trilogy"

Fox & Friends, Mendacious Facsist Fucks

One of the tools on Fox & Fascist Friends was interviewing an author of a book on the New Hampshire primary who suggested that Dean had tried to recast himself as a Wellstone, even though he'd been a fiscally conservative Democrat. Luckily for the impartiality of the news, a Fox & Friend Fascist Fuck said "Not going to work." I'm glad this none-too-bright, poorly-educated, partisan gets to declare whether or not Dean can be a liberal. Although, if you ask me, that's the problem. We want a conservative, farm-state, pro-gun Democrat.

The Internet

Why did the President think if the last President couldn't get away lying about a private, consensual adult act, that he could get away lying about a war? I mean, the Internet makes lying by government officials far more difficult.

Hateful Democrats

Fine, I'll be hateful one, and all you Bush supporters can be "Murderers" For the record, though, I hate murderers. In fact, if you hadn't become a bunch of murderers, I wouldn't have had to bother hating you. So, as if anyone should be surprised, the Bush side started this whole "hateful" mess.

Imus Is In On It

Who gets beat easiest by Bush? John Kerry. Why? A New England Liberal Taxachusetts, buddy of Ted Kennedy, 18 year Senator who, when push came to shove, voted with the President on the war and the horrid anti-terrorism act drafted after September 11th. This means that the President can simply say "He may dislike the war, but when presented with the same evidence as I had, he was for it." Today, to the utter horror of one of his seconds, Imus announced he might vote for Kerry. The second declared that his loyalty to Bush had been rock solid just days before, and how could this be? Well, it's after Iowa, the general explanation emerged. But is it true? Would Imus really vote for Kerry over Bush? Could any candidate be found with less in common with the ruling Oilocracy than Kerry? I don't know, but my guess is not that Imus, a non-stop shill for the status quo, actually sees Kerry as a candidate. Maybe the Viet Nam thing really works for him. Maybe he's being honest. It just didn't seem that way to me. I'm sceptical of my own conclusion here, but maybe Rove did calculate Dean would beat Bush, so the GOP started pushing Kerry, sadly, what they didn't realize, is that anyone beats Bush, and they moved the Presidency to the left, if they are succesful (which they undoubtedly will be?) in moving the Democrats from Dean to Kerry.

Fox, Early Morn

I was watching Fox News this morning, 6:12AM. He's the weather person, but he's moderating a conversation between a member of the religious right (fmr Christian Coalition leader) and a relatively witty but sidelined Democrat (got in a good one on the Pres. mentioning 'roid use and endorsing Arnold "Roids 'R Good Food" Schwarzenegger). Then they started bashing Dean, of course. The trick is they are saying he was angry, when he was listing those states. He was screaming, yes, but he was happy, and excited, not angry. But even the Democrat suggested he had been angry. Have you ever been yelled at? I was in the military, and I certainly learned screaming and anger are different things. Of course, the fundamental inaccuracy in the reporting was repeated both by the host and his second, which was that in the State of the Union, the President outlined how he was going to make the country safer. Then they re-aired Leno (Schwarzenegger endorsing Leno) bashing Dean, and all their fake, fake, fake laughter. There is a Judge up there with them, doesn't he feel shame for his fake laughter? I wonder about his internal justification. I hope he shares it with me someday.

The Dispepsic Union

I caught the last 10 minutes of the President's annual Speech to his biggest fans, the U.S. Congress. The President touched on important Republican Party themes such as

Using the Federal Gov't to control who marries whom

Using the Federal Gov't to control public school sexual education, preventing the the dissemination of knowledge which might save someone's life

The support of one 10 year old "Andrea Pearson" for our troops.

I was a bit surprised that support for our troops was limited to this ten year old girl, but I suggest that we

Keep her away from any news

Try to dovetail this into support from other 10 year old girls, then maybe we can get some 11 year old ones...

Eventually a large % of pre-teens will feel like Andrea, and we'll only have rational adults to fool.... and we all know eventually they'll all be dead, and the world will only be populated by the ancestors of the girls who are pre-teens today. Right?

What I noticed

And I've noticed it before. The Iraqi Governing Council was at the White House today. There was a press conference on the White House property. Do you think there are a lot of people milling about at the White House, or is most everything controlled? Do you think they know which way the sun is going to shine before they put out people? Does the sun come up in a suprising place, most of the time? So when we see the IGC, with the sunlight glaring across their visages, which the worst pick-up(microphone) set-up I've yet heard (although perhaps that's a function of internal IGC bickering (who gets to stand up front)), and in the middle of which, when the Cleric was speaking, a huge machine started making the "backing-up noise" Do you think that accidentally happens when the President is speaking? Dear Fearless Leader Bush, I am trying my bestestest to convince everyone on Earth that we found nukular bombs in Iraq because it is my patriotic duty to make your lies come true but I am getting a little tired. Could you lie a little less? Thanks, Your Humble Servant, Josh

Facing Facts

Kerry people don't have much of a choice. It's simply do they want a liberal, anti-Gun, non-Spanish-speaking 20-year Senator from Taxachusetts, whose wife, apparently, has never trusted him with a joint account... Or a conservative, non-anti-Gun, Spanish-speaking (far better than Bush) 11 year governor, with some years of Lt. Governor experience and some years of Vermont State House (legislative) experience. Dean isn't perfect, but Kerry and Edwards supporters must realize the press, at least, if not the country, has moved right, and a very liberal man like Edwards, or fairly similar Edwards, is going to turn off huge numbers of voters. Don't get me wrong, I think he'd make a fantastic US AG. He wants to be President. The old story about Southern Democrats getting elected (a meme that works for Edwards + Clark right now) doesn't mean jack if the Southern Democrat in question is a progressive (Huey "Kingfish" Long, John Edwards, very left) rather than a more conservative Democrat (Carter or Clinton).

Dean in Iowa

So far it doesn't look that great for Dean, with 20% reporting I see Kerry, with Edwards close, and a viable, but distant Dr. Dean.

Why did this happen?

People in Iowa want to feel like they are acting responsibly. They have begun to believe the reports on Dean, so they say Kerry is against the war (1), and Kerry has war experience(2), so we will pretend we are party bosses, and vote Kerry.

But what is the truth? The truth is Kerry is a liberal Massachusettes Democrat, while Dean is a conservative Vermont Democrat.

1. Dean speaks Spanish, this is probably going to be a #1 issue for defeating Bush in marginal states like New Mexico, Arizona and Florida, although I don't actually know how a non-passive personality plays
2. Dean will not be endorsed by the NRA, but had an A rating from them
3. Massive list of endorsements, I liked that Gore and Bradley agreed
4. If the nominee is Kerry, Bush just says "When presented with the same facts, Kerry supported the war"

I want this election to be about these kinds of wars.

Polk, the trumped up Mexican War, Massive Deficits and One Term

Mahablog has mentioned Lincoln's anti-Mexican War speeches. Here is the full text of Lincoln's speech. Here is a direct link to the Congressional Globe, which should be pretty near the page where the speech in question is given. All the stuff from TIFF/Page 141 on is pretty neat, talking about Polk laying waste to the traditions of Washington and Jefferson. Representative Stewart Of Penssylvania had this to say, on the house floor, of Polk's men and what they can do with their war "Let them sport their pleasure-boat in the rivers of tears shed by orphan children and their widow mothers"

!Carter!

     I think the deal is that Presidents don't endorse.  But Carter wanted to pseudo-endorse Dean.

     But the media is spinning it the other way...

     Carter doesn't endorse Dean!

     What is the real story?   Well, for starters, President James Earl Carter was not nearly the peacenik in office that most people imagine.  In fact, I argue that President Carter was the only President in Oil American History (post-Theodore Roosevelt) who stood up to the Saudis, and the American people wouldn't stand.  The American people did not care about standing up to the Middle Eastern OPEC leaders (which had far more of a share then, as they will again in the future, than they do now), thanks to the media far more interested whatever easy tripe the media usually doles out.

     I just watched the speech after the church attendance, and it seems to me that Carter is doing his best to endorse, without actually violating Presidential rules and endorsing, Howard Brush Dean III.

     How does the media spin this?  In the vagueness of politics, almost anything can be spun anyway, no?

     Here is an interesting tidbit.  Of the people who were relatives, and Presidents (the Adamses, the Harrisons and the Roosevelts, but not officially the Bushes) were not in the same party.  John Adams=Federalist, John Quincy Adams = Democratic or National Republican, William Henry Harrison, Whig, Benjamin Harrison=Republican, Theodore Roosevelt=Republican or Bull Moose, Franklin Delano Roosevelt=Democrat, George Herbert Walker Bush=Republican, George Walker Bush=Imperial)

C-SPAN turns South

Today C-SPAN was bashing Dean. Steve, Steve who thinks he is so cute, having lunch with the Fox guys. No one has my views, it's true, but Steve, C-SPAN host, reading two pathetic stories from the media, that was just pathetic! What's the worst part of political reporting? When they make big issues out of crap. Who likes to make big issues out of crap? Crap-throwers like the political media, who all have some beliefs which match, however vaguely, with some person or faction in politics. Like me, for instance, who seems attached to Dean. What's crap reporting? Reporting on politician's clothes, unless particularly outlandish or stylish, seems out of order. So what if some candidates weren't born with a silver spoon up their nose and happens to buy the same shoes as former Iraqi Saddam "No-WMD" Hussein, from a particular Italian shoemaker. Today, "Slick" Steve read to the C-SPAN audience a story about the clothes Dean wears, and then he read another story about clothing Clark is selling. That's right folks, two stories on clothes, but look who was the brunt? Dean wears one suit, has to be guarded from stains, while people are going to be bidding for Clark's clothes, isn't that internet-savvy of him? Fuck you, Steve, and I mean that. Who runs

To the tune of "New York, New York"

Press pulling the strings Like never before Telling you Dean is angry and Kerry's more, (under your breath: beatable) and more The way I see it, two weeks ago, the press started Dean bashing and Kerry praising, and now Kerry is doing well in the polls. TV is so ephemeral, it is hard to catch them. I have some.

This Blog Endorses Dean

He's not perfect, he's not the most liberal, by any means, he is not even the savviest. But savvy with baggage isn't very savvy at all, savvy? For the millions of Iowans who read this blog daily, please consider this. In 1845 James K. Polk began the Presidency, and basically lied to Congress to get us in a war, and Abraham Lincoln got up on the floor of the U.S. House "and basically called the President of the United States a liar." He was a one term President. (quote from John Seigenthaler, Author of James K. Polk, Times Books)

Is Someone Going to Have to Move You?

C-SPAN is an institution that, for 25 years, has attracted people with an interest in the U.S. Government. Their offices, in Washington, D.C., were sullied sometime after 1996 as the insidious, vermin Rupert Murdoch installed his larval nest of Fox News Washington Offices in the same office building, one floor below. I believe the only thing to do is to separate these two institutions. If I win one constituency, if I ever officially run for Office, is the C-SPAN constituency. Everything else is gravy.

OK, Heritage Has Gone Tard

I am watching them listen to someone analyze Tolkein, and Jackson's movie portrayal of the Lord of the Rings. OK, it's more intelligent than if the girls had tried it in high school, but is this really what "Intercollegiate Studiest Institute Interns" do? Well, I'm glad they get sent to the Heritage Foundation, I'd be embarassed to see them talk in front of me.

Fox News: Stupid or Partisan? You Decide

Just now on Fox News Shephard Smith said that the Iowa caucii were important because, and I quote "Since 1972, the following Presidents all won the Iowa caususses, Carter, Reagan, Clinton, and George W. Bush" That wrong, but what did you expect from Fox? Facts? Reagan lost Iowa in 1980 to George Herbert Walker Bush. Clinton lost Iowa in 1992 to Tom Harkin. In other words, since 1972, Carter and George W. Bush won Iowa, and then won the Presidency. Actually, Fox can claim to be accurate because, as sitting Presidents, Reagan and Clinton won their parties endorsement in virtually uncontested races. But that's obviously deceptive, and that's obviously their goal, to deceive. Fox has to stop the Dean campaign now, so they are saying a Dean loss in Iowa (which may well happen, considering the current closeness and the media barrage) is significant, when in fact only two one-term Presidents ever won the Iowa caucii (correct plural of cuacus, genii). UPDATE! I WAS FOOLED! In part, it's just the press itself being greedy! If the nomination is wrapped up quickly, it means bad ratings.

Why do I like the Daily Howler?

The Daily Howler isn't an easy read unless you know your press corps. I think This is a gem:

But just what makes the Deans’ marriage so “wacky?” Dean’s wife “has never even been to Iowa,” Dowd grouses. Nor is she likely to show up there, the scribe says, “since she prefers examining patients to being cross-examined by voters and reporters.” Imagine! Dean’s wife would rather heal the sick than spend time with people like Dowd!

Tombstone Crawl

Tombstones are when two newspaper headlines, next to each, other, read like one headline, and are funny. The "Crawl" are the words along the bottom of Fox. This isn't really Tombstone Crawl, it's the opposite. When a complete crawl item, out of context, is just too funny. President Bush Was Not Troubled Laying Weath at Grave On What Would Have Been King's 75th Birthday Which reminds me a lot of this tidbit, which I think goes a long way to pointing to the really insidious "racism" of the President of the United States (warning, Flash).

Mind Games

The Dean camp, apparently, has spent the last month trying to get ahead of Clark in the few states where Clark was known to be ahead. Meanwhile, in the White House, Rove has realized that a Dean win is bad, so the guns have been going full bore to boost Kerry, who now has a lead only in Iowa, the only place it counts. Maybe I'm being naive, and Kerry cut the deal with Fox. Flip on Fox? You'll see how phenomenonly Kerry is doing and questions on whether this is the death knell for Dean, I'd wager. Actually, CNN is pushing that line even harder than Fox! And certainly MSNBC is. Fascists are so proud of themselves! On my news station, we'd show a national map, and wonder aloud about Kerry's support in Iowa alone looks a lot like a last ditch effort, since he isn't even ahead in his home state. O'Reilly eats my poop.

Imperialism = Lack of Service?

When was the last stupid, militaristic phase of American Imperialism, long decried throughout the world? The Spanish-American War, 100 years ago. In the space of roughly 15 years, through Presidents McKinley, Roosevelt and Taft, we took (all from Spain) Puerto Rico, Panama, Cuba, Guam, and the Phillipines Islands. About 100 million people live in those places, today. Guess what? According to James Fallows at Atlantic Monthly, the % of Americans in uniform is the lowest since that Imperialistic phase. The same time that Voteview people Poole/Rosenthal illustrate was the point of highest partisanship since today was the 1895-1915 period, which they also correlate with % of foreign born (which is also as high now(11.5%) as any time since the 1900-1915 period, when it reached closer to 15%. A massive resurgence in the KKK, based in Indiana, was a reaction to this) Perhaps there is a direct correlation between "willingness to send troops to do what we want" and "percent chance you know someone in uniform" are inversely correlated. In fact, it's absurd to think they aren't. There are numerous other reasons to see the similarity, including this State of the Union, by President Stephen Grover Cleveland, American Interests in the Cuban Revolution, and this article from Century Magazine in 1898 by Senator Carl Schurz, Thoughts on American Imperialism

Programmers?

Hi, I'm a computer programmer. Last night I whipped up a neat-o little program, and you can benefit! The program paints maps of the United States, each state in one color. I did this in just a very few steps

Find a map of the outlines of the states of the U.S.. I found a great one that didn't have Hawai'i! So I copied that from another map

Find a point inside each state, so I know where to "bucket fill" for each state. Some states, (ex. Michigan) needed multiple points

Wrote a tiny perl "Gimp::Fu" script

So, if you have a list of states, and the colors you want them to be, just send them to me in an e-mail (example formats: AK red, AK #FF0099) and I'll send you the image in any format you want. Gzipped .png files are best, though :)

Today, on CounterPunch

This and this are sizzling offerings today from counterpunch.org.

Power Politics in Iran

Religious hardliners in Iran have used their religious authority in the State to disqualify lots of the opposition from upcoming elections, including the President's own brother. I'm honestly wondering what percentage of the clergy thinks that this is a long term strategy that can work. There will always be candidates it can't disqualify who will espouse the views it doesn't like. Labor instead to, to some, adopt, for the conservative, co-opt, some essential character of the reform. The existence of a healthy Islamic Republic outside Turkey, is a challenge which the Iranian people have adopted. They outnumber you by far, and your good interest in their well being is the best tool for guiding transformation.

Recent Dean Comments!

Have you heard what he said the Department of Labor did? It's classic doublespeak. Apparently, the Dept of Labor sent out its new rules along with a a simple guide to help employers make sure they don't pay any extra money in wages. Yeah, you heard me, they sent out new labor rules, which supposedly expand rights for overtime pay, while including a simple guide to make sure the employers don't pay any extra money to employees who work overtime. Have you asked, Laborers, what will happen for those employees who don't work overtime?

Paul O'Neill, Proof that Bush is a Liberal

Paul O'Neill, like all patriotic consumers, believes that American corporations should pay no income taxes. For uttering into debate this truest of all statements, President Bush punished Secretary of the Treasury of the United States (a man who has a handle on the jerk in the Current Accounts Deficit (and yes, only an Economist crossed with a Physicist is going to get that crack, but hey, I have to live, too!)) by sending him on a month long trip to Africa with that Irish singer, Bongo Pop. Now true Corporate American, champion of CEO pay, without whom many thousands wouldn't have jobs, and many millions goods to consume, Paul O'Neill, says Bush wanted a war all along. Did I ever actually say that? I know I thought it. It was very painfully obvious.

Fox News Can't Afford to Lose

Why should I even say anything that can't be proved? That couldn't, except with the words of a Rupert Murdoch, top of News Corp., parent Corp. of Fox News, or a Roger Ailes, head of Fox News, subsidary of News Corp., in any way be substantiated? Well, you heard it here first? (see comments) There are different levels of disaster for any Democratic victory in '04, although Fox has played gently enough with Clark and Lieberman that most of the following scenario will be muted, but right now it looks like Doctor, Governor, one time Stockbroker, Howard Brush Dean III, is going to be the nominee. I argue that a Dean win would mean the following losses for Fox News, the American flagship of the Murdoch machine commonly known as NewsCorp, but whose legal fictions prevent any precise naming. Just remember "Rupert Murdoch."

special status with government

nearly as many White House exclusives

a surplus of Clinton bashers around (last elected, we ought recall, in 1996)

a serious blow to their early predictions, that part, at least , I know they will own up to if the event arises

What do all these things mean? They mean, quite simply, that Fox would lose a certain portion of their already inestimable force, and perhaps their lock on #1. What's the value of that? I can only estimate the actual cash value is in the 10s of millions over the short 4 years, and untold riches over the long haul, but, even if it is only 5 million for a 4 year term, in leveraged terms, that's 50, or 100 million, and these are very conservative estimates. Being suddenly without their former power, Fox's suffering is going to be predictably of the "new kid too big for britches" type, and that idea will play well with a lot of people's sensibilities. But the truth is that Murdoch and Ailes pick Republicans to win, with snide, sneering, sniggering talk about Democrats at every turn. Would I want a modern Congressional Democratic agenda passed? I'm not sure. But I'm very sure that their version of most any bill is going to be with a spirit in mind better for the American people, the American land, the American past, the Amerian future, Our American Liberty.

Mostly Repetition

I've already talked about how I think a warning flag should have probably gone up when we found out there was a newly crafted intelligence outfit inside the Pentagon, run by thinkers and not spies, called the "Office of Special Plans" (a good starting place). The reason I bring it up again is I just learned a little about the Ottoman triumvirate of the brother's Pasha. They set up the Armenian genocide, or at least central enough to it to be damningly responsible, and they set up a group to do it called the "Special Comission." Has anyone asked if there is an Office of Secret Plans, an Office of Extra-Special Plans, an Office of Special Secret Plans? Who knows? Who has asked?

Internationale

Kids, the man is bad. The man wants to keep you down. Nothing makes the man as happy as when your highest ambition is to work for him, and people who have these ambitions, or pretend to, are rewarded by the man. The only way to get ahead is to be rewarded by the man, or you could be born to it, and then sometimes there are lottery like events, windfall profits in tax talk. You would have probably noticed by now whether or not your were in the second class.

Blast from the Past

Is it right to dredge up things on their anniversaries? I'm not waiting. On June 15, 1965, Lyndon Baines Johnson, President, in a telephone call to Dean Rusk, I think, or maybe Bob McNamara (he was on the phone with both that day, and others), that the thing about the Vietnamese, and "winning" that war, is that he knew something about the Vietnamese. They were never going to leave. Johnson basically said, in 1965, that we couldn't win because the Vietnamese were not "going to leave" Vietnam

O'Reilly Lies

Don't worry, Fox viewers, this is not the first time. O'Reilly had lefty pollster John Zogby on, who did an exceptional job describing the polling data he had accurately. Zogby noted that "church attendance" was 25% higher in "red" states than "blue" states. What Fox damn well knows is that it is not a matter of States, but Cities, but that's not the point. Jokingly, O'Reilly said blue state residents didn't attend Church. Actually, if the average in red states is 4 times per moth, then it is 3 times per month in the blue states. Consdidering that GOD DOES NOT EVEN EXIST, and that EVERY RELIGION IS A BUNCH OF LOONY DECEIVERS, I would rather be a blue stater. Sorry that all those christians got brainwashed by their parents. Family Values is a 4,000 year old philosophy, perfect for the son of a President President.

Let me guess

Yonah Alexander is a pretty ardent supporter of U.S. and Israeli foreign policies? As a "director" at some think tank, seemed to blame the entire existence of Islamic terrorism on the Iranian revolution of 1979. Fuck all to the fact that the Algerian revolution was done by a terrorist campaign that began in the 1950s. Is there some excuse for Alexander not to know that? Of course not, since the Algerian Ambassador to the United States was the second speaker he introduced. First though was the Ambassador from Sri Lanka, a teardrop-shaped, Ohio-sized country off the coast of India. This person called the Tamil Tigers an "international" terrorist movement. Dear readers, the Tamil are an physically distinct looking minority population of the southern part of India and Sri Lanka. It's an indigineously populated rebel movement. Sure, the guns aren't local, they don't make them, so they come from another country, so they are "international." Just like the people who eat Costa Rican beef in their McDonald's burgers are really "international" gourmands. Idriss Jazairy of Algeria spoke next. He is a thoughtful guy in a difficult position. I hadn't heard about his "three phases" of Algerian terrorism, so I'll share. 84-94, GIA-based, 30-50 terrrorists now, targetted at intellectuals, foreigners, possibly been educated by Egyptian teachers Algeria imported to help the country. 94-98 I forget 98-03 150 members of IGCA? Algeria has lost more Muslims that any other country to Al-Qaida, he stated. This guy has my focus.

Think

Think a lot. Think about punk bands like Minor Threat, Corrosion of Conformity. Would you hire them to teach morals to your children? Now, think about a group that calls itself "Global Risk," would you trust it to keep security in Iraq? You would if your a crony of Chalabi! Haha, isn't capitalism great! I mean, crony capitalism!

Shorter Immigration Policy

"Get a J-O-B"! If you are already an illegal immigrant with a job, you can get a three year legal visa to continue working. If your employer has agreed to hire you, you can come from Mexico for the same three years. Here's saying the same thing.

Extremely disappointing," said Cecilia Munoz, vice president for policy at the National Council of La Raza. "They're proposing to invite people to be guest workers without providing any meaningful opportunity to remain in the United States to become legal permanent residents."

Another Major Iraqi Scientist on WMD

Omar Khadduri I linked to before. Now Tamimi was used in this Washington Post article to say that all the weapons systems he ever worked on were just on paper, and not anything like a threat.

Shameless!

Fox News gave a teaser about "Dean" and profiteering in government, but did the story have anything to do with Howard Dean? Viewers would have had to wait around for ten or fifteen minutes to find out that Fox was full of crap. They were naming the PROSECUTING ATTORNEY ("Deen)" in a speed trap case. Does Fox usually cover speed trap cases? Yes, if someone is named "Deen" and they can use his name in the teaser and get a chance to use "Deen" and "government profiteering" in the same sentence! This is a well orchestrated operation that is operating against the interests of the United States. Fox News is a treasonous station, and any rational President would do something akin to seizing their license under the RICO statutes.

Oil Security in Iraq!

Well, I didn't find the story myself (no mention of it on C-SPAN or near the front page of whatever news sources I tried at that time) but here it is, from Counter Punch. this year's biggest Christmas present...

We refer, of course, to the $40 million contract awarded by occupation authorities to a private security company called Erinys Iraq. ... Now little Erinys will guard the Holy Grail of the entire invasion project: Iraq's oil industry. Erinys is a joint venture between a large South African freebooting firm and a few choice Iraqi investors. How choice? They are intimates of Ahmad Chalabi: leader of the Iraqi National Congress exile group, member of the Bush-appointed Governing Council

Now this story has been out one week, and I am going to google for Erinys, and here is a larger section of the story. From the Indian newspaper Sify

Coming to grips with the number of security firms operating throughout Iraq and the exact nature of their missions is next to impossible. The biggest players in Iraq's security bonanza are US firms ArmorGroup and Haart and the British Control Risks Group (CR), and Erinys and Olive. That is without mentioning the private armies employed by the likes of oil firm Halliburton and its unit Kellogg, Brown and Root (KBR), Bechtel and power giant General Electric, who are the biggest beneficiaries of Iraq's multi-billion dollar rebuilding contracts.

And a little more from them to get just a taste of their "progress"

Erinys was awarded a contract this summer to deploy 6,500 mostly Iraqi security force to guard the country's oil pipelines and facilities, which have come under frequent attacks and sabotage by insurgents since Saddam's fall, prompting the closing of the vital northern export pipeline... ...The British advisor says..."They are not disciplined, you train them then the following week they go to 'Inshallah' because they have no white eye looking over at them,"

Hasn't whetted your appetite yet for oil security in Iraq?

Bless America!

I can say that. I lot of people would have a tough time saying that. Want a great chuckle? Have a visiit to Church Lite. and a marvelous time was not had by all, since some believed mighily in an almighty

I Can See Far?

I watched the State Department breifing today, I hadn't noticed Boucher had been changed. The new guy has a pretty funny "I am being serious face." I am just kidding, of course. I listen with extra-regular interest, for numerous reasons, when the topic is Iran, and I was thinking how that although the Iranians didn't accept Bush's offer of kindness at this time (which the spokesperson mentioned), but that we actually appreciate that about them: independence being part of the bedrock of our nation, and the selfish benefit of saved resources. May all our dialog be as pleasant, and may it not again be over matters so calamitous, Adieu! (unmistakable, in every way) Is this what Zarathustra said to the adder? I don't know, but it sounds like chimes from here.

Lieberman and Citizen's for Tax Justice Disagree

Whom do you trust? This article, part of this study, at Citizen's for Tax Justice (CTJ) shows that noone except the top 15% has a tax cut over $1800, yet Senator Lieberman said that the "average family" in Iowa got a tax cut from Bush of $1,800. Looks like Lieberman is spinning, just wrong, or the CTJ study is too old. Lieberman said the most outrageous thing, that he wanted another income tax cut, and that that, an income tax cut, is "Clinton" economics. I seem to recall a tax hike at the outset of the Clinton administration, no cut. He's been on Dean's leg quite fiercely.

They aren't talking about it!

I've been watching, or sometimes half-watching, the Demcorat Debate going on now in Iowa. Braun was sounding good (whoops, she just said the job loss was 6 mill, not 3). The rest fought a lot. But none of them talked about cutting defense spending. We are planning to spend 2.5 Trillion dollars on the JSF (the new one, the F-22 went on without the JSF title, it's now the F-33). We are planning a new round of aircraft carriers, and the first one of the new type to be rolled out in 2013. I would (perhaps) increase R&D but decrease prototyping and push back the roll out We keep our Nuclear ("boomer") subs in the Oceans like Total Nuclear War is close to imminent (reduce "optempo" (8 from 14 per batch)) FInally cancel the Osprey (all the danger of a Helicopter in a Plane! Paratroopers Union Says No! j/k) Is the Crusader canned for good? I've got an idea for transforming the tech (less of a total loss?) Base cafeteria nutrition analysis! OMG. They feed our boys crap, I swear, it's crap. I'm not saying they should have balsamic vinagerette on mesculun and bitters, but Iceberg lettuce? Is anyone growing up on fruit cocktail anymore? pre-BRAC environmental clean up where available (which would have to make them less eligible to be R'd or C'd) If I think of more I'll add them here.

DEAN IS ANOTHER MCGOVERN

¿Vote NIXON? Vote for the candidate who will bring

Illegal and internationally condemned bombings! Yay!

Massive, private interest planned social programs (this time, no costs until after the election!) Yay!

Enjoy freshened relations with foreign despots! Yah!

Get ready for another resignation! VOTE NIXON BUSH 1972!

Giving Bush Credit

I am glad President Bush wanted to send a mission to Iran with Senator Elizabeth Dole, and considering that the same President Bush had repeatedly called Iran "evil," (without any sort of qualification, or any type of hedge, implying an absolute and pure evil), I am not surprised that Iran turned the U.S. down. Does anybody not think that the U.S. would likely use the mission for intellgience activities? This morning on C-SPAN I learned about Bush's "Millenium Challange Act" which is supposed to go to aid to foreign governments that aren't police states, and instead are making an honest effort at honest government. The Congress hasn't appropriated anything yet, and I can't imagine that the highly partisan nature of today's politics won't mutate the process (supporting free market countries that are really corrupt, while ignoring politically free but economically controlled societies), but it sounds like a good idea. The President has spent hours and horus of press time talking about tax cuts and wars, but I haven't seen him talk about the MCA, but maybe that's just me.

Christmas/NY Pudding

Like I said before, the ultimate "Friday news release time" is actually the week between Christmas and New Year's Eve. The only even semi-interesting thing this season was Ashcroft's recusal of himself in the Plame affair. Is it really anything? I have no clue.