Grilled Mueller with Avocado Butter

I just got home and I was watching an enjoyable performance on the teevee. No, it wasn't some symphonic masterpiece, a reunion concert of a bunch of old and withered rock stars, not even the running of a classic black and white Japanese Kurosawa film. Nope, it was simply a display of elective consequence.

Robert Mueller was squirming under the disbelieving questions of a handful of Senators, trying desperately to justify and explain the actions of the FBI, aided of course by that Senator from Alabama, Sessions, and the whiner from Utah. Last year, Mueller would have had a couple of glare downs with Sen. Feinstein, maybe some curt words with Sen. Leahy, and that would've been that. Just another drive-by bricking of America's windows, and soon done.

But not this time. And it was a pleasure to see.

It happened, Mueller said, because of "mistakes, carelessness, confusion, lack of training, lack of guidance and lack of adequate oversight."

Then came this line, which senators didn't find reassuring either:

The FBI's use of inaccurate information to obtain secret search warrants? The problem was "very lengthy documents . . . with thousands of facts."

See, this is what we voted for, an end to this nonsense. Feinstein and company aren't buying the incompetence canard so much, because they don't have to. And when you look at the forces peeling back the layers of corruption being revealed by the purging of those US Attorney's, you see substantive, concrete, changes thanks to 11/7/06.

Just listen to the bleating from the Bobo's and Broder's out there, trying in their own timorous ways to head off the Democratic investigations threaten their grip on power. They know that once this train gets a rollin there will be no stopping it. And know this, my friends, for all of its horrors and heartbreak, for all of the destruction being wrought to both Iraq and the United States, the Iraq Invasion and Occupation is not the heart of the matter, is not the purpose and mission of this Administration.

Iraq, al Qaeda, Incompetence, US Attorney's, NSA spying, Evolution in Kansas, Mexicans at the Border, all these things are symptoms or distractions or both for what they really want, a Corporate Government. They don't want to do the actual governing work, that's too tedious and quaint. They just want to be the puppet master greasing the skids for their access to all of that USA cash.

That's what is a the center of the US Attorney purge, Carol Lam's investigation. Josh Marshall has been all over this from the get go, and every day it gets darker and higher up the food chain. Don't think this is about Alberto, no this is all about stopping Lam's investigation, and if we have to fire some decent people and gut 6 or 8 other investigations in the process, so be it.

Consider this piece from Copley News Service

First came the May 11, 2006, exchange between Justice Department officials suggesting Lam's removal, the day after she notified them she would serve search warrants on former CIA Executive Director Kyle “Dusty” Foggo.

It was a week later that Mercer revealed in an e-mail that Lam's situation “now has Frist's attention” – referring to then-Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, a Republican struggling to ensure his party retained control of the Senate in the upcoming November elections.

Two weeks after that, Mercer questioned the wisdom of giving Lam more resources.

The day after this Mercer missive, Sampson directed Mercer in an e-mail to have a “heart-to-heart” with Lam about “the urgent need to improve immigration enforcement in San Diego.”

“Put her on a very short leash,” Sampson wrote. “If she balks – or otherwise does not perform in a measurable way by July 15, remove her.”

You don't need to be a rocket scientist to figure out what's happening here, it's all about the contracts and the access and the jobs for spouses and the burnishing of the image with those lavish charity dinners that cretins like Randy Cunningham wallowed in, the dismantling of the structures and reputations of our government so they can replace it with something more lucrative. That's the Heart of the Matter. And that's what these investigations are going to reveal. Because they've stepped on too many people to get to this place, people once on their side but now tossed aside or under the bus, and much like an Iraqi whose home has been invaded by American GI's, revenge is their coin.

Senatorial Embarassment

Watched VP Gore tonight talking to the Senate. Inhofe musta made ol BartCop proud with that performance. He truly torpedoed his efforts by being such an asshole about the whole thing, I don't think he earned many points with his folks back in OK with the respectful way he treated the former Vice president and Senator and Academy Award Winner, and if my memory serves me, at least this is what the GOP is always preaching about folks in the heartland, it's that they are respectful of people like former Vice Presidents. Not so Jimmy Inhofe.

Call it what you will, wankery, ignorance, fundy fruitiness, general rudeness, I think it was just an act by a desperate man fronting for his masters, Big Oil and Big Utilities. Because Mr. Gore talked about the one thing that can truly get us off of the oil monkey, truly impact global warming, really move in a way that makes us all part of the solution not the problem, that empowers Americans in ways the GOP can't really internalize (to use a phrase from Mr. Gore today) at all.

Distributed energy production. Instead of one big power plant we all shackle ourselves to, Gore thinks we need to have distributed power, and guess who loses in that scenario? Corporations, that's right. And thus we get that ridiculous performance by Inhofe. He's not crazy, he's not even that stupid (yeah, I know, he is that stupid, but a different kind of stupid bred out of greed and fear and personal cowardice), but in reality he's just a tool of the money that doesn't want anything that gives power to the people, literally in this case, at their expense.

You want to get back at those guys? Buy something solar powered, get a little wind generator for the backyard, something that moves you towards distributed power and away from centralization and the attractive colors of its lures, away from those fur lined handcuffs dangling before you courtesy of Springfield Power, away from the tempting Power Company Marlboro Man.

That's what they fear, and that's why they seek to destroy Al Gore, environmentalists, why they attack the very notion of global warming. Why, it's the same strategy they used when Kerry said that nice thing about Cheney's lesbian daughter, attack since the contradictions exposed by Democrats would fracture the GOP coalition of the insane and the insatiable.

It's the same strategy they use for everything they do, the war, US Attorneys, Aids, Global Warmng, Cafe standards, you name it, attack so you won't look at the reality and fracture their untenable coalition of the insane and the insatiable. I repeat that coz it sounds kinda catchy!

Nixon and Bush

[cross posted at DKos]
As I was reading this AP piece, I couldn't help but visualize Richard Nixon solemnly swearing that these stacks of transcripts

In these folders that you see over here on my left are more than 1,200 pages of transcripts of private conversations I participated in between Sept 15, 1972, and Apr 27 of 1973 with my principal aides and associates with regard to Watergate. They include all the relevant portions of all of the subpoenaed conversations that were recorded, that is, all portions that relate to the question of what I knew about Watergate or the coverup and what I did about it.

[...]

As far as what the President personally knew and did with regard to Watergate and the coverup is concerned, these materials—together with those already made available—will tell it all.

Bush says this:

The president cast the offer as virtually unprecedented and a reasonable way for Congress to get all the information it needs about the matter.

"If the Democrats truly do want to move forward and find the right information, they ought to accept what I proposed," Bush said. "If scoring political points is the desire, then the rejection of this reasonable proposal will really be evident for the American people to see."

You want it made more clear? Try this, first Bush, then Tricky Dick.

Bush said he worried that allowing testimony under oath would set a precedent on the separation of powers that would harm the presidency as an institution.

"My choice is to make sure that I safeguard the ability for presidents to get good decisions," he said. "If the staff of a president operated in constant fear of being hauled before various committees to discuss internal deliberations, the president would not receive candid advice and the American people would be ill-served."

Tricky

Ever since the existence of the White House taping system was first made known last summer, I have tried vigorously to guard the privacy of the tapes. I have been well aware that my effort to protect the confidentiality of Presidential conversations has heightened the sense of mystery about Watergate and, in fact, has caused increased suspicions of the President. Many people assume that the tapes must incriminate the President, or that otherwise, he would not insist on their privacy.

But the problem I confronted was this: Unless a President can protect the privacy of the advice he gets, he cannot get the advice he needs.

This principle is recognized in the constitutional doctrine of executive privilege, which has been defended and maintained by every President since Washington and which has been recognized by the courts, whenever tested, as inherent in the Presidency. I consider it to be my constitutional responsibility to defend this principle.

Other than the fact that Nixon could speak without sounding like an idiot, is there really any difference between these two Presidents, the heretofore reigning Worst President Ever and the Hands Down New Champ?

The discussion and overanalysis of the "Constitutional Crisis Question" will continue regardless of what I say, but NOW is the time to back up the Democrats on this. Bush's "offer" is an insult, a joke, a charade, to not just Congress, but to every American living or dead, an insult to the troops dying for greed and hubris, an insult to the taxpayers who fund this government (He [Bush] added that federal prosecutors work for him and it is natural to consider replacing them. [Actually they work for the American People you feckless git]), an insult to my Dad who taught 6th grade for 30 years, my Mother who taught me decency and compassion before she passed, to my sweet little Gramma who taught me about family and homemade desserts and scratching each others back while watching Hawaii 5-0, yeah, that was some offer he made. No oath, no press, no transcript, pretty much never happened.

Here's the link to the House Judiciary Committee, here's the link for the Senate Judiciary Committee, and here's its contact page. Use it.

More Lies From the GOP

You have to love House Democratic Whip James Clyburn's comments yesterday about Abu Gonzales and company from this AP screed:

"They don't know anything about running government. They're just political hacks," Clyburn said at a news conference in Columbia, S.C. "Gonzales is just a political hack."

Their hackery goes beyond The Purge, and Plame, and Iraq, and Tax Cuts, of course, and here's another one.

Via The Wilderness Society we get an example of another way they operate. The National Wildlife Refuge System is getting stressed to the breaking point, and here's how they do it.

The Land and Water Conservation Fund is intended to fund acquisitions of areas of value to the refuge system, yet of the $900 million from oil and gas royalties available, Bush and the GOP Congress spent 16 percent of that, and Bush has proposed to spend 6 percent next year. Of course the new Democratic Congress will probably reverse that trend, but the fact remains that the Bush Administration is not a good steward of our lands, our laws, or our people.

They've done this same dodge with Aids in Africa, and countless other programs, budget a bunch of money but never spend any, the only purpose being to claim they increased the budgets, even though they didn't spend the money. It's just another LIE from the mouths of George W Bush and his soulless coterie of fiends and hacks and incompetents, just to prove that government doesn't work so we need to privatize it.

That's all they do. See, we increased the budget, and the place still fell apart. Government can't do the job, private industry can ride to the rescue better and cheaper. Of course, as Scout Prime is chronicling about the latest New Orleans Katrina outrage, and gee, guess what, the Bush's are involved, well, maybe if by rescue you mean liberate millions from the taxpayers for the corporate coffers in return for supplying goods and services that don't work.

I really don't like these people, at all.

Attorney's and Corruption

Paul Krugman raises a good question, and i was very happy to hear Chuck Schumer make the same point today during the Judiciary Committee hearing. What about the ones not fired? For instance,

[T]he subpoenas that Chris Christie, the former Bush “Pioneer” who is now the U.S. attorney for New Jersey, issued two months before the 2006 election — and the way news of the subpoenas was quickly leaked to local news media.

The subpoenas were issued in connection with allegations of corruption on the part of Senator Bob Menendez, a Democrat who seemed to be facing a close race at the time. Those allegations appeared, on their face, to be convoluted and unconvincing, and Mr. Menendez claimed that both the investigation and the leaks were politically motivated.

Then there's this piece from New Mexico regarding a local Democratic scandal involving courthouse construction. Here's the key line in the article, after all the Rove involvement is discussed: The courthouse controversy has yet to yield indictments.

We've all heard about this study that out of 375 investigations, 298 involved Democrats. Seeing as how there's some rough parity of elected officials party affiliation across the country, you would figure the numbers would be more like 200 GOP and 150 Dem and the rest others, but then you wouldn't be thinking about who's involved here. Karl Rove, Mr politics is policy.

I have to hand it to the committee today, Schumer made that point, Feinstein made some good points about the obvious politization involved here, and she countered when that jackass Kyl threw in the Clinton fired all 93 US Attorney's canard. And I have to question that based on this article from Minnesota Public Radio, (my bolds) to wit:

Tom Heffelfinger resigned his post as U.S. attorney in Minneapolis last February. He had served two stints -- the first from September 1991 to April 1993, and then again from September 2001 to February 2006. President Clinton took office in January of 1993, so there's one USA he didn't fire, it would appear. I'll bet there's others who they asked for and received resignations from, but who then stayed for a while until replacements were found. After 12 years of Reagan and Bush you know damn well they needed replacing by Democrats, that's just too long for one party to control their positions, especially given the corruption and cronyism, a pale spectre of Bush/Cheney's but present nonetheless, of Reagan and his Spymaster Bush.

Somebody at TPM Muckraker said that Abu would resign and that would be the end of it. But I say no. Perjury is a felony regardless of your employment status, and there are too many threads of corruption running around this issue to be satisfied by the scalp of that wretched little man Gonzales. Not that he's ever going to talk, he knows what would happen to him if he did, there'd be no spider hole deep enough for him to hide in, but putting the squeeze on him and his wretched flunkies is bound to achieve results. Hey, it worked for Khalid Sheik Mohammed, right, it oughta work for Abu G.

GOP Demonstration

Just heard Trent "Where's My Porch Brownie?" Lott waxing on about how the Senate can't get anything done, blah blah blah. Two things came to mind. One, then vote for the Democrats bills you petulent hack, and, more tragi-comically two, if only the Democrats had acted this way as a minority party.

It would have been so simple in so many cases to just say no and not allow debate to stop on anything of substance, to just block the GOP, there weren't 60 Republicans at any time, even counting Joe Lies A Lot, sorry, that's Condi's handle, Joe Lies About His True Values (Kiss kiss, smoochie smoochie Goeorgie poo!).

But alas, the Democrats haven't quite gotten the knack of putting your values, as represented by your Party, ahead of your own personal ambitions or beliefs, in order to place yourself in the POSITION OF BEING ABLE TO DO ANYTHING ABOUT IT. Maybe if they had 80 Senators and 350 Congressmen they might be able to push forward with getting what 60 to 70 percent of the American People want, us out of Iraq.

Certainly the *Blue Dogs* haven't figured it out, and yes, it's been a long standing Democratic traditiion to circle the firing squad and act like a bunch of cats on catnip, but now is the time to break that tradition, don't you think?

Instead of a Donkey maybe the Dems should adopt a frightened hen as their fetish, for all the good they APPEAR to be accomplishing. And that's the root of the problem, they keep on ceeding the PR battle to the Goppers, they continue to reinforce the Gopper framing of what is a Democrat, and you don't win friends and influence getting framed as a s bunch of gutless wimps, Henry Waxman and bouncing Abu Gonzales notwithsatnding.

I mean, it won't be the Democrats who get credit for purging us of Little Himmler, it's going to be John Sununu and the other "Brave" Republicans who cross the lines to get rid of that terrible liability hanging around Bush's scrawny neck, which of course further insulates Bush from responsibility for his own administration and its multitude of crimes and outrages. Now if the Democrats were to lead the charge they could hammer both Little Abu and Lil' Boots mercilessly and DEMONSTRATE Democratic vs Republican values, but that would require some fortitude and unanimity so lacking in the Democratic brain stem.

I'd love to be proven wrong, but I'm not going to withhold breathing waiting.

Media Tidbit-CNBC Hearts Fox

Joe Kiernan, on Squawk Box had this little filler thing, the 3 "reporters" sitting around, talk show like, showing off the woman's legs, and Kiernan went off on the Dem's cancelling the Nevada Debate on Fox "News", although he tried to make it sound like it hadn't been cancelled. He defended Fox, questioning those nasty bloggers like Markos, those dirty hippies like MoveOn, wanting to know why the Dems want to associate with those off the chart wacko's instead of the mainstream massive majority of Democrats who should treat Fox as a fully legimate news organization. And of course they pooh poohed Ailes Obama / The Murderous Terrorist Bush Has Failed To Find slur, rightly viewed as an excuse for the pullout, but also NOT acknowledged as very indicitive of the nature of Faux "News."

Unbelievable, the hackery. He posited what next, the GOP boycott CNN???

Stop it Joe, yer killin me!!!! [sniff, wipes tear from eye]

There was no reason for this segment they had, it was just killing some time at the end of the hour, yet it accomplished many things for the corporate press. Legitimizes Faux, deligitimizes MoveOn and Kos, and confuses the border between the pure "news" divisions of the various networks, and their corporate activites like branding and ratings for their shows, etc. Faux running a political debate is not "news," it's a business function, and that's fine, there's nothing wrong with it, and there's absolutely nothing wrong with Democrats responding to the people they represent and deciding that it would be inappropriate to support that business function of a lying, smearing, pandering, bootlicking outfit like Faux News.

But CNBC "reporters" apparently got their marching orders from GE HQ, and decided that shilling for Faux was more important than journalistic integrity. Faux, CNN, CNBC, MSNBC, all legitimate "News" operations, and don't you dare think otherwise, oh, and don't listen to that huge number of dirty filthy hippies who believe in democracy and a free press and actual news reporting like the sort that Dana Priest has demonstrated with her Walter Reed stories.

Bi-Broder-Sans Grey Mystery Meat

Read Broder's Thursday column at work, just had a good laugh. What astounds me is how Mr Dean of the Fairies, er Pundocracy, Pundidiotocracy, Punditirodacy, DC Hand Jobbers, is how he forgets some minor factual matters in his desparate embrace of civility over substance, comity over progress, or congeniality over accomplishment.

For instance, and doesn't Tom Daschle make a fine example? Sen. Gopper Leader Frist campaigns against his opposite number, Sen. Daschle, breaking a 50 year tradition, straining the bonds of comity in the process. Sen. Daschle, of course, having been accused of all manor of heinous crimes, from treason to not being sufficiently supplicantable in his relations to George W Bush while, horrors, a war was happening, was so fierce and violent in his attacks against Bush that he had to be defeated you know.

"I don't think the success has been overstated. But the continued success I think is still somewhat in doubt. Whether we continue to succeed depends on whether we get the right answers to the questions Senator Byrd was posing yesterday. ... I will say that at this point, given the information we've been provided, I don't think it would do anybody any good to second-guess what has been done to date. I think it has been successful. I've said that on many, many occasions. But I think the jury's still out about future success, as I've said."

He also suggested Thursday that it was necessary for the United States to find Osama bin Laden and other al-Qaida leaders for the war on terrorism to be considered a success.

And in response Sen. Daschle got this:

Trent Lott, however, fired back almost immediately by attacking Daschle's right to criticize the Bush administration's prosecution of the war. "How dare Senator Daschle criticize President Bush while we are fighting our war on terrorism, especially when we have troops in the field," Lott stated. "He should not be trying to divide our country while we are united." Bill Frist, called Daschle's remarks "thoughtless and ill-timed." Meanwhile, Rep. Thomas Davis, claimed Daschle's "divisive comments have the effect of giving aid and comfort to our enemies by allowing them to exploit divisions in our country."

[...] Andrew Sullivan suggested that Daschle's comments marked the start of a campaign "to undermine the war in order to gain some political traction against the president."

Mr. Broder forgets stuff like that, forgets the ugly smears that republicans have been throwing out at Democrats for years, forgets the contempt that Republicans have demonstrated for Democrats in every way, remember Sensenbrenners fit at the basement hearings the Dems were having, just relagating them to basement hearings, Bill Thomas calling the cops on the Democrats, oh the list is a long one, why just yesterday some House gopper of some name, can't remember which one nor does it matter, kept making the snotty little Democrat Party comment, minor to be sure, but a petty insult that demonstrates the GOP's sense of comity nonetheless, yes, David Broder forgets that at the heart of this divide is nobody but Republicans.

Tom Daschle asks a wishy washy question, and you'd think he'd raped Mary Cheney for christssake. And David Broder thinks these eminent gris leaders are going to save the country from partisanship?? Broder wants gruel sans the grey lump of mystery meat or salt and thinks that is going to make this a better place for all.

As Ezra Klein notes though, tellingly so,

You can't bipartisan the health care crisis. You can't bipartisan Iraq. You can't bipartisan energy. There are solutions to these issues, and you have to be courageous enough and concerned enough to actually make the hard choices and advocate for the right ones. [That's why we have political parties, they think their own solutions are the right ones-DGR] And maybe, if you're forceful enough, and savvy enough, you can get members of both parties to agree that your solution is the right one. But you don't start with bipartisanship, you end with it.

More Good Economic News

FOR SOME AMERICANS THE ECONOMY IS GREAT

CNBC this morning reported on retail sales for Feb. this morning, Sacks, Nordstroms, the high end retailers in general, had a pretty good month, but not so much for the rest of the pack, in general. As I noted earlier, labor costs, i.e. wages and benefits, were up last quarter, in large part to big bonuses paid to high-income workers.

So you see, the economy is doing great! It's like the ad I heard on KLSD Air America one morning, some financial planner who wants to give back to his community for all of his business successes as a way to say thanks, and to help people out.

How nice, I thought, how progressive even. Then I heard the pitch. It was for a seminar to help the successful wealthy investors make the most out of their high end investments! Way to give back to the community, dude. [Shakes head in wonder and amazement]

In a related area, I also heard the spokesman for the American Bankers Association talking about credit cards, I guess Congress held some hearings on credit card debt yesterday, and he said that a lot of the problem is an educational one, that people need to be better educated about credit and how it works.

True enough I said, but, when you watch the way the credit card companies sell their product, and isn't that what advertising is all about, educating the consumers about your product? But, alas, when you watch the ads, they're selling vacations and golf outings and impressing the boss and buy buy buying more crap for your house. I'm pretty sure that educating the consumer about responsible credit, the impact of just making the minimum payment on your credit card accounts, and a whole plethora of things related to credit and credit cards, is AWOL from their campaigns.

But their spokesmodel said the problem is the consumer being un-educated. No mention of their culpability in it, no sirree bob, it's you, you dear readers, at fault.

Graham and Faux Outrage Covers for Bush War

ON NEWS HOUR BLAMES TROOPS, DENIES TRUTH

I just finished watching the News Hour interview with Sen. Patty Murray, D-WA, and a truly reprehensible Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-SC, about the VA/Military Hospitals care. Twice in the space of the interview Graham went out of his way to throw blame on Sgt's and maintenence workers and lower ranking officers for the mess at Walter Reed, and, incredibly enough, at Abu Ghraib.

And $250,000 was spent in 2005 to renovate the building. My question is, as a military lawyer for 20-something years, who was the first sergeant in charge of Building 18? Who was the company commander whose job it is to inspect facilities?

And we want to hold commanders at the highest level accountable, but there is also a chain of command down below. Some rooms in Building 218 got to be deplorable because it was just not structurally sound. Somebody in the Army is responsible for maintaining that building. I want to know who they were and why they didn't do a better job. [...]

What was Abu Ghraib about? It was about not enough people to run the jail who were poorly trained.

Nice. I'm surprised he didn't try to toss Bill Clinton that bus too.

Sen. Murray did a pretty good job making the case that the problem stems in large part from the failure of the administration to properly plan for Cheney's War of Occupation, and she also noted a couple of times that the Bush Administration is impeding the Congress in trying to correct the problems.

And I think that, you know, here in the Senate, we're not going to sit by idly and wait for more commissions. We are going to get to work and try to deal with this, but that takes honesty from this administration.

An honesty lacking by this administration and apologists like Lindsey Graham. They won't tell Congress how many traumatic brain injuries there are, as Murray clearly puts it, frankly, what we've seen from the V.A. is the same thing we've seen from the Pentagon, at this point, is that we haven't been given honest numbers and assessments of what this war is costing so that we can provide the resources that are needed.

And that's the crux of this matter, it's the filter you need to look through with every outrage surrounding this stinking "war."

We cannot know the true costs of this war, the real costs, the costs that affect and impact our actual lives, not the fantasy lives of the media narrative, of our national psyche, of our detached and disconnected world, no, we cannot know what this war is actually costing us, because if we do ever figure it out, the support for this "war" and the criminal corporate nationalistic enterprise it is feeding, will fall through the floor, and there will be some repurcussions unlike any this nation has ever seen. Mark my words, for there is no justification for this war. It was wrong the instant it was moved out of the bowels of PNAC, it was wrong in every way when it was pushed by Cheney's special plans group, by Rummy and Scooter and Powell and Graham and Lieberman and every other enabler and nationalist and oilogopolist. And maybe, just maybe, if we keep pushing this story of the failed care of our troops, if we keep pushing our weak-kneed Congressmen to act, maybe, just maybe, the scales will fall from our eyes, and we shall see; and seeing, we shall know the truth; and knowing the truth, we will be set free from our bonds of greed and fear.

And there will be celebrations across the land.

More Good News-Labor Costs Rise!

And productivity increased as well! Hooray! Bravo, good job, workers! You worked hard for all that money!

What? What's that you say?

Not so fast, lowly laborers, is that what you're telling me?

Bugger!

It was the biggest quarterly increase in labor costs since a 9.1 percent surge in the first three months of 2006. Both gains [labor costs-DGR] were attributed in large part to big bonuses paid to high-income workers.

Oh.

Well, never mind, I need to go work now.

US Attorney's Firing Linked to Bill Clinton

Yes, I heard it on C-SPAN so it must be true. Granted, it was a caller on the Republican line, so there's a chance that some mis-information may be involved. But at any rate, we have one of the talking points that justifies yet again the Bush adminstration putting their power grab over the priorities of the Country.

You see, Clinton fired all 93, count 'em, 93, US Attorney's when he came into office. Sure, after twelve years of Reagan and Bush, that seems reasonable, and given that new administrations always ask for the resignations of ALL political appointees, that seems like standard procedure, but not to the faithful, oh no.

The writer from the Legal Times, Jason McClure, who was taking questions with Rob did not really respond to that call, or a later one that pointed out the routine nature of Clinton's firings, didn't mention that in respect to mid-term firings, 3 since 1980 or so, these were unprecedented, in fact he sorta went out of his way to defend Bush pointing out that he kept some US Attorney's without acknowledging that, yes, incoming Presidents ask for the resignations of all political appointees, whether they accept them or not or that after 12 years under one party there aren't going to be much that a supposed outsider is going to want to keep.

No, it's just all Bill Clinton's fault, don't you know anything? He had an unauthorized blow job in the White House! Better he got it across the street in the park I suppose.

Support of Our Troops, Republican Style

While looking for a transcript of the hearings at Walter Reed, I went to the Oversight Committee website, where I found this report from the Committee on Government Reform — Minority Staff Special Investigations Division. My bolds.

The Department ... has had long-standing problems providing care for eligible veterans. In 1996, Congress passed the Veterans Health care Reform Act, which expanded eligibility for VA care to all veterans. Since the legislation was passed, enrollment in VA health care facilities has increased by almost 300%, from 2.9 M in '96 to an estimated 7.5 M in '03. Funding for the VA, however, increased at a much lower rate during this period, leading to shortages of capacity and long waiting times for many veterans.

That Republican congress had to pass Clinton's bill, but they didn't have to pay for it all that much. In the same way, Bush, demonstrating his support for those heroes he loves to pose before, would impose fees and cost increases on Priority 7 Veterans that effectively forces tens of thousands of them out of the system, and deny enrollments for a whole large group of new Vets, so called Priority 8 Veterans.

Priority 7 veterans are veterans whose injuries are not service-related and whose income is more than $24,644 ($29,576 for a veteran with a dependent) but less than 80% of the community’s median income. Priority 8 veterans are veterans whose injuries are not service related and whose incomes are higher than Priority 7 veterans. Together, these two classes of veterans represent 41% of the veterans currently receiving VA health care.

So to honor our Veterans, the great Cult of the Military Forces, that would be the GOP, would deny access to any VA care for a whole class of Veterans, while raising a never before done TAX!!! on another group of Vets, effectively forcing thousands of Veterans out of the VA system.

We're supposed to honor our troops by supporting them, by taking care of them, even after they're done with their service. They made great sacrifices, of time and body, and we should pay for their healthcare as part of our bargain for their service. Bill Clinton got that done, only the Republicans seem to have undone it, just as they have attempted to undo everything else Bill Clinton accomplished in office, see North Korea, Iraq, Iran, Roadless Rules, Clean Air, Fair taxation, you name it, to the extent I'm surprised they haven't tried to restart the The Troubles in Northern Ireland.

Support the troops indeed.

Congressional Questions-Democratic Version

Okay, to be honest, other than wanting to know why they're such greedy and feckless Bush lickers, there will be no Republican version, their answers lack the merest shred of credibility. But I want to know, having heard some blather from Chuck Schumer this morning, a few things. First, the gist of the offending comment:

In a letter Sunday to Defense Secretary Robert Gates, Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., asked for an independent commission, possibly headed by former Secretary of State Colin Powell, to investigate all post-combat medical facilities and recommend changes.

Why do you need an independent investigation?
Aren't your values good enough?
Aren't you capable enough?
Do you lack the integrity necessary to conduct an investigation, as demonstrated by continually running for bi-partisan cover instead of standing on your own?
Are you afraid of what the "Press" is going to say about you?
Afraid they might question your patriotism?
Afraid they might label your actions as "political and partisan" even though the American People want to know the answers and do not support this war or the Bush administration and don't believe them and their lies any longer?
Do you enjoy the taste of Colin Powell's spew that much, the same spew he gave you with his pre-war WMD testimony, that you would invite him to head your investigation, not just be apart of it, but HEAD it?

These are just a few of the question I have for the Democratic LEADERSHIP, and they're all pretty much centered on the central question that keeps swirling around my head, around the blogosphere, around the water coolers and kitchen tables and talk radio's and anywhere else people congregate, namely,

WHY WON'T YOU LEAD US OUT OF THIS NIGHTMARE THAT IS THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION???

The Beneficiaries of "Incompetence"

Some musings on the US Attorney's Purge, prompted by a number of TPM posts, here, here, and especially here.

So who hired these US Attorney's in the first place?

Wouldn't it have been the, yes, wait, Bush Administration?

I concur wholeheartedly with the "incompetence" dodge reader BG wrote about, they're only incompetent if you think that what they have been doing is trying to run a democratic government for the betterment of the American People in its entirety.

Given that such a consideration is far down the list of their policies and beliefs, the incompetence dodge disappears under the weight of so much greed and delusional ideology. Granted, some of them are incompetent, some too are pretty much certifiable, some, like the attorney general, are about as close to being a complete sociopath as I've ever seen, but for the most part, the problem is that they are profoundly immature in their belief systems, that they are so suffused with fear and shame that they project their inadequacies onto a grand scale, not unlike a group of people who plunged the world into the most hideous maelstrom of death and destruction and insanity ever.

So back to my question, when their tools misbehaved, either by action or inaction, they moved to replace them with more willing tools, or less willing tools you could say, depending on the particulars. What this demonstrates is not incompetence, but an inability to appreciate that some people do behave in ways that uphold their duty to their oath's of office, that their Mayberry Machiavelism renders them incapable of understanding honor and dignity and responsibility. That doesn't make them incompetent or corrupt, it makes them, essentially, evil.

And it's far past time for the Democrats to embrace that concept, and act accordingly. And soon.

Watch the News Hour

Friday's News Hour had some good reporting and discussions, even from Bobo, believe it or not.

And they even had a representative from the online world, Mark Benjamin from Salon.com. Bloggers have been talking about this story from day one, that's why Atrios was always wondering why Bush would never visit the troops there, DKos has had weekly discussions of the treatment of soldiers and veterans, people like Seven of Six have talked about their "adventures" with the VA, but until the WaPo went front page, nobody did didly. This exchange between Lehrer, a former Marine, and Bobo, not a former Marine, tells quite a lot:

DAVID BROOKS: And to me -- and I really wasn't aware of how much had been reported in Salon. I wasn't aware until Dana Priest just said it, that there had been a hearing.

JIM LEHRER: In 2005, and nobody paid any attention, including us.

As Judy Woodruff noted, now that we have a divided government again, these sorts of stories will come out. But the question is why they haven't before this? Why did/does the Bush Administration suppress so much about this war, beyond the fact that half of what they do is illegal, the other half incompetent?

They actually kindof discussed it in the Walter Reed story and in the Shields and Brooks discussion, but I'll summarize.

They don't want the people of this country to know the consequences of the Administration's War of Occupation. They don't want us to sacrifice, because if we become a part of this nightmare we will begin to seriously question why; those 30 percent dead enders that back Bush without question will start to wonder when things begin to impact their own Cheetos stained lives, those 10 percent supporters will not just leave Bush, but go after Bush and Cheney, and start to look for changes and solutions, will start demanding that the troops come home now, and it won't be unequivocable either. And Bush/Cheney can't afford that.

Because then stories like the two that followed Shields and Brooks will get addressed too, and then their whole criminal enterprise will come crashing down around their preciousssssssss corporate masters. Here's a link to the video of the Port Pollution story. Check it out too, it's quite interesting, and once again California is actually trying to fill the void left by Bush's Administration.

Bush Rebuked in NOLA

Scout Prime sent me an e-mail about this, better late than never, here's the link and here's another link to what people in NOLA have to do with their time if they want to get help.

All I can add to this is that Bush showing up in New Orleans only reminds people of how badly Bush and Brownie and Bush's FEMA (not Bill Clinton's FEMA, George W Effing Bush's FEMA) failed their responsibilities. It's like everytime he makes a speech on Iraq his poll numbers go down.

And Rove is a genius, right?

C'mon Democrats, take these people on!!!!!!!

Two Recoveries

This article from Bob Woodruff talks about the struggles of our wounded veterans returning from Iraq:

Navigating the military and veterans health-care system can be daunting and sometimes downright maddening for the families of wounded veterans.

"It's almost like a scavenger hunt," said Sarah Wade, whose husband, Sgt. Ted Wade, lost an arm and suffered a traumatic brain injury when his Humvee was hit by an improvised explosive device, IED, nearly three years ago.

"I'm still trying to recover what I've lost, and I'm still trying to reorganize myself," Ted said.

Sarah dropped out of college and quit her job so she could advocate full time for her husband's care.

"It's taken a toll on me physically. It's been really, really hard," she said.

Recall the comments of Rep. Young, R-FL-10: we were made to feel very uncomfortable," said Young, about asking questions of the staff. Then he ran away. Gee, you useless coward, that must have been really hard work.

But has anybody noticed that Bob Woodruff is recovered enough to go back to work, while the people in the military having suffered the same sort of injuries, are scavenging aid and benefits through the VA healthcare system, and still trying to recover?

Why can't the people that we paid to put in this place without their choice, compared to Woodruff who wanted to be there, why can't we get those people standing and falling in our stead taken proper care of, made whole again?

Abu Gonzales Tries to Make His Case

I saw this on the local news this evening, and here's the local cat box liner report. There's a few things to consider.

The chief complaint against Carol Lam was that she wasn't prosecuting border smuggling cases hard enough. That came from republican White House operatives better known as GOP Congressmen.

Now, suddenly, presto ho ha,

Federal authorities Wednesday arrested dozens of individuals across the country suspected of bringing 18 tons of illegal drugs into the United States, Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales said in an afternoon news conference here.

Now, I ask you, this was a pretty far flung and complex investigation involving more than 100 agencies, foreign and domestic. It's pretty safe to say that this did not occur over the course of the time since Ms. Lam stepped down on Feb 15th, so it's also safe to say that the allegations against Carol Lam really don't hold any water. Which brings us back around to finding out why she and the other US Attorneys were replaced.

As Josh Marshall is reporting, it stinks of politics, and it appears that the Democrats are sinking their teeth into this one. Having Gonzales announcing the arrests here in San Diego is another indication the gopper thugs are feeling some heat from this effort to protect the GOP from more damaging investigations and convictions, Jerry Lewis and John Doolittle and Virgil Goode. But that guy is like kryptonite to humanity, and it doesn't sound like it's working much.

Again, the chief complaint against Lam was her supposed reluctnace to prosecute smugglers at the border. But this big drug bust makes those charges demonstrably false, which means that there is a criminal conspiracy being conducted to cover-up the real reason for her dismissal. And really, we all know what that is, we just need to prove it.

What is a Republican

As this newest article from Anne Hull and Dana Priest details, the conditions at Walter Reed should come as a surprise to no one. Yet just like Condi and her big "nobody imagined they would hijack an airplane and crash it into a building" lie, there are some who are shocked at these developments.

But what's important to see in all of this isn't fixing the problems at Walter Reed, that's the detail that gets us lost in the symptoms without diagnosing the disease. No, the thing that reveals all is the response of the Republican, Rep Young, R-FL-10 in this case.

Faced with a problem, and in a position to actually correct the problem, as Steve Soto notes, the POS RAN AWAY [My highlights]

Young said he voiced concerns to commanders over troubling incidents he witnessed but was rebuffed or ignored. "When Bev or I would bring problems to the attention of authorities of Walter Reed, we were made to feel very uncomfortable," said Young, who began visiting the wounded recuperating at other facilities.

Cheney hides in his hole, Bush hid in Air Force One, Young went somewhere because he was made uncomfortable, as opposed to the soldier laying in a pool of urine, or the families stranded at the Superdome while Brownie diddled himself and Condi shopped for shoes and Bush played guitar and golfed.

This is what Republicans do. They see a problem and they calculate it's impact on themselves, how they can benefit from it, what implication it might have for their long term dream of a modernized Dickensian world run by the corporate boardrooms.
Democrats try to fix the problem.

Whether they're capable or resolute or organized enough to do it is a different matter altogether, but that is in general what they try to do.

So tell me again, who would you prefer having run the government, selfish bastards who punish wounded soldiers for expecting their self professed troop loving republican government to actually follow through on their claims, or Democrats who actually proposed and passed these programs in the first place, and who truly do want to help people, the downtrodden and the weak and the insecure?

Ahhhhh, Democrats

Was reading this miserable AP article when this line jumped up at me.

"Iraq is going to be there — it's just a question of when we get back to it," [Senate Majority Leader] Reid said.

That is about as inept a statement as any Democrat could make, and hopefully it doesn't gain much traction (I don't think my 3 readers will help much), but really, Harry, that shows a very tin ear.

I don't subscribe to the Dems are just as bad as Goppers, that they're in cahoots, bought and paid for, and so on. I do think they suffer from being on the inside too much to see the problems, and their corrective steps. Which is why I think we need to get on their cases, call and write them, as opposed to throwing them in with the republicans, since, that's what the gop wants us to do in the first place.

Look Harry, they own the media, and the media bleats what the gop tells them to bleat, and there's no changing that. The thing to remember though, is that the voters don't give a rat's ass about what the media says. We want us out of that hell hole in Iraq NOW, RIGHT FUCKING NOW, Harry, not later.

Look people, this is how the Democrats operate when you get more than a couple together. They dither and consider everybodies concerns, worry about what people will say, how things will appear blah blah blah. Christ on a nitro fueled pogo stick, somebody needs to step up and start driving this bus BEFORE it goes over the cliff already. Please, I'm beggin ya.

CNN Smears Vice President Gore

You've all probably read this piece at Kos, well, CNN just did their part this morning. I sent them some feedback, you should too. To wit:

I just heard your very brief "report" on Al Gore's energy use. If I heard it correctly, Ms. Stouffer said that "an environmental group" is criticizing Mr. Gore's home energy use.

This is some seriously poor reporting for a number of reasons, and I would like to see it retracted and corrected for the record.

First, you do not name the group. For all we know they could be a completely disreputable organization, or a group of two people claiming the label. This is horribly inaccurate and incomplete and misleading journalism. And as a matter of fact, I know who the group is, and they are not an environmental group at all, your reporter may have misspoken, regardless, since you left the group un-named, how could we tell?

Second, that group, "The Tennessee Center For Policy Research," IS a non-entity and hardly non-partisan, certainly deeply conservative, a fact you could determine with a little research. Look at who they link to, AEI, CATO, Club for Growth, Separation of School and State Alliance, all anti government, anti tax, highly conservative. And by reporting this group's attack on Mr. Gore, you give standing to an organization with NO standing, certainly not on a par with Mr. Gore.

Third, the attack is specious on many levels. Of course his energy consumption is higher than the average, his house is a bit bigger than the average home as well. And since you did nothing more than repeat this groups attack without verifying its validity or accuracy or context, you have simply participated in a right wing smear to discredit Mr. Gore and his message. As the Vice President's spokesman reports, "What Mr. Gore has asked is that every family calculate their carbon footprint and try to reduce it as much as possible. Once they have done so, he then advocates that they purchase offsets, as the Gore’s do, to bring their footprint down to zero."

Since you also don't report on what kind of activities go on in the Gore residence and guest house, such as intensive computer use, security equipment such as alarms, cameras, sensors etc, guests using the home as a research center, a well used home office, you know, figure out the context of WHY they use energy at the home, simply reporting a high level of energy usage is meaningless without that context, and, again, poor reporting.

Repeating a smear that begins with some conservative group of no real policy standing or credibility, and then moves on to a right wing smear gossip site like Drudge is poor reporting, shoddy reporting, lazy reporting, in fact, it isn't reporting at all, it's rumour mongering and partisan political attacks of the worst sort.

I want a correction, and I truly wish you people would do your damn job and, you know, RESEARCH before you report something. This charge against Mr. Gore is unfounded and nothing more than a conservative attack to try to stop us talking about global warming, and that CNN perpetuates that foolhardy behavior is almost criminal. Please stop. Report the NEWS, don't just repeat unfounded garbage handed to you. And don't tell us about time pressure, that is not an excuse.

Private Equity-Too Much Liquidity?

CNBC was gossiping this morning, talking about "the market" and they were talking to some guy (sorry, forgot his name!) about the big TXU (Texas Utility) private equity acquisition, and Mark Haynes (not a fan at all but he does ask the right questions from time to time, in between relentless cheerleading) asked if the deal wasn't so much about market conditions but really a matter of private equity liquidity, in other words, there's too much money available in private equity.

The trader somewhat agreed, and that's the point, really. Wonder where all of our money has gone? The "Market." There have been a large number of these privitization deals of late, due in large part, IMHO, because these firms have all of our money, courtesy of BushCo. Consider this snippet from one article discussing the deal.

Kohlberg Kravis Roberts and Texas Pacific Group led a group that included Goldman Sachs and three other Wall Street firms that will pay $69.25 per share, or about $32 billion, for TXU, and assume TXU's debt. [...]

Goldman Sachs, Lehman Brothers, Citigroup and Morgan Stanley also intend to be part of the purchasing group at closing [...]

TXU also said former Secretary of State James A. Baker III will serve as advisory chairman to the new owners, former EPA Administrator William Reilly and former Commerce Secretary Donald L. Evans will join the TXU board.

Now, I'm not criticizing the deal, it sounds like there are plans for some seriously good environmental concessions as part of the deal, time will tell of course, The firms won support for the buyout from some environmentalists who have criticized TXU by agreeing to sharply scale back TXU's controversial $10 billion plan to build 11 new coal-fired power plants that would produce tons of new greenhouse gas emissions, there's that 'ol ubiquitous "some" for one, but it just seems to me that too few people have too much money, that for all of their incompetence, stupidity, and delusion, that's one area where the Bush Administration has been quite successful. And given George W's inabiltiy to find oil both in Texas and the Persian Gulf, you have to think that somebody else has been in charge of that part of the government.

If only that bunch had allegiance to anything besides money.

Al Gore's Truth

Just in case nobody noticed, Vice President Gore's movie won two Oscars, Best Documentary, and Best Song, "I Need to Wake Up."

I like what Ms. Etheridge had to say:

"Mostly I have to thank Al Gore for inspiring us, inspiring me and showing that caring about the Earth is not Republican or Democrat. It's not red or blue. We are all green. This is our job now, we can become the greatest generation, the generation that changed, the generation that woke up and did something and changed," she said.

Nice framing there, Melissa! And not bad for a freakin President, eh!

I finally watched the movie last weekend, a Christmas present for me and Ms. Duckman, and it's a great show. I thought it might make me angry and depressed, but no, it didn't at all. It truly motivates you, and that shows you how brilliant and effective the film is. It's not Michael Moore, Fahrenheit 911, another brilliant film, it's not political, it's reality, and it's not just about global warming, but it's about the journey of a man, a smart and warm human being who wants the world to be a better place and who knows that if we don't start working on Global Warming its not going to be a better place. And that's why it won an Oscar. Because the artist, a politician remember, shines through the film. It's personal and it's informative, alarming and devastating in it's condemnations, but Al Gore's hope moves throughout the movie.

Some of the scenes in the film that hit me the most were of Al Gore trudging through the airport, of him talking about the road he's been on. You can see in his words and voice how he's been through the mill, cast aside, purged by the hip and slick and oh so comfortable elites, and emerged stronger, and determined to ignore the bleatings of the David Broders of the world, disregard the deluded ravings of the frightened Cheney's of the world, and focus on something that really matters, something that affects every person on this planet.

Congratulations to all those involved in the movie, it may be the best thing any politician has ever done for their country.

Eyes on the Prize

Well it's great to see the Democrats busily attacking each other, hopefully we all can limit it to the Presidential Candidates please. Not the grassroots and progressives and everyday real Americans.

Eyes on the prize people, eyes on the prize. Your guy or girl or other may be all well and good, but just because they’re superior to mine, does not make mine Satan’s hand holder, mmmkay?

Yes, the DLC is pretty useless in this particular fight, because they seek compromise and commity and some form of status quo at a time when we need unity within the party to pull this country away from the disastrous GOP pole. And yes, Lieberman is a two bit empty suit and no longer a Democrat. And yes Barbara Boxer will continue to hear about her poor choice in backing him, but, back to the point, I’ll take a DLC’er over a Republican any day of the week.

The Dems won some power, but we don’t have any great power, except the power to check Cheney/Bush’s next moves. And we have an opportunity to make our case, to sway the public debate, to DEMONSTRATE to the public what we stand for, even if we can’t accomplish so much on the national stage.

For one, we can accomplish things on a smaller stage, supporting the policies of the national Democrats through demonstrable actions. I’ll give you an example. I belong to a Democratic Club in my community, a club on deaths door two years ago, dispirited, ineffectual, barely active and involved. But we got a new Club President, and he started to make a difference, started to pay attention to what was happening in the heart of Duncan Hunter territory, got others in the community involved.

He found the City Council was using taxpayer money to broadcast, on Public Access teevee, right wing fundamentalist propaganda films, and got them to stop. And now he's organized Citizen Oversight Panels to watch what the public agencies and elected officials are actually doing with our time and money, and discomfitting Republicans in Duncan Hunters home district in the process.

Here's an excerpt from a letter the Club President, Raymond Lutz, sent to the San Diego Union Tribune. As time passes these ideas will cause actions and reactions from the entrenched powers, as a vivid demonstration of what happens when Democrats take action. Attack the Republicans at all levels, make them react to us, force the complacent and co-opted media to pay attention and get the message out to a wider audience. It can be done, but not by attacking Democrats.

East County citizens have watched in disbelief as these forces took over the high school district, college district, ECPAC Theater, and certainly, the El Cajon City Council and the Redevelopment Agency. Now, some citizens have had enough, and have formed Citizens’ Oversight Panels (“COPs”) to provide oversight of councils, boards, and planning groups. Already, the group has a web site at CitizensOversight.org, and they are having an effect, and are having fun doing it too.

At the last February 13th City Council Meeting, five “COPs” panelists appeared with golden badges to push for improved access to public documents, suggesting that the City Council agenda should be posted in its entirety on the City web site, that the city should avoid placing large agenda items on the consent calendar, and that the City rushed give free days at the East County Performing Arts Center to insiders without offering those free days to other organizations.

The republicans on the El Cajon City Council do not know what to do about this, and it's only going to get worse for them, and if it totally gets out of their control, what do you think it's going to do to Duncan Hunter? How many local scandals are going to have his name crop up? More than a couple, I'll bet.

See, that's how it works, not by undermining any and all Democrats because you don't like their stands on issues, or their advisors, or their groups, or their backers, or their skin color, or whatever, as opposed to your preferences. So let's go get us some Republicans and take away their lunch money and make them cry!!!!

Anger at Catholic Church Justified

[Cross posted at Daily Kos]

Just wanted to point out something in relation to the recent media driven frenzy over John Edwards' bloggers. We all know the story, I just wanted to give an example that illustrates a possible source for any enmity the ladies may have for the Catholic Church, not to be confused in any way, shape, or form, with the Catholic Religion.

Seems the San Diego Diocese is contemplating chapter 11 bankruptcy protection in the face of hundreds of lawsuits regarding priestly molestations allegedly enabled and covered up by the Church itself through agents like Bishop Brom.

From an institution that wants to take ultimate responsibility for the very fundamental essence of one’s being, that seems to be what they practice, not preach. And that could reasonably lead to some anger and disgust with open minded people like Amanda and Melissa.

“Just like (Brom is) hiding in the diocese today, that's what this threat of bankruptcy protection is all about – to protect him,” Grant said […]

“The true and only reason that Bishop Brom wishes to file bankruptcy is to stop the upcoming civil trials and end the continued inquiry into his own role in, and responsibility for, the scandal in San Diego,” attorney John Manly said in a statement.

Read the letter from one group of affected parties. They challenge the timing, the stated reasons, the secrecy and lack of dialogue, even as the Church ignores their pleas for resolution.

Maybe that's why people get so pissed off at the Catholic Church, not the Religion, because they DON'T TAKE RESPONSIBILITY FOR THEIR ACTIONS.

And just because that Donohoe character heads an organization with the word Catholic in it, does not mean he represents the Catholic Church or the Catholic Religion. pity the Media can't seem to comprehend that, but you gets what you pays for.

Words to consider

Digby has this great post that compares gop words and actions, you've all probably read it, or you should, but I think you need to ask your congresspeople about it, especially if they're republicans. I think I'll send a letter to presidential wannabe Duncan Hunter and ask him what he thinks about it, he's a veteran, does he see any incongruity in the issue?

And maybe I'll ask him about the healthcare treatment of our Iraq war veterans, see what he says about that. The two issues are somewhat bound to each other. If I get a response, I'll let you all know!

The WaPo has this two part article on the consequences of Bush/Cheney's war, and even the headline writer seemed to be paying attention. The Hotel Aftermath is the second part, and just as tragic as the first part, and a bitter reminder, not of their incompetence so much, as how hideously this gang of cowardly men are serving us, with their delusions and ignorance and lust for power. I've said it before, I'll say it again, they aren't interested in doing a good job or serving the country, they are more interested in serving their master, mammon.

Maybe they've been taken over by a Yenaldlooshi, a Skinwalker, one who gain[s] power by killing a close relative [fellow Americans]... . They are known to desecrate sand paintings [art or beauty] by urinating, spitting, and defecating on them. They also practice cannibalism and necrophilia. Yenaldlooshi are also said to be able to create a pollen from ground human infant bones that when sprinkled on sleeping Navajo families, causes sickness, social problems, and death.

That sounds like them, maybe we need a hataalii to protect us from these creatures.

While Mologne House has a full bar, there is not one counselor or psychologist assigned there to assist soldiers and families in crisis -- an idea proposed by Walter Reed social workers but rejected by the military command that runs the post.

After a while, the bizarre becomes routine. On Friday nights, antiwar protesters stand outside the gates of Walter Reed holding signs that say "Love Troops, Hate War, Bring them Home Now." Inside the gates, doctors in white coats wait at the hospital entrance for the incoming bus full of newly wounded soldiers who've just landed at Andrews Air Force Base.

And set back from the gate, up on a hill, Mologne House, with a bowl of red apples on the front desk.

Who supports the troops, George?

The Big Lie, Bush/Cheney Care

I got a letter from Sen. Obama today, asking for my support. It was a lovely letter, a sober assesment of the divide between the people and politics. He wrote of how politics has lost its purpose, that it’s treated like a sporting event, that our leaders have lost their way, that there is more common ground than divisive ground and that we need to move forward, not live in the past of partisanship. And he wrote aboutthe hopefulness of real Americans and their dreams.

Then I got an e-mail from the DSCC, with this bit: Today, Sen. Schumer talked about how meeting the challenges America faces begin with restoring our people's faith in government. Republicans - many hostile to the very idea of government - have bought us Iraq, Katrina and an unmitigated string of government failures.

Schumer touches on the point, the critical point, the unspoken point, that overlays everything that’s gone wrong in this country, a point that Obama doesn't seem to recognize in his optimistic talk.

Everybody thinks, wants to think, couldn’t believe otherwise, that Bush/Cheney are patriotic Americans, concerned with our founding principles and the normal operations of this country. You hear it from Hillary as she tries to explain her war vote, you read it in the words of Sen. Obama, Sen. Edwards, the Broders and Russerts and Picklers.

But as Chuck Schumer notes, they’re hostile to the very idea of government, and I’ll go even further and say that they’re more than hostile, they don’t believe in Democracy and the Constitution, don’t believe in the Declaration of Independence, don’t believe in the precepts of the Magna Carta, no, they believe in power unto itself, and nothing more.

And when you think of it that way you realize that what’s broken isn’t our politics, isn’t the institutions of this nation, but the Bush administration.

There are two systems in operation here, the one Obama speaks of, the one most everybody lives in, the normal world of reality, with all it’s bizarre behaviors and rank stupidity, it’s greed and selfishness, it’s sacrifices and duties and everyday heroics going to work or raising a child or stopping at a stop sign, and then there’s this other, fundamentally sociopathic world of Dick Cheney and George Bush.

The problem is in expecting BushCo to act in a way consistant with the reality world, when that world of policy and commity and goals and shared community, shared American heritage, doesn't exist for them. They don't care about us, about Americans, about veterans, about laws and decency and doing the right thing. Look at how they crap all over the veterans of their own war, let alone those from past wars. Does cutting funding for veterans, of leaving the National Guard troops out in the cold when it comes to benefits and care sound like a cry of concern?

Just this week the Administration admitted that they had underfunded veterans' health care by $3.7 billion over the next two years. And about 20 percent of all reservists do not have health insurance at all – approximately 12,219 in California, leaving them and their families without coverage when they leave active duty.

Disabled veterans in California face delays, barriers to getting benefits they earned. More than 41,212 in California are still subject to the disabled veterans’ tax, which forces veterans to sacrifice one dollar of their pension for every dollar they receive in disability benefits. In addition, there is a huge backlog of almost 500,000 compensation and pension claims, including those from veterans of the current war in Iraq and Afghanistan. Disabled veterans in California are still waiting approximately 181 days for their disability assessment.

Just keep reminding yourself, they are indeed hostile to government, and the incompetence they demonstrate is designed to make us think that our government, our politics, is the problem. They want us to throw the bums out, to lump the Democrats in with the republicans while they go merrily about their real business. Let's not let them get away with it.

Somebody to Love

This summary is not available. Please click here to view the post.

Twisted Police Action Threads

Explain to me why the White House has to have a top double secret backgrounder without attribution to show all of their ginned up evidence on Iranian culpability in IED's in Iraq, why the reporters accept it as business as usual, and why nobody can put their name to the evidence.

I mean, other than being a bunch of lies like the last time, why the secrecy? It makes no sense in a reality world, what's the angle for Cheney? How does this serve the perceptions of the public who do need some swaying at the moment just for the PR campaign.

Okay, I heard CNN say something about Iran helping al Queda which the reporter should have stated outright is a contradiction, should have pointed out that the Iranians, if they're helping anybody it's the Shia of al Maliki, that would be the same party that we're supporting as they purge Baghdad of Sunni's, so, in effect, we, the United States of America, are helping the Iranians kill our own troops to aid the party with the least ties to the damn terrorists we're supposed to be fighting.

Did I get that right?

Oh, and since when have they started investigating the bombs and bombing sites? And, how much of the explosives were actually from the stockpiles that we failed to secure in the first part of the invasion of Iraq?

Note to the Dean

Mr. Broder,

You wrote this column entitled "Suggester in Chief" and I wonder if you might want to review what you said? I ask because, well, I find it hard to understand why you would think that Bush and the Republicans would do any of these things. (My underlines for effect.)

"But his main plea was for the president to take the temperature of Congress, by meeting personally with the Foreign Relations Committee and consulting seriously with its members, before settling on a policy for Iraq.

"The president needs some well-informed friends," Lugar said pointedly, and he warned Bush that people such as himself will not be ready to defend his decision if he simply waits and declares it after private discussions of the kind he has been holding within his war Cabinet.

After an election in which war-weariness was a motivating force for the defeat of Republican candidates, the president has to face the reality that the only decision on Iraq that can possibly command sustained public support is a collective decision shared with Congress -- not a personal order.

Any action he takes may still be thwarted by Iraq's own divisions. But if he does not bring Congress and both parties into the process, the policy will inevitably fail. He has to face that reality."

President Bush does not consult seriously with Congress, and he doesn't seem to face reality either. And Sen. Lugar certainly has, as the rest of the GOP have indeed done just that, defended his decision, else they would have supported the non-binding resolution of someone's, even their OWN resolution.

You write and speak with great assurance of your knowledge and standing in the great hub of the DC Beltway, yet there seems to be a bit of a disconnect between that picture and the ugly realities on the ground. Perhaps in your privileged spaces those truths don't stand up, but in the hot desert of Iraq, on the streets of over producing and underpaid America the truth is that George W Bush is not playing the same game as you.

You're playing this game of pretty JFK, the mighty heroes of the Greatest Generation, the vast "silent majority" confused by the lies and misapplication of history and intelligence in Vietnam; and our wonderful Decider is selling us all out through the delusional ravings of Dick Cheney and Doug Feith and Eliot Abrahms and Bill Kristol for the gains of Big Oil, you know, Exxon-Mobile's $39 BILLION last year, for the Media Monopolies (oh, so is Rupert Murdoch one of you now?) and the Military Industrial Complex that are the driving forces in our Chinese dominated economy (are the Chinese one of you now too?)

So when you write things like the above, I have to wonder. Are you feeling okay? Watching what you eat, drinking enough water? I mean, really, did you seriously think Bush was going to work with Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid and Howard Dean and Pat "Eff You" Leahy? Face reality? George W Bush, who has never his entire life faced reality, is going to start now, when the destruction of our government is fast approaching the drowning stage, when the corporate coffers are bursting out at the seams, when the ranks of the millionaires and billionaires are growing faster than anything?

I look forward to some introspection in future columns on your part, Mr. Broder, some reflections not so much on the accuracy of your columns, but the mindset that produced them, the sense of well being and entitlement that allows you to be so wrong about this subject you've spent your adult life writing about. That's what I'd like to see for your next column, not some claptrap about vitriolic bloggers saying nasty argumentative things on their blogs, (and later I'll send you some stuff that will curl your eyebrows) but some serious discussion about the lies and mendacity and greed and arrogance of the Bush/Cheney administration, and the failure of the news media to report on that substance.

Chalmers Johnson and the Dragon

I just got back from hearing Chalmers Johnson speaking at a Democratic Club meeting this evening, my advance copy of his newest book, "Nemesis: The Last Days of the American Republic" in hand. The thrust of his book is that the consequences of 60 years of American military imperialism has finally caught up with reality.

His talk was a history lesson, an explanation, and a warning, for future generations and would-be empires, here lay the foundations of your fall from grace.

His previous books discussed this as well, the notion of blowback, the coming home to roost of the consequences of our meddling and power projections, our arrogance and ignorance, and the power of the military industrial complex.

He's not real optimistic on our future, painting a bleak picture of the bind we're in thanks to our actions, beginning, perhaps, with the overthrow of the Prime Minister of Iran, Dr. Mohammed Mossadegh, in 1953.

The original initiative to oust Mossadegh had come from the British, for the ... Iranian leader had spearheaded the parliamentary movement to nationalize the British owned Anglo-lranian Oil Company (AIOC), the sole oil company operating in Iran. In March 1951, the bill ... was passed, and at the end of April Mossadegh was elected prime minister.... On 1 May, nationalization went into effect. The Iranian people, Mossadegh declared, "were opening a hidden treasure upon which lies a dragon".

A dragon truly run rampant today.

Dr. Johnson posits that we do own this war since Bush did win the popular vote in 2004, and that we need to stop the policies of the M-I-C that only make matters worse. He said that we don't even see 40 percent of the military budget, it gets buried in the Veterans Department or Treasury war debts, or Homeland Security, or black operations, and this is feeding that dragon.

And that dragon, that's my word, he didn't use it, it just sounds so apropo from that article I referenced above, exists as Preventive War as Public Policy. It exists as our economy comes to depend on military spending, and he cites the Senators from Washington as an example, good liberals until someone mentions the word "Boeing" upon which they become ravenous blood thirsty hyenaes. It exists as deficit spending, "ruinous" spending that has brought us to the brink of losing our democracy to our imperialism. And he mentioned two examples of states that faced a similar choice, the Roman Republic-Madison's model for ours, and the British Empire.

The Romans chose, in a manner of speaking, to keep their imperialism, the Brits chose to give up their empire, albeit with many stops and starts and messy imperfections, but they saved their democracy in giving up their glorious empire, and they saved themselves in that choice. No Caligula or Nero for Britain, just the Good Queen Elizabeth II, her jewels and her castles and her pagaentry.

And he described Tony Blair as an atavistic response to old empire. My bold.

The American Heritage Science Dictionary -
atavistic (āt'ə-vĭs'tĭk)
Relating to an inherited trait that reappears in an individual after being absent from a strain of organism for several generations. Atavistic traits were formerly thought to be throwbacks to ancestral types but are now known to be due to the inheritance of a pair of recessive genes.

He was charming even as his message was somewhat depressing, but he did offer some solutions, abolishing the CIA, breaking the MIC, public financing of election campaigns, and busting up the media conglomerates. Here's his take on the quality of teevee news. "Watching the evening news is just a way of marking the end of the day." Sadly true, I would say.

But his other proscription was that our imminent bankruptcy would actually serve as some sort of salvation, as we would be forced to lower our standard of living, you know, live within our means, and throw the yoke of the MIC from around our necks in the process. Essentially he sees the US as enthralled by the dragon's yoke, our political system first broken, then tamed with little recourse in any of our failed institutions, the legislature, the judiciary, the press, the states. Of the states, he writes in his book,

[T]he drafters of the American Constitution produced a sophisticated scheme to balance power in a republic. The most basic structure they chose was federalism, setting up the states as alternatives to and limitations on the power of the national government.

Isn't it convenient that the National Guard is being destroyed by Bush in Iraq? And that's why I favor the Electoral College, it's another brake on power.

But that didn't sound very hopeful to me, so I asked him if he thought that the growth of the grassroots, the bloggers and MoveOn and DFA and Drinking Liberally and Code Pink and Cindy Sheehan and many others might not be helping to turn the Titanic from its doomed course? And speaking of icebergs, what impact did he think Global Warming was going to have on the dynamics of our current economic situation?

I didn't get a good answer on the first part, he liked the question but didn't have a ready answer, but he did think that educating the people was a good thing that might help, and he didn't address the GW part, which was okay. At least he's thinking about the question.

My thought on Global Warming is that it may indeed be our salvation, that it's so big and universal that it's going to change our paradigm entirely, that the issues that troubled us before won't matter so much in the future, that what cloud being you prefer won't matter much when all of the cloud beings are pissed off at all of us. That there will be such great opportunity in dealing with the problem and its manifestations that feeding the dragon of military spending won't enter into the decision making matrix of our policy makers.

Let me conclude this post with two more thoughts from Chalmers Johnson. One, he called Wal Mart an agency of China's industry, Wal Mart, that great All-American success story, and he said that Economics is the name of power, not aircraft carriers or cruise missiles.

And that's a war you could call a class war. Where the top 1 percent own 60 percent of the wealth of this nation, or whatever it is, see this DKos post for details. That's John Edwards Two America's, Jim Webb's divided America. And it's one we all need to participate in, from our purchasing decisions to our activism.

So all in all, a good show tonight, go ahead, buy the book, I don't agree with all of his assesments or views, but the facts are the facts, and this country needs to face up to them, if we want to have any hope of saving our Democracy from the Dragon.

US Attorney Update-Can't Tell Ya

It's always amusing when a White House official explains one of their decisions. In this case I'm refering to the recent spate of US Attorney firings. Now, check out this explanation and let me know if it makes sense, please. My bolds.

A top Justice Department official acknowledged Tuesday that more than a half-dozen U.S. attorneys were fired in the last year, in some cases without cause, but denied Democrats' allegations that they were dismissed and replaced for political reasons.

In testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee, Deputy Attorney General Paul McNulty defended the department's firing of seven U.S. attorneys since March, for reasons he would not divulge.

All the elements are there. Denial of the obvious, fired without cause, and remember, they've admitted that some of the changes were simply to give other people that notch on their resume, er, I mean, that experience, and the always popular, "I can't tell you, it's secret and would restrict the decision making ability and unfettered advice component required for the duly and proper exercise of the President's power to decide what's right for America."

Let's hope Sen. Feinstein pushes this issue.

Letter to No Point Broder

Atrios rightly crowns the frightened Dean Broder as wanker of the day for this pile, prompting a note to the useless Dean.

Mr. Broder,

A couple of things that I have to question about your recent column about the DNC meeting last week. What are trying to imply when you say this about John Edwards: "Edwards almost never mentions his own political history -- especially not his 2004 race as John Kerry's running mate."

Are you suggesting that there's something dirty there, something he needs to hide, what? Because that is the implication, otherwise there is no point including that line in your article, it holds no meaning except as a suggestion of things unsaid.

And what is the meaning of this line? "forgetting that few in this particular audience have much experience with, or sympathy for, the military."

That is a slanderous accuasation, a nasty slur on the patriotism of the Democratic Party and its membership, and I want a retraction from you, immediately.

How dare you. How many "Fighting Dems" ran for Congress this past election, many of whom won, I note? How many Democrats have served in the military, and how mnay members of the executive branch have done so? The Democrats are the party that wants to increase benefits and coverage for veterans, the party that wants to see our troops in the field properly equipped, the party that constantly proclaims their support for the troops, but not the mission foisted on them and us by this reckless administration.

I guess in your view wanting to pull our military out of the middle of a civil war, or whatever word you choose to describe it, of our own creation, in a war launched under false pretenses in a place unaffiliated to the threats we were facing at the time, a war whose conduct only proves the wrongness of President Bush's choices, I guess that makes the Democrats military bashers, right?

Better that they should sacrifice more of our military forces, people, you know, and capability to wage a hopeless and pointless war, heck, even to the point of expanding it to another place, much like the British did in their Gallipoli campaign in World War I, a hopeless and pointless meat grinder that cost the lives of thousands upon thousands of good men for no good reason.

Because that would clearly show the depth of our love and support for the military, right Mr. Broder?

Lastly, you say it's going to be great fun. I guess you think it's all a game, isn't that right Mr. Broder? Politics is just a board game to demonstrate who is the winner, the king of the hill, and never mind what's really at issue, the governance of this nation, the application of our resources to make this place a better home for all Americans and our guests and visitors.

I guess you have your piece of the pie, so you can play your games sans concern or humanity. That's pretty sick if you ask me. Maybe you need to retire and go play full time, since you don't seem to have much purpose in chronicling our political life.

And make sure you read what Oliver Willis says if you click through from Atrios' post. Because that is the truth, that crap is a bald headed lie.

Super Bowl Observations

First, let me say that i enjoy football, the drama and the strategy, the way a battle of wills, yes, will, is played out in a competitive struggle. The moves a guy makes to break into the clear, the strength, the willingness to go all out to make a play, a clean, resounding hit, an acrobatic catch, yeah, it's all good.

I've seen some great players in my day, the Don Coryell Chargers, Marshall Faulk hitting a hole like nobody I've ever seen for the SDSU Aztecs, and it's been fun.

But, the commercialization, the militarism, the overt so-called patriotism, the fact that the Chargers owner is a huge Bush supporter, as are many in the NFL, takes away from the game. And this god display after tonights game sure didn't help me either.

God doesn't care about the Colts winning, how absurd. God doesn't care if the two head coaches were godly men of god fearing ways and christian thru and thru. God doesn't care if you took the Bears and the points either. Let's face it, the Bears lost because their QB wasn't very good, at all.

As for the commercials, the companies spend millions of dollars on the time, and sometimes they run the same old commercial which seems pretty smart business wise, others spend millions more on a new, expensive ad, and they're all pretty much crap. Shitty beer commercials for shitty beer, bizarre or absurd commercials for failing car companies, seems to me they would be better off investing that money in their employees and their products, instead of hawking a humongous new gas guzzling Ford F-450 truck.

Lastly, I found a whole new ton of respect for Prince. Why? First, he played the show his way, at the end he had that look that said he'd done his job as a pro, "here's how you perform, people," like he'd nailed the performance, which he did. I guess he can actually play the guitar and sing a song without being utterly self indulgent, or utterly manufactured like Janet Jackson or Timberlake.

And damn if he didn't give the FCC a great big FU, with a devils pointed tail to boot, an intelligent FU mind you, that clearly demonstrated how ridiculous the whole nipple outrage thing was. Kudos to Prince for that, and a nod to Peyton Manning, who seemed to avoid any reference to god in his post game talk, maybe he's not so bad after all.

A Day Like Many Others

This is what I saw today on the home page of McClatchy News. Just click it. There's just not a lot of good news if you're George W Bush or Dick Cheney or one of the architects of this truly FUBAR mess that their fear and greed and associated ignorance and incompetence have created.

And there was more, and none of it, about 17 articles, not one single one, was a plus for BushCo. I find that pretty stunning, depressing, infuriating, pathetic, shameful, for our nation and our reputation and our future.

The kind of leadership that produces a news day like this is not doing us any favors, and they really need to go sooner, rather than later.