San Diego Burning

Well my friends, once again San Diego County is on fire, fires to the North of me having burned 145,000 acres and hundreds of homes, a fire to the South of me 20,000 acres and unknown how many homes, but one life has been lost in the area where it started, Potrero.


We're fine, I don't think that the fires are going to head my way, but I'm keeping my eyes open just in case.


A quarter of a million people have been ordered to evacuate, or have evacuated, you never can be sure which it is. But it's a big mess, a true disaster, you look at pictures of the wind whipping the fire, it just doesn't look real, but look at this slide show for yourself. Look at that picture, 16, fire from side to side. Look at some of those pictures of this huge billowing cloud of smoke looming, boiling, on the horizon. Look at that blood red sunset picture.

All real. I've seen that tower of smoke so many times in my life, but somehow the last couple of times have just been disastrous to the people of the county. I remember the Laguna Fire in '70 as a young lad, the air brown and thick with ash, I remember the Cedar Fire in '03, the flames creeping down the hillsides by my house, I remember the canyon behind my Dad's house burning every other summer fior some reason (damn kids and firecrackers, a cherry bomb one year I know because I heard it go off!) and let me tell you, this shit ain't no fun.

But that's how it goes, I always knew that summer was over when the fires started up in the mountains, that's just the cycle we live by in San Diego. Only when I was a kid nobody lived in those areas. Now, they either are subdivisions like San Diego Country Estates, or people building on their remote properties to get away from the subdivisions and housing tracts.

Right now people are setting up camp with their animals, horses and dogs and cats, you just don't realize how many people have horses in this area, but they're all over the place, there are just so many rural areas in San Diego, it's not just this big ol beach town and biotech metropolis at all. The High School by my house is setting up, I'm going to go take a look and see if they need stuff, I'll give an update when i get back.

For now it's all quiet, but like Sunday afternoon, it can go from nothng to something in a matter of moments. Right now they're evacuating the northern beach cities, Del Mar, Solana Beach, Encinitas, so the Northern fire, the Witch Creek Fire, has gone from the mountains to the ocean in a day, not sure when it's going to stop. Pretty freaky.

Update:

Nobody needs stuff, everything seems pretty calm in my neck of the woods. That's it, not much of an update.

In Our Name, Do Not Try This At Home

Just picture this in your neighborhood, think about what that would be like in your own town, and consider how that might influence your neighbors thinking. I'll highlight the key sentence from this article.

U.S. forces backed by airstrikes raided Sadr City, Baghdad's main Shiite district, killing 49 militants on Sunday as they targeted a militia leader accused in high-profile kidnappings, the military said. Iraqi officials said women and children were among the dead.

The US military is bombing a city, just consider how that works in reality, try to picture yourself on the ground as these innocuous sounding "airstrikes" start falling all around you in the middle of the night.

It's not a particularly comforting image, and it's why we will never "win" in Iraq, not just because there is no description of what "winning" is, but because the Iraqi people will never accept the American presence in Iraq. Look at how long the Jews and Arabs have been fighting in Canaan, do you think the Iraqi's are going to forget what we are doing to them now?

We will be paying the price of Cheney's and the Oil Lobby's stupidity and greed and fear for a long time to come. Thanks to one and all who made this possible.

Why Democrats Lose Arguments

In response to Mary's post at the mothership, I commented on the article about why the FISA Telcon debate matters. And it's long so I thought to immortalize it here for my edification. With some editorial improvements or additions.

Frankly, I have a HUGE problem with Dean's article, or rather Solove's article.

Yes, it's fine as an intellectual exercise, an underpinning of the philosophical in a broader context.

But that's the god damned problem. It's why people think the Democrats are weak and feeble. And they are. Because they never get practical and down and dirty. They still don't tell people why "I've got nothing to hide" completely misses the point and why it matters to YOU.

Privacy is namby pamby amorphous bullshit. How about it matters because the government can use the information they gather to ruin your life? Give your confidential business affairs to your competitor? Twist your innocent e-mail into a rendition trip to Kazakhistan? Find out about your health issues and use that information as leverage to shut you up?

Suppose you're a random blogger, and the Bushites want to shut you up. You haven't done anything wrong. But they can use information gleaned by spying on you to make you late for a Doctor's appointment, or let your red necked boss know about your political activities, and he can fire you for some bs reason.
They could say, "Steve, we know what schools your kids are going to, we know who you work for, we know what things concern you the most, and we can make sure that those things happen to you."

"Congressman McNerny, we can ruin the business you built, we can make sure that freeway offramp goes by Mr. Issa's car alarm shop, we can find out your scheduled flight and get it cancelled, we can find out where those runaway Democrats went from the Texas Statehouse, and get one of them to switch his vote by threats and pressure and demonstrations of crossing Tom DeLay because look at what power he can access from the NSA, even though he hadn't done anything wrong."

They can threaten to expose reporters sources unless the reporter stops asking questions, it goes on and on and on.

Yes, Solove is correct, that defense only works when you assume that privacy is only used to hide wrong doing. And yes, a lot of what we do is nobody else's business, i.e teenage angst, And yes, a leering, lurking government watcher inhibits freedom of expression.

But that doesn't account for the practical abuses, and that's what the republicans specialize in. Remember, republicans are, at their core, stupid and/or ignorant (at least the ones we have to deal with today). They don't trouble themselves with high notions or concepts. They only want to know how they can make MONEY from the deal. Who is on your side and who isn't. Who is helping Blackwater set up shop in Potrero, and who is working to stop them

Give practical reasons for why this spying must stop. Not because it's wrong, and runs completely counter to the basic core of the Declaration of Independence and our Bill of Rights, which it is and which it does, but because they can use it to screw over innocent Americans who get in the way of their greed and lust for power.

Why do you think republicans always seem to get the best deals, the best contracts, the best jobs? Dumb luck? Because they earned it? Please.

So, to sum up, don't just make the philosophical argument, make the practical argument, and make the practical argument first, then buoy it up with the deeper underpinnings. I'm sure you all can think of real examples of how all that gathered information can be used against perfectly innocent Americans, so use them instead of the touchy feely weak ass stupidity that Democrats usually use and lose with.

Thanks, rant off.

San Diego's own Bush

I'm tellin ya, readers, the rest of you got nothin on San Diego.

Long ruled by Building Developers, we're finally getting to the point of unsustainability. Everybody wants to live here because of the weather, never mind the realities that make it possible to actually live here, like water and housing and infrastructure. There were plenty of jobs thanks to the Navy, airplane pioneers like Ryan and Lindburgh, Jonas Salk, and others. There was lots of open land to build on, and so we grew, and grew, and grew, 600,000+ when I was a lad to 1.2 million today, just for the city mind you, county population growth is even bigger.

Lots of changes, twists, turns, as America's Finest City has become Enron by the Bay. And you might have seen the sinkhole/landslide/slippage recently in La Jolla, up on Mt Soledad specifically, CNN had it I'm sure, and like all good teevee journalists, they showed the disaster, then left.

But what really happened there? Did this just suddenly appear overnight? Were there no warnings? Mountains (okay, it's a tall hill, covered in houses) generally don't just move on their own, so what preciptated the move? Mayor Sanders was quick to deny City culpability, that evil bastard City Attorney Mike Aguirre said we better look into it.

Could it be that maybe the developers have built in places they shouldn't be? Like on an earthquake fault, hillside slip zone? And could it be that the bought and paid for mayor, former Police Chief and Savior of the corrupt Red Cross of San Diego is working overtime to protect the developers and the city from assignation of fault? Because if the city gets assigned the blame, more questions arise, like who let them build there, who wasn't doing their jobs, and how much money did the developers spend to get their way?

Look at these e-mails and tell me that the City, and by extension, the Mayor, weren't aware of a looming problem on the Mountain.

The designated area of concern, the 5700 block of Soledad Mountain Road, is on the verge of possible catastrophic failure due to continual ground movement caused by an unknown condition...

Which is why they were letting a quarter million dollar sole source request for monitoring ground movement in the area, on 9/27/07. And the slide occured on 10/3/07, and the city's responses had been band-aid at best.

After all, they were getting reports about problems since June, there had been serious slides in the area in the past, and yet, the Mayor was vacationing, er, sitting in a classroom, sorry, lobbying in Washington DC when the slide occured, and nothing had been done to address the problem, or prepare for an inevitable problem.

So the next time you think you have it bad, think about San Diego. We have the worst President ever, the most evil Vice President ever, a horrible actor as Governor, and Mini Me Jerry Sanders Bush as Mayor, a real trifecta if there ever was one.

Corpirate America

I typo'ed that title but it seems appropo so I left it!

Looking for something to do? Strike a blow against the corporations. Just got a Cisco proxy material in the mail, perusing the Board of Directors to elect, I had recently decided to just vote no against all directors regardless, but then when I was looking at the list I thought that might dilute the impact of my no votes, so I did my due diligence.

Anything to do with Wal Mart ever, "No" vote. Stanford University, until they repudiate Rice, "No" vote. Bankers, "No" vote. Too many boards already, "No" vote (although none of Cisco's fell into that category. Michael Powell, "Noooooooo" hold on, can I vote twice?

Yes, that feckless, soulless, lever on Dad's soul, Michael Powell. They list the committees the members sit on, and guess what, Michael Powell doesn't sit on a committee. He just gets his $50,000 fee and $69,699 option award to do nothing, to show up at a couple of posh board meetings and agree with everybody else and pocket over a hundred grand.

So, my fellow ducklings, if you happen to own Cisco stock and get to vote your proxy, please vote no against Michael Powell. And should you happen to be at the shareholder meeting, ask them what it is that he did to earn that money.

Airport Security Isn't

This story just outrages, me as it does you all I'm sure. There's just no excuse for this kind of crap happening in this country, just imagine if that had been Bob Filner getting treated that way, as it probably almost was.

Authorities have said Gotbaum, who was handcuffed and shackled to a bench, may have accidentally strangled herself Friday.

Does that sound like a likely scenario, shackled to the bench and handcuffed she somehow managed to strangle herself?

Just another dead American to chalk up to the Republicans fear and cowardice and greed.

Free Trade with Columbia on CNBC

Yes, I'm still alive, faithful readers.

Just watched a bit of debate about the looming free trade agreement with Columbia. What I love the most is that the reporter had a pro and con and some business talkers on, and as soon as the con started talking, she, the reporter, had to talk over and interrupt her because she wanted to argue with what the woman was saying. Was I watching O'Leilly all of the sudden?

Say what you will about Jim Lehrer (I won't, much) but the strongest part of his show is that the reporters DO NOT become part of the report. When they do, they get axed, like Stuart Taylor did some years back to be replaced by Jan Crawford Greenburg.

Back to CNBC. The great Gen. McCafferty said, "Polls, schmolls" when asked to comment on the fact that the majority of Columbians oppose the agreement, because the business community is all for it. And we know who matters in the world, right, great General? Then some Wall Street guy started talking about how it helps keep cheap, low cost goods available for Americans. To which I say, WE ALREADY GET THAT POISON FROM CHINA, why do we need somebody else's?

Then the reporter was all happy, at which point I cursed the teevee and turned it off. Better Democrats, better reporters, how about better JOURNALISM SCHOOLS?

It's Going To Be a Long Campaign, People

Talking Points has this discussion about some comment that Bill Richardson made about God and Iowa the other day. I would be happier if god were not a part of our elections at all, in fact the more irreligious the candidate the more I like them, which pretty much leaves me out in the cold these days, so I have to go by other criteria.

I won't even characterize Richardson's comments as a mistake, dumb, bad joke, whatever, it's just a comment that the bloggers want to blow up into something else. Tongue in cheek or irreverent sarcasm perhaps. Yet, people on the left are attacking one of our own as if it's the worst thing ever said. Today. Brilliant! (Which reminds me, is it too early for a Guinness?) Well, I posted a comment, which I'll repost on MY blog, that pretty much sums up my feelings about the matter. Then can we move on to more important matters, like attacking the Republicans and trying to get OUR Democratic Senators and Congressmen to stop Bush from attacking Iran? Huh, how about it? Please.

What Malangali and Not the senator said. We need to stop with the Alpha Girls behavior, let these people talk, and stop getting your panties, that's right, PANTIES, all in a wringer because a candidate said something imperfect or unfunny or unappealing or what you found offensive.

Jeebus effing christ, parse this! They all say crap like this, if they don't there's something seriously wrong with that person. I do not want a robot as president, an uptight, scripted, automaton (Hillary) who never speaks in a more direct manner to people, who calculates all.

In fact, that's the problem with our politics today, the candidates get placed on some sort of platform where all of their utterences are given such weight, that they lose their connection to reality. I want a guy who, yes, I said GUY, because that's my generic for person, christ give ita rest already, might speak more directly and colorfully, maybe stumble and mumble once in a while, not like a retard like Bush, and yes, I said RETARD coz that's the euphemism for god damned effing idiot in my book if that's okay with you, so get off the guys back already.

For those who don't remember, here's a reminder, read it and weep at what might have been if not for this bs:

Al Gore and the Alpha Girls

We Have the Wrong Book

My commute to work lately has gotten ugly. It's not parking lot commute, worse, traffic moves, but everybody out there seems intent on driving in my way, I'd go so far as to say they're all out there trying to kill me! And on the way home, it's worse, they all have nothing better to do than sightsee, yack on their phones, anything that keeps them on the road in my way, and not at home.

That sounds like somebody, and since I'm reading the book again, I know who. Yossarian

Early in the book, Capt. Black, bitter over the fact that Major Major was given the squadron replacing the dead Major Duluth, embarks on a power play, The Glorious Loyalty Oath Crusade. And here's the clincher

Without realizing how it had come about, the combat men in the squandron discovered themselves dominated by the administrators appointed to serve them. They were bullied, insulted, harassed and shoved about all day long by one after the other. When they voiced objection, Captain Black replied that people who were loyal would not mind signing all the loyalty oaths they had to. To anyone who questioned the effectiveness of the loyalty oaths, he replied that people who really did owe allegiance to their country would be proud to pledge it as often as he forced them to. And to anyone who questioned the morality, he replied that "The Star-Spangled Banner" was the greatest piece of music ever composed. The more loyalty oaths a person signed, the more loyal he was; to Captain Black it was as simple as that, and he had Corporal Kolodny sign hundreds with his name each day so that he could always prove he was more loyal than anyone else.

We've been thinking it was an Orwellian World, in reality it's a Catch-22 World. Pessimist has a great piece there, I just googled the GLOC and that was the number one listing. It's been a while since I read Heller's book, where Orwell is more matter of fact and ironic, Heller is much more deeply insane, capricious, careless, selfish. And that seems a better fit for the Bush crowd, as we approach Katrina's 2nd anniversary it's pretty clear to me that what we have, if you just look at their operations, is no government whatsoever. Just little fiefdoms operating at the whim of whichever petty little tyro Bush has annointed to destroy the function of that particular department.

THAT'S WHY HE SHOULD BE IMPEACHED.

He hasn't earned the least bit of respect or admiration, he sucks as a CEO, as a leader, as a spokesman, as a cheerleader, as a judge of character, his impeachment and conviction and unceremonious kicking to the curb won't damage our American Psyche, split the nation asunder, or destroy our way of life. Au contrare, it will be the first step back to sanity and away from the insanity of Catch-22

John Edwards

I'm in. Sen. Edwards is the only candidate who wants to take on the forces that need to be brought to heel, the corporations and the top 1 percenters. And who has the chops to do it.

This speech lays it out:

[The system is] controlled by big corporations, the lobbyists they hire to protect their bottom line and the politicians who curry their favor and carry their water. And it's perpetuated by a media that too often fawns over the establishment, but fails to seriously cover the challenges we face or the solutions being proposed. This is the game of American politics and in this game, the interests of regular Americans don't stand a chance.

Can Hillary say that? Does Obama get direct like that? Does Dennis Kucinich have any sort of chance to win the nomination? Does Chris Dodd have that fire? Does Bill Richardson have the rhetorical skill and presence?

Don't get me wrong, I like all of the candidates, they all have many great qualities, strengths, values. They have experience, knowledge, and by Spaghetti Monster if we elect an idiot ever again in this country instead of somebody with an IQ higher than their blood pressure we deserve every bad thing that happens, but they also have issues. Edwards has shown to me that he is right on target, and has correctly identified the problems that face this country. And they aren't a bunch of religious manipulators trying to take control of their own part of the world. And he's willing to fight them.

And that's what I want, somebody not afraid to go after these things, these leeches and viruses destroying our freedoms and our way of life to preserve their mammon worship.

Things to Consider

Michael Vick made his statement, and the little piece they put on the teevee news showed him speaking, not reading, what he had to say. I'm going to give him some consideration for his statement, he did seem to recognize his mistakes, not sure if he recognizes the wrongness of his actions, but hopefully he will. And he should never play professional football again, as sorry and redemptive as he may be, just because he found god suddenly does not cut it, but he needs to be a role model for how money can corrupt you.

If professional sports can learn that giving these kids this kind of money is in some ways unconscionable, if they address the absurdity and warped priorities that puts so much wealth into these games, then maybe some good comes of all this.

There was a rally in support of San Diego's KLSD Air America Radio station today, a couple hundred people, maybe more, showed up to challenge Clear Channel to keep one progressive radio station in San Diego County. It was a pretty good turnout and event given the 4 days we had to prepare for it, organized, orderly, passionate.

Now, if only we owned some radio stations and wouldn't have to subject ourselves to being at the mercy of some corporation, that would be progress. Keep pushing them, sign the petition, something, call Clear Channel and tell them of your support, call or write advertisers tell them you're glad they advertise on KLSD and will look favorably on their business for doing so.

Let's see, Mike Vick gets a $130 million dollar contract, and we can't keep one lousy radio station because of what, $10-20,000 a month? A fraction of what one guy gets paid to star in the NFL.

Clear Channel Silencing Free Speech in San Diego

Rumors have been flying about San Diego's Air America station, 1360 KLSD, home to The Stacy Taylor Show and all of that liberal /progressive talk in a region of 3 million people and no liberal media save this one. Here's a link to an action page of sorts for info and things to do.

Clear Channel seems to be intent on shutting down Air America and all that liberal talk in San Diego, and many people are determined to stop them. Do what you can, contact their sponsors and nicely encourage them to put pressure on what is really a bad business decision to alienate one third of the San Diego market.

3 million people, 1/3 Dem, Indy, repub, that's a million potential customers with no radio station to listen to. Is that good business sense?

Media Hackery, West Coast Version

Via Atrios and TPM, this editorial by a journalism professor is a fine example of just what is wrong with the news media today. Because if a professor is teaching people what he's demonstrating in this editorial, the news media, as we all know, has some problems. I was suitably moved to write to the Times in response, and as The Offspring might say, "it came out sounding something like this."

That's a lovely paean to journalism, and a rather gratuitous and un-informed slap at bloggers Mr. Skube has written. For the record, I'm a blogger far down the list, but people might know my handle if they saw it. But not today.

Debate is going to save us? And too much information is a bad thing? I'm reading this in the LA Times, but discounting it as quickly as possible.

What nonsense. Given the near absolute secrecy of the Bush Administration, given the manufactured and empty debate that the news media is giving us for the past 30 years or so, you would think that a reporter might thank the bloggers for carrying on an actual debate of issues, he certainly isn't going to get it from the journalists of the news media, for the most part.

On today's politics page there's this: "Ah, those fickle Nevada Republicans" reporting on POLL Numbers, "Key is that since March, Romney has gained 24 points while Giuliani has dropped 20 points" and Oprahs Obama party instructions and something about the Supreme Court Justices and their "funny" robes, and a no doubt breathless piece on Fred Thompson's hometown getting ready to capitalize on his impending candidacy announcement.

I could go on, but do you see the debate there? Or you could go to Daily Kos and see debate on psychologists and torture, the real meaning of the Minnesota bridge collapse and the Utah mine disaster and some solutions, debates on student loans, NASA, Iraq, and of course all of the presidential candidates.

If you have paid the least bit of attention the past six years you would realize that the news media truly does need watchdogs. Reporters have been in turn uncritical of the GOP; cheerleaders and enablers of the Bush Administration; threatened, terrorized, and corporatized.

The abuses and failures at Walter Reed didn't just happen in 2005, yet until a blogger talked about it, nobody knew. If it weren't for bloggers asking questions about the firings of the United States Attorneys, we wouldn't even know about how Karl Rove has politicized the Cabinet Departments, how Gonzales tried to manipulate a sick John Ashcroft to sign off on what had been declared illegal wire-tapping, that they were decimating the ethics division of the Justice Department, and so on.

I quote here from your article, '"What democracy requires," Lasch wrote in "The Lost Art of Argument," "is vigorous public debate, not information. Of course, it needs information too, but the kind of information it needs can only be generated by debate.'

When all you get from the White House is countless legalistic variations of 'I don't remember,' 'That's under investigation so I can't tell you', 'Homeland Security,' and 'Executive Privilege,' there is no public debate. Except on the blogs, where, funny enough, the public debates. And sometimes that debate spills over into the physical world or the journalism world, and actually furthers the cause of a badly abused democracy.

And on an aside, could Mr Skube kindly either, a) identify who "Some" are who reject that label, or, b) stop using that dishonest and uninformative and meaningless argument. Last time I looked, "Some" could be anybody or any number of body's, and a professor of journalism ought to know that terminology has no business being in a piece of journalism, opinion or otherwise.

That Primary Schedule

Ms D and I were watching Rep. Oberstar try to explain why the House hadn't done anything about fixing our bridges since some bill he had passed as the chairman of the Transporation committee in 1987. Yes, 1987. Which sent Ms. D off on how the D's aren't all that either since they've had the chance but hadn't done anything, which prompted me to say that we need to primary these people, Better Democrats Please should be our refrain right alongside Impeach Bush, which got me to thinking.

Suddenly it occured to me that one of the consequences of this ridiculous primary train wreak that both parties are creating is, in reality, a massive incumbant protection plan. Think about it for 10 seconds, if you haven't already.

Incumbants already have cash on hand, but challengers do not. And all the fund raising of the campaign committees is really geared for the general election in November 2008. So who will benefit the least from a compressed election priimary schedule?

That's right, challengers of incumbants. When Oberstar proposes a damaging and regressive and oh so typical solution to the sudden bridge crisis in this country, raise gas taxes, and thereby demonstrates his uselessness to progressivism, when Steny Hoyer and company utterly fail to protect the Constitution by either gross incompetence, ignorance, or cowardice, or worse (and I haven't bought the conspiracy argument yet), and we see the need for shaking up their complacency and ineffectiveness with primary challenges, we wake up and realize it may be too late, the primary is right around the corner and reasonable challengers are hard pressed to raise funds and build name recognition in their communities, there's just not enough time, and Steny Hoyer in his $1000 suits is safe for another 2 years of bad job performance.

What can be done, I don't know, but if somebody is on the fence thinking about running a primary challenge, the time to get off the fence is now, not later.

Mine Safety-The Bush Legacy

We remember the Sago Mine disaster as rescuers continue to look for the 6 trapped miners in Utah. George W Bush's MSHA is a different entity than the one of Bill Clinton's.

Consider this:

“This mine [Sago] should have been closed… the record is very clear,” says Jack Spadaro, former director of the National Mine Safety and Health Academy.

Instead, MSHA continued issuing fines and the managers at then-owner Anker Mining Co. simply wrote them off as a cost of doing business on the cheap. It made perfect sense for the corporation's bottom line; the fines for those 205 violations total about $25,000. This was a pittance to Anker, never mind International Coal Group (ICG), which bought the Sago mine last November. ICG's most recent quarterly earnings were $158 million, meaning the average fine levied in 2005 -- about $150 -- equals a few seconds of income.

Don't kid yourself that Bush putting a mining executive in charge of the Mine Safety and Health Administration is any better than putting Heckuva Job Brownie in charge of FEMA. Because protecting the corporate bottom line trumps all.

And look what's happened. More miners die. And add on to the men trapped below, this tragedy utterly preventable. It sounds as if this mine was even more recklessly operated than the Sago Mine, and the mine owner as care less to the safety of his miners as they were back in the 10's and 20's and 30's.

What I understand is that the miners leave pillars of ore to support the roof, and as a mine plays out they start mining the pillars on the way out the door, as it were. This sounds incredibly dangerous, a mining practice that should exercise the highest level of operational safety actions. Yet that doesn't appear to bethe case, and for this big time Bush supporter, people die because of his failure to place the safety of his employees above the profits from his mine.

That's the Bush Way, my friends. Ms. Duckman was telling me that somebody said, I think it was on Kudlow and Cramer this afternoon regarding the stock market correction, that the best solution (as if there is something wrong with a stock market correction) for this market volatility was, yes, to do away with all regulations.

Well, that's what we've pretty much had for the past 6.5 years, how's that working out for us all? Do you think that guy has the guts to ask the family of that rescue worker? Or some Iraqi family brutalized by some Blackwater Mercenaries? And I could go on and on. The Bush Legacy-Death and No Taxes for the Rich.

Jon Stewart Shames the Press-Again

While Broder is whining about how bad partisanship has been, I guess he means that since the GOP has been stuffing partisanship down the country's throat as one of their many legacy's that makes the GOP bad for the country, right? Well, whatever, while that's going on in the Preserve OUR Corporate Cash press, Jon Stewart shows us yet again how an honest interviewer could approach a topic, and even with his obvious bias, still do his job.

Stephen Hayes was on talking about his book about Dick Cheney, and Jon had just gotten done, ala Timmeh Russert, showing old clips of Dick Cheney from 1994 talking about why we didn't go into Baghdad after Desert Storm.

Because it would be chaotic and deadly and would not end up with any kind of clear resolution that would advance American interests in the region.

Stewart hit on the clearest point, not that Cheney lied us into the war, not that Hussein wasn't a threat to the US or that he didn't have WMD's, not that 9/11 changed the world view or situation that faced our interests in the region. No, he stuck to what Dick had said, to demonstrate the essential truth of Bush/Cheney's actions after 9/11.

"Given all of that, given that he knew that in 1991 removing Hussein would lead to chaos and unforseen consequences in Iraq and the Middle East regardless of the circumstances at that time, why would they not plan for what they knew would happen if we 'took out' Saddam Hussein?" [I'm paraphrasing here-DGR]

And when the author tried to defend Cheney, Stewart would have none of it, and kept repeating that point, if they knew bad things would happen, why is there a total absense of any kind of effort to plan for and act accordingly? And Cheney's admission of miscalculation and mistake does not qualify as a satisfactory answer in any way.

Their failure to do so tells you everything you need to know about what their intentions were/are in Iraq. How they few human life, Muslims, Iraqi's, geo-politics. Like Josh Marshall keeps saying bout Romney and Guiliani, they don't have the least bit of comprehension about the area, and the White House doesn't have one either, nor do they care.

Such callous ignorance makes you wonder what the hell they're doing over there in the first place. And like I told Ms. Duckman this evening, they're there for the oil, in one way or another. And that is an impeachable offense, and contrary to the Geneva Convention.

Barry Bonds and Bud Selig, Rummy and Saddam

I can't help it, but when I see Barry Bonds getting snubbed by Bud Selig, I see and hear Donald Rumsfeld raving against Hussein. Then I see this picture and see the hypocrisy and complicity of the Republicans in this nightmarish facade of lies and greed.

Just like Barry Bonds is getting denigrated by Official Major League Baseball, not Henry Aaron who is perfectly well within his rights to snub Bonds, but the greedy owners and their Executive Committee, you need to remember that once upon a time Bud Selig and company turned a blind eye to the destructive actions of some of their players, to save their precious toys and their even more precious investments.

Because it’s high time, too, for the suits running baseball to come forward and admit complicity in a scandal they did little to stop and everything to profit from.

Maybe Bud is doing it because George W Bush wants to get tough on steroids. Maybe because he doesn't like a cheater. Maybe because he has no way of reconciling his past actions with the present situation created by those actions. I think that's what they call cognitive dissonance.

I realize that the crimes aren't the same, baseball being a game slowly having the life squeezed out of it by people like Selig and Sandy Alderson and the Corporations and ESPN, while the lives being squeezed in Iraq are real, once living and breathing, now dead at the hands of George Bush and Dick Cheney and Don Rumsfeld and Colin Powell and all the rest of the enablers, Bremer and Kristol and Kagen and Limbaugh and Drudge and all the rest.

Yeah, Bonds cheated. But his bosses told him too, one way or another. He'll get the record, for how long is debatable, but at a personal cost way out of proportion to that deserved by his arrogant and sometimes churlish behavior. Ken Caminiti paid for it with his life, Manuel Noriega rots in a Miami prison, Iraq is ripped to shreds, it's all a matter of scale, but the motivations seem pretty much the same.

We're just tools to be used, abused, and tossed onto the garbage heap when they're through with us. Because they have the power.

We need to take that power away. Every way and every day.

Larry King and Sicko

The vice president, who'd you think I was talking about?

I watched King's interview, he does ask questions, just doesn't follow up real well, but just listening to Cheney, Dick sounded much more like a sick old man than the LegoExecuto of Death he normally sounds like.

And as for what he was saying, we've heard it all before, the guy is just so full of crap it's amazing to me that it doesn't ooze from his eyeballs. Hillary has no business asking for operational details on any evacuation plans, when that really isn't what she asked, now was it? (my bolds-DGR)

Dear Mr. Secretary:

On May 22, 2007, I wrote to you to request that you provide the appropriate oversight committees in Congress - including the Senate Armed Services Committee - with briefings on what current contingency plans exist for the future withdrawal of United States forces from Iraq. Alternatively, if no such plans exist, I asked for an explanation for the decision not to engage in such planning.

Pretty clear there, isn't it? Tell what kind of plans you have, and if not, why not. But Cheney can only twist words to make them fit his delusioned reality, he must attack and destroy anybody who opposes him, because that's all he has, that's what he is, a sick, dying, terrified old man. Did I mention selfish? And since the world is centered on him, if he's scared, than we all must be scared.

Even Larry King can expose the man what for what he is. Larry wasn't scared of the guy, he seemed pretty skeptical really. Yet the Democrats can't beat this guy?

Oy.

Feingolds Censure Violates HIS Oath

Sen. Feingold sent me an e-mail, talking about his latest attempt to censure the President. I will add this argument, then post what I sent him in reply.

If you're going to take the time to do something, you ought to do it right. Censure is meaningless, Impeachment is not. My response follows.

Dear Honorable Senator Feingold,

Your response to the actions of the Bush Administration is deeply disappointing.

How can telling President Bush and Vice President Cheney that what they are doing is wrong, and that they should feel really bad about it, have any impact whatsoever on their actions? How can it be that censure, which has no real consequence, holds them accountable for anything?

We all know who the President and Vice President are, we all know the absolute lack of regard these men hold for the institutions of this government, how could telling them that they've been bad little boys have any impact whatsoever?

The fact is, and I quote, "the blatant disregard President Bush has shown for the rule of law on which our country was founded" tells you exactly what their reaction to censure will be, doesn't it? If they disregard the Constitution, the highest law in the land, what is a meaningless rebuke going to do?

You argue against impeachment, I say you are dead wrong. Is there really any doubt that what they are doing goes far beyond high crimes and misdemeanors; look me in the eye and say otherwise.

I argue three points on impeachment. One, since it is clear that they have violated their oath to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States of America, that they have usurped the powers enumerated in said Constitution rightly the provence of the House and the Senate, that their lies and cover-ups have led us to this miserable failure in Iraq, YOU, Senator Feingold, would be in violation of YOUR oath of office if you did not impeach the President and Vice President.

You have sworn an oath to protect and defend the Constitution, these men are violating it and destroying it on a daily basis, and you think it isn't in our nation’s best interest to UPHOLD YOUR OATH? That there are more important things to do than that?

Two, you say there are more important issues that would be delayed were impeachment to go forward. Like what? Since your friends and respected colleagues, the Republicans, are filibustering most Democratic Legislation, and that anything you do pass is going to get vetoed by the President, and sustained by the Senate, or, even worse, is a priority of the President, the Constitution violating President, I cannot think of any issues that shouldn't be put on the back burner. We can’t pass ours, who wants to pass theirs? And as for Presidential appointments, from a man who violates the laws of this country daily, none should be approved, so, again, what issues are there that cannot be put aside?

Three, while that man remains in office, what guarantees are there that he won't initiate military actions against the State of Iran on some Gulf of Tonkin type incident? Or that he won't pardon every member of his administration prior to any potential indictments or impeachments? Or that he won't use illegal wiretaps and other illegal means to violate the rights of innocent Americans who are working in opposition to the Bush White House, to include Senators like yourself, financial supporters like a George Soros, members of the press like a Dan Rather, so as to maintain their control of Executive Power even after an election?

Who is to say, given their past actions, that such a thing would not pass? And who would allow such a thing? By not taking the proper, right, and Constitutional action, that would be you Senator. Because you and your colleagues did not fulfill the terms of your contract with the American People, to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States of America. You wrote: "Some may disagree with that, but at a minimum we can agree that censure resolutions, holding the President and his administration accountable for the actions I've outlined above, are needed." I wholeheartedly disagree. Censure is a total waste of time, means nothing, does nothing. By what mechanism would it hold them accountable? Shame? Embarrassment?

The American People have figured this out, and we're not asking you to lead us in this, we're asking you to do your job, fulfill your oath.

Most Sincerely,
etc.

Young Republicans-Worse Than the Adult Form

Watch this video, think about it, and figure out who might benefit from watching this video of Young Republican Values, and get them to watch it.

Not fellow Democrats, but fellow Americans, Teachers, Professors, Psychologists, Grocery Store Managers, College Recruiters, somebody who can make use of this view of the basic cowardice of those young people, and do something about it.

Somebody is giving those people scholarships to go to college. And that is a tremendous waste of money.