cult of lack of personality

from Billmon's Whiskey Bar:

And now we have local GOP Gauleiters in Florida soliciting oaths of allegiance not to the flag, not to the country, not to the constitution, but to the person of the leader -- albeit still an elected one, at least for now.

Hail Caesar. Pretty scary stuff.

Link

inspiration

from Talking Points Memo:

Received yesterday from a reader down in the trenches...

Still in Florida.

This was one of the most moving, meaningful days of my life.

My job is to get people to the polls and, more importantly, to keep them there. Because they're crazily jammed. Crazily. No one expected this turnout. For me, it's been a deeply humbling, deeply gratifying experience. At today's early vote in the College Hill district of East Tampa -- a heavily democratic, 90% African American community -- we had 879 voters wait an average of five hours to cast their vote.

This is all that matters now. I believe the biggest story of this election will be high turnout. especially for Democrats and first-timers.

Out On a Limb Dept.:
Electoral: Kerry 291 Bush 247.
Popular Vote: Kerry 50%, Bush 48%, Nader 1%
Senate Democrats 49, Republicans 50, Independents 1

Link

Tora Bora timeline

Don't forget who let the badguy get away...

from Top Dog:

How Bin Laden Got Away

"Mr. President, Plan of Attack by Bob Woodward states that you asked General Franks to start planning for Iraq just two months after 9/11. Your own Vice President told ABC News at the time that he thought Bin Laden was at Tora Bora. Can you explain the timing of this apparent distraction?"

Link

test your electoral vote scenarios

elegant interactive map from the NYT

Link

OBL tape a positive for Kerry?

check out this post-OBL poll from the Minnesota Star-Tribune:

Minnesota Poll: Kerry takes 49%-41% lead over Bush

Independent candidate Ralph Nader, who received 5 percent of the vote in Minnesota four years ago, appears to remain a non-factor in 2004. He is supported by only 1 percent of the state's likely voters.

Jacobs, whose most recent poll had Nader at 5 percent, said that's more evidence of Kerry's gathering strength.

"You can see he's gotten his feet under him among independents and moderates who had been thinking of voting for Nader," he said. "They're coming home maybe because they saw Bin Laden's face on TV [Friday] night and decided they can't take the chance of a protest vote."

The repeated airing of Osama bin Laden's latest video Friday may have been one reason there was a spike in support for Kerry in the interviews conducted that night, compared with three previous nights of interviewing, agreed Jacobs and Minnesota Poll director Rob Daves.

"Maybe it was Bin Laden, maybe it was the news about the missing explosives [in Iraq], but the news seems to have been injected with the seriousness of national security events," Jacobs said.

Very comforting indeed. If Kerry can pick up nervous Nader voters in battleground states, that could mean 1-2% gains.

Link

utterly baffled

from NYT:

To the Editor:

Re "Video Shows G.I.'s at Weapon Cache" (front page, Oct. 29):

The primary stated reason for the invasion was to remove Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction for the safety of the United States and the world. Al Qaqaa was a known W.M.D.-related site. Among the hundreds of tons of explosives - as the video shows - were some bearing the International Atomic Energy Agency seal, indicating nuclear weapons-related materials.

I'm just a citizen and not a military strategist, but I simply don't understand. How could our war plan not include a list of such sites, as well as clear orders and procedures for troops to identify and secure them? Wasn't that what the whole war was about?

How could we have had a war plan in which that was not Job No. 1? What was our plan then? I am utterly baffled.

William F. Bennett
Somerville, Mass., Oct. 29, 2004

Link

No Surrender

from Common Dreams:

So let's roll up our sleeves. That's why I'm here today, to stand
alongside Senator Kerry and to tell you that the country we carry in our
hearts is waiting. And together we can move America towards her deepest
ideals. And besides, we had a sax player in the [White] House -- we need a
guitar player in the White House.

    Alright -- this is for John. This is for you, John.

    [Bruce launches into No Retreat, No Surrender]

Link

are we there yet?

This week has been such an exhausting ride that time seems to be telescoping, making election day feel like an eternity away. Plenty of time for some Karl Rove spectacular. As for the Friday afternoon OBL PR stunt, I think that anyone who switches their vote now is allowing the enemy to influence the process. Seems likely to have a positive effect on Republican turnout, though. The comment made by the Bush campaign official calling the tape "a gift" is notable, especially considering the White House knew about the tape Friday morning. I guess they didn't feel it necessary to share this "gift" with the Kerry campaign before it went public.

Yes, General, Sir!

from the Kerry-Edwards blog:

General Wesley Clark released the following statement today in response to President Bush's remarks today about the missing explosives in Iraq:

“Today George W. Bush made a very compelling and thoughtful argument for why he should not be reelected. In his own words, he told the American people that “…a political candidate who jumps to conclusions without knowing the facts is not a person you want as your Commander in Chief.”

When I heard the president's comments today this phrase jumped out as being particularly ironic. I'm so glad someone picked up on it.

Link

an important message from your President

View

a liberal dose of reality

are you looking at my blog?

blog-looker...

from USA Today:

Instead of ducking every time Bush lobs an attack on liberalism, Democrats should point out how often he embraces the good it produced. They should remind voters that it wasn't limited government that created housing for returning GIs after World War II. That it wasn't a massive tax cut for the wealthy that funded Social Security for U.S. workers. And that it wasn't conservative ideals that built the interstate highway system, which fueled the growth of the auto industry.

Link

October is full of surprises, it seems...

from NYT:

After the invasion, when widespread looting began in Iraq, the international weapons experts grew concerned that the Qaqaa stockpile could fall into unfriendly hands. In May, an internal I.A.E.A. memorandum warned that terrorists might be helping "themselves to the greatest explosives bonanza in history."

Meanwhile, our boys were guarding Oil Ministry offices... why, if the troops were overwhelmed by "other priorities", wasn't the order given to destroy these ammo dumps???

Link

October Surprise

BREAKING NEWS
Supreme Court Chief Justice William Rehnquist hospitalized for treatment of thyroid cancer, senior government officials tell CNN.

my favorite Texan

from Jim Hightower:

Here's a new political slogan with some integrity and democratic gravitas to it: "Let's run government like a government."

This is, of course, the opposite of the tired, old, tried-and-failed slogan that politicians of both parties have been pushing for years: "We'll run government like a business." The Clintonites used this in the Nineties with their "reinventing government" campaign, declaring that government agencies should become efficient business operations and treat people as "customers."

Oh? Efficient like what? The mammoth insurance-company bureaucracies, or maybe the military contractors who waste and defraud us of billions of our tax dollars? And, do they mean customer treatment like we get from don't-give-a-damn banks and telephone companies?

Give this guy a listen on KALW-FM 91.7 in the Bay Area, every weekday morning at 7:49, or on the web.

Link

I wish my clients were this gullible

from Reuters:

The U.S. Army is laying the groundwork to let Halliburton Co. keep several billion dollars paid for work in Iraq that Pentagon auditors say is questionable or unsupported by proper documentation, the Wall Street Journal reported on Friday.

Forget about big government. The business of war is sucking our country dry. While we suffer a degraded environment, departing jobs, decaying infrastructure, and a debilitating health care crisis, the major shareholders of what Eisenhower called the Military Industrial Complex profit handsomely from the chaos and fear mongering.

Link

John Dean & the potential for post-election chaos

from FindLaw:

A storm warning of things to come if the vote is as close as expected.

This next presidential election, on November 2, may be followed by post-election chaos unlike any we've ever known.

Look at the swirling, ugly currents currently at work in this conspicuously close race. There is Republicans' history of going negative to win elections. There is Karl Rove's disposition to challenge close elections in post-election brawls. And there is Democrats' (and others) new unwillingness to roll over, as was done in 2000. Finally, look at the fact that a half-dozen lawsuits are in the works in the key states and more are being developed.

This is a climate for trouble. A storm warning is appropriate. In the end, attorneys and legal strategy could prove as important, if not more so, to the outcome of this election as the traditional political strategists and strategy.

Link

shenan-agains

from AP:

�U.S. Rep. Robert Wexler, a Boca Raton Democrat, sued and demanded that all counties produce paper records.

In testimony this past week in Fort Lauderdale, the attorney for county elections chiefs said Wexler was playing politics, trying to "squeeze one more vote out" and "regress" to the confusing recounts of the 2000 election.

Florida law requires a manual recount in any race with a victory margin of one-quarter of 1 percent or less. In April, Hood issued an order prohibiting manual recounts on touch screens. The rule was struck down after the ACLU suit. On Oct. 15, exasperated officials issued new guidelines for recounting virtual votes.

Let's see... the touch screen machines can't produce a paper trail, but election officials want to assure us that every vote will be counted...

Hm... election officials propose rules prohibiting manual recounts for touch screen voting machines... Is this supposed to make us more confident that all votes will be accurately counted?

We need to closely re-examine the appointment of partisan election officials. Elections should be administered by non-partisan structures with no relationship to incumbent office holders. It seems to me there is an obvious conflict of interest anytime you have appointed, partisan officials in charge of elections.

In the wake of the 2000 recount debacle, our elections were supposed to have been made more transparent and fair, not less. If our elections are to be legitimate, there needs to be absolutely no doubt or uncertainty.

Link

where's the party, dude?

more dirty tricks:

from the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette:

Scores of college students in Pennsylvania and Oregon have had their voting registrations switched by teams of canvassers circulating bogus petitions and, in some cases, partially concealed voter registration forms students were requested to sign.

Link

who's paranoid now?

from NYT:

The Democrats, who tend to benefit more than Republicans from large turnouts, said they had registered more than 2,000 recruits to try to protect legitimate voters rather than weed out ineligible ones.

Republican officials said they had no intention of disrupting voting but were concerned about the possibility of fraud involving thousands of newly registered Democrats.

"The organized left's efforts to, quote unquote, register voters - I call them ringers - have created these problems," said James P. Trakas, a Republican co-chairman in Cuyahoga County.

Mr. Trakas calls them "ringers"... I call them newly registered Democrats. You know, the ones that are going to prove all the pollsters wrong by turning out in record numbers and ridding this country of Mr. Bush and his vicious band of cronies.

Link

liberalism is good for America

via email:

Subject: FW: A day in the life.....

A DAY IN THE LIFE OF JOE REPUBLICAN

Joe gets up at 6 a.m. and fills his coffeepot with water to prepare his morning coffee. The water is clean and good because some tree-hugging liberal fought for minimum water-quality standards. With his first swallow of water, he takes his daily medication. His medications are safe to take because some stupid commie liberal fought to ensure their safety and that they work as advertised.

All but $10 of his medications are paid for by his employer's medical plan because some liberal union workers fought their employers for paid medical insurance - now Joe gets it too.

He prepares his morning breakfast, bacon and eggs. Joe's bacon is safe to eat because some girly-man liberal fought for laws to regulate the meat packing industry.

In the morning shower, Joe reaches for his shampoo. His bottle is properly labeled with each ingredient and its amount in the total contents because some crybaby liberal fought for his right to know what he was putting on his body and how much it contained.

Joe dresses, walks outside and takes a deep breath. The air he breathes is clean because some environmentalist wacko liberal fought for the laws to stop industries from polluting our air.

He walks on the government-provided sidewalk to the subway station for his government-subsidized ride to work. It saves him considerable money in parking and transportation fees because some fancy-pants liberal fought for affordable public transportation, which gives everyone the opportunity to be a contributor.

Joe begins his work day. He has a good job with excellent pay, medical benefits, retirement, paid holidays and vacation because some lazy liberal union members fought and died for these working standards. Joe's employer pays these standards because Joe's employer doesn't want his employees to call the union.

If Joe is hurt on the job or becomes unemployed, he'll get a worker compensation or unemployment check because some stupid liberal didn't think he should lose his home because of his temporary misfortune.

It is noontime and Joe needs to make a bank deposit so he can pay some bills. Joe's deposit is federally insured by the FSLIC because some godless liberal wanted to protect Joe's money from unscrupulous bankers who ruined the banking system before the Great Depression.

Joe has to pay his Fannie Mae-underwritten mortgage and his below-market federal student loan because some elitist liberal decided that Joe and the government would be better off if he was educated and earned more money over his lifetime. Joe also forgets that in addition to his federally subsidized student loans, he attended a state funded university.

Joe is home from work. He plans to visit his father this evening at his farm home in the country. He gets in his car for the drive. His car is among the safest in the world because some America-hating liberal fought for car safety standards to go along with the tax-payer funded roads.

He arrives at his boyhood home. His was the third generation to live in the house financed by Farmers' Home Administration because bankers didn't want to make rural loans.

The house didn't have electricity until some big-government liberal stuck his nose where it didn't belong and demanded rural electrification.

He is happy to see his father, who is now retired. His father lives on Social Security and a union pension because some wine-drinking, cheese-eating liberal made sure he could take care of himself so Joe wouldn't have to.

Joe gets back in his car for the ride home, and turns on a radio talk show. The radio host keeps saying that liberals are bad and conservatives are good. He doesn't mention that the beloved Republicans have fought against every protection and benefit Joe enjoys throughout his day. Joe agrees: "We don't need those big-government liberals ruining our lives! After all, I'm a self-made man who believes everyone should take care of themselves, just like I have."

Couldn't have said it better myself!

right wing columnist backs Kerry

I've been a little behind on my posts... very busy time of year.

from The American Conservative

 George W. Bush has come to embody a politics that is antithetical to almost any kind of thoughtful conservatism. His international policies have been based on the hopelessly naïve belief that foreign peoples are eager to be liberated by American armies - a notion more grounded in Leon Trotsky’s concept of global revolution than any sort of conservative statecraft. His immigration policies - temporarily put on hold while he runs for re-election - are just as extreme. A re-elected President Bush would be committed to bringing in millions of low-wage immigrants to do jobs Americans “won’t do.” This election is all about George W. Bush, and those issues are enough to render him unworthy of any conservative support.

I never thought I'd be in complete agreement with this magazine, but this is no ordinary election year.

Pat Buchanan looked silly on McLaughlin Group this week trying to parse his own support for the President while disavowing support for the President's policy failures. That's the true conservative. Stick with who brought you to the dance, even though he steps on your feet.

Link

it's fun to bash lawyers, that is, until you need one...

from Media Matters:

Conservatives echoed dubious Bush claim that lawsuits are responsible for vaccine shortage

Following Senator John Kerry's recent criticism of President George W. Bush's alleged failure to anticipate the current nationwide shortage of flu vaccinations, conservative media figures have quickly echoed Bush's claim that medical liability is the major cause of the shortage. But, according to Dr. Anthony S. Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease, a division of the National Institutes of Health, fear of liability is "only a very small part" of the vaccine shortage.

Link

Sinclair bows to pressure

from LA Times:

Facing advertiser defections, a viewer boycott and a plummeting stock price, as well as strong opposition from Democrats, Sinclair Broadcast Group Inc. scrapped its plan to air a film that attacks the 1970s-era antiwar activities of Sen. John F. Kerry (news, bio, voting record), and will instead run a special produced by its news division incorporating parts of the movie.

The decision not to run all of "Stolen Honor: Wounds That Never Heal" came after several shareholder complaints against the company were announced Tuesday, sending Sinclair shares down 3.5% after a nearly 8% slide Monday.

Link

the first casualty of war

from Media Matters for America:

Gen. Franks's claim in NYT contradicted by news reports

In an October 16 New York Times op-ed piece, retired General Tommy Franks attempted to undermine Senator John Kerry's assertion that the Bush administration "took its eye off the ball" with regard to pursuing Osama bin Laden and prosecuting the war against Al Qaeda in Afghanistan. Franks claimed: "Neither attention nor manpower was diverted from Afghanistan to Iraq." But highly specialized personnel and equipment that had been used successfully against Al Qaeda and bin Laden were reassigned in March 2002 to the impending invasion of Iraq.

Link

CIA 9-11 report suppressed

And this analysis:

(both from LA Times)

  

The 9/11 Secret in the CIA's Back Pocket (link)
    By Robert Scheer
    The Los Angeles Times


    Tuesday 19 October 2004

The agency is withholding a damning report that points at senior officials.

    It is shocking: The Bush administration is suppressing a CIA report on
9/11 until after the election, and this one names names. Although the report
by the inspector general's office of the CIA was completed in June, it has
not been made available to the congressional intelligence committees that
mandated the study almost two years ago.

Is it really so "shocking" considering the Bush administration's history on dodging oversight of its policies and performance? If this executive branch had its way, there would be no oversight whatsoever. The legislature has all but abdicated its responsibilities in this area. Who's left? The Supreme Court???

Link

are you being served? 'cause they didn't...

from a friend:

Subject: WHO SERVED AND WHO DIDN'T (fwd)
Date: Sun, 17 Oct 2004 01:09:37 +0000

DEMOCRATS
* Richard Gephardt: Air National Guard, 1965-71.
* David Bonior: Staff Sgt., Air Force 1968-72.
* Tom Daschle: 1st Lt., Air Force SAC 1969-72.
* Al Gore: enlisted Aug. 1969; sent to Vietnam Jan. 1971 as an army journalist in 20th Engineer Brigade.
* Bob Kerrey: Lt. j.g. Navy 1966-69; Medal of Honor, Vietnam.
* Daniel Inouye: Army 1943-'47; Medal of Honor, WWII.
* John Kerry: Lt., Navy 1966-70; Silver Star, Bronze Star with Combat V, Purple Hearts.
* Charles Rangel: Staff Sgt., Army 1948-52; Bronze Star, Korea.
* Max Cleland: Captain, Army 1965-68; Silver Star & Bronze Star, Vietnam.
* Ted Kennedy: Army, 1951-1953.
* Tom Harkin: Lt., Navy, 1962-67; Naval Reserve, 1968-74.
* Jack Reed: Army Ranger, 1971-1979; Captain, Army Reserve 1979-91.
* Fritz Hollings: Army officer in WWII, receiving the Bronze Star and seven campaign ribbons.
* Leonard Boswell: Lt. Col., Army 1956-76; Vietnam, DFCs, Bronze Stars, and Soldier's Medal.
* Pete Peterson: Air Force Captain, POW. Purple Heart, Silver Star and Legion of Merit.
* Mike Thompson: Staff sergeant, 173rd Airborne, Purple Heart.
* Bill McBride: Candidate for Fla. Governor. Marine in Vietnam; Bronze Star with Combat V.
* Gray Davis: Army Captain in Vietnam, Bronze Star.
* Pete Stark: Air Force 1955-57
* Chuck Robb: Vietnam
* Howell Heflin: Silver Star
* George McGovern: Silver Star & DFC during WWII.
* Bill Clinton: Did not serve. Student deferments. Entered draft but received 311 - not called-up.
* Jimmy Carter: Seven years in the Navy.
* Walter Mondale: Army 1951-1953
* John Glenn: WWII and Korea; six DFCs and Air Medal with 18 Clusters.
* Tom Lantos: Served in Hungarian underground in WWII. Saved by Raoul Wallenberg.

REPUBLICANS
* Dennis Hastert: did not serve.
* Tom Delay: did not serve.
* Roy Blunt: did not serve.
* Bill Frist: did not serve.
* Mitch McConnell: did not serve.
* Rick Santorum: did not serve.
* Trent Lott: did not serve.
* Dick Cheney: did not serve. Six (6) separate deferments, the last due to a child born just nine months after change in deferment policy.
* John Ashcroft: did not serve. Seven (7) separate deferments to teach business.
* Jeb Bush: did not serve.
* Karl Rove: did not serve.
* Saxby Chambliss (The man who attacked Cleland's patriotism) did not serve
* Paul Wolfowitz: did not serve.
* Vin Weber: did not serve.
* Richard Perle: did not serve.
* Douglas Feith: did not serve.
* Eliot Abrams: did not serve.
* Richard Shelby: did not serve.
* Jon Kyl: did not serve.
* Tim Hutchison: did not serve.
* Christopher Cox: did not serve.
* Newt Gingrich: did not serve.
* Don Rumsfeld: served in Navy (1954-57) as aviator and flight instructor.
* G.W. Bush: six-year Nat'l Guard commitment (in four). Did not complete service obligations.
* Ronald Reagan: due to poor eyesight, served in a non-combat role making movies.
* B-1 Bob Dornan: Enlisted after fighting was over in Korea.
* Phil Gramm: did not serve. Multiple draft deferments. Commented how he was - and his students were - more important at University than in Vietnam.
* John McCain: Silver Star, Bronze Star, Legion of Merit, Purple Heart and Distinguished Flying Cross.
* Bob Dole: an honorable veteran.
* Chuck Hagel: two Purple Hearts and a Bronze Star, Vietnam.
* Duke Cunningham: nominated for Medal of Honor, Navy Cross, Silver Stars, Air Medals, Purple Hearts.
* Jeff Sessions: Army Reserves, 1973-1986
* Colin Powell: Long military career, finished as Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
* Wayne Gilchrest: USMC in Vietnam; wounded in action.
* Don Nickles: Biography does not list military service.
* Dana Rohrabacher: did not serve.
* John M. McHugh: did not serve.
* JC Watts: did not serve.
* Jack Kemp: did not serve due to medical deferment although he played in the NFL for 8 years post-deferment.
* Dan Quayle: Journalism unit of the Indiana National Guard.
* Rudy Giuliani: did not serve.
* George Pataki: did not serve.
* Spencer Abraham: did not serve.
* John Engler: did not serve.
* Lindsey Graham: National Guard lawyer.
* Arnold Schwarzenegger: AWOL from Austrian army base.
* G.H.W. Bush: Pilot in WWII. Shot down by the Japanese.
* Tom Ridge: Bronze Star for Valor in Vietnam.
* Sam Johnson: Combat in Korea and Vietnam, POW in Hanoi.
* Ted Stevens: WWII pilot, DFCs, two Air Medals.
* John Warner: Served in the Navy during WWII as a RM3
* Heather Wilson: Air Force 1978-1989
* Gerald Ford: Navy, WWII PUNDITS & PREACHERS
* Sean Hannity: did not serve.
* Rush Limbaugh: did not serve (4-F with a pilonidal cyst in the crack of his buttocks)
* Bill O'Reilly: did not serve.
* Michael Savage: did not serve.
* George Will: did not serve.
* Chris Matthews: did not serve.
* Paul Gigot: did not serve.
* Bill Bennett: did not serve.
* Pat Buchanan: did not serve.
* John Wayne: did not serve.
* Pat Robertson: not, as claimed, a "combat veteran." A "Liquor Officer."
* Bill Kristol: did not serve.
* Kenneth Starr: did not serve.
* Antonin Scalia: did not serve.
* Clarence Thomas: did not serve.
* Ralph Reed: did not serve.
* Michael Medved: did not serve.
* Charlie Daniels: did not serve.
* Ted Nugent: did not serve.
* Ollie North: At least he served.

next time you hear one of these chicken hawks talk about "duty", "honor", and "country", remember their sacrifices, or lack of same.

Rove frogmarch update

from AP:

Rove Testifies in CIA Leak Investigation

and Joe Lockhart's response:

In response to reports that Karl Rove testified before the grand jury investigating the CIA leak case, Kerry-Edwards campaign Senior Adviser Joe Lockhart issued the following statement:

“With two weeks to go before the election, the American people are still in the dark about how it is that their White House leaked the name of an undercover CIA operative to the press, jeopardizing the life of this agent and possibly violating federal law.

“Instead of hiding behind the lawyers he so often likes to criticize, George Bush should direct Karl Rove and anyone else involved to go to the White House briefing room and come clean about their role in this insidious act. If the president sincerely wanted to get to the bottom of this potential crime, he’d stop the White House foot dragging and fully cooperate with this investigation.”

I was hoping this would come up before Nov. 2

Link

ok, REALLY... these are ALL the documents we have, OK?

you've got to be kidding me.

from AP:

Link

great line

Jon Stewart on Crossfire 10/15/04

from CNN:

President Bush was saying, John Kerry's rhetoric doesn't match his record.

But I've heard President Bush describe his record. His record doesn't match his record.

here it is

Today's Crossfire featuring Jon Stewart

Link

Jon Stewart for President

from MTV:

Jon Stewart Bitchslaps CNN's 'Crossfire' Show
10.15.2004 6:43 PM EDT

In what could well be the strangest and most refreshing media moment of the election season, "The Daily Show" host Jon Stewart turned up on a live broadcast of CNN's "Crossfire" Friday and accused the mainstream media — and his hosts in particular — of being soft and failing to do their duty as journalists to keep politicians and the political process honest.

looking for a complete transcript - keep you posted

Link

about Mary

hypocrisy is tawdry

from electablog:

Elizabeth Edwards may have had the clearest response to the outrage being expressed by the Cheneys and the rest of the right:

"I think that it indicates a certain degree of shame with respect to her daughter's sexual preferences. It makes me really sad that that's Lynne's response."

Is there any other way to read into the rage expressed by Lynne Cheney?

Link

defining moment

definitions revisited

The President has been shifting his rhetoric away from "flip-flop" and toward "tax and spend liberal". Ironic though, that if you look up "liberal" in the dictionary, you read this:

> lib•er•al
> adj.

Definition #1:

> 1. a. Not limited to or by established, traditional,
> orthodox, or authoritarian attitudes, views, or dogmas;
> free from bigotry.
> b. Favoring proposals for reform, open to new ideas
> for progress, and tolerant of the ideas and behavior of
> others; broad-minded.

Count me in!

> con•ser•va•tive
> adj.
> 1. Favoring traditional views and values; tending to
> oppose change.

When things are going downhill, don't count on a conservative to change course.

> 2. Traditional or restrained in style.

Our President has seldom acted with restraint, except when it comes to restraining enforcement of environmental regulation.

> 3. Moderate; cautious.

W? You've got to be kidding. He came into office as a moderate, but a radical right-wing agenda has been pursued as if winning the closest election in American history constituted a mandate. And cautious??? Come on.

> 4. a. Of or relating to the political philosophy of
> conservatism.
> b. Belonging to a conservative party, group, or
> movement.
> 5. Conservative Of or belonging to the Conservative
> Party in the United Kingdom or the Progressive
> Conservative Party in Canada.
> 6. Conservative Of or adhering to Conservative Judaism.

This next one is right on:

> 7. Tending to conserve; preservative: the conservative
> use of natural resources.

On this alone, his actions on the environment, fiscal and energy policy, and on the lives of the young men and women in the armed forces betray his self-identification as "conservative."

I almost forgot, there is a secondary definition of "liberal":

Definition #2:

> 2. a. Tending to give freely; generous: a liberal
> benefactor.

This sounds more like the current administration: generously giving away our treasury to their corporate pals, amply providing tax breaks and bailouts to maximize shareholder value and minimize human values of loyalty, community, and responsibility. If liberals are "tax and spenders", today's Republicans are "tax-cut and spenders." Fiscal irresponsibility. No wonder Pat Buchanan is pissed off with the President... even though he plans to vote for him anyway. Now there's the real conservative: clinging to a sinking ship for fear of the alternative.

> b. Generous in amount; ample: a liberal serving of
> potatoes.

Yep, that's them alright. "... a liberal serving of potatoes." Filling, but not very nutritious... and some of them couldn't even spell "potatoes".

what, me worry?

from NYT:

Until sometime early in the summer, President Bush and his advisers sporadically wrestled with a fundamental choice: Was it smarter to go into the final months of the election campaign confessing to considerable error in decisions leading up to the invasion of Iraq, and in early calculations about how best to occupy the country? Or would the president - "not a man given to backward-looking introspection," as one close aide put it - be better off conceding only the smallest errors of judgment, and focusing the electorate on the hope of a bright future for Iraq and the whole Middle East?

He's made his bed and now he's gotta lie [sic] in it.

Link

lies, lies, lies, yeah!

The bigger the better

from the Des Moines Register:

We live in Orwellian times, where obvious falsehoods are asserted brazenly as the truth.

The day after the final report of the Iraq Survey Group confirmed that Iraq had no weapons of mass destruction and no active programs to produce them, Vice President Dick Cheney blithely asserted that the report justified the invasion of Iraq.

Are you listening, America?

Link

postmortem of a "dismal failure"

A FAILED "TRANSITION": THE MOUNTING COSTS OF THE IRAQ WAR

A Study by the Institute for Policy Studies and Foreign Policy In Focus

Full report with citations (.pdf document)

"Just the Numbers" factsheet - feel free to photocopy and share (.pdf document)


KEY FINDINGS
A Failed 'Transition' is the most comprehensive accounting of the mounting costs of the Iraq war on the United States, Iraq, and the world. Among its major findings are stark figures about the escalation of costs in these most recent three months of "transition" to Iraqi rule, a period that the Bush administration claimed would be characterized by falling human and economic costs.

Link

oops... maybe we need those inspectors after all

from The Guardian UK:

Equipment which could be used in an illicit nuclear bomb programme has disappeared from previously monitored sites in Iraq, and radioactively contaminated items from there have been found abroad, the International Atomic Energy Agency has told the UN.

The UN inspectors' presence would have eventually removed all doubt that there were no weapons, so the US needed them out of the picture if the regime change operation was to take place under the guise of an anti-WMD crusade. Why prevent the UN from completing the inspections and spend hundreds of millions to find out what the inspectors were already telling us in 2002? The threat was speculative at best, and at worst, non-existent.

Link

Krugman says the "L" word

from NYT:

It's not hard to predict what President Bush, who sounds increasingly
desperate, will say tomorrow. Here are eight lies or distortions you'll
hear, and the truth about each...

Why is it that so many people are taken in by the wanna-be cowboy hero? Is it because they want a President who is less intelligent than they are?

For a cartoon hero, his impulsiveness, swagger, and finger-pointing would be entertaining. For a President, they're downright dangerous.

Link

mee-owch

>
> George Bush is taking a stroll around Capitol Hill with a senior member of
> Congress when he meets a little girl carrying a small basket with a
> blanket
> over it.
>
> Curious, he says to the girl; "What's in the basket?".
>
> She replies; "New baby kittens" and opens the basket to show him.
>
> "How nice" said Bush. " What kind are they?".
>
> The little girl says, "Republicans."
>
> Bush smiles and pats the little girl on the head and they continue on.
>
> About three weeks later, he and another Congressional colleague are again
> strolling around Capitol Hill when he sees the little girl again with the
> same basket.
>
> Bush says to his colleague; "Watch this, it's very cute" and they approach
> the little girl.
>
> Bush asks the girl how the kittens are and she says fine.
>
> He then says, "What kind of kittens are they?" and she
> replies,"Democrats."
>
> Somewhat abashed, Bush says, "Three weeks ago you said they were
> Republicans!"
>
> "I know," she says." But now their eyes are open."

let the disenfranchisement begin

from KLAS-TV, Las Vegas:

The out-of-state firm has been in Las Vegas for the past few months, registering voters. It employed up to 300 part-time workers and collected hundreds of registrations per day, but former employees of the company say that Voters Outreach of America only wanted Republican registrations.

Two former workers say they personally witnessed company supervisors rip up and trash registration forms signed by Democrats.

Isn't there a way to avoid disclosing party affiliation for a non-partisan ballot? And if there isn't, shouldn't a registrant's party affiliation be concealed from partisan registration drives?

Link

smirk, swagger, wink

My entry today will have to be brief...

debate impressions:

The President needs to wipe that self-important smirk off of his face. The winking and swaggering was ridiculous and did not reflect well on the "leader of the free world." He was angry, agitated, and, at times, appeared unstable.

John Kerry missed a huge opportunity to identify a major failing of this administration: the ceding of environmental policy decisions to industry and the abandonment of enforcement of existing regulations. He also did not rebut the President's assertions in this area.

Kerry's answer on abortion spoke volumes about the differences between these two men when it comes to legislating morality.

The President, when asked about the mistakes he has made, refused to take any responsibility for his failings and instead cited his dissatisfaction with others. This is like the quarterback blaming his linemen for his own play calling. I guess we know where the buck doesn't stop.

Well, that's it... I'm off with my daughter for a road trip weekend. Keep the faith.

you need schoolin' and baby I'm not foolin'

The always sensible Talking Points blows the lid off of this bit of ersatz pre-Halloween fear mongering re: disks containing school floor plans, etc. found in Iraq:

But this CNN report from late this morning says that Department of Homeland Security officials say "the material was associated with a person in Iraq, and it could not be established that this person had any ties to terrorism. He did have a connection to civic groups doing planning for schools in Iraq."

So the guy with the disks was involved in setting up schools in Iraq? Sounds a little less worrisome than finding them in Zarqawi's butler's knapsack, right?

Link

nice poster, child!

homemade poster seen in the background of CNN's "Debate 360" outside the debate venue in St. Louis:

"Vote Bush/Cheney - Why Change Horsemen Mid-Apocalypse?"

JibJab - the sequel

See it here

Link

tune in, turn on, and blurt out...

This might explain his many ridiculous gaffes - but that would be letting him off the hook, now wouldn't it. Anyway, here goes:

Remember back in the eighties when folks used to say that Nancy Reagan fed Ronnie his lines? Well, history may be repeating itself, with the help of technology. There are theories (some supported by plausable anecdotes) that our President wears an earpiece so that he can be fed lines during public appearances. Although, in W's case, I have a feeling it's not Laura talking in his ear. Go here for more on this...

tidbits also can be found here:

and on Wonkette (she appeared on Kudlow and Cramer today... looks, brains, and, best of all, she's a Kerry backer!)

full text of Salon article can be found here.

Link

reality denied

from Paul Krugman, NYT:

President Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney have an unparalleled ability to insulate themselves from inconvenient facts. They lead a party that controls all three branches of government, and face news media that in some cases are partisan supporters, and in other cases are reluctant to state plainly that officials aren't telling the truth. They also still enjoy the residue of the faith placed in them after 9/11.

This has allowed them to engage in what Orwell called "reality control." In the world according to the Bush administration, our leaders are infallible, and their policies always succeed. If the facts don't fit that assumption, they just deny the facts.

I have trouble calling what our administration has been doing "propaganda." The term implies an intelligent strategy of deception. The reality is closer to self-reinforcing, closed-loop delusional group-think.

Link

Mr. Bush, your strategy paper is LATE. You will receive an "F".

from the AP:

TERENCE HUNT, AP White House Correspondent

WASHINGTON - The Bush administration has developed a formal written strategy for Iraq that envisions using a mix of diplomacy and military force to try to wrest control of dozens of key cities from insurgents before planned January elections, a senior administration official said Friday.

"Rummy, Cheney, Condi, can ya help me out... they want this thing written down and I got me a 12:00 tee time..."

Link

vote for me - I'm just like him... no wait...

from the brilliant Talking Points Memo:

This morning in Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania President Bush told a crowd:

"My opponent says he has a plan for Iraq. Parts of it should sound pretty familiar -- it's already known as the Bush plan."

Then about a minute later he said:

"In Iraq, Senator Kerry has a strategy of retreat; I have a strategy of victory."

Oops ...

Link

no war for oil?

from Youssef M. Ibrahim, USA Today:

Instead of rosy promises by the neoconservatives of the Bush administration who pushed for the invasion, partly on the premise that they would turn it into America's private gasoline-pumping station, the contrary has occurred.

The world has lost Iraq's oil.

In the aftermath of the swift military victory, aided greatly by the unprecedented retreat and refusal to fight by the mostly conscripted Iraqi army, a major priority for U.S. troops when the looting began was to protect the Iraqi Oil Ministry offices instead of civilian sites such as museums, hospitals, universities, and scientific facilities.

Where is the money that was budgeted for reconstruction of the oil infrastructure? Why is there apparently no significant effort underway to secure pipelines from sabotage? How can the Bush administration justify the corruption and misuse of authority that is now taking place in the new Allawi administration?

If this was indeed a war, in part, for oil, as the actions of those troops showed during the looting, the Bush administration has lost it.

Link

VPs kaffeeklatsch #6 (and final)

By far the biggest disappointment for me was Edwards not addressing the extreme partisan strongarm tactics and trashing of legislative rules in the House of Representatives that resulted in the Medicare bill which Cheney trumpets so proudly. He didn't even respond to Cheney's mention of Zell Miller! Hello, Senator... are you listening? That sound is opportunity knocking!!!

Here’s the part of Cheney’s statement I’m talking about. It was in repsonse to this question:

> IFILL: ...you're going to inherit a very deeply divided
> electorate, economically, politically, you name it. How
> will you set out, Mr. Vice President, in a way that you
> weren't able to in these past four years, to bridge
> that divide?
>
> CHENEY: ...We used to be able to do more together on a bipartisan
> basis than seems possible these days. I'm not sure
> exactly why. I think, in part, it may be the change in
> the majority-minority status in the Senate has been
> difficult for both sides to adjust to.
>
> And the Senate, of course, has been very evenly
> divided, 50-50, then 51-49, then 49-51 the other way.
> We'll keep working at it.
>
> I think it's important for us to try. I believe that it
> is essential for us to do everything we can to garner as
> much support from the other side of the aisle as
> possible. We've had support -- we had our keynote
> address at our convention was delivered by Zell Miller.
> So there are some Democrats who agree with our approach.
>
> And hopefully in a second term, we'll see an
> improvement along those lines.

You’d better tell that to Tom DeLay, who is doing everything in his power to make sure that the House of Representatives is among the least democratic (both small “d” and capital “D”) places in our nation's Capital. The profound partisan divisions in Washington are in no small measure deepened by this cynical, unethical, legislative dictatorship. “All or nothing”, “with us or against us”... bellicose rhetoric and limiting of public debate is not the way to promote bipartisan cooperation or democracy.

Senator Edwards lets them all off the hook. He could have brought this derailing of our legislative traditions and rules into the white-hot light of national TV, but instead, he does this:

> IFILL: Senator, there's 90 seconds.
>
> EDWARDS: Thank you.
>
> The president said that he would unite this country,
> that he was a uniter, not a divider.
>
> Have you ever seen America more divided? Have you ever
> seen Washington more divided?
>
> The reality is it is not an accident. It's the direct
> result of the choices they've made and their efforts
> that have created division in America. We can do better
> than that in this country.
>
> Now I want to go back to the whole issue of health
> care,

WHAT??? Aw, man, you missed it. I don't think people really know what's going on in our Congress. I hope at some point in the domestic policy debate that Kerry addresses this issue. The general public most likely do not have a clue what a miscarriage of the democratic process is taking place in the House. They need to be made aware that terrorism is not the only danger our democracy is facing.

Link

VPs kaffeeklatsch #5

I was surprised Cheney didn’t catch Edwards in a rhetorical bind. Read the following and see if you can find it:

> EDWARDS: Mr. Vice President, we were attacked. But we
> weren't attacked by Saddam Hussein. And one thing that
> John Kerry and I would agree with you about is that it
> is...
>
> ...One thing that we agree about is the need to be
> offensive in going after terrorists.
>
> The reality is that the best defense is a good offense...

I expected Cheney to reply by saying something to the effect that, to have a good offense means snuffing out terrorist threats before they become a reality. Using Cheney’s logic (as flawed as it is) that Saddam did qualify as a terrorist and legitimate target in the W.O.T., there is an obvious contradiction in Edwards’ statement. Cheney’s reply is baffling:

> IFILL: Would you like to respond? Thirty seconds.
>
> CHENEY: No.

All I can say is “phew”. We dodged a bullet there.

Link

VPs kaffeeklatsch #4

I think Edwards missed a couple of opportunities tonight.

The first came on AIDS. He did not challenge the administration’s insistence on abstinence as the primary tool in the fight against AIDS, the muzzling of doctors who promote condom use, and backwards policies on clean needles and sex education which are direct contributions from right-wing Christian Conservatives. This kind of self-righteous moral evangelism from our Federal Government has no place in public health policy, especially when the stakes are so high, as they are with AIDS.

And second, on the “flip-flop” question, I was surprised and dismayed that Edwards did not clarify the Kerry vote on the $87 billion after Cheney said this:

> ...I think if you look at the record from voting for
> sending the troops then voting against the resources
> they needed when they got there, then saying I actually
> voted for the $87 billion before I voted against it,
> saying in response to a question knowing everything I
> know now, yes, I would have cast exactly the same vote
> and then shortly after that saying wrong war, wrong
> place, wrong time, consistency doesn't come to mind as
> I consider that record.

Cheney’s remarks then drifted into No Child Left Behind and Edwards left the “would have cast the same vote” distortion unchallenged.

Link

VPs kaffeeklatsch #3

Cheney:

> ...The fact of the matter is, the president and I will go
> forward to make the tax cuts permanent. That's good
> policy. That's what we ought to do. But with fiscal
> restraint, we'll also drive the deficit down 50 percent
> in the course of the next five years.

If the last four years are any indication, they've changed the definition of the words "fiscal restraint".

Federal budgets are plagued with unrestrained spending: giveaways to corporations and massive partisan pork. Has the President held the line and used his veto power or influence to exercise real "fiscal restraint?" No. And I doubt things will be any different in a 2nd term.

I guess Cheney's "fiscal restraint" really means restraining any efforts to employ sound fiscal policy.

Dems used to be called the "tax and spend" party, but at least we planned to pay for our increased spending through increased revenue. That’s called ”fiscal responsibility”. The Republicans in Congress have been the "tax-cut and spend" party... what makes anyone think things will be different in a 2nd Bush term? Although the way things are going, their "muscle", Tom DeLay, may be unable to apply the kind of leverage he is now well-known and in deep trouble for.

Link

VPs kaffeeklatsch #2

Cheney:

> ...I'd zero in, in particular, on education. I think the
> most important thing we can do is have a first-class
> public school system. I'm a product of public schools.

Puzzling. How can he be in favor of vouchers and be for a strong public school system? The two would seem to be mutually exclusive.

Link

VPs kaffeeklatsch #1

IFILL: Mr. Vice President, the Census Bureau ranked Cleveland as the biggest poor city in the country, 31 percent jobless rate.

You two gentlemen are pretty well off. You did well for yourselves in the private sector. What can you tell the people of Cleveland, or people of cities like Cleveland, that your administration will do to better their lives?

CHENEY: Well, Gwen, there are several things that I think need to be done and are being done.

We've, of course, been through a difficult recession, and then the aftermath of 9/11, where we lost over a million jobs after that attack.

This figure is widely disputed, with even members of his own administration in disagreement. I'm disappointed Edwards did not challenge this figure. Oh, well... back to the response:

But we think the key is to address some basic, fundamental issues that the president's already working on.

I think probably the most successful thing we can do with respect to ending poverty is to get people jobs. There's no better antidote to poverty than a good, well-paying job that allows somebody to take care of their own family.

To do that, we have to make America the best place in the world to do business. And that means we've got to deal effectively with tax policy. We've got to reduce the litigation costs that are built into our society. We've got to provide the adequate medical care and make certain that we can, in fact, create the opportunities that are vital to that process.

Whoa there, cowboy, the question was about making peoples' lives better, and you're droning on about tax policy and litigation? Litigation is not the problem, if it were not for rapacious greed and corruption on the part of Corporate America, there would be no litigation. Let's see, who would benefit from limiting corporate liability and exposure to lawsuits? Workers? No, silly, the answer is corporations. We need more checks on their greed, not fewer.

And do you really have any clue how it feels to be unemployed? Do you worry every month how you're going to pay for health insurance? Do you have any compassion at all for the many who have lost their livelyhoods as the result of offshoring and outsourcing? Is the gradual erosion of workers' benefits, wages, safety, and representation a good thing? Well, I guess for your corporate pals, it is.

Link

a tidbit for Edwards to use tonight

from Newsday:

from a Speech by Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld before the Council on Foreign Relations in New York City, October 4, 2004

...QUESTIONER: My name is Glenn Hutchins. Mr. Secretary, what exactly was the connection between Saddam Hussein and al Qaeda?

RUMSFELD: I tell you, I'm not going to answer the question. I have seen the answer to that question migrate in the intelligence community over the period of a year in the most amazing way. Second, there are differences in the intelligence community as to what the relationship was. To my knowledge, I have not seen any strong, hard evidence that links the two. There are--I just read an intelligence report recently about one person who's connected to al Qaeda, who was in and out of Iraq, and there's the most tortured description of why he might have had a relationship, and why he might not have had a relationship. There are reports about people in Saddam Hussein's intelligence service meeting in one country or another with al Qaeda people from one person to another, which may have been indicative of something, or may not have been. It may have been something that was not representative of a hard linkage...

To recap, he said, "To my knowledge, I have not seen any strong, hard evidence that links the two." Do you think that will put to rest Dick Cheney's faith-based linkages between al Qaeda and Saddam Hussein? I wonder who was the source of the "tortured description" he mentions... Mr. Vice President, do you know?

Link

do as we say, not as we do

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The company that makes nearly half the flu vaccine used in the United States said on Tuesday it will not supply any vaccine for the coming flu season because of problems at its plant in Britain.

The announcement left U.S. officials scrambling to pull together a flu vaccination program.

Chiron Corp. said British regulators had forbidden them to sell its flu vaccine after checking out sterility problems at its plant in Liverpool. The U.S. had expected to get 46 million to 48 million doses from Chiron.

That would leave the United States with at least an estimated 54 million doses of vaccine made by other companies -- far short of the 100 million health officials had expected to have on hand.

Aventis S.A. Headquarters
Espace Europeen de l'Entreprise
16, avenue de l'Europe
67917 Strasbourg - Cedex 9
France

Chiron Corporation
Gaskill Road
Speke
Liverpool L24 9GR
UK

Let me get this straight... the two suppliers we rely on to manufacture 100 million doses of flu vaccine to protect our elderly and infirmed, Chiron and Aventis, make their vaccines in Europe, but it's illegal for U.S. patients to buy prescription drugs from Canada? Does anybody else see a contradiction here?

You don't think the multinational pharmaceutical corporations have any influence over import/export policy in the U.S., do you?

Link

OK... so you're SURE there are no more files?

from AP:

National Guard Hands Over More Bush Papers
By MATT KELLEY, Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON - More than a week after a court-imposed deadline to turn over all records of President Bush (news - web sites)'s military service, the Texas Air National Guard belatedly produced two documents Tuesday that include Bush's orders for his last day of active duty in 1973.

Aside from the fact that the government has been withholding and, for all we know, continues to withhold documents that could clarify the President's stint in the Texas Air National Guard, the article itself is misleading. The reporter repeatedly uses the phrase "active duty". This is a designation reserved for members of the four primary branches of the military: Army, Navy, Air Force, Marines (you remember the commercials, don't you?). Reserve and Guard personnel are not Active Duty and are not entitled, among other things, to join the American Legion upon their discharge.

Link

today's quote

"Leadership should be born out of the understanding of the needs of those who would be affected by it."

- Marian Anderson (1897-1993)

Link

the little black box of democracy

from Electronic Frontier Foundation:

The 2004 presidential election might not be flawed like the last one was; it might be even worse. Communities across America are purchasing electronic voting (e-voting) machines, but the technology has serious security problems that aren't being addressed. Most of the machines use "black box" software that hasn't been publicly reviewed for security. Almost none provide voter-verifiable paper ballots to detect fraud. A recent analysis by several academic researchers outlines the many and varied ways that anyone from a technically proficient insider to an average voter could disrupt an e-voting system to defraud an election.

this is the place to read up on the flaws of electronic voting, 2004 election style

Link

powers of observation

from Helen Thomas:

It may come as a surprise to American voters, but two international groups will be observing the fairness of our Nov. 2 elections.

Does this have anything to do with the 2000 election fiasco? You bet.

Be highly suspicious of anyone objecting to the presence of election observers. We should be proud of our democratic system of government. Our pride should include showing the world that we can have free and fair elections. If there are questions about how we run our own elections, how can we hold ourselves up as a model for the rest of the world to emulate?

Link

Dean revisited

from Electablog:

"If new information comes in then
you ought to change your position.
Otherwise you're an idiot."

or you're the President.

Link

more early Halloween tricks

Here's the executive summary

The Boston Globe investigation into back-room deals on Capitol Hill found that under the Republican-controlled Congress, longstanding rules and practices are ignored, and committees more often meet in secret. Members are less able to make changes to legislation on the House floor. Bills come up for votes so quickly that elected officials frequently don't know what's in them. And there is less time to discuss proposed laws before they come up for a vote.

Among the Globe's findings:

The House Rules Committee, which is meant to tweak the language in bills that come out of committee, sometimes rewrites key passages of legislation approved by other committees, then forbids members from changing the bills on the floor.

The Rules Committee commonly holds sessions late at night or in the wee hours of the morning, earning the nickname "the Dracula Congress" by critical Democrats and keeping some lawmakers quite literally in the dark about the legislation put before them.

Congressional conference committees added a record 3,407 "pork barrel" projects to appropriations bills for this year's federal budget, items that were never debated or voted on beforehand by the House and Senate and whose congressional patrons are kept secret.

Bills are increasingly crafted behind closed doors, and on two major pieces of legislation -- the Medicare and energy bills -- few Democrats were allowed into the critical conference committee meetings, sessions that historically have been bipartisan.

The amount of time spent openly debating bills has dropped dramatically, and lawmakers are further hamstrung by an abbreviated schedule that gives them little time to fully examine a bill before voting on it.

The dearth of debate and open dealing in the House has given a crucial advantage to a select group of industry lobbyists who are personally close to decision-makers in Congress.

You can find the complete story in The Boston Globe.
Hopefully, Tom DeLay's power trip will soon be over. His unorthodox (some would say undemocratic) methods of control are getting the once-over now that indictments have been handed down for his PAC's corrupt dealings.

Lou Dubose, the co-author of a new book about Mr. DeLay entitled "The Hammer", was interviewed last week on NPR (listen). The anecdotes from the Medicare debate are quite chilling, including allegations of bribery. His book is a halloween "must-read".

In the immortal words of Count Floyd, "Ooooo! Scary, kids!"

Link

hello, America? is anyone paying attention out there?

from Slate:

We've just reached the crux of the presidential campaign-the moment in which one candidate, purporting to expose the other's fatal flaw, has instead exposed his own.

I hate these stupid tests... psst, Cheney, whadja get for number seven?

Link

pre-emption pre-empted

from The Chron :

George Bush has insisted repeatedly on the campaign trail that his presidency has been characterized by unwavering policies based on core convictions. But a key component of his security and military strategy -- a willingness to wage war 'pre-emptively' against perceived enemies -- lies largely in tatters, say experts and policy-makers.

These experts, from both sides of the political spectrum, say the brutal experience in Iraq has eroded many elements of what has come to be called the 'Bush doctrine,' leaving the United States with less flexibility in the war on terror.

talk about unintended consequences...

Link

flip flop fly

Rummy says the "w" word:

from CNN

> WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld
> appeared Monday to back off earlier statements
> suggesting Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein had links to
> al Qaeda.
>
> He also conceded that U.S. intelligence was "wrong" in
> its conclusions that Iraq had weapons of mass
> destruction.

I think Rummy's famous "threat matrix" needs another category:

there are:
• things that we know that we know (known knowns)
• things that we know that we don't know (known unknowns)
• things that we don't know that we know (unknown knowns)
• things that we don't know that we don't know (unknown unknowns)

and now:
• things that we don't want anybody to know that we knew (damn lies)

Link

you go, girls!

Win Back Respect's Band of Sisters is a courageous group of military wives and mothers from around the country who have come together to speak out about the Bush foreign policy and its impact on their lives and families. The Band of Sisters don't just want their husbands and sons home, they want America to get Iraq right, and they've lost faith in George Bush to do that

The Band of Sisters gathered in New York on the night of the first presidential debate to watch the candidates and share their impressions. Their first-hand knowledge and the experience of their families in Iraq were a stark reality check for the rehearsed, misleading lines repeated by President Bush throughout the debate. Win Back Respect produced this rapid-response ad in order to get the Band of Sisters' message out to the rest of America in this crucial period following the debate, releasing it the next morning. Please contribute now to ensure that thousands of other Americans get to view it.

Link

l'etat, c'est Jeb

from Jim Hightower:

Monday, October 04, 2004
"INTIMIDATING FLORIDA VOTERS"

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Governor Jeb Bush is out to make his state of Florida the next Florida.

In 2000, Jeb used such crude tactics as illegally purging voter lists to help engineer his brother's 537-vote "victory" in that election – and now, here he goes again. As one peer of Florida's GOP establishment candidly puts it: "A Democrat can't win a statewide election in Florida without a high turnout of African-Americans. It's no secret that the name of the game for Republicans is to restrain that turnout as much as possible."

It's frightening how these bullies (see earlier post re: Ohio) will stop at nothing to attempt to manipulate the electoral process for their own partisan ends. Let's hope the the 2000 experience is forcing the news media to shine some light on these murky machinations.

Link

new DVD release: just in time for Halloween

from NYT:

"George W. Bush: Faith in the White House" must be seen because it shows
how someone like General Boykin can stay in his job even in failure and why
Mr. Bush feels divinely entitled to keep his job even as we stand on the
cusp of an abyss in Iraq. In this pious but not humble worldview, faith, or
at least a certain brand of it, counts more than competence, and a biblical
mission, or at least a simplistic, blunderbuss facsimile of one, counts more than the secular goal of waging an effective, focused battle against an
enemy as elusive and cunning as terrorists. That no one in this documentary,
including its hero, acknowledges any constitutional boundaries between
church and state is hardly a surprise. To them, America is a "Christian
nation," period, with no need even for the fig-leaf prefix of "Judeo-."

Far more startling is the inability of a president or his acolytes to
acknowledge any boundary that might separate Mr. Bush's flawed actions
battling "against the forces of evil" from the righteous dictates of God.
What that level of hubris might bring in a second term is left to the
imagination, and "Faith in the White House" gives the imagination room to
run riot about what a 21st-century crusade might look like in the flesh. A
documentary conceived as a rebuke to "Fahrenheit 9/11" is nothing if not its
unintentional and considerably more nightmarish sequel.

BOO!

Link

so that's why he doesn't get it...

from Richard Reeves:

> What happened to Bush? What's wrong with him? I would
> say he has a bad case of Ovalitis -- an ear infection
> endemic to the Oval Office. Sit there long enough, and
> you don't hear anything you don't want to hear.

you think he hears the public turning against him?

Link

Kerry's post-debate bounce

from Newsweek:

> With a solid majority of voters concluding that John
> Kerry outperformed George W. Bush in the first
> presidential debate on Thursday, the president’s lead
> in the race for the White House has vanished, according
> to the latest NEWSWEEK poll. In the first national
> telephone poll using a fresh sample, NEWSWEEK found the
> race now statistically tied among all registered voters,
> 47 percent of whom say they would vote for Kerry and 45
> percent for George W. Bush in a three-way race.

boing...

Link

President Kerry can't do it alone...

Presenting this year's election: popular, moderate Democrats vs. the whackjobs of the extreme right. And if we win, we can take back the White House, the Senate, and our country.

From Ariana Huffington:

> If Kerry is the next occupant of the Oval Office, he
> will need legislative muscle to undo the disastrous
> policies of the Bush administration, which have damaged
> our economy, degraded our environment, added millions to
> the roll of America's uninsured, and seriously
> undermined our national security. No executive order
> can reverse all that.

Link

E.L. Doctorow on President Bush

pretty strong meat from the Easthampton Star (N.Y.):

> But you study him, you look into his eyes and know he
> dissembles an emotion which he does not feel in the
> depths of his being because he has no capacity for it.
> He does not feel a personal responsibility for the
> thousand dead young men and women who wanted to be what
> they could be. They come to his desk not as youngsters
> with mothers and fathers or wives and children who will
> suffer to the end of their days a terribly torn fabric
> of familial relationships and the inconsolable
> remembrance of aborted life. They come to his desk as a
> political liability which is why the press is not
> permitted to photograph the arrival of their coffins
> from Iraq.

Link

yowch, that's smarts!

It's the IQ Stupid
By Tim Grieve
Salon.com

> John Kerry didn't destroy George W. Bush in the
> presidential debate Thursday night. John Kerry didn't
> turn water into wine, and he might not have turned any
> red states blue. But for 90 minutes, John Kerry put
> George W. Bush on the defensive. For 90 minutes, John
> Kerry looked like he could be president. And for the
> moment - for the moment - a race that once seemed lost
> suddenly seems alive again.
>
> John Kerry won.

Link

keep... hope... alive!

from PBS, some words of inspiration from the 1988 Democratic Convention:

> Wherever you are tonight, you can make it. Hold your
> head high, stick your chest out. You can make it. It
> gets dark sometimes, but the morning comes. Don't you
> surrender. Suffering breeds character, character breeds
> faith. In the end faith will not disappoint.
>
> You must not surrender. You may or may not get there
> but just know that you're qualified. And you hold on,
> and hold out. We must never surrender. America will get
> better and better.
>
> Keep hope alive. (Applause) Keep hope alive. (Applause)
> Keep hope alive.

With domestic issues next on the debate agenda, I looked for a refresher on what "Liberal" values are and found this speech. Some of it is dated and not borne out by history, but many things resonate. Especially the sense of "we can do better for America". Also, the innate belief that the government we all pay for should work for us and help those in need. The government is our party - we invite the guests who cash our checks and decide how to spend them.

I think this speech goes to the heart of what it means to be a liberal in America. Is it excessive? In places, yes. But I think it's time for us to reclaim the "L" word. Our values are the values of our founding fathers, indeed, of our entire history: tolerance, equality, and justice for all. Self-reliance is all well and good on the frontier or in the boardroom, but we, America, are at our best when we are a community of common interests.

From dictionary.com:

> lib•er•al
> adj.
> 1. a. Not limited to or by established, traditional,
> orthodox, or authoritarian attitudes, views, or dogmas;
> free from bigotry.
> b. Favoring proposals for reform, open to new ideas
> for progress, and tolerant of the ideas and behavior of
> others; broad-minded.

Do I think there are things that business does better and more efficiently than government? Sure, but I also think there are things which the government should do that are in direct opposition to the interests of the free market. The free market is infallible. Infallibly cruel and unflinching. The free market enables Big Pharma and Big Healthcare to reap immense and obscene profits while imposing an unfair and immoral burden on working families, the elderly and the infirmed. The free market is consolidation and vertical integration. The free market is the absurd inequities of corporate compensation. The free market is busted unions, disappearing benefits, and outsourcing. The free market is environmental exploitation.

As liberals, we believe that the many should not suffer so that a only a few are rewarded. Call it Socialism if you want, but it is not. I am not talking about collective ownership. I am talking about collective interest. If we all have a stake and we all have a value, then we all have an interest in making it work.

This is the definition others prefer to pin on us:

> 2. a. Tending to give freely; generous: a liberal
> benefactor.
> b. Generous in amount; ample: a liberal serving of
> potatoes.

This second definition sounds more like the current administration, generously giving away our treasury to their corporate pals, amply providing tax breaks and bailouts to maximize shareholder value and minimize human values of loyalty and responsibility:

"Step right up, we've got ample natural resources, folks, just keep consuming and buying Hummers and everything will be OK. Here's $600! Go spend it! Doesn't matter what you buy, just go out and buy. Oh, and by the way, it's coming out of your retirement benefits."

Yep, that's them alright. "... a liberal serving of potatoes." Filling, but not very nutritious... and some of them couldn't even spell "potatoes".

Link

float like a butterfly, sting like a bee

William Rivers Pitt channels Howard Cosell

from truthout:

> This is what happens when you surround yourself with
> yes-men. John Kerry put the bricks to Bush and the last
> four years of his administration clearly, concisely,
> eloquently and with devastating effect. Bush reacted
> like a man who has never, ever had anyone tell him
> anything other than "Good job, sir."

I wonder what they're telling him today

Link