Despite what you will read on other blogs, this coming year will not provide any comfort to Repubs or Dems. There will not be massive gains by the Dems and the GOP will not continue to flounder. Yes, Americanlogic readers (hello?) 2006 will resemble its previous year.
We will see the final nail in Rove's coffin as Chief of Staff as he will be indicted early in the year of being the nastiest and repulsive political operative in recent memory, however not for outing a CIA agent. Bush as usual, will not fire him, but wish him luck as a member of the DHS.
Baghdad Scott McClellan will remain as press sec. He will continue to sweat profusely and become red when asked a handful of probing questions about Iraq, spying and the overal state of the kingdom.
And the president, well Bush will continue to coast towards the end of his term. His numbers barely cracking 45% (his base), his "opposition" party will continue to chase their tails unable to get behind principled men like Murtha and Feingold, you know those "radicals."
Iraq? What about it.
Friday, December 30, 2005
What's the problem?
"There is much to be said and done about the man-made annihilation of New Orleans, caused NOT by a hurricane but by the very specific decisions made by the Bush administration in the past four and a half years." - Michael Moore.
The above quote was the winner of the "Moore award," on Andrew Sullivan's site (you know, the Buddha of bloggers). Sullivan thinks Moore hates America for pointing out it is run by incompetent plutocrats.
I have no problem with Moore's statement. Moore is slightly out there on occasion, but the above statement is techinically true in that the priorities of the administration contributed to the disaster of Katrina. No, Bush and Co did not personally inundate New Orleans with sewer water.
How about this Sullivan? Quote of the decade: "You're doing a heckuva job Brownie."
The above quote was the winner of the "Moore award," on Andrew Sullivan's site (you know, the Buddha of bloggers). Sullivan thinks Moore hates America for pointing out it is run by incompetent plutocrats.
I have no problem with Moore's statement. Moore is slightly out there on occasion, but the above statement is techinically true in that the priorities of the administration contributed to the disaster of Katrina. No, Bush and Co did not personally inundate New Orleans with sewer water.
How about this Sullivan? Quote of the decade: "You're doing a heckuva job Brownie."
Wish I could do that
The last time Congress agreed to boost the debt limit was in November 2004 — from $7.38 trillion to the current $8.18 trillion. The government's statutory borrowing authority also was pushed up in 2002 and in 2003. (courtesy foxnews.com, yes you read that right)
Couldn't agree more
http://crookedtimber.org/2005/12/29/ten-worst-britons-and-americans/
Excellent, needed post by one of the blogosphere's finest.
Excellent, needed post by one of the blogosphere's finest.
Thursday, December 29, 2005
The new robber barons
Sometime early next year, the House of Representatives is expected to vote on the budget reconciliation legislation that the Senate passed on December 21 and the House passed in a slightly different version on December 19. That legislation would make significant cuts in a number of programs serving low- and moderate-income families and individuals, including Medicaid, child support enforcement, and student loans.
Supporters of the legislation defend the cuts as “tough choices” that need to be made because of large and growing budget deficits. These claims are undercut by the fact that, in the last six weeks, the House has passed four tax-cut bills that together cost more than twice what the budget reconciliation bill saves. The claims are further undermined by Congress’s unwillingness to rethink any previously enacted tax cuts as part of its supposed reevaluation of priorities in light of deficits.In particular, Congress has chosen to allow two tax cuts that exclusively benefit high-income households - primarily millionaires - to begin taking effect on January 1, 2006. By 2010, these tax cuts will eliminate two current provisions of the tax code that limit the value of the personal exemptions and itemized deductions that people at high income levels can take. (courtesy cbpp.org)
This has been going on for five years. Tax cutting during "war" and putting the comfort of those at the top before regular 8-5 working people. I am not an economist but even someone who has never studied tax policy can see this for what is truly is: the attempt to created a new gilded age for those at the very top. This is not about class warfare, it's about combining common sense with fairness. The choice to gut Medicare over repealing tax cut after tax cut is not a "tough" one.
Americanlogic is searching for anyone who will represent the beleaguered afflicted american people who have seen billions of dollars of their tax money go to a cause to promote democracy in an Arab country. Please show yourself soon.
Supporters of the legislation defend the cuts as “tough choices” that need to be made because of large and growing budget deficits. These claims are undercut by the fact that, in the last six weeks, the House has passed four tax-cut bills that together cost more than twice what the budget reconciliation bill saves. The claims are further undermined by Congress’s unwillingness to rethink any previously enacted tax cuts as part of its supposed reevaluation of priorities in light of deficits.In particular, Congress has chosen to allow two tax cuts that exclusively benefit high-income households - primarily millionaires - to begin taking effect on January 1, 2006. By 2010, these tax cuts will eliminate two current provisions of the tax code that limit the value of the personal exemptions and itemized deductions that people at high income levels can take. (courtesy cbpp.org)
This has been going on for five years. Tax cutting during "war" and putting the comfort of those at the top before regular 8-5 working people. I am not an economist but even someone who has never studied tax policy can see this for what is truly is: the attempt to created a new gilded age for those at the very top. This is not about class warfare, it's about combining common sense with fairness. The choice to gut Medicare over repealing tax cut after tax cut is not a "tough" one.
Americanlogic is searching for anyone who will represent the beleaguered afflicted american people who have seen billions of dollars of their tax money go to a cause to promote democracy in an Arab country. Please show yourself soon.
Wednesday, December 28, 2005
The next big thing?
For a point by point summary of the DLC's best hope go here:
http://www.draftmarkwarner.com/
Notice the similarities to the Dean record in Vermont.
http://www.draftmarkwarner.com/
Notice the similarities to the Dean record in Vermont.
the future of the other side
There is currently a lively, interesting debate on the future of the GOP and its conservative foundation.
Kickstarted by an op-ed in the WSJ, the debate rages between Andrew Sullivan, Julian Sanchez of Reason magazine, the Weekly Standard and Matt Yglesias.
Go here for more: www.andrewsullivan.com
Why the progressive side isn't having this kind of robust debate is beyond me.
Kickstarted by an op-ed in the WSJ, the debate rages between Andrew Sullivan, Julian Sanchez of Reason magazine, the Weekly Standard and Matt Yglesias.
Go here for more: www.andrewsullivan.com
Why the progressive side isn't having this kind of robust debate is beyond me.
Could you do this for a living?
"Well, it might not shock you to hear we might have a different view. The year ended on a pretty strong note, with 10 million Iraqis going to the polls and electing a permanent government. We've got some extremely strong economic data and tremendous job creation for the American people. And as the President said, as far as the economy goes, the outlook for the economy is very strong and the horizon is very bright."
- Trent Duffy, White House spokesperson today in Crawford addressing reporters.
Look, even if the public were paying attention to the slightly above average economic news (which it's not) Iraq would once again become center stage because we are still losing men and woman for reasons still unknown.
- Trent Duffy, White House spokesperson today in Crawford addressing reporters.
Look, even if the public were paying attention to the slightly above average economic news (which it's not) Iraq would once again become center stage because we are still losing men and woman for reasons still unknown.
The buck stops where?
When one thinks of abuse of presidential power, the mind automatically shifts to Richard Nixon and his enemies list.
Nixon was the most obsessed of the modern presidents regarding secrecy and an empirical sense of entitlement. Bush is closing in on the crown as the king of the power obsessed. However, Harry Truman as I understand it felt it was within his role as commander in chief to force the steel mills to remain productive during the Korean War. He was then repudiated by the Supreme Court by a 6-3 vote. The country was also not in a state of war at that time. Truman, despite his strengths left office with the lowest approval rating in presidential history at 28% Moral of the story: don't overreach.
Although Al-Qaeda represents a threat to this country, we are currently not in a state of war. The right however, is operating under that premise. Their War on Terror is infinite, hence the president should have infinite powers to deal in this war. What will their feeling be if the president elect in 2008 is not one who bends along their ideological lines? Will they still want a President Feingold or Hillary Clinton to wield these powers to detain, torture and spy? Is this only Bush's war?
- Just a few observations.
Nixon was the most obsessed of the modern presidents regarding secrecy and an empirical sense of entitlement. Bush is closing in on the crown as the king of the power obsessed. However, Harry Truman as I understand it felt it was within his role as commander in chief to force the steel mills to remain productive during the Korean War. He was then repudiated by the Supreme Court by a 6-3 vote. The country was also not in a state of war at that time. Truman, despite his strengths left office with the lowest approval rating in presidential history at 28% Moral of the story: don't overreach.
Although Al-Qaeda represents a threat to this country, we are currently not in a state of war. The right however, is operating under that premise. Their War on Terror is infinite, hence the president should have infinite powers to deal in this war. What will their feeling be if the president elect in 2008 is not one who bends along their ideological lines? Will they still want a President Feingold or Hillary Clinton to wield these powers to detain, torture and spy? Is this only Bush's war?
- Just a few observations.
Tuesday, December 27, 2005
Some things are simple
Once again, the elite punditry has taken what seems like a simple issue and turned it on its head. The latest is wiretapping. As we all know by now, the president after 9/11 and ever since has spied on american citizens as a matter of presidential authority.
Someone who is not immersed in the culture of DC would probably say: "Well, is that legal?" Depends on your definition of legal so they say. The president and the NSA can spy on anyone they want as long as they obtain a warrant to do so, especially in instances of national security.
Problem is, Bush hasn't obtained warrants. He's doing it under the general shroud of "war." Since the war on terror is endless, we expect more spying and trampling of the constitution. We've already "debated" waterboarding, on to reading the nation's diary.
Can someone stand up and demand accountability on a national level? Anyone. The president swore an oath to defend and uphold the Constitution, terrorism or no terrorism. What we really have here is a debate about the powers of the president and congressional oversight. Do we want an unchecked presidency. Our humble VP seems to desire this. Bush seems to assume it.
Some things are not up for "debate." Torture and warrantless spying included.
Someone who is not immersed in the culture of DC would probably say: "Well, is that legal?" Depends on your definition of legal so they say. The president and the NSA can spy on anyone they want as long as they obtain a warrant to do so, especially in instances of national security.
Problem is, Bush hasn't obtained warrants. He's doing it under the general shroud of "war." Since the war on terror is endless, we expect more spying and trampling of the constitution. We've already "debated" waterboarding, on to reading the nation's diary.
Can someone stand up and demand accountability on a national level? Anyone. The president swore an oath to defend and uphold the Constitution, terrorism or no terrorism. What we really have here is a debate about the powers of the president and congressional oversight. Do we want an unchecked presidency. Our humble VP seems to desire this. Bush seems to assume it.
Some things are not up for "debate." Torture and warrantless spying included.
whatever you want to call it
"The Iraq War of 2003 didn't come out of nowhere; it represents the culmination of misguided policies, virtually all of them-including the 1980s ''tilt'' toward Saddam Hussein-carried out in plain sight of the American public. Blaming everything on Bush won't prevent a recurrence of Bush's mistakes. A realist might suggest that Americans looking for someone to hold accountable begin by looking in the mirror." (Andrew J. Bacevich in the Boston Globe last month)
Realism, isolationism, neoliberalism, conservatism, all mean for us to stop meddling with the world. Tend to our own needs. Maybe call it newamericanism.
Realism, isolationism, neoliberalism, conservatism, all mean for us to stop meddling with the world. Tend to our own needs. Maybe call it newamericanism.
Let it snow?
An interesting look at how other parts of this globe other than Buffalo handle snow:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/weather/Story/0,2763,1674128,00.html
http://www.guardian.co.uk/weather/Story/0,2763,1674128,00.html
Looking back
If you really want to get technical, it's all Al Gore's fault....
That was my first attempt at blogging. It was the launching pad of americanlogic. Looking back at the statement itself, politically speaking, it's true. Five years ago despite the contested results, america decided to take a chance on a seemingly humble Texan. He was a Bush, we were familiar with the Bushes and their dynasty. We heard "compassionate conservative" uttered over and over again.
Al Gore, as he proved as Vice President, was an able, intelligent man who would continue the policies of Clinton centrism, a ideal while flawed, had the countries best interest at heart. The media saw Gore as an elitist, by which they meant "smarter than them." Bush was affable, funny at times and seemed uninterested in anything. Why not?
I voted for the Gore/Lieberman ticket and still would. Most people would do the same. Would we be in Iraq? maybe (regime change was the policy of the Clinton administration). Would those at the bottom or near the bottom be less comfortable? probably not.
Despite all their problems, their inability to get it together, the Democratic party still is the party of the afflicted. The GOP is the party of the established, no more is that apparent in the spending package squeaked through this month. Make the wealthy share the burden of war and stuggle? Nope. Cut the only thing that keeps families from completely falling apart? You bet. The party of endless war abroad and at home.
It all started in 2000.
That was my first attempt at blogging. It was the launching pad of americanlogic. Looking back at the statement itself, politically speaking, it's true. Five years ago despite the contested results, america decided to take a chance on a seemingly humble Texan. He was a Bush, we were familiar with the Bushes and their dynasty. We heard "compassionate conservative" uttered over and over again.
Al Gore, as he proved as Vice President, was an able, intelligent man who would continue the policies of Clinton centrism, a ideal while flawed, had the countries best interest at heart. The media saw Gore as an elitist, by which they meant "smarter than them." Bush was affable, funny at times and seemed uninterested in anything. Why not?
I voted for the Gore/Lieberman ticket and still would. Most people would do the same. Would we be in Iraq? maybe (regime change was the policy of the Clinton administration). Would those at the bottom or near the bottom be less comfortable? probably not.
Despite all their problems, their inability to get it together, the Democratic party still is the party of the afflicted. The GOP is the party of the established, no more is that apparent in the spending package squeaked through this month. Make the wealthy share the burden of war and stuggle? Nope. Cut the only thing that keeps families from completely falling apart? You bet. The party of endless war abroad and at home.
It all started in 2000.
Fitzmas?
Under the radar is the CIA leak scandal. Something is about to give. Americanlogic predicts Patrick Fitzgerald will make a New Years appearance soon. Keep your eyes and ears open.
Just for the record, the creation of "Fitzmas" was not one of the highlights of 2005.
Just for the record, the creation of "Fitzmas" was not one of the highlights of 2005.
going forward
Americanlogic is back from his holiday hiatus. If anyone missed me, thanks.
Pat Buchanan, one of the solidly old Right voices, hits the right mark in a piece on his site american cause (www.americacause.com) Basically, it details the folly of American enterprise in promoting "freedom and democracy" and doing so in countries that despise us. Quite a frightening summary of the hostility and distrust that has built up in places like Canada and Europe when it comes to this president and his vision of the world.
Pat Buchanan, one of the solidly old Right voices, hits the right mark in a piece on his site american cause (www.americacause.com) Basically, it details the folly of American enterprise in promoting "freedom and democracy" and doing so in countries that despise us. Quite a frightening summary of the hostility and distrust that has built up in places like Canada and Europe when it comes to this president and his vision of the world.
Tuesday, December 20, 2005
Where do you stand
Americanlogic believes in liberty and justice for all. Where do you stand? We know where the president and vice president stand. They believe in secrecy at all costs, shadow government and political punishment for any who disagree. This is not America.
We should get on our knees and thank God for people like Russ Feingold and those principled conservatives who truly believe that the president should not have unchecked power even in the face of jihadists.
We should get on our knees and thank God for people like Russ Feingold and those principled conservatives who truly believe that the president should not have unchecked power even in the face of jihadists.
Name that president
This is all over the blogosphere:
"Now, by the way, any time you hear the United States government talking about wiretap, it requires -- a wiretap requires a court order. Nothing has changed, by the way. When we're talking about chasing down terrorists, we're talking about getting a court order before we do so. It's important for our fellow citizens to understand, when you think Patriot Act, constitutional guarantees are in place when it comes to doing what is necessary to protect our homeland, because we value the Constitution." (President Bush)
That folks is called a lie. Not a misleading statement, a lie. And he told it right here in Buffalo.
"Now, by the way, any time you hear the United States government talking about wiretap, it requires -- a wiretap requires a court order. Nothing has changed, by the way. When we're talking about chasing down terrorists, we're talking about getting a court order before we do so. It's important for our fellow citizens to understand, when you think Patriot Act, constitutional guarantees are in place when it comes to doing what is necessary to protect our homeland, because we value the Constitution." (President Bush)
That folks is called a lie. Not a misleading statement, a lie. And he told it right here in Buffalo.
Local watch
"You may not like it but in this county we have rules. well if you don't like it keep quiet. we have rules in this country."
This gem was directed at councilman-elect Satish Mohan at the Amherst board meeting. Once again, thanks Mr. President for fostering this kind of environment in this country.
This gem was directed at councilman-elect Satish Mohan at the Amherst board meeting. Once again, thanks Mr. President for fostering this kind of environment in this country.
Hang your head in shame
"We are at war with a Jihadist enemy who wants us and our families dead. It is not clear that some of our elites recognize that fact or care any more. And some on the left fear that President Bush is a greater threat to our nation's security and liberties than the Jihadists."
Believe me, the man you've described as a "man-child" has told us many times to be afraid.
Mr Whittman, or Moose, hang your head in shame.
Believe me, the man you've described as a "man-child" has told us many times to be afraid.
Mr Whittman, or Moose, hang your head in shame.
King George
Take a step back for a moment. Witness the press conference given by our president yesterday. If anyone thought for a moment he would continue the olive branching they would be fooling themselves. Yesterday, you saw a president so obsessed with his own power, the press conference became an excercise in caution as to not upset the master. Bush was loud, angry and totally unreasonable. Throughout his presidency, he has made it perfectly clear to the casual observer that he hates these kind of things, namely open and honest government.
Wiretaps will continue as long as he deems them neccessary (Vegans beware!). Oh, and in case we forgot "there is an enemy that lurks and wants to kill Americans." Sprinkle with a little 9/11 and you have a recipie for autocratic rule. Can you imagine how the families of the victims of 9/11 react everytime they hear this president invoke 9/11 as if its a protective vest? Bush should be charged a seat in Congress every time he utters it.
Listen, I remember 9/11. I cried at my desk the morning of 9/11. The day after 9/11 I didn't know if we would experience a 9/12. Bush continues to exploit this day for his political benefit. Why doesn't a reporter stand up and say: "Mr President, stop using this tragedy for your presonal and political gain and realize today is what matters." I truly believe that a good amount of americans operate as if terrorist attacks are imminent. Bush can count on this group all the time for support. Terrorists don't lurk, they plan in hotels or houses or gathering points. They are not the Muslim man next to you in line at the grocery store in smalltown USA.
For the rest of his presidency, George Bush will use 9/11 as an excuse for everything he has done or will do. From torture to spying, he will ask that we swallow this bile to prevent another attack. I for one, refuse to do so.
Wiretaps will continue as long as he deems them neccessary (Vegans beware!). Oh, and in case we forgot "there is an enemy that lurks and wants to kill Americans." Sprinkle with a little 9/11 and you have a recipie for autocratic rule. Can you imagine how the families of the victims of 9/11 react everytime they hear this president invoke 9/11 as if its a protective vest? Bush should be charged a seat in Congress every time he utters it.
Listen, I remember 9/11. I cried at my desk the morning of 9/11. The day after 9/11 I didn't know if we would experience a 9/12. Bush continues to exploit this day for his political benefit. Why doesn't a reporter stand up and say: "Mr President, stop using this tragedy for your presonal and political gain and realize today is what matters." I truly believe that a good amount of americans operate as if terrorist attacks are imminent. Bush can count on this group all the time for support. Terrorists don't lurk, they plan in hotels or houses or gathering points. They are not the Muslim man next to you in line at the grocery store in smalltown USA.
For the rest of his presidency, George Bush will use 9/11 as an excuse for everything he has done or will do. From torture to spying, he will ask that we swallow this bile to prevent another attack. I for one, refuse to do so.
Monday, December 19, 2005
You've got to be kidding
From and Penn said the most defensible ground for Democrats is a middle path: rejecting deadlines for troop withdrawal but endorsing "clear benchmarks" to measure progress and hold Bush accountable for the results (tip: NewDonkey.com)
Ahh, DLC you think you are dealing with a real leader here don't you. You think you're dealing with a president who will actually give a damn what the democratic leadership thinks or suggests. This is a man who only through wrangling took TORTURE off the table, not to mention spies on american citizens at his discretion.
Memo to DLC: Bush believes in empire abroad and at home. You can't expect an emperor to be accountable to anything.
Ahh, DLC you think you are dealing with a real leader here don't you. You think you're dealing with a president who will actually give a damn what the democratic leadership thinks or suggests. This is a man who only through wrangling took TORTURE off the table, not to mention spies on american citizens at his discretion.
Memo to DLC: Bush believes in empire abroad and at home. You can't expect an emperor to be accountable to anything.
Friday, December 16, 2005
Democracy comes a marchin
Yesterday's elections in Iraq were an incredible milestone.....for Iraqis. With the daily release of new information surrounding our exercise in folly being leaked to the press every day the american people are starting to get a fuller picture of the circumstances surrounding the nation's first preemptive war. They should be scratching their heads.
Americanlogic is convinced the reason this country initially supported this endeavor is due to the hyped nuclear threat. Imminent and nuke aren't words americans are too comfortable with. Bush and Co hyped Saddam's capabilities and they know it. So don't buy Bush's "Congress saw the same stuff I saw" bull. Well, in fact they didn't. Couple this with Cheney's heavy hand at the CIA and you have the ultimate rationale for preemptive war: "imminent attack.
Well, suprise no nukes. nothing. nada. zip. Just a friggin vile of something. Ok, we're in america said to itself. Will we anticipate an insurgency and be prepared for such a resistence? Nope, Rumsfeld's in charge. Not enough troops at the outset, not enough body armor equals american deaths. Now approaching 3000.
Currently, we are in the middle of a civil war. We also were responsible for Abu-Gharib and the lovely torture debate we were having. See, Bush likens himself to a Roman emperor. He's making the calls on torture, infinite detention, wiretapping and secret CIA prisons.
Which leads me to ask america, what the hell were you thinking?
Americanlogic is convinced the reason this country initially supported this endeavor is due to the hyped nuclear threat. Imminent and nuke aren't words americans are too comfortable with. Bush and Co hyped Saddam's capabilities and they know it. So don't buy Bush's "Congress saw the same stuff I saw" bull. Well, in fact they didn't. Couple this with Cheney's heavy hand at the CIA and you have the ultimate rationale for preemptive war: "imminent attack.
Well, suprise no nukes. nothing. nada. zip. Just a friggin vile of something. Ok, we're in america said to itself. Will we anticipate an insurgency and be prepared for such a resistence? Nope, Rumsfeld's in charge. Not enough troops at the outset, not enough body armor equals american deaths. Now approaching 3000.
Currently, we are in the middle of a civil war. We also were responsible for Abu-Gharib and the lovely torture debate we were having. See, Bush likens himself to a Roman emperor. He's making the calls on torture, infinite detention, wiretapping and secret CIA prisons.
Which leads me to ask america, what the hell were you thinking?
The case against Hillary Clinton
Americanlogic was disheartened after seeing some polls today that continue to show Hillary Clinton as the frontrunner in the 2008 pack for Democratic candidate.
Although I shouldn't take to heart polls three years in advance, I already see the disaster this will be down the road.
Clinton, like Joe Lieberman will not vote regular working class interests when it comes down to it. Clinton's flag burning amendment is as popular as Michael Brown right now. Lieberman, whom Bush kissed after one of his recent speeches, is as pliable as salt water taffy. As Bill Maher said last night on Larry King Live, the democratic party needs to become, for better or for worse, the liberal progressive party.
How about a party of workers? A party that will end corporate welfare. A party that will disengage america from the grip of the Bush doctrine of preemptive war. How about a party that will actually respond to a national disaster swiftly and without hesitation?
Although I shouldn't take to heart polls three years in advance, I already see the disaster this will be down the road.
Clinton, like Joe Lieberman will not vote regular working class interests when it comes down to it. Clinton's flag burning amendment is as popular as Michael Brown right now. Lieberman, whom Bush kissed after one of his recent speeches, is as pliable as salt water taffy. As Bill Maher said last night on Larry King Live, the democratic party needs to become, for better or for worse, the liberal progressive party.
How about a party of workers? A party that will end corporate welfare. A party that will disengage america from the grip of the Bush doctrine of preemptive war. How about a party that will actually respond to a national disaster swiftly and without hesitation?
Thank You
A couple of senators who stood up to the abusive powers of the Bush White House:
Sens Chuck Hagel, John Sununu (no liberal), Lisa Murkowski, Larry Craig, Russ Feingold, Patrick Leahy.
As with the torture "debate," this bill is not about terrorism, it's about what we stand for in this country. At the moment, this represents us:
"The New York Times reported Friday that Bush, months after the September 11th attacks, 'secretly authorized the NSA to eavesdrop on Americans and others inside the United States to search for evidence of terrorist activity without the court-approved warrants ordinarily required for domestic spying, according to government officials.' (cnn.com)
This has been the question since the attacks, how to we fight the jihadists? Do we torture, spy on american citizens, comb through people's records all while spreading democracy in......IRAQ?
Or do we continue the offensive in Afghanistan and start putting our efforts towards infiltrating the network and killing it from within.
Thank God there is some sanity on Capital Hill.
Sens Chuck Hagel, John Sununu (no liberal), Lisa Murkowski, Larry Craig, Russ Feingold, Patrick Leahy.
As with the torture "debate," this bill is not about terrorism, it's about what we stand for in this country. At the moment, this represents us:
"The New York Times reported Friday that Bush, months after the September 11th attacks, 'secretly authorized the NSA to eavesdrop on Americans and others inside the United States to search for evidence of terrorist activity without the court-approved warrants ordinarily required for domestic spying, according to government officials.' (cnn.com)
This has been the question since the attacks, how to we fight the jihadists? Do we torture, spy on american citizens, comb through people's records all while spreading democracy in......IRAQ?
Or do we continue the offensive in Afghanistan and start putting our efforts towards infiltrating the network and killing it from within.
Thank God there is some sanity on Capital Hill.
Thursday, December 15, 2005
Bush/Delay 2005
"I hope that he will, 'cause I like him, and plus, when he's over there, we get our votes through the House," Bush told Fox News' Brit Hume.
Our president, putting partisan loyalty above everything else. How can average working class people support this man? He is the ultimate plutocrat. In the same interview, Bush also expressed confidence in the soon to be indicted Karl Rove, the VP for torture and the man responsible for Abu-Gharib, Don "heck of a job" Rumsfeld. Any other sane person would determine Rumsfeld has been the worst Defense Sec of all time.
Our president, putting partisan loyalty above everything else. How can average working class people support this man? He is the ultimate plutocrat. In the same interview, Bush also expressed confidence in the soon to be indicted Karl Rove, the VP for torture and the man responsible for Abu-Gharib, Don "heck of a job" Rumsfeld. Any other sane person would determine Rumsfeld has been the worst Defense Sec of all time.
End game
"We cannot torture and still retain the moral high ground," said Rep. John P. Murtha (D-Pa.), who called for the vote yesterday. "No torture and no exceptions." (washingtonpost.com)
John Murtha explaining the importance of the McCain amendment. Bush's obligation is to sign this bill in front of the world. Despite the continued efforts of this White House, McCain refuses to budge on this issue. If Bush vetoes this bill, then all bets are off. Impeachment proceedings should begin to remove this president from office before he destroys us for good.
I'm confused as to some in the blogosphere's continued support of this president effort's rewrite history. The president has had three major speeches on his war, and so far it hasn't changed public opinion (sure hasn't changed mine). The war apologists (Andrew Sullivan, Chris Hitchens, National Review, Weekly Standard, WSJ etc) continue to express faith in the strategy of this president. They want us to remain in Iraq forever. They are obsessed with the Iraqi people and their desire to impose our "standard of democracy" on them. Bush finally admits he went to war based on false intelligence and the apologists applaud with glee: "See, he truly is a war leader."
As long as the Democratic party as a whole does not stand behind Murtha's plan for immediate redeployment (not "cut and run") the general public will begrudgingly get behind Bush. We are engaged in a civil war and today's elections although important for Iraq's future do not mean a damn thing to the average american.
More later on how a preemptive war became the "War on Terror."
John Murtha explaining the importance of the McCain amendment. Bush's obligation is to sign this bill in front of the world. Despite the continued efforts of this White House, McCain refuses to budge on this issue. If Bush vetoes this bill, then all bets are off. Impeachment proceedings should begin to remove this president from office before he destroys us for good.
I'm confused as to some in the blogosphere's continued support of this president effort's rewrite history. The president has had three major speeches on his war, and so far it hasn't changed public opinion (sure hasn't changed mine). The war apologists (Andrew Sullivan, Chris Hitchens, National Review, Weekly Standard, WSJ etc) continue to express faith in the strategy of this president. They want us to remain in Iraq forever. They are obsessed with the Iraqi people and their desire to impose our "standard of democracy" on them. Bush finally admits he went to war based on false intelligence and the apologists applaud with glee: "See, he truly is a war leader."
As long as the Democratic party as a whole does not stand behind Murtha's plan for immediate redeployment (not "cut and run") the general public will begrudgingly get behind Bush. We are engaged in a civil war and today's elections although important for Iraq's future do not mean a damn thing to the average american.
More later on how a preemptive war became the "War on Terror."
Wednesday, December 14, 2005
stand firm McCain
This bill could be your lasting legacy John. Do not cut a backroom deal with this White House on anti-torture legislation. Be wary of Hadley. Make the president sign this bill, dare him to veto it.
America is watching John.
America is watching John.
Tuesday, December 13, 2005
Ignore those inspectors!
Apart from the resentment that the imperial style produces, the aloof attitude means that American officials don't benefit from the experience and expertise of foreigners. The U.N. inspectors in Iraq were puzzled at how uninterested American officials were in talking to them—even though they had spent weeks combing through Iraq. Instead, U.S. officials, comfortably ensconced in Washington, gave them lectures on the evidence of weapons of mass destruction. "I thought they would be interested in our firsthand reports on what those supposedly dual-use factories looked like," one of then told me (again remaining anonymous for fear of angering the administration). "But no, they explained to me what those factories were being used for."
From a Newsweek piece by Fareed Zakaria entitled "Imperial Presidency."
Is there any clearer example of the need to get to the bottom of prewar intelligence and manipulation? We cannot just forget about how we entered into the first preemptive war in american history.
Although Zakaria is fervently pro war when it comes to Iraq, he does occasionally point out the many issues Bush has with tradition and diplomacy.
From a Newsweek piece by Fareed Zakaria entitled "Imperial Presidency."
Is there any clearer example of the need to get to the bottom of prewar intelligence and manipulation? We cannot just forget about how we entered into the first preemptive war in american history.
Although Zakaria is fervently pro war when it comes to Iraq, he does occasionally point out the many issues Bush has with tradition and diplomacy.
Monday, December 12, 2005
National Review defines torture
Caution: vile, disgusting rationale being employed below.
From America's friends at National Review Online:
"The most constructive path forward would be for Congress to put aside legalisms and empty phrases and work its way through interrogation practices, starting with the least controversial. Is dietary manipulation "cruel"? Are cold rooms? Is sensory deprivation? Is being made to stand for hours? How about an "attention grab," i.e., shaking a detainee? Sleep deprivation? A belly slap? We think these methods would all pass muster in any rational debate, provided they are applied within reason (there is a difference between standing for two hours and twenty hours)."
My bolding. Earth to NRO: when you torture someone, you are not concerned with reason or rational thinking. Your only hope is to inflict pain either out of sadistic desire or to gain useless information or both. There is also a difference between standing for two hours in a grocery waiting line or being forced to stand outside naked in the freezing cold for hours.
More enlightenment:
"Then Congress could make its way to the most aggressive techniques, such as water-boarding, which simulates drowning. It has reportedly been effective in breaking high-level al Qaeda detainees within seconds, but is a practice with which most people would be uncomfortable. It is at least close to the line of what constitutes torture, and is certainly "cruel" in almost every circumstance."
IT IS TORTURE! Waterboarding was used by the goddamn crazed Khmer Rouge. These atrocities are well documented, do the research. Please stop the handwringing and the pathetic attempt to justify this barbaric behavior on the account that your perfect, comfortable life was shattered on 9/11.
From America's friends at National Review Online:
"The most constructive path forward would be for Congress to put aside legalisms and empty phrases and work its way through interrogation practices, starting with the least controversial. Is dietary manipulation "cruel"? Are cold rooms? Is sensory deprivation? Is being made to stand for hours? How about an "attention grab," i.e., shaking a detainee? Sleep deprivation? A belly slap? We think these methods would all pass muster in any rational debate, provided they are applied within reason (there is a difference between standing for two hours and twenty hours)."
My bolding. Earth to NRO: when you torture someone, you are not concerned with reason or rational thinking. Your only hope is to inflict pain either out of sadistic desire or to gain useless information or both. There is also a difference between standing for two hours in a grocery waiting line or being forced to stand outside naked in the freezing cold for hours.
More enlightenment:
"Then Congress could make its way to the most aggressive techniques, such as water-boarding, which simulates drowning. It has reportedly been effective in breaking high-level al Qaeda detainees within seconds, but is a practice with which most people would be uncomfortable. It is at least close to the line of what constitutes torture, and is certainly "cruel" in almost every circumstance."
IT IS TORTURE! Waterboarding was used by the goddamn crazed Khmer Rouge. These atrocities are well documented, do the research. Please stop the handwringing and the pathetic attempt to justify this barbaric behavior on the account that your perfect, comfortable life was shattered on 9/11.
WWTR do?
"The Moose salutes a great senator, a great statesman, and a great American. The Democratic Party needs Joe now more than ever - he is the tribune of progressive hawks.Senator Lieberman is the recipient of the highly prestigious and coveted Golden Antlers Award for his achievements in the areas of national security and the environment in the tradition of the Great Man himself, T.R., - Bully!The Moose hereby declares Monday, December 12 as Joe Lieberman Appreciation Day!" (mooseblog.com)
I have a question for Mr. Whittman, would Tedddy Roosevelt throw his support behind a man who says "we do not torture" and calls torture "unacceptable," all the while being fully aware we are indeed torturing and engaging in "unacceptable" behavior?
Just asking.
I have a question for Mr. Whittman, would Tedddy Roosevelt throw his support behind a man who says "we do not torture" and calls torture "unacceptable," all the while being fully aware we are indeed torturing and engaging in "unacceptable" behavior?
Just asking.
Why haven't we left yet?
More than two-thirds of those surveyed oppose the presence of troops from the United States and its coalition partners and less than half, 44 percent, say their country is better off now than it was before the war, according to an ABC News poll conducted with Time magazine and other media partners. (AP)
Bush indicts himself
"This conduct is unacceptable, and the prime minister and other Iraqi officials have condemned these abuses, and an investigation has been launched and we support these efforts. Those who committed these crimes must be held to account," Bush said
That would be George Bush in response to abuses by Iraqis against Iraqis.
However, Mr. President you have committed a crime far worse: the destruction of American values towards torture. Do not veto the McCain amendment when it reaches your desk.
That would be George Bush in response to abuses by Iraqis against Iraqis.
However, Mr. President you have committed a crime far worse: the destruction of American values towards torture. Do not veto the McCain amendment when it reaches your desk.
Continue world domination
"If the president understands that his ultimate legacy will indeed be Iraq, and that history will judge him primarily on that matter, then he needs a successor. This process will take real time and relentlessness. Who better than McCain? He can recast conservatism away from its intolerant, sectarian trend and back to the center. And he can bring to the war ferocity and humanity and trust. A McCain succession would not only be good for the country but for Bush as well. Especially if he anoints McCain himself." (andrewsullivan.com)
While I agree with Sullivan that Iraq will be Bush's legacy (a failed one at that), the passing of the baton to McCain will continue this failed policy. As I've said before, and the Nation and more recently TNR has pointed out, McCain is a pro war hawk. He is a fervent believer in the neoconservative fantasy. Despite his efforts on the torture issue, McCain is not to be trusted in the arena of foreign policy.
"And he can bring to the war ferocity and humanity and trust."
Bush's war brought us to this point where we are condoning torture with the wink of an eye.
While I agree with Sullivan that Iraq will be Bush's legacy (a failed one at that), the passing of the baton to McCain will continue this failed policy. As I've said before, and the Nation and more recently TNR has pointed out, McCain is a pro war hawk. He is a fervent believer in the neoconservative fantasy. Despite his efforts on the torture issue, McCain is not to be trusted in the arena of foreign policy.
"And he can bring to the war ferocity and humanity and trust."
Bush's war brought us to this point where we are condoning torture with the wink of an eye.
Saturday, December 10, 2005
The next president
Americanlogic is looking ahead to the future of this country. The question of whether we will have survived the Bush era still remains unanswered. In three years, several things could happen under Bush's failed leadership. We could have already invaded Syria or other stops on the "Make the World Free Tour." We could even have suffered another terrorist attack on our soil, seeing as though we still to this day are not prepared for such an attack.
I can honestly say I don't know where we will be as a nation in the year 2008. What will the newly elected president face, what landscapes will he have to deal with? Americanlogic has a few predictions:
We will embrace, thankfully, a new isolationism. The kind that distinguished the conservatives of the past and classic liberals will have to come to terms with. Iraq has soured the american taste for nation building and neoconservative fantasy. Not to mention, any future president who makes a case for invasion or preemptive strike will have to arm themselves with insurmountable evidence and persuasive argument. This isolationism will be characterized by a laser like focus on our true enemies and their infastructure. Translation: Al-Qaeda's days are numbered. Bin Laden will have found to be dead and the organization will become fractured. We will have completely removed ourself from any Arab soil. Resources will be allocated to finally wipe out this menace for good. America will realize we cannot forcefully create democracy where there is no desire.
We will have a Clinton-like obsession with the deficit. As the true consequences of the Bush era are revealed to America, we will recoil in horror and finally work towards fiscal sanity. This will be done by ending corporate welfare and embrace of progressive taxation. The very segment of the population who had it the easiest during the Bush era will finally be asked to sacrifice again. This will not be "class warfare," but a boiling point will be reached by middle and lower income America. After years of downsizing, outsourcing and union busting we will have had enough.
Tax reform and health care reform will go hand in hand. Bush will have been correct in his pursuit of a sane tax system, but his ultimate goals will have been rejected due to their (suprise!) tendency to favor K street while ignoring common America. HMO's will be MIA in the process to reform the American health care system and they will be rolled over by the desire of the American people to finally make sure at least most of the nation's children have healthcare coverage.
Some may say Americanlogic is naive to think Americans will become this active in the role of their government. Will they have any fight left in them after eight years of having their futures ignored in pursuit of Iraqi self determination? Will they have confidence in their government nailing down the basics? After Katrina, will they be wary of a federal government response to terrorism or national disaster?
We'll see. Three years is a long time.
I can honestly say I don't know where we will be as a nation in the year 2008. What will the newly elected president face, what landscapes will he have to deal with? Americanlogic has a few predictions:
We will embrace, thankfully, a new isolationism. The kind that distinguished the conservatives of the past and classic liberals will have to come to terms with. Iraq has soured the american taste for nation building and neoconservative fantasy. Not to mention, any future president who makes a case for invasion or preemptive strike will have to arm themselves with insurmountable evidence and persuasive argument. This isolationism will be characterized by a laser like focus on our true enemies and their infastructure. Translation: Al-Qaeda's days are numbered. Bin Laden will have found to be dead and the organization will become fractured. We will have completely removed ourself from any Arab soil. Resources will be allocated to finally wipe out this menace for good. America will realize we cannot forcefully create democracy where there is no desire.
We will have a Clinton-like obsession with the deficit. As the true consequences of the Bush era are revealed to America, we will recoil in horror and finally work towards fiscal sanity. This will be done by ending corporate welfare and embrace of progressive taxation. The very segment of the population who had it the easiest during the Bush era will finally be asked to sacrifice again. This will not be "class warfare," but a boiling point will be reached by middle and lower income America. After years of downsizing, outsourcing and union busting we will have had enough.
Tax reform and health care reform will go hand in hand. Bush will have been correct in his pursuit of a sane tax system, but his ultimate goals will have been rejected due to their (suprise!) tendency to favor K street while ignoring common America. HMO's will be MIA in the process to reform the American health care system and they will be rolled over by the desire of the American people to finally make sure at least most of the nation's children have healthcare coverage.
Some may say Americanlogic is naive to think Americans will become this active in the role of their government. Will they have any fight left in them after eight years of having their futures ignored in pursuit of Iraqi self determination? Will they have confidence in their government nailing down the basics? After Katrina, will they be wary of a federal government response to terrorism or national disaster?
We'll see. Three years is a long time.
Friday, December 09, 2005
Bush will bounce back
The above headline reads like something from the Weekly Standard, but alas it's my headline.
Americanlogic thinks Bush will once again climb the mountain of the polls and reach above 40% approval. There are several factors that will lead to this.
One, the opposition party. The war in Iraq has done quite a number of things, but the one thing its done is fracture the Democratic party even more. Plenty of blame to go around on this one. Sheepish senators like Clinton and Kerry voted to give the president authorization to go to war, foolishly thinking he was going to do everything in his power to avoid it. They also seemed to reject american precedent which states we do not attack or invade other countries without provocation. Now, they are stuck. The Murtha plan is the best course but once again the party refuses to get behind this GIGANTIC hawk and show themselves as an opposition party. I'm sure one could imagine a triumphant Bush speaking for a newly elected Iraqi parliment this spring or summer. Media translation: We won.
Speaking of the Media. They love Bush, even when he's down. In contrast, they hated Clinton, even when he was up. There is something in the way Bush carries himself that makes the talking head pundits swoon. From Peggy Noonan's steadfast look every time she talks about Bush to Chris Matthews swaying in the political winds, Bush is popular amongst this crew. They show us what a shithole Iraq is every night but can't bring themselves to actually blame the president as if he was a bystander. The common scapegoats of the Iraq war: Rumsfeld and Cheney. Granted, both are certainly not blameless, but who made the decision?
And finally, America. Bush is stubborn just like we are. Bush finds it impossible to admit fault or error. We do the same thing. Bush has so successfully fused together Iraq and 9/11 that most people will use them in the same sentence, even when presented with insurmountable evidence to the contrary. America also fails to explore the idea of terrorism, just like Bush. Bush chooses to use storybook language ("terrorists lurk").
So, in the end it may not matter what happens on the ground in Iraq. Bush has succeeded in being the ultimate politician, just a lousy president.
Americanlogic thinks Bush will once again climb the mountain of the polls and reach above 40% approval. There are several factors that will lead to this.
One, the opposition party. The war in Iraq has done quite a number of things, but the one thing its done is fracture the Democratic party even more. Plenty of blame to go around on this one. Sheepish senators like Clinton and Kerry voted to give the president authorization to go to war, foolishly thinking he was going to do everything in his power to avoid it. They also seemed to reject american precedent which states we do not attack or invade other countries without provocation. Now, they are stuck. The Murtha plan is the best course but once again the party refuses to get behind this GIGANTIC hawk and show themselves as an opposition party. I'm sure one could imagine a triumphant Bush speaking for a newly elected Iraqi parliment this spring or summer. Media translation: We won.
Speaking of the Media. They love Bush, even when he's down. In contrast, they hated Clinton, even when he was up. There is something in the way Bush carries himself that makes the talking head pundits swoon. From Peggy Noonan's steadfast look every time she talks about Bush to Chris Matthews swaying in the political winds, Bush is popular amongst this crew. They show us what a shithole Iraq is every night but can't bring themselves to actually blame the president as if he was a bystander. The common scapegoats of the Iraq war: Rumsfeld and Cheney. Granted, both are certainly not blameless, but who made the decision?
And finally, America. Bush is stubborn just like we are. Bush finds it impossible to admit fault or error. We do the same thing. Bush has so successfully fused together Iraq and 9/11 that most people will use them in the same sentence, even when presented with insurmountable evidence to the contrary. America also fails to explore the idea of terrorism, just like Bush. Bush chooses to use storybook language ("terrorists lurk").
So, in the end it may not matter what happens on the ground in Iraq. Bush has succeeded in being the ultimate politician, just a lousy president.
Thursday, December 08, 2005
the pro liberty six
The six senators opposing the conference report are: Sen. Larry Craig (R-ID), Sen. Russ Feingold (D-WI), Sen. Dick Durbin (D-IL), Sen. Ken Salazar (D-CO), Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-AL) and Sen. John Sununu (R-NH). (tip: rawstory.com)
"I will do everything I can, including a filibuster, to stop this Patriot Act conference report, which does not include adequate safeguards to protect our constitutional freedoms," said Sen. Russ Feingold, D-Wis., who was the only senator to vote against the original version of the Patriot Act. (abcnews.com)
Thank God for people like Feingold.
"I will do everything I can, including a filibuster, to stop this Patriot Act conference report, which does not include adequate safeguards to protect our constitutional freedoms," said Sen. Russ Feingold, D-Wis., who was the only senator to vote against the original version of the Patriot Act. (abcnews.com)
Thank God for people like Feingold.
Shameful
After once again lying to the world about our participation in torture, our SOS did her best impression of Donald Rumsfeld:
"Because you are a democracy, does not mean you are perfect," Rice said.
"Because you are a democracy, does not mean you are perfect," Rice said.
Follow this man's lead
The Pennsylvanian said he had received calls from 12 senators - "they're all running for president" - asking for information about his proposal. He told one Democrat to "get off the middle ground, because what your position is, is in-between and it's nothing."
Murtha said the senator did not like that comment. But Murtha said he was not trying to win any hearts - just the minds.
"When I go by Arlington cemetery, and I pass by every day, I don't see Democrat or Republican on those gravestones," he said. "I see Americans. And that's what I want to look at this as, an American dialogue." (courtesy San Jose Mercury)
My bolding. We know where the GOP stands. Democrats, unite behind Murtha.
Murtha said the senator did not like that comment. But Murtha said he was not trying to win any hearts - just the minds.
"When I go by Arlington cemetery, and I pass by every day, I don't see Democrat or Republican on those gravestones," he said. "I see Americans. And that's what I want to look at this as, an American dialogue." (courtesy San Jose Mercury)
My bolding. We know where the GOP stands. Democrats, unite behind Murtha.
Never forget about this
FEMA's top official was told more than a year before Hurricane Katrina that the agency's emergency response teams were unprepared for a major disaster and were operating under outdated plans, documents show. (courtesy USAToday.com)
We have this story and a recent cover story in Time magazine about how three months later the people of New Orleans the surrounding area are still without power, basic needs and more importantly, money. Money is sitting there unspent while we worry about the electricity needs of Iraq.
Is there anyone more deserving of public humiliation circa colonial times as Michael Brown? He is the human incarnation of negligence and incompetence. Guess who shoved through his confirmation? Joe Lieberman and crew. You know, our next defense secretary:
http://nydailynews.com/front/story/372921p-316984c.html
We have this story and a recent cover story in Time magazine about how three months later the people of New Orleans the surrounding area are still without power, basic needs and more importantly, money. Money is sitting there unspent while we worry about the electricity needs of Iraq.
Is there anyone more deserving of public humiliation circa colonial times as Michael Brown? He is the human incarnation of negligence and incompetence. Guess who shoved through his confirmation? Joe Lieberman and crew. You know, our next defense secretary:
http://nydailynews.com/front/story/372921p-316984c.html
Wednesday, December 07, 2005
um.....part 2
"Terrorists have made it clear that Iraq is the central front in a war against humanity, so we must recognize Iraq as the central front in the war on terror," said Bush in a speech hosted by the Council on Foreign Relations in Washington, D.C.
Bush, on the result of his own actions.
Bush, on the result of his own actions.
Um.......
Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice sought Wednesday to clarify U.S. policy on harsh interrogation methods, saying no U.S. personnel may use cruel or degrading practices at home or abroad. (msnbc.com)
Ms. Rice, it's happening.
Ms. Rice, it's happening.
Tuesday, December 06, 2005
Wall Street Journal's favorite Republican
"Lieberman, whom the Bush administration has praised repeatedley for his war stance, defended the president, "It's time for Democrats who distrust President Bush to acknowledge he'll be commander-in-chief for three more years, "the senator said. "We undermine the president's credibility at our nation's peril."
Ok Joe you had me until the last sentence. This is standard issue Bush. Don't ask questions, continue along on a failed path and risk more American lives in the process as you call for all of us to hold hands and sing the national anthem on the Capital steps. Mr Lieberman, maybe you have given up on open and accountable government but Americanlogic hasn't. Make sure the investigations are completed, determine how we got into Iraq and figure out how we leave ASAP. This is our next Defense Secretary?
Ok Joe you had me until the last sentence. This is standard issue Bush. Don't ask questions, continue along on a failed path and risk more American lives in the process as you call for all of us to hold hands and sing the national anthem on the Capital steps. Mr Lieberman, maybe you have given up on open and accountable government but Americanlogic hasn't. Make sure the investigations are completed, determine how we got into Iraq and figure out how we leave ASAP. This is our next Defense Secretary?
Torture and you
Reason's Cathy Young talks torture and crushes the "ticking time bomb theory" here:
http://www.reason.com/cy/cy120605.shtml
http://www.reason.com/cy/cy120605.shtml
Alignment
John Murtha is “a lovable guy,” but “he’s never been a big thinker; he’s an appropriator.” Using language that Bush never could, McCain tells me that Murtha has become too emotional about the human cost of the war. “As we get older, we get more sentimental,” McCain says. “And [Murtha] has been very, very affected by the funerals and the families. But you cannot let that affect the way you decide policy.”
- John McCain on misplaced emotion (thanks thinkprogress.org) By the way, how many funerals has Bush attended? That's right, none.
- John McCain on misplaced emotion (thanks thinkprogress.org) By the way, how many funerals has Bush attended? That's right, none.
Sticky Rice
Have we ever had a Secretary of State preempt criticism of her country before leaving for Europe? No we haven't. We really have never had a crew like this.
Here's the sad fact: We are represented by a government that believes the best way to fight terrorism is to be as secretive as possible. Create laws such as the PATRIOT ACT, have torture as an american policy, practice rendition which leaves innocent men in the hands of brutal regimes and proclaim it all in the name of freedom.
By the way, where is Andrew Sullivan's outrage about his favorite choice for VP? Matter of fact, where is the consistentcy? Does the war on terror include a war on our soul?
UPDATE: Sullivan on Rice
"The only way to win this war is to abandon the illegal and immmoral detention policies rammed through the system by Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld. As for Condi, she has rebuilt our alliances rather successfully so far. Surely she must see that until the McCain amendment passes, her good work will have been in vain."
Yes, the "good work" of representing a country in which torture is a matter of foreign policy.
Here's the sad fact: We are represented by a government that believes the best way to fight terrorism is to be as secretive as possible. Create laws such as the PATRIOT ACT, have torture as an american policy, practice rendition which leaves innocent men in the hands of brutal regimes and proclaim it all in the name of freedom.
By the way, where is Andrew Sullivan's outrage about his favorite choice for VP? Matter of fact, where is the consistentcy? Does the war on terror include a war on our soul?
UPDATE: Sullivan on Rice
"The only way to win this war is to abandon the illegal and immmoral detention policies rammed through the system by Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld. As for Condi, she has rebuilt our alliances rather successfully so far. Surely she must see that until the McCain amendment passes, her good work will have been in vain."
Yes, the "good work" of representing a country in which torture is a matter of foreign policy.
True Fantasy
Forget Narnia or even Harry Potter, the most magical fantasy was uttered last night on "Hardball" by Republican Duncan Hunter who made the case for remaining in Iraq until it becomes a land of freedom and joy.
Hunter laid out the plans of neoconservatism: remake the Middle East into a land of free democracy, impose our will on the people of these nations and stay in these countries until this process is complete. Comparing the struggle to communism and facism, Hunter gravely said "We can either let the world change us or we can change the world." (not an exact quote) So there it is.
This is so dangerous a thought I can't begin to address it here. Let it be said though, that America is suffering in spirit, we could use a little remaking of our own. More later.
Hunter laid out the plans of neoconservatism: remake the Middle East into a land of free democracy, impose our will on the people of these nations and stay in these countries until this process is complete. Comparing the struggle to communism and facism, Hunter gravely said "We can either let the world change us or we can change the world." (not an exact quote) So there it is.
This is so dangerous a thought I can't begin to address it here. Let it be said though, that America is suffering in spirit, we could use a little remaking of our own. More later.
Monday, December 05, 2005
And so it begins
Stepping away from politics, please join me in my extreme happiness.
Danielle C Levesque, my fiancee is on her way to becoming the greatest Nurse in history.
More about the most remarkable woman I know soon.
Danielle C Levesque, my fiancee is on her way to becoming the greatest Nurse in history.
More about the most remarkable woman I know soon.
I still like Ike
"Though force can protect in emergency, only justice, fairness, consideration and co-operation can finally lead men to the dawn of eternal peace."
-Dwight Eisenhower
-Dwight Eisenhower
Rummy's World
A lie moves around the world at the speed of light," he said, stressing there is a "jarring contrast between what the American people are reading and hearing about Iraq and the views of the Iraqi people."
As an example, he said allegations from two former Iraqi detainees that they were thrust into a cage of lions in Baghdad and quickly pulled out as an interrogation technique have yet to be substantiated. (abcnews)
That's right, we only waterboard, we would never use lions. Can you imagine this type of attitude displayed during WWII? "No, there is no such thing as the Nazi Party."
As an example, he said allegations from two former Iraqi detainees that they were thrust into a cage of lions in Baghdad and quickly pulled out as an interrogation technique have yet to be substantiated. (abcnews)
That's right, we only waterboard, we would never use lions. Can you imagine this type of attitude displayed during WWII? "No, there is no such thing as the Nazi Party."
Sunday, December 04, 2005
Request
Americanlogic would like to offer the following resignations on behalf of the president:
Donald Rumsfeld: the most inept Defense Secretary of all time. Three years into this war and we are debating what to call the people we are fighting. According to Rummy, "don't call them insurgents." Hey Don, they're insurgents. They wish for the USA (occupying force) to leave their country. However his worst offense, allowing the torture and abuse to run rampant on his watch. Then again, shit happens.
Karl Rove: Bush's brain. The puppeteer. The man responsible for dropping the equivalent of anthrax into the political bloodstream. Responsible for slandering war heroes. Adept at playing politics with national security.
and finally......
Dick Cheney: VP of torture. That's all that needs to be said.
Please fire or ask for the resignation of these gentlemen Mr. President.
Donald Rumsfeld: the most inept Defense Secretary of all time. Three years into this war and we are debating what to call the people we are fighting. According to Rummy, "don't call them insurgents." Hey Don, they're insurgents. They wish for the USA (occupying force) to leave their country. However his worst offense, allowing the torture and abuse to run rampant on his watch. Then again, shit happens.
Karl Rove: Bush's brain. The puppeteer. The man responsible for dropping the equivalent of anthrax into the political bloodstream. Responsible for slandering war heroes. Adept at playing politics with national security.
and finally......
Dick Cheney: VP of torture. That's all that needs to be said.
Please fire or ask for the resignation of these gentlemen Mr. President.
Wary
I have to admit i'm a little wary on the future of the McCain amendment. For all press reports it seems McCain will not budge and made that clear on "Meet the Press" this morning. However, I can't bring myself to fully trust that McCain will not somehow allow the CIA provision in some how with some backroom dealmaking with this White House. After all, this is the same man who shamed himself on the campaign trail last year in support of a man he clearly loathes.
The Nation has a great piece on McCain this month reminding everyone he is not liberal nor has he any liberal tendencies. If he runs in 2008 (95% chance), he will be far right of Bush. McCain, although a victim of war, is even more of a hawk than Cheney. On fiscal side, he is traditionalist GOP (which is not such a bad thing). Democrats enamored with McCain should be under no illusions that he run from the center to get into the White House.
The McCain amendment must pass. It must reach Bush's desk without any changes or provisions so that Bush's hand will be forced. This will be the single most important bill ever passed and forwarded to the president for his signature. If we allow continued torture of prisoners in secret gulag's we will no longer be America. This nation will have no soul and will have no moral ground in this conflict.
The Nation has a great piece on McCain this month reminding everyone he is not liberal nor has he any liberal tendencies. If he runs in 2008 (95% chance), he will be far right of Bush. McCain, although a victim of war, is even more of a hawk than Cheney. On fiscal side, he is traditionalist GOP (which is not such a bad thing). Democrats enamored with McCain should be under no illusions that he run from the center to get into the White House.
The McCain amendment must pass. It must reach Bush's desk without any changes or provisions so that Bush's hand will be forced. This will be the single most important bill ever passed and forwarded to the president for his signature. If we allow continued torture of prisoners in secret gulag's we will no longer be America. This nation will have no soul and will have no moral ground in this conflict.
Friday, December 02, 2005
Blog discovery
www.powerofnarrative.blogspot.com
Americanlogic approved.
Insightful, informed and telling the cold hard truth about the Bush era.
Americanlogic approved.
Insightful, informed and telling the cold hard truth about the Bush era.
Abortion
Although I disagree with the Moose on the war, Marshall Whitmann, former McCain advisor and current DLC member gives us a potential Democratic strategy when it comes to abortion, suggesting the democrats become the new "Big Tent" party:
http://www.bullmooseblog.com/
On the whole, I agree. We should examine some fundamental issues and decide if we should continue "playing the role." Then again, I feel this is strictly a woman's issue to reformulate.
http://www.bullmooseblog.com/
On the whole, I agree. We should examine some fundamental issues and decide if we should continue "playing the role." Then again, I feel this is strictly a woman's issue to reformulate.
Thursday, December 01, 2005
the god of bloggers weighs in
"The Iraqi people - the long-suffering, triply betrayed Iraqi people - deserve our resilience in this. We should put our feelings about this president to one side and consider the national interest, and our remaining moral responsibility for the almighty but still-promising mess we have created." (andrewsullivan.com)
Interesting, it's rare to see promising and mess in the same breath.
Interesting, it's rare to see promising and mess in the same breath.
need I remind you
Murtha's Democratic colleagues reacted warily to his remarks, while Republicans pounced. Rep. Rahm Emanuel (Ill.), head of the House Democrats' campaign effort, said, "Jack Murtha went out and spoke for Jack Murtha." As for Iraq policy, Emanuel added: "At the right time, we will have a position (washingtonpost.com)
This is the state of today's Democratic leadership. They must unite behind John Murtha's position as Nancy Pelosi has just done. Kerry wants benchmarks, does he expect to get them with this administration? Please. Biden thinks the President made progress yesterday? What speech was he watching? Dean is a mess. In 2002, the Democratic position should have been no preemptive war without concrete irrefutable evidence. Doubts do not mean you vote "yes." Especially with the most fiscally irresponsible president we've seen in our lifetime.
This is the state of today's Democratic leadership. They must unite behind John Murtha's position as Nancy Pelosi has just done. Kerry wants benchmarks, does he expect to get them with this administration? Please. Biden thinks the President made progress yesterday? What speech was he watching? Dean is a mess. In 2002, the Democratic position should have been no preemptive war without concrete irrefutable evidence. Doubts do not mean you vote "yes." Especially with the most fiscally irresponsible president we've seen in our lifetime.