Monday, July 31, 2006

US Does Not Want a Cease-fire

The New York Times reports this morning, “The United States has refused to back Mr. Annan’s call for a cessation of hostilities, saying that any halt must be one that removes the threat to Israel from Hezbollah. “John R. Bolton, the American ambassador, said that what the United States had objected to was “conclusionary language about the nature of the incident and language that attempted to foreshadow the political solution,” which he said was being pursued by Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice. “This is a very delicate matter that requires careful discussion so that rather than jump to conclusions about cease-fires and other matters, we thought it was important to let that play out and do what was important to do, which was to address the tragic loss of civilian life.” That is total baloney and nonsense. The Bush administration does not want a cease-fire and it will make impossible requirements and conditions to ensure that there is no cease-fire. Cheney/Bush/Rice/Bolton are a set of nested Matryoshka dolls. They are so far up each other’s ass they speak out of both sides of one mouth. If the US truly wanted peace in the Middle East then it would negotiate with Syria and Iran. The US has refused to have any direct talks with Syria and Iran. Yesterday, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said she “had decided” to postpone her trip to Lebanon. It was a ridiculous lie. All news reports showed that she had been told by Prime Minister Siniora not to come to Lebanon. The White House keeps spinning its version of reality even when the truth has been put on film and is being broadcast simultaneously with the White House lie. After showing Rice saying she decided not to go to Lebanon, CNN’s John Roberts said that Siniora, not Rice, had made the decision she should stay home. Why does the White House keep telling these lies large and small? It’s for the same reason that the Roman Catholic Church claims that all popes are infallible, including the popes who came before the Vatican’s edict in 1870 that popes are infallible. To admit that any pope is fallible is to give the lie to the claim that all popes are infallible. For the Bush administration to start telling the truth now would be an admission that everything had been a lie in the past. But, you may say, the world knows the Bush administration always lies and that popes are as fallible as anyone else. I didn’t say these policies are logical and sane. I only say that they are the modus operandi of the Roman Catholic Church and the Republican Party. And why are Israel and the United States opposed to peace in the Middle East? Israel and the United States are opposed to peace in the Middle East because they have become bullying fascist nations that prefer to tyrannize and oppress than to live peaceably with their neighbors. Terrorist groups like Hezbollah and Hamas are the inevitable results of oppression and tyranny. The United States and Israel have empowered Hezbollah, Hamas and the insurgency in Iraq. And terrorism justifies further tyranny and oppression, which the neocons in the Republican Party love and admire. When nations go to war it is always because a small group of insane men decide to go to war for insane reasons.

Saturday, July 29, 2006

Bush: Do What’s Right Not What’s Popular

The full Bush quote from the joint press conference yesterday between President George W. Bush and UK Prime Minister Tony Blair is: “And, therefore, it's essential that we do what's right -- not necessarily what appears to be immediately popular.” George Bush just reached the age of 60. In sixty years, as the useless eldest son of George H.W. Bush, George W. Bush has never done what is right. In fact, he invariably has done what is popular within a small group of weak and avaricious criminals who masquerade as corporate and political leaders in the Republican Party. The Prez kicked off the press conference by saying, “Today, the prime minister and I talked about the ways we're working to advance freedom and human dignity across the world. “Prime Minister Blair and I discussed the crisis in the Middle East. In Lebanon, Hezbollah and its Iranian and Syrian sponsors are willing to kill and to use violence to stop the spread of peace and democracy, and they're not going to succeed.” Bush joked about his four-minute live-microphone gaffe at the recent G-8 Conference in Strelna Russia. He said, “Prime Minister Tony Blair, welcome back to the White House. As you know, we've got a close relationship. You tell me what you think. You share with me your perspective. And you let me know when the microphone is on.” You can bet your ass on that. It is certain Tony Blair made very sure his conversations with George W. Bush were overheard by no one. It’s doubtful that advancing freedom and human dignity was ever talked about except as a joke, between these two lying, neocon fascists. If Bush told Blair that he was going to publicly rebuke Hezbollah for being “willing to kill and use violence to stop the spread of peace and democracy”, they both must have fallen off their chairs giggling. Killing, using violence and spreading chaos and terror in the Middle East is exactly what the Bush/Blair cabal has been doing since they joined hands to attack Iraq. “Our top priorities in Lebanon,” Bush said, “are providing immediate humanitarian relief, achieving an end to the violence, ensuring the return of displaced persons and assisting with reconstruction.” That’s odd. We’re sending arms to Israel to help them kill Innocent civilians in Lebanon. Humanitarian relief and ending violence is not a high priority to the Israelis. Bush said, “Our goal is to achieve a lasting peace, which requires that a free, democratic and independent Lebanese government be empowered to exercise full authority over its territory.” Which, of course, is exactly the ploy being used in this country by the Bush administration when the House passed the minimum wage proposal yesterday. A rider was attached that lowered taxes for the rich. That makes the minimum wage initiative unacceptable to Democrats in the Senate. The Republicans don’t want the minimum wage to be raised. Bush and Blair do not want peace in the Middle East. To require that any steps toward peace be attached to a requirement that those steps guarantee and insure that the peace be lasting, means all peace initiatives will fail. No peace in the Middle East can be guaranteed to last. It sounds good but it’s like an unfunded mandate. It ensures failure. Blair gave a mini-history lesson, telling in brief how and why Israel attacked Lebanon. Blair said, “In defiance of the U.N. Resolution 1559, Hezbollah for almost two years has been fortifying and arming militia down in the south of Lebanon, when it is the proper and democratically elected government of Lebanon and its armed forces who should have control of that area, as they should of the whole of Lebanon. “They then, in defiance of that U.N. resolution, crossed the U.N. Blue Line. As you know, they kidnapped two Israeli soldiers. They killed eight more. “Then, of course, there was the retaliation by Israel, and there are rockets being fired from the south of Lebanon into the north of Israel the entire time. “So we know how this situation came about and how it started.” Blair forgot two points. 1) The Lebanese have allowed Hezbollah into their culture and into their lives because they want them there and they feel protected by Hezbollah. 2) Israel has become a bully just like the United States. Israel and the US have developed into countries that respond to crises like thugs and by using over-kill. And the UK is the little sniveling putz that offers to hold the bullies’ coats when they beat the shit out of the weak. Under the leadership of the Bush administration, the US has become an aggressive fascist nation that oppresses and annihilates the weak. Israel has become its own worse nightmare of what it feared and hated when the State of Israel came into being on May 14, 1948. And the United Kingdom is a tiny has-been power relegated to drooling over the prospect of mayhem and destruction. George W. Bush must be forced to resign. Whatever it takes. Truly…WHATEVER IT TAKES!

Friday, July 28, 2006

Governor Race in Nevada

August 15th is Primary Day for Nevadans. That’s the day they will find out the names of the Republican and Democrat contenders for Governor. Currently, the polls are giving the nod to Republican candidate Jim Gibbons and Democrat candidate Dina Titus. One candidate, adult movie actress and erotic dancer Republican Melody "Mimi Miyagi" Damayo, has embarked on a campaign that seems to be a joke and PR ploy. Former Las Vegas domina, (the preferred term over dominatrix) Leola McConnell, is very serious about her career as a liberal politician. But the official poll numbers are hovering around 6%. “I will do ‘Whatever It Takes’ to make our infrastructure second to none,” Ms McConnell says on her website at: She promises, “As your Governor, my only job will be to strengthen and expand Nevada's infrastructure for you, ‘the working people’ of Nevada.” “My past dealings with certain neo-con/Project for a New American Century (PNAC) members has given me a distinct advantage over others in the race on how best to disrupt their "neo-con two step" and thwart these plans. “Their disastrous policies have led us into an ever expanding war in the Middle East (with future plans of attacking Iran, North Korea, Syria and possibly Venezuela) with no end in the foreseeable future while deaths of American soldiers (nearly 2,600) and innocent Iraqi civilian casualties (estimates as high as 150,000) mount on a daily basis. “If elected governor of Nevada, my sworn duty will be to defend the Constitution of our State against all enemies, be they foreign or domestic -- and I will do so with the enthusiasm of an evangelist.” In addition to the above excerpts from her website, Leola McConnell has issued two provocative public statements. In October 2004 she said, “I, Leola McConnell, do affirm that from the year 1998 until May 2003, I was PNAC member and radio talk show host William J. Bennett's Domina. I further stipulate that I counseled him [on several occasions] to seek professional help for his gambling addiction. He declined.” And on June 4, 2006 she published the following statement: “This Monday, George W. Bush will address the nation, calling for a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage. If he does not admit that he's a gay American (or perhaps bisexual), this speech will be as false as all his other public statements. “Too bad I won't be doing the rebuttal. In 1984 I watched George W. Bush enthusiastically and expertly perform a homosexual act on another man, one Victor Ashe. “Ashe is the current U.S. ambassador to Poland; and he too should come out, like former New Jersey Gov. James McGreevy, and admit to being a gay American. “Other homo-erotic acts were also performed by then-private citizen George W. Bush. I know this because I performed one of them on him myself. “My full account of this activity is on-line at, which has been up for nearly two years now. Bush's sex life should, of course, be no one's business but his own; however, his craven effort to reverse his slide in the opinion polls by using the "Defense of Marriage Act" to divide Americans must be exposed as the act of a desperate closet case. “Before impugning the humanity of gays who seek to marry–just as he was free to marry–Bush should come clean with the American people and admit his own past sexual behavior. He should admit that he violated his own marriage vows by having a furtive homosexual affair with a longtime family friend. “I had planned to run for governor of Nevada without going into any of this, but the president's hypocrisy compels me to go public with the story now, before he tries to do more harm to millions of his fellow-citizens. Leola McConnell, Liberal Democratic Candidate for Governor of Nevada." As anyone who reads this blog knows, I absolutely believe that George W. Bush is gay or bisexual. I sent Ms McConnell the following e-mail yesterday: “In just a couple weeks we'll know if you will be the Democrat candidate to run for Governor of Nevada, or if it will be someone else. “Out here in Philadelphia, most people haven't followed Nevada politics as closely as folks who live west of the Mississippi. Nonetheless, the blogs have kept your name upfront ever since you filed back in May. “I have a blog, Ratbang Diary: “And yes, your politics are my politics. But I would venture to say that most people read about you initially because of your profession, not your politics. That is certainly true of why I started to read about Leola McConnell. Your back-story is exotic. “I want as many Democrats as possible to win elections in 2006 and 2008, but even more than that, nothing would make me happier than for the Republicans' blatant hypocrisy to be made public. Most particularly, George W. Bush's blatant hypocrisy. “So, I will be printing your June 6, 2006 statement about Bush and I will be alluding to your October 2004 statement about Bill Bennett in my blog. And I will recap your already-published stances on major issues. “But I was wondering if there is anything specific you would like to state for publication in my blog? Such as, if you do not win the primary, will you continue to be active in politics? Has the Bush administration responded to your June 6th statement? Are there others who will stand with you and back up your allegations about Bush being either bisexual or gay? I have been alleging this for a number of years and it is one of those worst-kept secrets. But so far it's been impossible to prove. Or, I should say, those who can prove it are not coming forward with evidence. “What am I asking? I am not even sure. I know that no DNA-encrusted Bush tighty-whities are going to be produced. (Although, it would be interesting to know what kind he does wear.) But I guess I want to know if you actually have the goods that can bring this administration down? Yes. That's what I want to know. Thank you for taking the time to read this e-mail. Sincerely, Joy Tomme” I received this answer from Ms McConnell: “Joy, Everything humanly possible is being done to politically frag my run for governor of Nevada (jon ralston, molly ball, and other local reporters and bloggers). They lock me out of the debates even refusing to tell the citizenry I'm even in the race. My message to Nevadans concerning the neo-con agenda for our state is feared. They hope to keep them ignorant forever. "I get more death threats weekly than osama from rightist nuts. Boy george won't be opening his mouth to besmirch the GLBT (Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual and Transgender) community ever again, I have effectively silenced him on that ugly federal amendment front--Leola McConnell did that, no one else is responsible. What can he say? He knows to challenge me will get my Irish up, I'm no stranger to these rightists--I was there go to Domina when that was my world. Advancing Liberal politics is my life now, it has been for the last 3 1/2 years. If you look at the latest Survey USA poll my poll numbers are for 'likely' voters, I've been out meeting with 'unlikely' voters. They could be in for a real shocker. Can't help you with your sexual curiosities regarding boy george, he's just one of many closet bisexual men in America and in government service who likes having sex with both men and women. There are hundreds of george bush's in the government, Joy. Hiding makes their types mean spirited and gets our republic into all kinds of ugliness that is birthed in very dark places. All the best with your site. Leola” Well, okay. We have Ms McConnell’s word but no proof, no evidence and no corroboration about George W. Bush and his sexual kinks. For my part, I believe her. But so far nobody else has come up with anything definitive about the prez being gay. So what are the chances of George W. Bush being outed with irrefutable evidence by an unimpeachable source in the next year? I would say the likelihood is up from never-gonna-happen to as certain as civil war in Iraq.

Wednesday, July 26, 2006

What Were They Thinking?

Following is a sampling of nonsense being printed about Israel’s attack on Lebanon and a real-world translation: Israel’s top commanders say that knocking out Hezbollah in Lebanon may take many weeks. Translation: We miscalculated. It can’t be done...EVER! Hezbollah has built stalwart defenses and elaborate bunker systems and it will take a while for the Israelis to get in there and deny that space. Translation: The Israelis grossly underestimated Hezbollah and the State of Israel will be old as Methuselah before it can neutralize those bunkers. There is a debate in Israel over the army’s tactics and performance, but it’s centered on the effectiveness of the air war and the slow speed of ground operations. Translation: There is a consensus in Israel that everything the army has done in the last two weeks has been ill conceived and ineffective. Israelis say Hezbollah has no armor or easily visible storehouses or logistics lines and its members live among the civilian population of southern Lebanon, storing their weaponry in civilian buildings. Translation: The reason members of Hezbollah live among civilians in Lebanon is that the Lebanese like and trust Hezbollah. Never before in history has a terrorist organization had such state-of-the-art military equipment. Translation: Never before has Israel been so ill equipped, ill advised and delusional. Hezbollah has features of a stateless terrorist organization, but it also holds territory — and is quite dug in there — and is able to hold at risk the population of the regional superpower in the way that only national militaries once could. Translation: Holy shit! Those guys control actual real estate and they have the support of the Lebanese people. Who knew? A former paratrooper says, “I admit I had hoped for better from the army.” Translation: What a bunch of idiotic fuck-ups! It’s not just about the missiles and launchers, it’s about the roads and transport and the ability to command and control. All that is being degraded. But it’s going to take a long time. I don’t believe this is going to be over in the next couple of days. Translation: This thing is never going to be resolved…ever…not in a million years. There may be a new strategic situation in the making because Israel does not have the overwhelming strategic superiority that it thought it had. Translation: Hoo-boy! Those Israelis are crazy as George W. Bush. Secretary of State Rice took no questions from reporters during her Middle East swing. Translation: There were no questions, no one takes her seriously. Rice’s aides say she limited her public remarks to avoid jeopardizing international efforts to halt two weeks of fighting that has left at least 386 Lebanese and 41 Israelis dead, forced thousands of Lebanese from their homes and Israelis into underground shelters. Translation: We realize she’s an empty suit with no plan. Why talk when no one is listening? Demonstrators chanted, “Condoleezza Rice go home.” An upraised middle finger needs no translation.

Tuesday, July 25, 2006

Ms Rice Does the Middle East

Before bustling off to Israel with a so-called surprise touchdown in Beirut, Secretary of State Rice said her aim was to create the conditions for a “sustainable cease-fire”. Fortunately for her, no one asked how she planned to do this. It surely was not by spending time in Beirut. One protester in Beirut was quoted in the New York Times saying, “She left faster than she came, and no one will listen to her.” Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice spent two hours with Lebanon Prime Minister Fouad Siniora, one hour with Parliament speaker Berri Nabih Berri and 45 minutes with a group of anti-Syrian Lebanese politicians to whom she promised $30 million in aid. “Thank you for your courage and steadfastness,” she told Mr. Siniora. For his part, Mr. Sinora was unmoved by Rice’s canned sympathy. He said the Israeli bombing had set Lebanon back “50 years.” Once she got to Israel, Rice said in her halting, prissy, Church Lady way that an “urgent and enduring peace” was needed in the Middle East. And today, the Fool’s Fool is running around from this official to that in Israel reiterating her demand for an enduring Mideast truce while contending that peace can only be accomplished after Hezbollah is neutralized. The Bush administration plan for peace in the Middle East is war. This insane strategy makes sense only to Israel and to the Bush administration. It sounds like madness to sane Americans and to all normal people who live in the Middle East and the rest of the world. So who benefits from war? Any corporation or entity that gets paid to produce armaments, men who invent armaments, men who deploy armaments, men who think about armaments, and men who talk about thinking about armaments all benefit. The top bunch in this group is The Carlyle Group, the Pentagon, Republicans and any company that has ever been in Dick Cheney’s stock portfolio. All persons that get paid to scare the crap out of the sane world benefit. All countries (read, United States, Great Britain, Russia, the Vatican) that no longer have any power but who want to be seen as having power benefit from weenie-waving and saber rattling. Governments of countries that don’t have power but want power (read any government in the Middle East) benefit from legal and illegal arms sales and excuses for nuclear arms build-up. In brief, all craven, greedy, powermad, unethical people in the world benefit from war. And all sane, reasonable, peace-loving people get screwed by war. That’s it.

Monday, July 24, 2006

We’re Getting Only Half the Story

News reports about the meeting Sunday between the Saudis and the Bush administration are reporting that the Saudi’s asked Bush to push for a cease-fire between Israel and Hezbollah and that the United States said no. What is not appearing in lead paragraphs or in bold type is that last week the Bush administration said it was “in the beginning stages of a plan” to get Saudi Arabia and Egypt to “encourage” the Syrians to cut its ties to Hezbollah. The reason we have to go to the Saudis with this plan rather than going directly to the Syrians is that we don’t speak to Syria anymore so we need an intermediary. We are hearing that we said no to the Saudis about a cease-fire. But what did the Saudis say to us when we asked them to go to Syria on our behalf and tell the Syrians to turn against Hezbollah? We’re not hearing much about that. The New York Times reported this morning, “American officials had planned to ask the Saudis to press Syria to cut ties to Hezbollah and Iran, something they also planned to ask of other moderate Arab allies, including Egypt and Jordan. American officials would not comment on whether the United States had made progress on that score. Saudi officials played down the importance of the subject at the meeting. They have questioned how much leverage they truly have with Syria and are clearly uncomfortable being seen as a proxy for the United States.” Sounds like tit for tat. We said no to the Saudis and the Saudis said no to us. But the reasons for the rejections are different. We said no to a cease-fire because we are sending arms to Israel to aid their war in Lebanon and the last thing we want is for that war to end. The head of the Republican National Committee Ken Mehlman said recently at a Christians United For Israel dinner that Israel’s war is our war. The Saudis rejected our request because the last thing they want is to return to the Middle East looking like Bush administration gofers. Plus, Hezbollah makes the Saudis quake in their American-made boots. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said on Sunday that it’s important for the United States to “empower” Lebanon to “control” its country (that means disarm Hezbollah). How do we do that? We’re sending arms to Israel. How do we empower Lebanon to boot out Hezbollah unless we send arms to Lebanon? I doubt Lebanon would consider a cheerleading speech from Ms Rice is an empowering act. I just had a funny thought. You don’t imagine that Condoleezza Rice thinks anyone in the Middle East takes her seriously do you? She does know what a terrible impression she makes, right? Like it’s three strikes: Strike One: Frightful example of a female. Strike Two: Clumsy diplomat. Strike Three: Inept foreign affairs adviser. If we need proof as to the extent of Rice’s bungling, it’s that VP Dick Cheney has been letting her pretend to be Secretary of State so that she can watch over George W. Bush while he pretends to be President and she’s even failed at being a nanny. A bunch of hairy scary Middle East terrorists are going to stop marauding and murdering because the fumbling ineffectual bogus US Secretary of State says, “Play nice”? Not unless Dick Cheney also offers nuclear weapons to Syria…and you know what? He might.

Sunday, July 23, 2006

Tell Me They’re Kidding!

Condoleezza Rice, George W. Bush, Dick Cheney and Stephen J. Hadley (the guy who told Bob Woodward that Valerie Plame was a CIA operative) are meeting with Saud al-Faisal the chief of the Saudi national Security Council this afternoon in order to talk the Saudis into talking the Syrians into telling Hezbollah to go away. So what have we got here? We’ve got Condoleezafucking Rice, the most inept, graceless, and grating-voiced Secretary of State ever known in the history of the earth. We’ve got President George W. Bush who last week went bonkers on international television because he was either drunk, high, over-medicated or all three. We’ve got Vice President Dick Cheney, a neocon, warmongering, war-profiteer so out-of-control and drunk that he shot a good friend in the face. And we’ve got the National Security Agency blabbermouth and leaker Stephen J. Hadley. And this is the crew that picked itself to mediate a meeting with the Saudis (who bombed the World Trade Center) in order to tell them to tell the Syrians to tell Hezbollah to piss up a rope. Oh, and Miss-I-Druther-Shop-for-Shoes-than-Check-Out-a-Hurricane Rice has decided that attending this meeting is so important that she is squeezing it in before racing off to Israel where she will intrude her rigid, clenched, self-conscious, unbending persona into Middle East affairs and where she will cause further waves of hatred to be radiated at the United States from every corner of the world. The only thing I can figure is this group of drunk, disorderly and braindead White House officials want terrorism to continue and prosper or they would take a backseat and call in professional negotiators for guidance. And since these clowns are so determined to make the US a laughing stock and terrorist target, why weren’t Donald Rumsfeld and Ahmed Chalabi asked to lend their expertise? What a bunch of maroons!

Friday, July 21, 2006

Why GOP Picked George W. Bush to be Prez

At least that mystery is now solved. Only George W. Bush could be counted on to veto a bill to expand federal support for stem cell research after having started a war of global aggression which has killed 2,558 American soldiers, killed at least 100,000 Iraqis and is costing $10 million an hour to wage. And after having accomplished these crimes against humanity, only George W. Bush could be counted on to say without even a trace of embarrassment or irony: "This bill (the Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act) would support the taking of innocent human life in the hope of finding medical benefits for others…it crosses a moral boundary that our decent society needs to respect. So I vetoed it." "If this bill were to become law, American taxpayers would, for the first time in our history, be compelled to fund the deliberate destruction of human embryos, and I'm not going to allow it." There are many politicians who have supported the war in Iraq and who are adamant pro-life conservative religious fanatics. But there are few, if any, who would be so crass and ignorant as to stand before the American people and make statements that imply that frozen embryos which are going to be destroyed have more value in every sense than a fully-grown American soldier. But the GOP found that one rare politician in the person of the favored son of the grossly insensitive and bloody-minded Barbara Bush. And having found him, the GOP made him president. When Bush vetoed the stem-cell bill, the president’s new press secretary Tony Snow said: “The simple answer is he thinks murder's wrong.” Snow should have added, “That is, George W. Bush thinks murder is wrong if the living thing is the size of a pin-head. Larger than that and all living things are fair game.”

Wednesday, July 19, 2006

AG Gonzales is a Weenie and the Prez is Insane

It’s no secret that Attorney General Alberto Gonzales has balls the size of BB’s. And it’s no secret that the President of the United States is gibbering like a monkey in a zoo. These two facts make a New York Times headline this morning an impossibility: "Bush Blocked Ethics Inquiry, Gonzales Says". George W. Bush makes no decisions and engages in no acts that are not sanctioned by Karl Rove and Dick Cheney. Likewise, the Attorney General makes no decisions and engages in no acts that are not initiated by Karl Rove and Dick Cheney. The lead in the NYT story reports, “Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales told the Senate Judiciary Committee on Tuesday that President Bush had personally decided to block the Justice Department ethics unit from examining the role played by government lawyers in approving the National Security Agency’s domestic eavesdropping program.” George W. Bush most assuredly did not personally decide to block the DOJ from examining the NSA’s wiretap program. He wouldn’t know how. And AG Gonzales would not make that statement unless he had been told to make that statement by Karl Rove and Dick Cheney. So exactly when did the White House Razzle-dazzle team decide to make the president the scapegoat for everything that’s wrong with the Republican Party? Probably about the time they began to leak stories that the Prez was drinking again. That the Prez is being allowed to talk off-the-cuff, or as he would say, “just make it up”, is an about-face from the days when he had to hear answers through an earpiece in order to make it through a press conference. And George W. Bush is so out of it he does not realize he’s been set up. Senate Judiciary Committee chairman Arlen Specter (R-PA) asked Gonzales, “Why wasn’t O.P.R. (Office of Professional Responsibility) given clearance as so many other lawyers in the Department of Justice were given clearance?” Gonzales said, “The president of the United States makes decisions about who is ultimately given access…he makes the decision because this is such an important program.” What a load of crap. Two-to-one, they’ve sold you out, Mr. President. Now that Bush has been taken off the leash, he can say anything he wants to say anywhere in the world and make a total jackass of himself any day of the week. But the thing he cannot do is make decisions. And the Mainstream Media is complicit in this plan to saddle the Prez with the blame for everything from global warming to Israel’s bombing of Lebanon. The MSM keeps saying, “the president decided” and “the president says” and “the president believes”, when the MSM knows full well the president is incapable of deciding what color shirt to put on in the morning. When GWB has been totally discredited, who will ride in to save the world? George W. Bush with brains, wit and charm: John McCain. A more frightening and deadly combination one cannot imagine.

Tuesday, July 18, 2006

Who’s Controlling the Prez? And Why Not?

Last week in Stralsund, Germany President Bush thought it was clever to sidestep questions about the Middle East and Iran by making remarks about pigs. The remarks were inappropriate, foolish and not funny. German chef Olaf Micheel had bagged wild game boar especially to serve to Bush at a barbecue in Trinwillershagen, a tiny town on the Baltic Sea. The boar chef is also the town’s second deputy mayor. First Bush said, "Thanks for having me. I'm looking forward to that pig tonight." Later, when asked questions about the Middle East, he said, “I understand I may have the honor of slicing the pig.” When he was asked a question about what he may have learned from his visit to a rural seaside town that at one time had been behind the Iron Curtain, he said, "I haven't seen the pig yet.” And when an American reporter asked about the Israeli bombing in Beirut the president said, "I thought you were going to ask about the pig, I'll tell you about the pig tomorrow." The point is not that the Prez was evading questions. Although it makes no sense for the president not to answer difficult questions when the reason for his road trips is to show he’s a good and informed leader. The point is that the Prez thought he was being charming and funny and he was being obnoxious, tactless and boorish. President Bush is indiscreet and injudicious. On June 14th, President Bush made fun of the sunglasses worn by a blind reporter. It doesn’t matter that Bush did not know the man was blind or that he phoned him later to apologize. What matters is, the president says anything that comes into his mind, like a child. When he makes these blunders, he thinks he’s being cute, smart, charming and funny. President Bush is imprudent, incompetent and out of control. Yesterday at the G-8 Conference in Strelna Russia, Bush babbled on an open mike for nearly four minutes. He said, “I think Condi's going to go (to the Middle East) pretty soon." A remark that shows he indeed does NOT make decisions about his administration. He said he was just going to talk off the cuff in his closing remarks at the conference. "I'm just gonna make it up. I'm not gonna talk too damn long like the rest of 'em," he said. "Some of these guys talk too long.” And then he said, "See, the irony is that what they need to do is get Syria to get Hezbollah to stop doing this shit and it's over.” And to cap his gaffes at the G-8 conference he grabbed German Chancellor Angela Merkel from behind and massaged her neck. The act was caught on camera. The film shows the attention was unwanted in the extreme and Chancellor Merkel was horrified and furious. These are not the boisterous acts of a fun-loving high-spirited guy. These are the ill-advised, unmanageable episodes of a man in the throes of a serious mental disease. For those who have been wondering what it would look like when President George W. Bush has a public mental breakdown, this is what it looks like.

Monday, July 17, 2006

I Object!

I object to reporters writing news stories as though they were starting the great American novel. I object to leads like this one in the LA Times this morning: “It was only 8 a.m., the day after Memorial Day, but the desert sun was already unforgiving. The heat radiated from the desert floor with a glittery sheen as the anthropologist and the team of soldiers set to work.” Overwritten as it is, the lead could qualify for a Bulwer Lytton award. Who would imagine the story is about the military being forced, belatedly, to examine the remains of 10 airmen whose B-24 bomber crashed in the California desert on April 9, 1944? At the time of the crash, the military issued death certificates, and 10 sealed caskets were sent to families for burial. Families were told the bomber crew had been on a training flight, that the bomber had crashed because of pilot error and the cause of death was “dissolution of body”. Within days of the crash, death certificates were issued for each victim, and 10 sealed caskets were delivered to families across the country for burial. The following paragraph, which should have been near the top of today’s story, was buried deep in the middle: “The first bones were found in August 2005 by amateur aviation archeologists whose hobby is to look for World War II crashes. They reported their finding to the Kern County coroner's office, which notified the military.” Now finally, the pit that the bomber made when it spiraled into the desert is being investigated and bones and teeth are being found. And families are wondering what was in the caskets that were buried over 60 years ago. Some have conjectured that the remains were sandbags. Whether any of the families will allow exhumation is an open question. It is, in fact, a fascinating and dramatic story. But it deserved a who-what-when-where-why lead, not a florid voice-over script for a grade-D TV show. And I also object to the following bit of amateur writing which should never have survived an editor’s blue pencil: “Staff Sgt. Keith Burnette was screening a pile of dirt, rocks and trash when he found a molar with a filling and a wisdom tooth attached. The entire team gathered around when Burnette announced what he had found. They examined the tooth like they were admiring a new car and patted Burnette on the shoulder. “ Like they were admiring a new car? H.G. Reza wrote this story. He’s an LA Times staff writer. He’s not a fledgling. He should know better, and the LA Times editors should know better. It’s a badly written piece that seems to leer and ogle rather than report a grim event. However, the topic is an interesting one. And it certainly shows that the military has been lying and doing cover-ups since gunpowder was invented.

Sunday, July 16, 2006

Putin Nails America’s Problem(s)

Russia is hosting a "Group of 8" summit meeting. Friday night at a private dinner President Bush arrogantly and foolishly told Russia’s President Vladimir V. Putin that Bush desires to promote change in the world and he hopes Russia will also promote change in parts of the world like Iraq where there is a free press and free religion.” And Putin said, “We certainly would not want to have the same kind of democracy as they have in Iraq, I will tell you quite honestly.” To which our quick-witted president got red in the face and said, “Just wait.” Problem 1-Our president is running around the world saying, “Look at our success in Iraq” when there is only failure in Iraq. And George W. Bush is so delusional that he is the only person in the world who can't see he has brought forth a cretinous, ugly, deformed, insatiable, hate-spewing monster in Iraq, not freedom and democracy. Problem 2- When confronted with the truth about the US failure in Iraq, our president gets red in the face and says, Oh yeah? Problem 3- Every news outlet in the world is quoting George W. Bush’s statement about Putin on June 27, 2001: “I looked the man in the eye. I found him to be very straightforward and trustworthy and we had a very good dialogue. I was able to get a sense of his soul.” Oh, and in addition to the US problems that Bush’s trip to Russia is showing the world as if on an IMAX screen, Bush is saying, in effect, that the new upsurge of violence between Israel and Lebanon has been caused by the old upsurge of violence between Israel and Lebanon. And therefore Lebanon has to stop with all the shooting and…stuff. Okay. I admit there is good news. The good news is that George W. Bush has once again given standup comics around the world material to last for weeks. I am sure even Jon Stewart is saying, “Thank you, Jesus!”

Saturday, July 15, 2006

What’s the Answer?

The “Cost of Iraq War” calculator is set to reach $315 billion on September 30, 2006, which is the end of fiscal year 2006. Sounds like over 10 mil an hour to me. The reason I bring this up is that now that Israel has decided to bring World War III down on the world, the world is looking to the US to do something. Back on March 20, 2003 the Bush administration had two options for doing something: 1) The White House neocons could invade a weak country like Iraq in order to rattle sabers and let putzes like George W. Bush & Co. feel powerful, or 2) The US could let Iran know that its plans for nuclear arms and aggression would not be tolerated. As we know, the White House needledicks decided to invade Iraq. Back in May, 2003, the UK’s “Guardian” reported: “During a bout of diplomatic activity over Christmas he (Donald Rumsfeld) warned that the US could fight two wars at once - a reference to the forthcoming conflict with Iraq. After Baghdad fell, Mr. Rumsfeld said Pyongyang (North Korea) should draw the "appropriate lesson". Now it’s 2006 and for certain North Korea has drawn the appropriate lesson: The unnecessary vanity war in Iraq has bankrupted us; we have exhausted our military resources; we have mortgaged our souls to China and other countries who have bought our debt; our balance of trade deficit has caused the US dollar to fall; and the US is powerless to fight the war it has, let alone fend off Iran, Korea, or aid Israel. The only thing the US can do in any of the current emergencies is talk. Which it is doing in the most inane and mind-numbing way. Regarding Israel’s war with Lebanon, President Bush said, “The best way to end the violence in the Middle East is to understand how it started.” Huh? First, when did George W. Bush ever understand anything? Second, when did George W. Bush ever understand anything about anything in the Middle East? And third, when did the Middle East’s understanding of anything ever stop its violence? About “the Answer” thing: We can do NOTHING about problems in the Middle East until we have something in our defense arsenal. Right now, we don’t even have an arsenal…so I’ve got nothing on that. But the US has to save itself. We have to get out of Iraq. And we have to vote out all Republicans in November. Those are the most basic initial steps the US has to take to save itself. While the GOP is in the White House, it must silence George W. Bush. He’s a detriment. He’s stupid and he looks, acts and sounds pig-ignorant and stoned. If silencing Bush means putting him in a medically induced coma until January 20, 2009, then so fucking be it. And from now on, anyone speaking for the US must sound thoughtful and intelligent, which rules out Boots Rice, Deadeye Cheney, Numnut Frist, Asshole Hastert, Braindead Specter, Podperson McCain, Swishy Ken Mehlman, and Talking-Out-His-Ass Tony Snow. If the GOP has to find a ringer to sound thoughtful and intelligent then so fucking be that too. Actors can be hired. Who says the Dems don’t have a plan? I've got a plan.

Friday, July 14, 2006

If Specter Is Behind It, It’s Pro-GOP

And if Bush agreed to it, it’s Pro-Bush administration, Pro-GOP, Pro-government snooping-on-Americans, Pro-secretive shenanigans and ANTI-AMERICAN PEOPLE. The NYT reports this morning that the White House has agreed to let a secret court decide whether the NSA wiretaps were legal or illegal. This secret court is the FISC--Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, which is part of FISA (Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act). FISA is a legal entity that was established for the purpose of deciding "foreign intelligence" surveillance matters. It is separate from ordinary law enforcement surveillance. But here’s the most interesting part. The FISC is a secret—ne plus ultra secret--court. It doesn’t have to publish its findings. It makes its decisions in secret and they stay secret. The FISC bases its findings on presentations from the Department of Justice. Yeah, that’s right, as in: Attorney General Alberto Gonzales and the Department of Justice. Um…let me amend my former statement. Here’s the most interesting part: Senator Arlen Specter (R-PA and chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee) worked with President Bush and White House officials to agree on a plan to review the wiretapping program. Are we talking foxes in charge of the henhouse, or what? As the NYT says, “If approved by Congress, the deal would put the court, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, in the unusual position of deciding whether the wiretapping program is a legitimate use of the president’s power to fight terrorism. The aim of the plan, Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales told reporters, would be to ‘test the constitutionality’ of the program.’” Representative Jane Harman, (D-CA) the ranking Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, said the Specter-White House agreement “is an end run” around the FISA law requiring the approval of individual wiretapping warrants. “I have great respect for this guy,” Harmon said of Mr. Specter, “but he hasn’t been briefed on this program, and he’s giving away in this legislation a core Fourth Amendment protection by basically saying that the FISA court has permission to bless the entire program, which will abandon as best I can tell the requirement of individualized warrants.” With all due respect to Jane Harmon, I have no respect whatsoever-at-all-and-no-way for Arlen Specter. He’s a GOP tool, a weasel, a scum-sucking, forked tongued betrayer of the American people. BTW, he still strongly believes that a magic bullet killed President Kennedy. Arlen Specter will always support any plot, scheme or plan that consolidates and increases the secret powers of the GOP. And this plot/scheme/plan is a beaut. The FISC will go into secret session, decide that the NSA secret wiretapping was absolutely and incontrovertibly legal, but it will not publish its findings. The only way we will know is when AG Gonzales stands up in front of TV cameras does his Gonzales smirk and says, “I can’t give you any details because they are secret. But surveillance cameras in US malls have revealed an upsurge in the number of low-income senior citizens going into malls in hot weather and not buying anything. Therefore, in order to differentiate between low-income senior non-buyers and terrorists, the US government is requiring all low-income seniors to wear buttons in the shape of red/white targets on their lapels. This is necessary for national security and it was made a US Department of Justice law by an entity I cannot reveal, at a time I cannot reveal, by a court whose name I cannot reveal, in findings I cannot reveal by men whose name are secret.”

Wednesday, July 12, 2006

Robert Novak Claims He’s Pure as Driven Snow

Exactly one month ago, on June 12, 2006, Karl Rove’s attorney, Robert Luskin, read a short letter he had received from Special Counsel Patrick J. Fitzgerald. The letter said that Fitzgerald “does not anticipate seeking charges” against Rove. To date, we have not heard directly from Patrick J. Fitzgerald. But those are very specific and carefully chosen words. Did Rove make a deal that Fitzgerald was giving notice that Rove had better honor or he would be charged? No matter how you disect the sentence, it does not say Karl Rove is innocent and will not be charged. However, every newspaper in the land pronounced that Rove would not be charged. In fact, in reporting about Robert Novak’s latest column which circulated on the Internet last night, the New York Times said this morning, “Last month, Mr. Fitzgerald informed Mr. Rove, who had testified before the grand jury five times, that he would not be charged.” It was three years ago, July 14, 2003, that Novak’s weasely column started the whole mess by leaking information that Joseph Wilson’s wife was a CIA undercover agent who used her maiden name, Valerie Plame. Joseph Wilson is the man who put the lie to the White House claim that Saddam Hussein had tried to buy uranium in Africa. Novak’s latest column says, “I have been subpoenaed by and testified to a federal grand jury. Published reports that I took the Fifth Amendment, made a plea bargain with the prosecutors or was a prosecutorial target were all untrue." Novak named Karl Rove, Bill Harlow of the CIA and a third source whose name he would not divulge because the official has not come forward publicly. The NYT reported “Mr. Novak said his decision to discuss his sources with Mr. Fitzgerald had been made reluctantly, after he realized that the prosecutor had learned independently of those sources and his lawyers had advised him that he faced a costly and probably unsuccessful legal fight if he refused to cooperate.” If Novak says he did not make any deals with Fitzgerald, then we know he made a deal. Just as we know Rove made a deal. But the real question is: In order to save their worthless asses, who did Novak and Rove rat out that would be more than worth a Novak and a Rove? Sounds like Cheney or Bush to me.

Tuesday, July 11, 2006

Mr. Ratfucker Is Surprised By Your Surprise

Mr. Ratfucker has been reading recent news reports, opinions and man-on-the-street interviews. He has found that the public is genuinely astonished that our soldiers are engaging in rape, murder and torture in Iraq and Afghanistan. In an effort to explain why this turn of events has occurred, one news story reported that the military is having trouble getting decent recruits and has lowered its standards to the point of accepting skinheads, neo-Nazis and gang members into its ranks. Even if that were true, Mr. Ratfucker believes it is a factor not a reason for the cruel and subhuman behavior of our soldiers. The reason our troops are acting like unprincipled brutes is twofold: 1) All of mankind is capable of quickly sinking into inhuman behavior when threatened. 2) In all wars, American soldiers are trained to think of the enemy as nonhuman things. How cruel would an ordinary American be if his life were in peril? The answer is VERY. In 1961-1962 Stanley Milgram conducted a series of experiments on obedience to authority at Yale University. He found that 65% of his subjects (ordinary residents of New Haven) willingly gave apparently harmful electric shocks of up to 450 volts to a pitifully protesting victim, simply because a scientific authority ordered them to do it. And the subjects knew the victim did nothing to deserve to be punished. In reality, the experiment used an actor who did not actually receive shocks. But this fact was not revealed to the subjects until the end of the experiment. The most ordinary of us is capable of inflicting horrible pain on our fellowman if an authority figure either condones it or commands it. Mr. Ratfucker is well aware how comforting it is to think we are the person who would never deliver an electric jolt to another human being just because we were told to do it. And he is well aware how comforting it is to cluck our tongues over the rapes going on in Iraq, knowing in our hearts we are too well brought up, ethical and nice to do such atrocious things. However, the training our soldiers are receiving dehumanizes the enemy. And the Bush administration is the authority that condones these brutal attacks. It is the only way a government—any government—can ratchet up the kill response in an ordinary human being when the government decides to go to war. Mr. Ratfucker asks: Can you be so sure how you would act if you were scared shitless, filled with hatred, had a gun, felt threatened, and had been told your government condoned and blessed every brutal act you could inflict on the enemy?

Monday, July 10, 2006

PA’s Problem, But the Nation Should Worry

New York Times Headline this morning: Running Hard, Senate Power (Rick Santorum-R-PA) Seeks a New Image. The NYT said, “Polls show that Robert P. Casey Jr., the state treasurer, holds a comfortable lead over Mr. Santorum — in a Quinnipiac University poll, Mr. Casey is in the lead by 18 points.” However Rick Santorum is dancing as fast as he can to try to make Pennsylvanians forget who he is and what he believes in. Lest anyone forgets: Rick Santorum has voted with President Bush 98% of the time. He’s a religious fanatic conservative, he rubber-stamps every Republican initiative, and he has made some of the most outrageous statements ever to come out of the US Senate. Santorum’s voting record: Rated 25% by the ACLU, indicating an anti-civil rights voting record. Rated 0% by NARAL, indicating a pro-life voting record Rated 25% by CURE, indicating anti-rehabilitation crime votes. Rated 27% by the NEA, indicating anti-public education votes. Rated 100% by CATO, indicating a pro-free trade voting record Rated 0% by APHA, indicating an anti-public health voting record. Rated 0% by SANE, indicating a pro-military voting record. Rated 0% by APHA, indicating an anti-public health voting record. Rated 0% by the AFL-CIO, indicating an anti-union voting record. Rated 10% by the ARA, indicating an anti-senior voting record. Santorum said, “If the Supreme Court says that you have the right to consensual sex within your home, then you have the right to bigamy, you have the right to incest, you have the right to adultery. You have the right to anything." On May 18th, 2005 he expounded on the Senate filibuster fight and equated those who were against changing the way judges are confirmed with Hitler. He said. “It's the equivalent of Adolf Hitler in 1942, 'I'm in Paris. How date you invade me. How dare you bomb my City? It's mine.'” On September 6, 2005, Santorum said regarding Hurricane Katrina: "I mean, you have people who don't heed those warnings and then put people at risk as a result of not heeding those warnings. There may be a need to look at tougher penalties on those who decide to ride it out and understand that there are consequences to not leaving." He believes the world and everything in it was created 6,000 years ago and he admires the fanatic Opus Dei cult. In an April 7th, 2005 Associated Press interview Santorum said that “marriage has not ever to my knowledge included's not, you know, man on child, man on dog, or whatever the case may be. It is one thing.” He has publicly fought for capping pain and suffering lawsuits at $250,000. But his wife sued her chiropractor in a pain and suffering case for $500,000 and won $350,000. I said on April 23, 2006 “Santorum has six children. He enrolled his school-age children in a school that was open only to Pennsylvania residents, even though the Santorums live in Virginia. He only removed the kids from the Pennsylvania school when a school board member raised a stink about the illegal arrangement.” Now he’s involved in another controversy about his residency. The NYT reported this morning: “He (Rick Santorum) found himself mired in controversy over his residency in recent weeks, with his detractors highlighting the fact that while he maintains a modest residence in suburban Pittsburgh, his family lives in the Virginia suburbs when the Senate is in session, which is the majority of the year. Critics argued it was not unlike the living arrangements he denounced in his 1990 House race against Representative Doug Walgren, the Democrat he defeated.” On Thursday, June 22, 2006, Santorum said, "We have found weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, chemical weapons.” So, once again, I must repeat the words of former Democratic senator Bob Kerrey who wondered whether Santorum is "Latin for asshole.”

Sunday, July 09, 2006

What’s Behind GOP Plan to Muzzle Press?

It was one more preemptive strike when the Bush administration cried foul over stories running in the New York Times, Wall Street Journal and LA Times about our government tracking banking transactions of potential terrorists since 2001. The White House used the publishing of the stories as an excuse. The information was anything but secret and had been known and written about during the last five years. And the White House had publicly acknowledged the fact that banking transactions were being surveilled. Ever since George W. Bush became president in 2000, the White House has tried to control the press. And it was fairly successful until the President’s approval ratings plummeted into the 30’s. At that point, the mainstream media finally discovered it still had vestigial ca-jones. Although I have no idea what nefarious plots and schemes the Bush administration wants to keep away from the public, you can take this to the bank: The White House has a desperate need to totally control the press RIGHT NOW. I am assuming it has to do with some nasty, smelly and potentially treasonous sweetheart deals the White House has made or wants to make with Russia, China and yes, North Korea. Hence the most recent preemptive strike against the mainstream media. If the White House can make the public’s right to know illegal, then it can proceed with its fascist plans. And if John McCain wins the next election, it will be so much easier for him to proceed with the Republican sale of the United States to foreign countries if he doesn’t have to worry about a meddling press. The list of countries that George W. Bush designated as the "axis of evil" (Iraq, Iran and North Korea) needs to be revised to include the US under Republican rule. And by the way, the New York Times had some interesting comments this morning on the “surprise windfall” the Repubs are boasting about re shrinking the deficit this year to $300 billion. “One reason the run-up in taxes looks good”, the NYT says, “is because the past five years looked so bad. Revenues are up, but they have lagged well behind economic growth.” The NYT went on to report, “’The fact is that revenues are way below what the administration said they would be a few years ago,’ said Thomas S. Kahn, staff director for Democrats on the House Budget Committee. ‘The long-term prognosis is still very, very bleak, and the administration doesn't have any kind of long-term plan.’” Two rules-of-thumb apply for deciphering White House statements: 1. When the Bush administration makes a statement, it is a lie and the exact opposite is true. 2. The Bush administration has allied itself with the most evil and corrupt men in the world.

Friday, July 07, 2006

Prez Hopes Lay’s Heart Was Right With God

That’s what George W. Bush said on Larry King last night. "You know,” our folksy born-again God-anointed President said, speaking about Enron Corp. founder and betrayer of the innocent Kenneth Lay, “my hope is that his heart was right with the Lord”. And as any God-fearing, self-righteous, Bible-thumper knows, being right with God means having confessed your sins to God and having asked Him for forgiveness. Oddly, though, what we have here are two people who see themselves as sinless: George W. Bush and Ken Lay. So neither one could confess his sins and ask for forgiveness because neither can see he’s done anything wrong. But one goes on national television and in order to appear just a tad more holy than God Himself, piously hopes that the one other sinless person in the world was right with God when he went to his reward. And, just in case God had gone out for a cup of coffee and neglected to pass judgment Himself, Little Jesus of the White House pronounced that Lay was “a good guy”. I can only assume the Almighty was laughing his ass off, or He would have knocked the pious putz off his chair with a camera boom and electrocuted him then and there.

Thursday, July 06, 2006

Ken Lay Was a Son of a Bitch

Former speechwriter for Reagan and GHWBush, Peggy Noonan, said today in the Wall Street Journal, “isn't it obvious that Ken Lay died of a broken heart?” The New York Times said, “Mr. Lay was fairly convicted of his crimes, but he was also a father and grandfather, whose family mourns his passing. He was headed for the penitentiary, but that did not have to be the end for him. He would have had an opportunity to use his personal skills to help other prisoners.” The NYT also said Lay had risen up by his bootstraps and that he was a Horatio Alger kind of guy. When Ken Lay was charged with his horrible crimes at Enron, he got on television and prated about what a fine Christian man he was. What crap and balderdash! Ken Lay was a greedy, avaricious, selfish, uncaring bastard and now he’s dead. How does death turn him into a saint? How does death make it impolitic and a social gaffe to remember him as the ugly person he was? Why are we not to speak ill of the dead? Death does not wipe out the devastation one has caused. If Ken Lay died of a broken heart, which he didn’t, who in the sane world cares? What about the broken hearts of the people he consigned to a poverty-stricken old age because he willfully and deliberately squandered their savings? By the time Ken Lay died, he had no heart to be broken. Horatio Alger must be spinning in his grave at being remembered in the same sentence with Ken Lay. Lay would have rehabilitated himself in prison? Not a chance. If the NYT wants to indulge in a fantasy about what Ken Lay would have done had he lived, I’m game. Ken Lay would have never stopped working on the fiction that he was innocent. He would have become a jailhouse lawyer who tried to help all the other criminals in his cellblock slither out of their righteous convictions. And he might well have become ordained by a born-again correspondence-school seminary--the better to deceive and defraud his fellow prisoners. The NYT likes far-out and unprovable conjecture? Okay. How about this? Knowing that his assets would be inheritable if he died, the Lay family suggested to their financial genius paterfamilias that he take a pill that would mimic a massive heart attack. Kind of like Frankie Pentangeli in The Godfather Part II. At least that would have shown a generosity of spirit. But even that probably didn’t happen because Ken Lay had no generosity of spirit.

Wednesday, July 05, 2006

Explain This To Me Please:

"I'm going to make you this promise…I'm not going to allow the sacrifice of 2,527 troops who have died in Iraq to be in vain by pulling out before the job is done." I have no idea what that means. And I doubt President Bush knows what it means. He made the dramatic pronouncement to soldiers and their families in Fort Bragg, NC yesterday on the Fourth of July. The actual total of American soldiers who have already died in vain in Iraq is 2,538. And what does getting the job done entail? What does getting the job done mean? When will the job be done? NO ONE in the White House, the entire Bush administration or the GOP has ever spelled out what “victory” in Iraq is. Presumably victory and getting the job done is the same thing. But what has to happen to accomplish it? In September of 2001, the President said he wanted Osama bin Laden “dead or alive”. This was a day after Vice President Dick Cheney said he would “willingly accept bin Laden’s head on a platter”. Six months later, in March 2002 Bush said, "I don't know where he (Osama bin Laden) is. You know, I just don't spend that much time on him. I truly am not that concerned about him." Yesterday Bush told his captive audience, "They administered compassionate medical care to a man (Al-Qaeda’s Abu Musab al-Zarqawi) who showed no compassion to his victims…and when this brutal terrorist took his final breath, one of the last things he saw was the face of an American soldier from Fort Bragg, N.C." It was not reported whether any of the soldiers puked in disgust at such maudlin manipulative nonsense. But why is the Prez even talking about Al-Qaeda’s ringleaders? A news report yesterday said that the unit hunting for Osama bin Laden had been closed down late last year because “Al-Qaeda is no longer as hierarchical as it once was.” Now that there is no Al-Qaeda to speak of, and Osama probably died of natural causes in his cave surrounded by a loving family and loyal followers a year ago, and civil war has already erupted in Iraq, and the people of Iraq are worse off than they were under Saddam, and the Iraqis want us and our murdering raping soldiers out of Iraq, tell me Mr. Jackass-in-Chief: Precisely what is “the job” in Iraq? And exactly what has to occur for it to be “done”?

Tuesday, July 04, 2006

More Bush Administration Doublethink

On February 9th, 2006, President Bush gave a speech to the National Guard in the National Guard Building in Washington, D.C. A white House press release billed it as "President Discusses Progress in War on Terror to National Guard". The Prez invoked the words “September the 11th” or “9/11” twelve times. And he said “Al-Qaeda” 19 times. Bush said, “The attacks in London and Madrid and other cities are grim reminders of how lethal Al-Qaeda remains.” At the time Bush gave his impassioned speech about the deadly Al-Qaeda, the CIA had already closed its unit for hunting Osama bin Laden late last year. The NYT reported this morning that intelligence officials say the Bin Laden unit (called “Alec Station”) was shut down because “Al-Qaeda is no longer as hierarchical as it once was.” Oh, and another reason it was shut down was because members of Alec Station “had acquired a reputation for crazed alarmism about the rising Al-Qaeda threat." Let’s see, what was it Bush said when Abu Musab al-Zarqawi was killed on June 8th? “The death of the Jordanian-born Zarqawi is a severe blow to Al Qaeda," and “the killing of Al Qaeda's leader in Iraq, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, offers a chance to ‘turn the tide’ in the war.” And how much cash money did MSNBC report the US government was offering for “information leading to al-Zarq1awi’s killing or capture”? Oh yeah, it was $25 million. What was that about crazed alarmism? So the White House isn’t hunting Osama anymore and Al-Qaeda has been downgraded to “no longer hierarchical”, and we didn’t attack Iraq because of WMD’s, and our spreading of Bush-style freedom has been as productive as spreading manure on a saltflat. So what are we doing in Iraq? Oh that’s right…we’re running Republican election campaigns for this coming November and for 2008.

Monday, July 03, 2006

Did the Pod People Get John McCain?

Watching John McCain (R-AZ) yesterday on George Steph’s “This Week” was like watching a Stepford Wife run her robotic conversation…the same bland silliness, the same zoned-out smile, the hollow laugh, the dead eyes. Oh dear…where has the GOP hidden the real John McCain? The worst-case answer is: This is the real John McCain. McCain wants to be president so bad that he’s finally showing us who he is. And he hopes kissing ass and saying yes to Republican crimes, greed and avarice will win the day. The NYT reported this morning that McCain had been giving President Bush words of support. McCain said he told Bush, “Look, hang on, things are bad, I'm proud of the job you are doing, and I wanted you to know that I will continue to do what I can to help.” McCain added, "I've tried, when his numbers went down, to be more supportive and outspoken, because I'd love to pick him up.” McCain says he’s confident Congress will overturn the Supreme Court’s recent ruling that Bush had overstepped his bounds re Gitmo prisoners. That is to say, whatever torture McCain went through during his five years as a POW, he thinks should be visited on US prisoners. And if the Supreme Court says otherwise, the Supreme Court should be overruled. Now, that’s something that is understandable. McCain wants revenge on his captors, and the one way he can get it is to torture our captives. I get that. But what about the other unconscionable Bush administration policies that McCain has rubber-stamped? What it means is, the GOP has decided to continue its fascist overthrow of the US government and it’s fine with John McCain. The GOP is sticking with whatever worked in 2000 and 2004 and John McCain has given notice he intends to sanction all of it, if the folks will PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE ELECT ME. The NYT reprinted a pic this morning of McCain during Bush's last election campaign desperately hugging Bush like a lost boy who had just found his Scoutmaster. It says it all.

Sunday, July 02, 2006

GOP Plan For Staying in Power: Talk Tough

House Republican leader John A. Boehner (R-OH) said that Al Qaeda was “surely pleased at the show of support from Capital Hill Democrats” last week when they applauded the Supreme Court’s ruling that the Prez had overstepped his powers re detainees at Gitmo. As the LA Times said this morning, tough talk “helped the GOP to take control of the Senate in 2002 and Bush to win reelection in 2004” And apparently the Repubs are confident that tough sounding bullshit will also win the day in 2006 and 2008. The other part of the tough talk plan is to paint the Democrats as “wishy-washy” traitors who “embolden” terrorists. Recently, the Prez said, "What's going to matter [in the 2006 elections] is who has got the plan that will enable us to succeed in Iraq.” The flaw in that idiotic boast is that the Bush administration has no plan for success in Iraq. And that is because the Bush administration cannot succeed in Iraq. The White House has switched from swagger and brag about winning the war to swagger and brag about defeating terrorism. And yet, neither is possible. For a couple of days, the White House talked trash about how killing the Al Qaeda leader Zarqawi had the insurgents on the run. But facts soon showed the claim to be ridiculous. A suicide bomb in an open-air market in Baghdad on Saturday killed 77 people and wounded 96 in the deadliest single attack since the Iraqi government was formed six weeks ago. And everyday we hear one more grisly story about American soldiers killing and raping civilians in this out-of-control, unnecessary and unwinnable war. The GOP says Democrats are “defeatists” and that they have no plan for victory in Iraq. It’s true. It’s impossible for a sane person to be optimistic about the chances for success in Iraq since there is no chance for success in Iraq. It’s impossible to have a plan for victory when victory in Iraq is out of the question. When do we start to defeat terrorism in Iraq? What does success in Iraq look like? What does victory in Iraq look like? And what is the Bush administration’s step-by-step plan for winning in Iraq? We will never hear answers to those questions because the White House cannot have a cogent plan for a situation that cannot happen. We will only hear how tough talk will win elections in the US. But here is a really tough question: Does the Bush administration want to win in Iraq and therefore have an end to this war? Or is it better for big business, better for Republicans, better for the foreign powers that the GOP has already sold out to, to keep this war going?

Saturday, July 01, 2006

The Problem With Having an Insane Leader

First, let’s me state the obvious: George W. Bush is insane. The problem with a nation having an insane leader (as in Germany’s Hitler, Uganda’s Idi Amin and Panama‘s Manuel Noriega) is that in the beginning, the leader’s insanity seems to work to the advantage of the people who let him rise to power. But having been granted immense and unprecedented power, an insane leader will always make rulings that not only are not helpful to his followers, but also run counter to the best interests of his nation. An insane leader simply wants unlimited power. And that is the state of the Republican Party today. The Supreme Court justices that the Repubs so masterfully elevated to the highest court in the land are now having to make rulings against the sociopath who put them in power in order to save the Republican Party. Loyal Repubs like Senator John Warner (R-VA) are having to step back and decide whether the Prez should be slapped down for overreaching. An insane leader will ALWAYS bite the hand that feeds him. And that means curtailing the power of those who anointed him. That’s the way it is. Interestingly, Idi Amin was abandoned by his father and grew up with his mother’s family. Manuel Noriega was given up for adoption at age 5 by his father and the maid his father knocked up. Hitler’s father was very strict and savagely beat his son. What about the boyhood of our insane leader? He’s a mama’s boy who had little contact with his father. Does this matter? It may explain a thing or two. But the important point is the United States has an insane leader who has decided he has the power to do anything he wants to do. And his henchmen are prepared to destroy anyone who opposes him. If the President’s henchmen wise up and realize that their insane leader will do ANYTHING--including destroying his henchmen--to increase his power, can they stop him? I have no idea. Do you?