Now We Know

When the criminally insane residents of the White House made plans to invade Iraq on the cheap by using poorly trained Army reserve and National Guard units, hypothetical scenarios were floated as to what would happen if: 1) The need to defend ourselves in other areas of the world arose 2) The need for National Guard units to be deployed within the United States arose 3) The need for National Guard units to be used in a natural disaster arose And now we know. We have been advised for years that the levees in New Orleans might not hold during a mega-force hurricane. And doomsday scenarios have been advanced about what might happen if these levees gave way. Now we know. While the thugs and lunatics in the Bush administration and Pentagon lived in their virtual world of happy talk and deceit, the real world descended into economic, military, and environmental disaster after disaster. Worst-case prophesies were advanced about what the event might be that would cause havoc to erupt in the United States. Now we know. It wouldn't be terrorists, it wouldn't be germ or chemical or nuclear warfare. It would be our own maniacal and crazed leaders and their screw-the-planet policies and run-amuck war in Iraq that would bring the US to its knees. And when that awful incident occurred, it was inevitable that our President would belatedly and lazily return from a five-week vacation during one of the most globally eventful months of the year, read the worst speech ever written in the history of mankind, fumble through off-the-cuff remarks on television and say things like the breaking of the levees in New Orleans could not have been anticipated. While it is impossible for mentally impaired George W. Bush to sit in a chair and look sane at the same time, the rest of us can easily do two things at once. We can give aid in the form of service and money to the Katrina victims and we also can move forward on the impeachment of the President for dereliction of duty and malfeasance (called Crimes and Misdemeanors in Article Two of the Constitution). We have the choice: Watch the Chimp go Ape or get rid of him.

Dear Francis Fukuyama:

What the hell are you up to? I just read your Op/Ed piece (“Invasion of the Isolationists”) in this morning's NYT. You give the Bush administration fits for its foreign policy since 9/11. And yet, the war in Iraq and all the decisions made by the Bush administration since its disastrous decision to blame the WTC attack on Saddam Hussein are due to the warmongering precepts that you, William Kristol, Dick Cheney, Jeb Bush, Scooter Libby, Donald Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz and 19 others signed June 3rd 1997 called The Project for the New American Century. If you now feel the PNAC principles were wrong, I want to hear it. I want to hear you say it. First, you betrayed the American people by aligning yourself with a bunch of warmongering isolationists who advocated pre-emptive strikes on countries who didn't agree to let the USA rule the world. Now you are betraying the PNAC by saying the Bushites are wrong-headed isolationists. And into the bargain, you are on the board of directors of something called The New America Foundation, whose mission statement is a masterwork of obfuscating gobbledy-gook: “Powerful forces - from rapid technological change to massive demographic shifts, from economic globalization to terrorism - are remaking America. Now, more than ever, our nation needs a robust public debate, one that does justice to the complex challenges and opportunities of this unfolding era. Yet there remains a dearth of new thinking on both sides of the political divide, as well as a lack of investment in developing the creative young minds most capable of crafting new public policy solutions. The purpose of the New America Foundation is to bring exceptionally promising new voices and new ideas to the fore of our nation's public discourse. Relying on a venture capital approach, the Foundation invests in outstanding individuals and policy ideas that transcend the conventional political spectrum. Through its Fellowships and Policy Programs, New America sponsors a wide range of research, writing, conferences, and events on the most important issues of our time.” Who are these “outstanding individuals” and what are the “policy ideas” that the New America Foundation plans to invest in? Are Jeb Bush, William Frist and Supreme Court Nominee John Roberts your type of outstanding individuals? Is privatizing Social Security, bringing back the draft and devising more deadly nuclear weapons in the US while making nuclear weapons illegal in the rest of the world your type of exceptional policy ideas? If the Bush administration's “Jacksonian isolationism” is "too pugnacious", what course would please you and your PNAC and New America cohorts? You take a dim view of our staying in Iraq because that would “ensure that the United States remains preoccupied with the Middle East to the detriment of other important regions - Asia, for example - for years to come.” So what are you suggesting? We should get out of Iraq in order to aggress on China? You may be right, Mr. Fukuyama, about the Bush administration's stupid isolationism. But if you are right it's for the wrong reasons. I doubt seriously your ideology has changed since 1997. By my lights you've simply become more devious and sneaky.

The Rationale for “Staying the Course” in Iraq

The White House wants to keep on fighting in Iraq, keep on sending soldiers to Iraq and keep on having American soldiers killed in Iraq because the Bush administration started a war it doesn't know how to end. That's it. You can take all the rhetoric about a pull-out weakening the area, all the hogwash about bringing freedom and liberty to the Middle East, all the military-speak about winning the war on terrorists, and all the nonsense about fighting over there so we don't have to fight here, and you can shove it up Karl Rove's ass (if George Bush's head has left any room, which I doubt). The White House, like the Roman Catholic Church, cannot admit it is wrong. From now until the insane asylum in the White House is closed down, we are going to hear THE BIGGEST LIE OF THEM ALL: the mission of the United States is to bring peace, democracy and women's rights to the Middle East. The United States started a war in Iraq because Iraq was supposed to crumble quickly, then we were going to aggress on other countries in the region, which were going to fall over like dominoes. Then we were going to crow about the moral superiority of the Christian religion and the military supremacy of our armed forced while we boasted and blustered about nuking the rest of the world if it didn't bow down to THE MASTER. And last, we and the Saudis and bin Ladens were going to control all the oil in the Middle East until the US knocked over the Saudis. Alas, it didn't quite work out that way. But not to worry, the US can spin lead into gold. Gone are the lies about finding Weapons of Mass Destruction, hounding Osama bin Laden out of his hidey-caves and making the world safe for the US to dominate. Now we get lies that corrupt Iraqi elections were free and democratic and that a hokey unworkable constitution will bring liberty and equality to the region. The only reason we are in Iraq is because BushII put us there through deceit and bad planning. And there isn't anyone in the White House or the Pentagon who has the foggiest idea how to end the little preemptive strike that was supposed to usher-in the US control of the world. We're in Iraq and we're going to stay there because the White House Ladies love to play soldier but they thought the other side would do the right thing and use fake ammo.

Thanks Frank Rich, I Needed That

As usual, Frank Rich is right. Although his Op/Ed piece this morning (“The Vietnamization of Bush's Vacation”) is an indictment of the Bush administration and its “hallucinatory loop of delusion” re Iraq, Rich is unsparing in his denunciation of the Democrats as well. By my count, Rich enumerated six ways the Democrats have fallen down on the job. And we Democrats must never forget our own culpability in the debacle in Iraq. Our sin has been to stand by and let it happen. Frank Rich is far from a Cindy Sheehan supporter. He admits she has been a catalyst that forced the people in the US to talk about the Iraq quagmire and to focus on the fact that we need to have a plan for getting out and that it needs to be sooner rather than later. But Rich is one of the few anti-Bush writers who is daring to say Camp Casey is now a circus and it's become counter-productive. Rich says that: 1) The Democrats have offered no alternative to the extremes of Bush's cant of “staying the course” or Sheehan's demand that we get out of Iraq now. 2) Russell Feingold is the only Dem “with a clue” re Iraq when he proposed that the US should have “a target date” for withdrawal and not a deadline. 3) Hillary Clinton who presumably will run for Prez in 2008 dropped the ball when a suicide bomber killed 27 children in Baghdad and Ms Clinton's response was to hold a press conference about protecting American children from the violence of video games. 4) The Dems policy of doing nothing in order to inherit the earth is not only immoral it's unpatriotic. 5) The Dems have been too cowardly to admit they made a grievous error three years ago when they bought the Republican lies and rubber-stamped the Iraq war. And this craven policy cane about at the time in order to win midterm elections. 6) The Republican polls are tanking but so are the Dems. And the Dems have no plans to rehabilitate themselves because they assume the Repubs will blink first. When Frank Rich is right, he's right. And we Democrats should listen and learn.

Is It Alzheimer’s Or Is It Propaganda?

George W. Bush keeps repeating himself. The montage of the President on The Daily Show last night said it all. We’re making progress, progress, progress, there are no timetables, no timetables, no timetables. And if you noticed…seeing the Prez indoors, outdoors and all around the globe, the left side of his face is drooping, drooping, drooping. And into the bargain his brain is not working, not working, not working. The worst of it is that George W. Bush does not realize the arguments his minders have given him for our being in Iraq (which he faithfully repeats, repeats, repeats like the robot he is) make no sense whatsoever--Christopher Hitchens notwithstanding. Bush and Hitchens say we are fighting terrorists in Iraq so that we don’t have to fight them here. What a load of nonsense. We attacked Iraq, by Rumsfeld’s own admission, because Iraq was the “best target” for going back and finishing GHWBush’s war. There was no threat from Iraq. We were on the offensive, not defensive. The White House knew Iraq had nothing to do with the 9/11 attack on the World Trade Center. The chickenhawks had decided to punish Saddam Hussein for GHWB’s humiliation and that’s what they did. But we’re still hearing the old cant that we have to stay and fight in Iraq so that they don’t bring the war here. Huh? We’re the ones going around provoking war in the world, not Iraq. The groups fighting against us in Iraq are defending themselves against our aggression and war of revenge. They did not start this war. We attacked them specifically because the army in Iraq was weak and we wanted to show them who was boss. The quote from the old comic strip “Pogo” is still right: “We has seen the enemy and they is us”. But…credit where credit is due. The GOP was brilliant in picking out GWB to run for Prez and to be fraudulently installed as President of the USA. There is not a single solitary man in politics except George W. Bush who would allow himself to be used as a mindless propaganda machine. There is not one other politician who would repeat the lies that GWB is willing to repeat. And God help us all, his brain is so addled, he actually believes the twaddle he’s told to say. However, GWB is not immune to feeling overwhelmed, inadequate and hyper. Another stroke/seizure is inevitable.

The Heartland

The tide seems to have turned out there in Illinois where the majority of my friends have always voted Republican. It's not that the folks in my hometown have switched sides. They are still Republicans. But they are Republicans who have come to despise the asshole they voted-in for President. They hate the war in Iraq, think we should pull out, and they are talking about it. At our reunion two years ago, I didn't dare mention that I was a Yellowdog Democrat. This time, I felt free to voice my views, although none of us got into heavy debates. But I am wondering about an issue which will be a BIG factor in the 2008 election: Will these one-time staunch defenders of the Republican Party vote against a GOP candidate, or will they sit the election out and wait for their guys to regain their senses? The Democratic Party is going to need to woo and win these Republicans who hate the war in Iraq. The issue of the war will be the deciding factor in 2008. Bush has now painted himself into a corner about the war and he leaves no wiggle-room in which 2008 GOP candidates can maneuver. The GOP Candidate has to agree with Bush on the war. If John McCain stands up and forcefully supports the idea that the US must stay the course in Iraq, many Republicans simply won't vote rather than vote against McCain. However, if the GOP has eyes to put Jeb Bush up as a candidate, the whole thing becomes easier for the Democratic Party. The Bush name in the Heartland is a four-letter word. On another topic: When Lance Armstrong used to compete in the big bike race in Philadelphia (this was before he was able to use cancer as a rallying cry), I despised him. It was something about his over-weaning stage-mother Mom. It was like watching an updated Oedipus story. I felt kind of guilty loathing Lance because he had a mother problem. But now I have a good excuse for those strong feelings of revulsion and antipathy. The man hobnobs with George W. Bush. I'll even discount the fact that (yup, seems to be a FACT) Lance Armstrong uses and has used performance-enhancing drugs. Lance Armstrong going down to Crawford, Texas to kiss GWB's ass is an ughly sight no matter how you look at it. Was Lance Armstrong bought and paid for by the White House Ladies? I wouldn't bet against it.

High School Reunion

I'm off to the Midwest to reune. Back on the 25th.

Dear Zev Chafets:

Your Op/Ed piece in the New York Times this morning (Mother Knows Best) is a piece of crap. However, you probably should be forgiven for writing this piece of crap because you're sitting there in Tel Aviv and you may not know (but more likely, you would rather not consider the truth of the fact) that President George W. Bush is a mentally defective, delusional, self-absorbed idiot. You praise GWB for being “a master politician”. You say GWB was able to coerce Ariel Sharon into ordering the pullout of Israelis from Gaza and the West Bank by his use of “common sense and credibility.” GWB has no common sense, Mr. Chafets. And he is the master of nothing in the US or in the world. He lost whatever credibility the Bush name conferred on him by acting like the arrogant, grandiose, narcissist that he is and always has been. You say that a letter Bush sent to Sharon in April of 2004 sealed the deal re the Gaza/West Bank pullout. You say no other American president had given Sharon the assurances that Bush gave him. First, Bush can't even say a simple declarative sentence, much less write one, so let's be clear: Bush writes nothing, Bush makes no policies, Bush has no thoughts on his own. The words in that letter were the words of Karl Rove and the White House speech writers, with a sentence or two thrown in by Richard Perle, Irving Kristol and Andy Card. The roadmap referred to in that April 2004 letter was basically the roadmap laid out by President Bill Clinton. However, the deal made behind closed doors between Sharon and the White House thugs was a deal that the US cannot and has no means to honor. That deal was that the US would make war on any enemy of Israel and that Israel might just as well kiss Palestine's ass because the US had Israel's back. This is the biggest lie the Bush administration has ever told, of course. The US can't even pull its dick out of the sand in Iraq, let alone make more wars just to be friendly. And another part of the closed-door deal was that if Israel didn't kiss Palestine's ass, the US would stop sending all those nice dollars to Israel. So, put a sock in it about the US saying the right words to Sharon and that the right words sweetened the pot and encouraged Sharon to order the Gaza/West Bank pullout. I am not a Sharon fan, but I have too much respect for his ability to make sharp deals and his stubborn cussedness to believe that sweet-talk turned the tide. What I find most irritating about your Op/Ed piece is the transparent way you suck up to President George W. Bush. Do you honestly think anyone in the world believes Bush is more than a mental patient living in the White House? Why don't you just come out and say what's really on your mind, which is: We now have done what the Americans have wanted Israel to do for decades. Oh please, please, please don't stop sending us money for services rendered. Oh please! It is interesting, though, Mr. Chafets, I have to admit, that both Ariel Sharon and George W. Bush are Mama's Boys. Many serial killers are Mama's Boys.

I Give You Our Hopelessly Addled President

Cox News Service posted a story by Ken Herman Sunday, August 14, 2005. It was George W. Bush's explanation of why he can't find the time to speak with Cindy Sheehan. Cindy Sheehan's son was killed in GWB's war in Iraq. It doesn't matter what Ms Sheehan has said in the past about George Bush or whether she has changed her mind over the months since her son's death in Iraq. It doesn't matter if she comes off strident or articulate, zany or thoughtful, anti- or pro-Bush. Cindy Sheehan is a mother whose son was killed in Iraq. And she wants to talk to George W. Bush about it. She wants her two minutes with GWB so much that she's willing to live in a camp-site down the road from the Bush ranch in Crawford, Texas. She's willing to wait for him to give her a moment. As you know, the economy is going to hell, our war debt is through the roof, the majority of US citizens want us out of Iraq, Israel is in a precarious situation what with the ouster of Israeli's from the Gaza Strip and the West Bank, Iran and Korea want nuclear weapons, Social Security needs to be overhauled but no one likes the White House ideas on how to do it, the President's ratings are in the toilet. Nevermind. President George Bush is taking a five-week vacation at his ranch. And inbetween his naps, here's what George Bush told Cox News about Cindy Sheehan. He said he is aware of the anti-war sentiments of Ms Sheehan and others who have joined her protest near the Bush ranch. “But,” he said, “whether it be here or in Washington or anywhere else, there's somebody who has got something to say to the president, that's part of the job, and I think it's important for me to be thoughtful and sensitive to those who have got something to say." Then he added, "I think it's also important for me to go on with my life, to keep a balanced life." He clarified this point by saying, "I think the people want the president to be in a position to make good, crisp decisions and to stay healthy. And part of my being is to be outside exercising. So I'm mindful of what goes on around me. On the other hand, I'm also mindful that I've got a life to live and will do so." Now let's recap this important statement to make sure we've got the president's message absolutely right. The president feels that it's part of his job to speak to anyone anywhere who has something to say to him. It's so important, in fact, that he wants to be thoughtful and sensitive when he speaks to people who have something to say to him. That's why he's decided not to speak to people who have something to say to him. Into the bargain, he believes that the people of the United States want him to be healthy and to make good decisions. Therefore, he's decided to go outside and exercise instead of speaking to people who want to speak to him even though it's part of his job to speak to anyone anywhere who has something to say. Our President makes it way too easy for Comedy Central. But the fucking buffoon is president of the United States. The United States has a mountain-bike riding bozo for president. Any rumors about the possibility of a presidential assassination won't be because of Bush's enemies or from Democrats. Be mindful of your friends, George. Stuff happens.

Frank Rich: The Iraq War is Over; Notify GWB

Thank God Frank Rich is back from vacation and writing for the New York Times again. For a couple weeks, no one was telling the unvarnished truth. But Rich is back and his Op/Ed piece this morning (“Someone Tell the President the War Is Over”) lays it on the line: Fox News Bill O'Reilly is bad-mouthing Rumsfeld, CNN's Bob Novak got the hell out while he could still walk under his own power, the shakers and spinners in the White House are now trying to call their war of choice a “struggle”, and old GOP loyalists are lining up on the other side against Bush. As Rich says, “On this sinking ship, it's hard to know which rat to root for”. And yet, our silly grinning Prez tells us from his ranch in Texas where he is performing the extraordinary feat of having his head in the sand and up his ass, that we will stay the course in Iraq. As of this morning, 1853 American soldiers have been killed in Iraq and President Bush prates that it's undecided as to when troops will start to be withdrawn. Which, of course, is a lie. It is absolutely known when the pullout will begin. The only one in government who doesn't know when we're going to extricate ourselves from George W. Bush's war is George W. Bush. But at this point, since Prez Bush is mentally incompetent, he's not kept in the loop about anything. He believes his mandate is to be the first King of the World. He thinks he can brush off the mother of a soldier killed in Iraq who is camped out down the road from his Crawford ranch. He's convinced no one knows about his gay escapades. And he believes God put him in the White House. But the madness of President Bush is not the important issue facing the United States. The big dilemma is how can the intelligent men and women in Congress and in the President's cabinet lead the country for the next two years and six months through the morass that the present Bush administration has placed us in. It's the Bush administration that's in its last throes, not the war in Iraq. The war will go on until we pull our troops out. Therefore, our troops must be pulled out and the decision as to when that will be has already been made. The next decision is: How can an administration that has made wrong decisions in every aspect of its leadership start to govern according to Democrat precepts but still appear to be Republican? Now that's a helluva challenge.

What? NBC's Parent Makes War Machines?

John Hockenberry, who no longer works at MSNBC, mentioned in passing on The Daily Show last night that NBC's parent, GE, is in the war business. It had never occurred to me. So I looked it up. Sure enough, GE produces helicopters, unmanned aircraft, and engines used in jet fighters, In the good old days when wars in Kuwait and Iraq were being promoted by the MSM as being the patriot duty of good Americans, GE bragged that the military weapons it produced “continue to operate in critical missions around the world.” GE has been involved in nuclear weapons production and the construction of nuclear power plants since the end of the Second World War. So…what do you think? Would NBC be interested in pushing a rosy view of the Republican's war in Iraq? Would NBC have an interest in fanning the flames of small wars around the planet? You bet your sweet ass it would. But here's the BIG question. We know that the Carlyle Group is amoral and corrupt and that it invests in defense, government shenanigans and industry throughout the world. But how far would the Carlyle Group and GE go in order to make money from nuclear weapons and power plants? Would these two mega-corps invest in nuclear weapons produced by countries unfriendly to the US? I'm just asking.

Yo…Prez Bush! The Shiites Just Took Baghdad…

…and not only that, according to a report out of Iran, Osama Bin Laden says he'll enter Iraq in October for Ramadan. Let me remind you White House Ladies of a thing or two. You planned to force Iraq to accept your choices for Iraq leaders in spite of all your freedom and democracy rhetoric. Well, they sure turned the tables on you. Your Paul Bremer installed the Baghdad Mayor the Shiites just deposed, Alaa al-Tamimi. That was before Bremer fled Iraq with his tail between his legs. "This is the new Iraq," Mr. Tamimi said, according to this morning's New York Times. Tamini is a secular engineer who is beholden to no party. "They use force to achieve their goal,” he said. This isn't the “new Iraq”. This is the old Iraq. Nothing has changed. As of today, 1842 American soldiers have died and Iraq is still ruled by force. And the awful irony is that the aim of the Republican Party was to rule Iraq by US force. Only we called it freedom and democracy. Our gutless President, who avoided serving in the armed forces by hook, crook and Daddy's favors, is so lily-livered he won't even walk down a country lane to talk to the mother of one of the soldiers he killed in Iraq. By the way, Mr. Hide-Behind-Any-Bush, how's that Osama “Dead or Alive” threat going?

Idiot Bush Calls Cindy Sheehan “Mom”

Cindy Sheehan's son Casey was killed in Iraq last year at age 24. Ms. Sheehan wants to confront President Bush and ask him, “Why did you kill my son? What did he die for?” Ms. Sheehan is camping-out down the road from the President's Crawford, TX ranch. Not too long ago, the president's minders would have sent thugs down that winding road to strong-arm Ms. Sheehan into understanding she should vamoose. But the President is in such bad odor these days that his advisors have seen the wisdom of sending senior officials to reason with Ms. Sheehan. Saturday afternoon, national security adviser Stephen J. Hadley and deputy WH chief of staff Joe Hagin hotfooted it down the road to have a confab. However, Ms. Sheehan is adamant. She's staying at her improvised camp-site until President Bush meets with her. The Prez would do well to set up a meet with Ms Sheehan ASAP, because she's already talked to a reporter from The Associated Press, CBS was taping a segment on her, she had appeared on CNN, and this morning she is appearing live on ABC. And her cell phone is alive with reporters from all over asking for interviews. Cindy Sheehan already has divulged a piece of information that has not hit the news shows from families of other soldiers killed in Iraq. And it may be the most interesting bit of info to come out of this standoff. Two months after her son Casey's death, Ms Sheehan and her family met with President Bush. The Prez holds these sessions regularly when he travels around the country. He uses them as photo-ops and tries to wring every ounce of human-interest sentimentality he can squeeze from the encounters. But we've never heard details about how the President conducts himself during these meetings. Until now. The NYT reported this morning re the Bush meeting with Ms. Sheehan, “Mr. Bush did not know her son's name when she and her family met with him in June 2004 at Fort Lewis. Mr. Bush, she said, acted as if he were at a party and behaved disrespectfully toward her by referring to her as 'Mom' throughout the meeting.” In another revealing exchange, Cindy Sheehan said Bush said he couldn't imagine what it was like to lose a loved one like an aunt or uncle. Ms. Sheehan told Mr. Bush that Casey was her son, and that she thought he could imagine what it would be like since he has two daughters and that he should think about what it would be like sending them off to war. Ms. Sheehan said, “Trust me, you don't want to go there.” Bush said, "You're right, I don't.” And Ms. Sheehan said, “Well, thanks for putting me there.” Here's what President George W. Bush should do. In fact, this is the only thing he can do to salvage any shred of credibility he may still have about the war in Iraq. Prez Bush should immediately meet with Cindy Sheehan. But before he ambles down that winding road to her camp-site, he should call up Donald Rumsfeld, tell him to ready the first boot-camp he can think of for two new recruits, because his twin daughters are signing up for duty in Iraq as soon they can be made ready and be deployed. After advising his daughters they are in the army now and he's proud as proud can be, then the President can meet with Casey Sheehan's mom and tell her all about his plans for Iraq and why her son died.

Presby Church Boycotting the Wrong Bad Guys

The Presbyterian Church has gotten righteously indignant and plans to take a vote about divesting itself of holdings in: Caterpillar, Motorola, ITT Industries and United Technologies. The Presbyterians say that these companies are providing military equipment and technology to Israel to aid the occupation of the Palestinian territories. Not to seem biased, the Presbyterians are blackballing Citigroup because the church elders say Citigroup is connected to a bank that provides money from Islamic charities to the families of suicide bombers from Palestine. Laurie Goodstein's article in the NYT this morning (Threat to Divest Is Church Tool in Israeli Fight)reports that the Presbyterians got the goods on Citigroup from an article in the Wall Street Journal. Goodstein wrote that, “The Episcopal Church U.S.A., the United Church of Christ, two regions of the United Methodist Church, as well as international groups like the World Council of Churches and the Anglican Consultative Council have all urged consideration of divestment or economic pressure in recent months.” As you might imagine, Jewish groups are pissed and are saying Israel is being unfairly blamed and Palestine should be shown as perpetuating the violence in Israel. But conspicuously absent from the Protestant hue and cry about ungodly US corporations is The Carlyle Group. Why doesn't the moral outrage of the Presbyterians and the Episcopal Church et al. extend to the biggest promoter of war and violence throughout the world-the Carlyle Group? The Carlyle Group and its investment in war munitions plants (as in, Cheney's Halliburton) are the nice folks who gave us the war in Iraq. Where were these Bible thumpers on that morally repugnant assault on humanity? When you get Christian churches defending Israel or Palestine, what you have are special-interest groups obsessed with keeping the birthplace of Jesus sacrosanct for Christians. Goodstein quotes The Rev. Clifton Kirkpatrick, clerk of the Presbyterian Church U.S.A., saying: "It's not a campaign to divest from the state of Israel. We're fully committed to the state of Israel. But it is a campaign to divest from particular activities that are doing damage and creating injustice and violence, whether that's the building of the separation barrier, construction related to the occupation, or weapons and materials that lead to suicide bombings." Christian churches are fully committed to the state of Israel because it's the birthplace of Christ. All the rhetoric about damage and injustice and violence is crap. The injustice and violence issue is only spin and justification. The real point is that Israel/Palestine is the location of all the action in The New Testament, and that location needs to be defended from all comers. It's not about morals it's about real estate. Let the Christian churches come out and loudly boycott the war in Iraq. Let the Christian churches demand truth-telling from the warmongering White House. Let the Christian churches stand up and stand for an end to the violence, lying and injustice promoted by the Republican Party and the Carlyle Group. Then, maybe, Christian churches will have some credibility. But until that day, they are just talking out their collective ass.

Robert Novak's Meltdown…Oh Happy Day!

I take it quite personally. Novak's breakdown was a gift to me. But then, Jon Stewart of The Daily Show saw Novak's profane snit and swivet as a personal gift to him. I dare say, all the 60,000,000 voters who voted against GWB in the 2004 election probably think Novak's on-camera temper tantrum was a personal gift to them. And the best part of this August Surprise is that CNN immediately told the sneaky, scumsucking, lying, White House shill to make himself scarce for an indefinite period of time. And then over at WNYC, Rick-the-dick Santorum lost his cool about gays and had a shouting fit on the Brian Lehrer show. Wheeeee!!! What's going on? With Santorum, it's just that he's a zealot and a moron. But with Novak, it's tempting to speculate. Why now? Was it a set up? Was it staged? Did CNN give Novak a way to exit the show that was more palatable to him that getting canned? Did Novak know that Ed Henry's next question was going to be a real stinker about the Plame case? It's probably none of the above. Most likely, it was a random mercy from God and we all should give a donation to our favorite charity to give thanks. Paul Krugman's Op/Ed piece in the NYT this morning says the expression “intelligent design” came from Irving Kristol. Intelligent design is a less loaded phrase than creationism, but it means the same thing. That is, everything that is now in existence came into being 6,000 years ago and was formed by God in six days, after which, God rested for a day. Irving Kristol is known as the founder of neo-conservatism. He also gave us the expression “supply side economics”--another theory that doesn't add up: tax cuts can be had for free because they don't cause budget deficits. Irving Kristol created William Kristol, who created the Project for a New American Century and was Dan Quayle's speechwriter. My point? The events of each day show more and more persuasively that it has taken man billions of years to get to his current apelike status and he's still not very far out of the trees. Plus, the events of every day point away from there being anything intelligent whatsoever about mankind. And, further, I would suggest that the kindest possible view of the intelligent design theory is that God is still resting.

The President's Priorities

Never has one article shown the President's mind-set as plainly as the one in the NYT this morning by Richard W. Stevenson, “President Makes It Clear: Phrase Is 'War on Terror'”. Let me quote a few sentences: “Mr. Bush arrived in Texas on Tuesday, and is spending the rest of the month at his vacation home in Crawford.” “In a speech here (Grapevine, Texas) Mr. Bush used the phrase 'war on terror' no less than five times. Not once did he refer to the 'global struggle against violent extremism'”. “Administration officials became concerned when some news reports linked the change in language to signals of a shift in policy.” “He used the word "war," as he did at least 13 other times in his 47-minute speech, most of which was about domestic policy.” “In an interview last week about the new wording, Stephen J. Hadley, Mr. Bush's national security adviser, said that the conflict was 'more than just a military war on terror' and that the United States needed to counter 'the gloomy vision' of the extremists and 'offer a positive alternative.'” So. There you have it. The Prez is going to kick back for a month in Texas now that his work is done. That global struggle language had to be given the old one-two. But having put us back on-track with the war on terror rhetoric and an upbeat view of war in general, the Prez plans to enjoy a month of R&R. Spreading propaganda is exhausting. What does not concern the President is that as of this morning, 1826 American soldiers have died in his unnecessary war in Iraq. (Or, as others have so eloquently pointed out, the President just doesn't give a fuck.) That men have died and been horribly maimed is a gloomy vision. To a man's man like George W. Bush who admires manly talk, and engages in manly pursuits like riding a mountain bike and chopping down scrub-brush on his ranch, and dressing up like a cowboy, war is grand. To a manly man like GWB, war is, well, war is just fabulous.

Bolton Another Lame Duck

There are two possible reasons why President George Bush decided on the end-run smart-ass recess appointment of John Bolton to the post of Ambassador to the UN. 1) The Prez has such contempt for the UN that Bolton is his best worst choice. Or, 2) Prez Bush is so giddy with power he decided to wait until Congress left town to use his constitutional right to appoint his personal choice, no matter how disastrous the appointment may be for the UN, for the US, and for his own reputation. I favor the latter reason, because it also accomplishes the former. If Bush had waited for Congress to affirm the Bolton appointment, Bolton would have served until the end of Bush's term. As it is, Bolton will only serve until the next one-year session of Congress. That is, Bolton's appointment lasts only until January 2007. Bush has chosen to flip the bird at Congress and the world rather than follow the normal course of events for confirming a UN Ambassador. And in doing so, his little show of disdain has seriously limited Bolton's ability to do the job of US Ambassador to the UN. Bush did not have to make this recess appointment. Bolton would no doubt have been confirmed. It has gotten to the point that President Bush's grandiose behavior is undermining his party and his own authority. And the White House Ladies are allowing him to do it. That is another puzzlement. Rove, Cheney, Mehlman and McClellan could have talked Bush out of his insane ploy to show everyone who's boss. Why didn't they? One can only ask the key question: Who benefits if Bush is discredited and found to be unfit and mentally unstable?

Prez Bush Got a Physical…So How's His Brain?

Today, the NYT revealed everything no one wants to know about President Bush's latest physical. We were told his resting heart rate, his cholesterol info, how much he rides his mountain bike, his weight and that he experiences a reflux reaction if he eats peppermint or drinks coffee. We even got this statement about GWB from nine doctors: there is "every reasonable expectation that he will remain fit for duty for the duration of his presidency.” What ain't we got? We ain't got facts. We got jargon up the yazoo, We got happy talk from quacks, We got weasel-words aplenty, We got medical college hacks, We got wagons in a circle, We got doctors covering their tracks. What ain't we got? We ain't got facts. Why does the left side of the president's face droop? When did he have a stroke? Why is his thinking so muddled and his syntax and logic a jumbled mess? Why does he keep falling off his mountain bike? Why isn't he kept informed of important matters? Why can't he understand, much less explain the Social Security privatization plan? Is he taking medication for bipolar syndrome or schizophrenia? We got doctors falling all over themselves, We got a president out of whack, We got statements from the AMA, We got MD's sounding like flacks, We got a president who cannot function, And doctors plugging cracks. What ain't we got? We ain't got facts. And that “reasonable expectation” baloney only applies to a mentally fit human being. You can't have a reasonable expectation of someone being physically fit for “duty” if that person is mentally unstable. We need FACTS.

Bill Frist Wants to be Prez

The Senate Republican Leader Bill Frist, MD has no morals, no ethics and he's dumber than a White House callboy. Which is why he thinks he can be president. Frist assumes his flip-flop on the stem-cell research issue will be more of a winner than a loser. It's simply a calculated risk and he's decided to take it. Frist's latest stance on stem-cell research was a surprise yesterday, but a bigger surprise lurked in a throw-away sentence in yesterday's NYT. “Because Mr. Frist's colleagues look to him for advice on medical matters, his support for the bill could break the Senate logjam.” The NYT is kidding, right? They gotta be kidding. Does anyone actually look to Bill Frist for medical advice? Or put another way, only someone as terminally stupid and immoral as Bill Frist would seek medical advice from Bill Frist. Dr. Frist said AIDS can be contracted from tears and sweat. Dr. Frist said his diagnosis of Terri Schiavo was that she was not in a vegetative state. In his book “Transplant”, Dr. Frist confessed that he had adopted cats from animal shelters when he was in medical school in order to experiment on them. Then he killed them. In 1997, Frist said in a commencement address at the East Tennessee State University, “Be prepared to adapt. Be willing to risk. Be eager to dream.” Bill Frist is all of that. He has no moral center and he's willing to adapt, to say anything and to risk everything in order to get what he wants. He's also counting on 55 Republicans in the U.S. Senate being as stupid and corrupt as he is. Is he right? We'll see.

Beck Is a Scientologist? Oh No!

Was anyone else surprised last night when Steven Colbert announced in his This Week in God segment on The Daily Show that rocker Beck is a Scientologist? Well, I must say, I plotzed. Now it’s old news that when Greta van Susteren was on CNN and before she bought her new face she was the go-to Scientology person. But BECK? And then I got another shock. While googling Beck I found out that Jenna and Bohdi Elfman are Scientologists. Bohdi Elfman is composer Danny Elfman’s brother. And Jenna…well, who doesn’t know that Jenna is Dharma. I admit, there is a certain attractiveness about a religion that says it can pronounce a person “Clear”. That is, free of all hang-ups and attachments. For instance, Beck’s wife Marissa Ribisi is Clear. Buddha and Jesus are only “slightly above” clear. And get this. You can be better than Buddha and Jesus. You can get to be “OT”, as in, an Operating Thetan. When you achieve that state, the one above Jesus and Buddha, you can leave your body and mind and “see, hear, and feel without access” to your normal senses. Back in the 70’s when I was in Oscar Ichazo’s weird cult, Arica, we would do our yoga exercises and eat our pure food and get high on really good grass, and we would laugh at L. Ron Hubbard’s weird cult, Scientology. We didn’t know too much about it, but we did know that he started it as a joke. And then seeing his gag had all the potential of being a mega-money-machine, L.Ron decided he’d been in error, it wasn’t a joke, it was real. Back then, the E-Meters, which, according to the Scientology site, are used “to locate areas of spiritual distress or travail”, were basically two tin cans and a string. E-Meters or Eletro-psychometers probably have become a little more technoid by now. E-Meters ferret out engrams. Engrams are psychic scars. So you get “audited” (back in the day, that meant you held a tin can in each hand) and the E-Meters show when you feel stressed. The point being: to remove engrams and thence to “progress from being "preclear" (PC) to "clear;" i.e. totally free of engrams.” It's certainly clear to me that van Susteren's obsession to be a Paula Zahn clone by getting work done up the yazoo, and Tom Cruise's recent meltdown on every TV show on the planet, probably are indications that they are pre-preclear. How does being audited lead to being clear? I guess you have to join the club to find out. But, I’m told by my sources, that Scientology’s stranglehold over members is that during auditing a person reveals every wart, every peccadillo, every sin big and small, every vice, every lust, every perversion, fetish, even…dare we say it?...every abominiation. And from that point, they gotcha…for life. The Roman Catholic Church boasts that if they get a kid at the age of six, they have him forever. Scientology needs only get your audit on tape. So…you have to know…van Susteren, Beck, Cruise, Travolta, the Elfmans, the Fat Actress Whatsername, Chick Corea, Priscilla Presley and all the other Scientology devotees revealed ALL, and I mean ALL to their auditors. Oh yeah! Gotcha forever! Don’t even think about leaving…there’s that little incriminating tape.

What Was Joe Tom Easley Thinking?

The Lord preserve us from well-meaning, maudlin do-gooders fueled by sentimental fantasies of being God’s surrogate on earth. Joe Tom Easley is a retired law professor living in Miami Beach. He forged an unlikely alliance with Robert Reilly, a gay-rights activist who is an advisor for the Defense Department. The two men decided that a worthy project would be to get approval to bring a thirteen-year old Iraqi, Ayad al-Sirowiy, to the United States for medical treatment. Easley had read about Ayad who had been injured at the beginning of the Iraq war (full story in today’s NYT). A cluster bomb went off and caused tiny pieces of shrapnel to be embedded in Ayad’s face. He was blinded in one eye and the shrapnel scars caused the boys in Ayad’s hometown to call him “Mr. Gunpowder”. Ayad was ashamed and dropped out of school. It took Easley and Reilly more than a year to get approval to bring Ayad to the US. Ayad and his father have spent two weeks in the US. They arrived in New York on July 13th. Ayad has seen the Empire State building, visited the Pentagon, the US Senate, met a Senator, drank all the Pepsi he could handle, saw a dermatologist in Washington DC and the best eye doctors in Baltimore. The dream offered to Ayad was that he would get a cornea transplant restoring the vision in his blinded eye and the gunpowder tattoo would be erased. Ayad assumed he would get his old face back and would see perfectly again. This was the United States after all. And it is not unreasonable that Ayad’s father assumed that now that he had rich and powerful friends in the US, he would get a job here, move the whole family to the US and everyone would live happily ever after. This was the United States. And George W. Bush could do anything. Anyone with half a working brain can guess at the real ending of this stupid project. Anyone except Easley and Reilly. Ayad couldn’t get the cornea transplant because the optic nerve in his right eye was destroyed. Instead, the doctors gave him a contact lens that would not help his eyesight but would make his destroyed eye look normal. He lost the lens immediately. Easley and Reilly hope to send him a spare. (And lots of luck with a spare cosmetic contact lens, should it arrive and it probably won’t. Ayad lives in a mud hut with no amenities.) The laser surgery to erase the scars only lightened them. Ayad needs follow-up treatment in a country with modern medical facilities. His return to the US or any other modern country is unlikely. Ayad’s father asked to be able to work in the US and was refused. He is furious. He told an Arab television network that he was promised money and gifts. “I demand to face George W. Bush, and I have some things to say straight to him," he said. Ah but their suitcases were “stuffed with new clothes, cameras and Herbal Essence shampoo”, the NYT said. Surely that will be enough, isn’t that right, Messrs. Easley and Reilly? It has been asked, in case you are wondering: Why help this boy? There are many others who are worse off. Easley answered. “Well, I don’t know about the other boys, but I do know about Ayad.” To the people who have not been targeted for help, succor and hope by Easley and Reilly, one can only say: THANK YOUR LUCKY STARS!

Rove Has a GIRLfriend? Oh Ha! Oh Hee!

Little stories are starting to appear out of nowhere that Karl Rove has a girlfriend. I have no doubt Rove himself is behind the leaklet. It would do Rove more good to have people thinking he's got a honey of the female persuasion on the side than thinking he's faithful to his wife. Karen Johnson, the girlfriend mentioned in the droppings, has been a Texas GOP friend of Rove's for years. But that she, or any female person, is a Rove inamorata, is about as likely as Scott McClellan being signed by the Washington Redskins. The rumors of gay hanky-cum-panky in the far-right, born-again Bush Administration are so rampant that now they are leaking stories about a Rove girlfriend. OMG! Thank you Jesus! LMAO. LMFAO.

Opus Dei and the Republican Party

Say what you will about the best-selling blockbuster, “The Da Vinci Code”” by Dan Brown, and there isn’t much that hasn’t been said. But this badly written, wildly plotted, ponderous mystery about the power struggle between the Priory of Sion (a real secret society with members who included Sir Isaac Newton, Botticelli, Victor Hugo and Leonardo Da Vinci) and Opus Dei has had one very positive result. For anyone living in a cave, the Da Vinci Code’s McGuffin is that the Priory of Sion was entrusted with the knowledge of the hiding place of the Roman Catholic Church’s most sacred relic and Opus Dei wants it. And then there’s all that true and not-so-true RCC history and the stuff about Jesus and his beloved disciple who wasn’t a guy. But the very positive upshot is that the people who have read “The Da Vinci Code” want to know more about Opus Dei. And that is a very good thing. Because Opus Dei is a very bad thing. Opus Dei is a Vatican-sanctioned cult. The man who started it in Spain in 1928, Jose Maria Escriba de Balaguer, was a madman and zealot. Pope John Paul II canonized this crazed psychopath on October 6, 2002. Escriba de Balaguer changed his name to Escriva because it sounded classier. JPII put Escriva on a fast-track to sainthood. And now, Joey Ratz has put JPII on the heavenly express to Saintsville. It’s hard to understand what’s up with these guys. They seem to believe that if they say a corrupt nogoodnik is holy, he becomes holy. Yo! Papa Ratz and all you Ratzies-in-training: You Are Not God. But back to Opus Dei. Thanks to people like Dianne DiNicola, Executive Director of ODAN (Opus Dei Awareness Network), the truth about Opus Dei is available to anyone who wants to find it (www.odan.org/). ODAN counsels people who have had negative experiences with Opus Dei. DiNicola’s daughter, Tammy, was a numerary in OD and was freed from the cult by an intervention by David Clark who is a cult expert. (A numerary is a single person who vows celibacy for life and agrees to devote his life to Opus Dei while working in the world.) Dianne and Tammy DiNicola and David Clark were guests on Chris Matthews' Hardball on June 8, 2005 along with Opus Dei priests and devotees. I didn’t see the show but read the transcript. Sometimes a transcript is more powerful than actually seeing the video. It was remarkable to read the words of Tammy DiNicola, who went through the horrors of being in the Opus Dei cult and of her mother who had watched the changes in her daughter because of the cult’s influence, and then to read the words of the Opus Dei flacks who said the DiNicola’s seemed sincere but they were mistaken. Right. And the Holocaust victims were mistaken. There has been a lot of conjecture about prominent Republicans who may be Opus Dei members. And, as you might expect, it’s impossible to find anything substantive to verify the rumors. The people most often said to be Opus Dei members are: Supremes Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas, Former FBI Director Louis Freeh, Senator (R-PA) Rick Santorum and Robert Novak. Here is the info I have found: There is no document or hard evidence that Antonin Scalia is a member. However, Scalia’s son is an Opus Dei priest. There is no evidence that Clarence Thomas is a member but the rumor will not die. There is no evidence that Louis Freeh is a member. Louis Freeh’s brother, John, used to be a numerary member. The only thing I could dig up on Rick Santorum is that he attended Escriva’s canonization. And here’s the poop on Robert Novak: Novak was raised in the Jewish faith until he was 13. At the age of 67, in 1998, Novak was converted to Catholicism by an Opus Dei priest named John McCloskey. Fr. McCloskey has made something of a career out of converting high-profile Washington, DC insiders to Opus Dei’s brand of Catholicism (Kansas Republican Senator Sam Brownback, and economist-commentator Lawrence Kudlow, for instance). In an article by Chris Suellentrop about McCloskey (“The Rev. John McCloskey-The Catholic Church’s K Street Lobbyist”), Tammy DiNicola was quoted saying, “I’ve experienced personally a side to Opus Dei that I wonder whether it comes from the Holy Spirit. I think Opus Dei is a cancer on the Catholic Church.” Fr. John McCloskey and Robert Novak should be very happy together.

What Bush Doesn't Know

Bob Herbert's NYT Op/Ed piece this morning is titled, What Bush Doesn't Know. And his main point is that President Bush doesn't know the war in Iraq has not made the US safer. Which, of course, is true. But Bob Herbert's view is too narrow. President George W. Bush doesn't know anything. And given the President's limited intelligence and narcissism, that not only is the way he likes it, that's the way it has to be. George W. Bush is the most ignorant man in the world. Bush brags he doesn't read newspapers. He brags he can't think of any mistakes he has made. He brags he won't change his mind. He brags he believes God intended him to be president. Is it any wonder that the men who actually run the world wanted George W. Bush to be President of the United States? He's a dream come true. The most ignorant, gullible, ego-driven, delusional, obstinate man in the world is willing to do and say whatever his minders tell him to do and say as long as they let him pretend to be King. And I would bet you that George W. Bush really doesn't know about Karl Rove's and Scooter Libby's involvement in the Blame Plame Game. And that's not the worst of it. Prez Bush doesn't know or care that 1,777 US soldiers have died in the war he started in Iraq so he could feel like a man. Prez Bush could not explain the privatization of Social Security if his soul depended on it. Prez Bush doesn't know and doesn't care that Japan and China own the US because they have bought billions of dollars of US bonds. He doesn't know or care that we are in peril because China is threatening not to buy any more of our debt. And why would Bush know anything? He knows only what Karl Rove tells him. And that's only enough to make him get up in the morning and continue to play King. What George W. Bush doesn't know and doesn't want to know could fill a book. And oh you betcha! It will fill any number of books, to his eternal shame.

Prince Bandar Resigns…Prince Turki Steps In

Anybody care? The wife of the Supremes nominee John Roberts is, according to the NYT, “a Roman Catholic lawyer from the Bronx whose pro bono work for Feminists for Life is drawing intense interest.” And Karl Rove and Scooter Libby’s political lives are hanging in the balance. Ergo, not much ink is being devoted to Saudi Arabia’s appointing a new Ambassador to the US. Maybe it’s those names: Prince Bandar son of Sultan son of Abdulaziz of the family Saud. And Prince Turki son of Faisal son of Abdulaziz of the family Saud. But at least everytime they are introduced you get all the family connections. However, unless you read Craig Unger’s “House of Bush House of Saud”, you’re not going to understand the intricacies of the business connections between the Royal Saud Family, the bin Laden family and the Bush family. Let’s put it this way. You can’t be obsessed with getting Saudi Arabian oil money into your own Texas pocket without climbing in bed with the Sauds and the bin Ladens. Which, of course, is exactly what the Bushes have done. And it really isn't going to make any difference whether Prince Bandar or Prince Turki is Ambassador. It wouldn’t even matter if a bin Laden were named Ambassador. The official reason given for President Bush’s buddy Prince Bandar's resignation is his bad health. (Will you ever forget the sight of Prez Bush giving Bandar a hot-oil back rub in Michael Moore’s movie, Fahrenheit 911? But I digress.) No one ever resigns from any government position except for bad health or wanting to spend more time with the family. (And given the size of the Saud Royal family, the latter probably would not have been a sane option.) It is true that Bandar’s health has not been good in the last few years. But even though Bandar and Prez Bush have gushed over the closeness of their families…“your family is my family” and that kind of maudlin stuff. Still, since 9/11 things have been strained. And the Bushes are not people who put friendship and loyalty ahead of politics. Friendship and loyalty is politics. That business of Bandar spiriting 40 Saudis out of the US on September 13th 2001 with no fuss, no muss and with help from the Bush Royal family has stuck in the craw of many Americans. And that other business regarding 15 of the 19 9/11 terrorists being Saudis also made Americans queasy about Bandar. So Bandar has been practically invisible both as GWB’s playpal and as Ambassador since 9/11. At least we knew what we had with Bandar. He was educated here. He loved what followers of Islam call our decadence and he was invaluable as a Bush connection to Middle East oil. But what have we got with Turki? He also is of the family Saud. He also was educated here. And to say he was a little too close to the Taliban, AlQaeda and Osama bin Laden before 2001 would put the case mildly. But, we are told, he’s out of that unfortunate bidness and he’s strictly on our side now. Well, the Saud Royal family and the bin Laden family have invested heavily in the Carlyle Group, so I guess you would call that being on our side. Because, God knows, the US has invested heavily in the Carlyle Group. But here’s the bottom line. We went to war in Iraq because of oil. The House of Saud and the bin Ladens (minus Osama) are all about oil. As far as the Bush family is concerned, nothing else matters. Therefore Bandar/Turki/bin Laden, it’s all one. They are totally interchangeable to the White House. Oil is the Bush/Saud/bin Laden family business. And we must never forget that.

The Drooling George W. Bush

No. I don't mean because of his impairment and the problem with his face because he's had a stroke. I mean Prez Bush looks so interested in the pretty young men coming across his sights these days that he's practically licking his chops. Did you notice him introducing his nomination for The Supremes, John Roberts? The Daily Show's Jon Stewart seemed to be reading GWB's mind when he added a comment to Bush's intro, “And he's soooooooo handsome.” Remember when President I'm-So-Manly-I-Ride-a-Dirt-Bike Bush told Canada's Prime Minister Scott Reid that he had a prettier face than Scotty McClellan? The whole quote from January 18, 2004 is: "You got a pretty face," he told the surprised Mr. Reid. He wasn't done. "You got a pretty face," he said again. "You're a good-looking guy. Better looking than my Scott anyway." Word has it that the Bush family tried to de-gay George W. and sent him to Worthy Creations near El Paso, TX in 1976. It's a church group that claims to convert homosexuals through faith. The party line at the time was that GWB was being detoxed. It may be time for another trip to Worthy Creations. Else the closet in the Lincoln Bedroom is going to get very crowded.

White House Pick for Supremes…

Federal appeals court judge John G. Roberts Jr. is the pick of the White House Ladies to replace Justice Sandra Day O'Connor on the Supreme Court. Nasty pick. Read the reports. The Ladies decided to choose a Supreme Court nominee quickly and without sufficient consideration of all options in order to divert attention away from the Karl Rove mess. Okay…two-minute break. Take a breath. Consider Roberts. He's a rotten choice. He's the wrong guy. Back to Rove. Bush says he doesn't know all the facts about the Plame case so he's reserving judgment. What crap! I don't know all the facts because the Bush administration is secretive and won't divulge facts on any issue. But the Prez is the Prez. Why doesn't he know all the facts? Well…right…he's not told anything about anything because his brain is too addled to sort through and ponder the most uncomplicated information. But if he could handle a simple thought, George W. Bush is the one person in the United States who can know all the facts. And, as Salon.com pointed out, the Prez was confident he knew all the facts when he claimed Rove wasn't involved, why does he say he doesn't know all the facts now? The reason is because Karl Rove told him it was a shrewd thing to say. Or, more accurately, since Rove is not a lawyer, Ken Mehlman told Bush to say he didn't know the facts and was reserving judgment because, legally speaking, it' a wise stance to assume. Speaking of facts. Here are some Karl Rove facts. His middle name is Christian. He is one of five siblings. He dropped out of the University of Utah and never got a college degree. He became a protégé of Donald Segreti who later was a convicted Watergate conspirator. Rove's mother guessed at the day of his birth in December in 1950, but wasn't quite sure. She picked Christmas Day. On Christmas Day when he was 19, his father walked out on the family. During his parents divorce negotiations, Rove found out from an aunt and uncle that the man he knew as his father was not his father. Rove and an older brother were the sons of a man his mother had an affair with. His mother committed suicide in Reno, Nevada in 1981. It's not hard to figure out why Karl Rove became the all-around corrupt and depraved politician that he is. But what's the GOP's excuse for letting a man like Rove run the Republican Party?

Who Is Ken Mehlman?

Right now Ken Mehlman is the Chairman of the Republican National Committee and the public face for Karl Rove's policies. That is to say, when a blatantly false statement needs to be repeated endlessly by the White House, Ken Mehlman is the fast-talker who broadcasts the lies and deceptions created by George W. Bush's deputy chief of staff. It's Ken Mehlman who tells the Bush administration's version of he truth at breakneck speed and seemingly without taking a breath. This motormouth facility is invaluable on news shows where bytes are kept short and often with only one point of view. But where did Mehlman come from? Mehlman is young (38) and smart. He got a B.A. in government from the Franklin and Marshall College in Lancaster, PA in 1988 and a law degree from Harvard in 1991. He was still at Harvard when he worked on Bill Weld's successful campaign to become Governor of Massachusetts in 1990. After graduating from Harvard Law, Mehlman practiced environmental law for three years in Washington D.C. for Akin, Gump, Strauss, Hauer and Feld. Then he began to concentrate on politics. He worked on GHW Bush's 1992 re-election campaign. In 1994 he was legislative director for Representative Lamar Smith (R-TX). He then worked on Representative Kay Gould's (R-TX) 1996 and 1998 campaigns and was her chief of staff. He worked on Bob Dole's 1996 presidential campaign. It was Mehlman who thought up what has been called the “historic Iowa model” used in the 2000 primaries, which garnered the “highest percentage of Republican votes in caucus history”. His model for building strong grassroots teams was also used in MD, VA and SC. Mehlman was made Deputy Assistant to GWBush and Director of White House Political Affairs in 2000. With those titles behind his name, he worked with Federal agencies, Congress, state parties and community organizations to manage the Bush political agenda. In 2004, Mehlman was Campaign manager for Bush-Cheney and credits his mobilization of grassroots workers and pushing forward the “Bush message” with the fact that (according to Mehlman) “the red states have turned redder while the blue states have turned purple.” Mehlman would have us believe he is a true-believer in the GOP agenda. Maybe so. But it's certain Mehlman is a true-believer in Mehlman. And he also seems to be a true-believer in the Karl Rove model of using character assassination, dirty-tricks, lies, deception and voter fraud just in case a candidate cannot win on his merits. It's not easy to find info on Ken Mehlman and I have used data from the John Kennedy Jr. Forum News article posted on December 15, 2004.

Looks Like Sy Hersh Has Another Scoop

This morning's NYT reports that the Bush team intended to fix the free election in Iraq this past January. And Seymour Hersh tells all (or as much of all as it's possible to tell) in the July 18th issue of The New Yorker. The NYT article by Douglas Jehl and David E. Sanger, “Plan Called for Covert Aid in Iraq Vote” reports “In the months before the Iraqi elections in January, President Bush approved a plan to provide covert support to certain Iraqi candidates and political parties, but rescinded the proposal because of Congressional opposition, current and former government officials said Saturday.” According to the NYT, Seymour M. Hersh's New Yorker article says “the administration proceeded with the covert plan over the Congressional objections. Several senior Bush administration officials disputed that, although they recalled renewed discussions within the administration last fall about how the United States might counter what was seen as extensive Iranian support to pro-Iranian Shiite parties.” The NYT says “Time magazine first reported in October 2004 that the administration had encountered Congressional opposition over a plan to provide covert support to Iraqi candidates." The Time mag article said House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi had "strong words" with then-national security adviser Condoleezza Rice. Once again we see the fine hand of the White House Ladies trying to run the world by illegal means. The sole woman in the WH Ladies' club, Condoleezza Rice, promoted the scheme to fix the Iraq election. Of course, at the same moment as Rice and her pal, George W. Bush, had decided to mount a covert plan to fix the election, they were making high-flown statements about how the United States would faithfully abide by the persons and the parties the Iraqis chose in their so-called free elections. In the end, the plan to influence the election was never put into action because members of Congress strongly objected. The NYT said that President Bush had either signed the secret formal authorization, or was about to sign it, when the whole nefarious scheme was quashed. Lies to promote the unnecessary and illegal war in Iraq, false stories intended to ruin lives, whispers down the lane revealing state secrets, a fixed US election in 2000 with the help of the Supreme Court and now covert plans to influence the Iraqi elections. This is the legacy of the two GW Bush administrations. Tell me again, why are we allowing the White House Ladies to run our country?

The White House Ladies

Who are the White House Ladies? They are the vicious, malicious, bitchy, prissy, rumormongering, lying, spiteful crew of White House men and their favored friends who traffic in character assassination and dirty-tricks plots for the GOP. To name a few names, the White House Ladies include President George W. Bush, Vice President and PNAC signatory Dick Cheney, GWB's political advisor and deputy chief of staff Karl Rove, Press Secretary Scott McClellan, Republican National Committee Chairman Ken Mehlman, Dick Cheney's Chief of Staff and PNAC signatory I. Lewis (Scooter) Libby, Defense Policy board member and PNAC signatory Richard Perle. Why dub them ladies? Because they are acting like a girls club whose main delight is making mischief and telling lies. Am I suggesting that the White House Ladies are, if not gay, then not 100% male-oriented males? Of course not. A suggestion like that could ruin lives, would be difficult to verify, might end careers, and might even lead to suicide. Who would do something like that, other than the White House Ladies? And on another note: The New York Times reported this morning that, “The Bush administration said on Friday that it would decide by Sept. 1 whether to allow sales of an emergency contraceptive without a prescription”. The NYT's article needs a little elaboration. Any girl or woman can request the so-called morning-after pills in a hospital's Emergency Room, right now, even though prescriptions are required in pharmacies. So, whether or not the Bush administration decides to make the pills available without a prescription won't change the fact that if a rape has occurred or if a female person simply wants to make sure she doesn't have an unwanted pregnancy because of unprotected sex, she can take that precaution right now. The only requirement is that she go to an ER and take the pills within 72 hours of the sex act.

Krugman: “What's Happened to America?”

This morning, in his NYT Op/Ed column, Paul Krugman lays it on the line. He condemns “Karl Rove's America” and finally asks, “How did our political system get to this point?” Another relevant question might be: When did the USA start being run by a bunch of gossiping, backstabbing, catty, lying, old ladies dressed in men's suits and ties? Nixon's administration was characterized by the high testosterone level of its foul-mouthed and profane top men. But the Bush administration has distinguished itself for the squawks and squeals of its spiteful, malicious, manipulative, passive-aggressive, bitch-slapping male impersonators. Where have all the real men in the GOP gone? Are they hiding out? Are they afraid they will be seen as effeminate if they associate with the White House Ladies? Karl Rove acts like my Aunt Etta. I have no idea what his sexual preference is, but he is devious, he deals in half-truths, his covert activities run to character assassination by outright lying, he is petty and mean, he simpers and smiles even when plotting a spiteful smear...just like Aunt Etta. And his devoted disciple, George W. Bush, thinks whatever Uncle Karl does is fabulous. I have nothing against Sewing Circles and Women's Clubs, I just don't want my country run by my Aunt Etta.

Rove is Amoral, Nasty and Corrupt: No Crime

Even though Karl Rove is the most Machiavellian, smarmy, depraved and unpleasant President the United States has ever had, he cannot be indicted or put in jail on those grounds. In fact, it is Karl Rove's willingness to lie, cheat and do whatever it takes that won the election in 2000 and 2004. And it's Rove's cynical and corrupt modus operandi that has made him the darling of the GOP. Karl Rove is running the Republican Party, he is running the White House, he is running the US and there's nothing to keep him from running the world except that Karl Rove is amoral, nasty and corrupt. The Rove way of doing things is the visible face of the Republican Party and of America. The Rove way of doing things took over all branches of our government in a bloodless coup. Thanks to Karl Rove, the US is universally despised. The US has become a bully and aggressor, US leaders lie and are proud of their lies and the US cannot be trusted, Karl Rove has won every battle he has fought. And the Republican Party has lost its soul, George W. Bush has lost his mind and the United States has lost its way. Karl Rove is an undisputed evil genius. But the monster machine he created has just slithered up its own asshole and is eating itself. What will cause the last gasp? Mark my words, it will be some small thing and it will blow the lid off the Rove Regime.

What If…

What if George-the-Unwise had not made the disastrous claim in his January 28, 2003 SOTUS speech that the Brits claimed Saddam Hussein was trying to buy uranium in Africa? George-the-Dupe knew on January 28, 2003 that Saddam had not tried to buy uranium. He knew because Joseph Wilson had gone to Africa at the behest of the CIA in February 2002 and reported back in March 2002 that he doubted Iraq tried to purchase uranium in Africa. If George-the-Beloved-Disciple had not swallowed the lies being fed to him by Karl Rove, and had not made the uranium claim in his SOTUS speech, would Ari Fleischer (press secretary before suck-up Scott McClellan took the job) still be press secretary? Fleischer resigned May 19th, 2003. If the Bush team hadn't lied about Iraq buying uranium in Africa and if Colin Powell hadn't refused to repeat the lie to the United Nations would Powell still be secretary of state? Would the White House have been able to set the Iraq war plans in motion March 20th, 2003 without the Africa uranium lie? That's the real point about the Plame case. The importance of the Karl Rove connection isn't on whether Rove outed Plame as a CIA operative (which he obviously did, whether he used her name or called her Wilson's wife). But that's of lesser importance than the fact that Rove gave Time mag reporter Matthew Cooper “a big warning” in July 2003 that Joe Wilson's report on Iraq “might not be entirely accurate”. Rove knew Wilson's report that Iraq was not trying to buy uranium in Africa was true. But he tried to influence reporter Cooper to keep telling the Bush administration lie. On July 6th, 2003, in a New York Times op-ed piece, Wilson wrote that he could not verify that Niger sold uranium yellowcake to Iraq. Karl Rove knew Wilson had to be neutralized one way or another or the lies that rationalized the illegal war in Iraq could not be kept afloat. That is the crux of this matter. Karl Rove is the mastermind behind the Bush administration's unprecedented record of deceit, lying and down and dirty strategies. Will the Bush administration keep Rove as Captain and go down with the ship? Or have new orders been issued?: MAN THE LIFEBOATS…YOU'RE ON YOUR OWN!

You Can't Make Up Stuff Like This

Condoleezza Rice is blowing off a major annual meeting of ASEAN (Association of Southeast Asian Nations) in Laos later this month. She is the first US secretary of state not to attend the event in more than 20 years. Rice gave a lame excuse like she was too immersed in the problems of the Middle East. But everyone knows it's because the US wants to pressure ASEAN not to allow Myanmar (used to be called Burma), which is under military rule to chair the group next year. Then, sensing that perhaps she was being undiplomatic, Rice made a trip to Thailand to explain why she's not attending ASEAN. The town she visited in Thailand is named Phuket.

As Expected, Karl Rove Is Sweet/Pure/Guiltless

WaPo reports this morning that Rove's attorney, Robert Luskin, admits “Rove spoke with at least one reporter about Valerie Plame's role at the CIA before she was identified as a covert agent in a newspaper column two years ago.” But Luskin said his client did not identify her by name. The WaPo article says, “(Time mag's Matthew) Cooper, according to an internal Time e-mail obtained by Newsweek magazine, spoke with Rove before Novak's column was published. In the conversation, Rove gave Cooper a "big warning" that Wilson's assertions might not be entirely accurate and that it was not the director of the CIA or the vice president who sent Wilson on his trip. Rove apparently told Cooper that it was "Wilson's wife, who apparently works at the agency on [weapons of mass destruction] issues who authorized the trip," according to a story in Newsweek's July 18 issue.” Whew! I'm so glad that's cleared up. Karl Rove fingered Valerie Plame and gave particulars about her job with the CIA but didn't say her name. Ergo, Rove is off the hook. The Plame case game is entering the “Lawyers Wriggle and Twist” Semi-finals. The rules are: to be considered a violation of the law, a disclosure by a government official must have been deliberate, the person doing it must have known that the CIA officer was a covert agent, and he or she must have known that the government was actively concealing the covert agent's identity. Good. That means if any government official accidentally and with no malice tells a reporter that the deputy chief of staff in the White House is a fat fascist twat who has committed war crimes and has never told the truth since he oiled his way into the Bush administration, that official won't get into trouble because he didn't say the name KARL ROVE. Coming up, the White House Whirl and Spin Finals: Karl Rove Reveals He's Jesus and George W. Bush is the Beloved Disciple.

NYT Says the Brits Are Breeding Terrorists

The day after the bombings in London last week, Peter Bergen of the New America Foundation wrote an article published in the New York Times claiming all terrorists to date have been British citizens. This morning, Elaine Sciolino and Don Van Natta, Jr. have written an article for the NYT saying that, “Long before bombings ripped through London on Thursday, Britain had become a breeding ground for hate, fed by a militant version of Islam.” It's been going on for a decade, they said. Not that the info in these articles is wrong. The info sounds well researched and probably is right on the nose. But how come wasn't this in banner headlines at the NYT when Bush/Blair were doing their war-chant-in-tandem routine? Now that Tony Blair is beginning to doubt his hawkish position on Iraq, he's no longer useful to the Bush administration. And it looks suspiciously like word has come down at the NYT that the Brits are fair game, to use a Karl Rove phrase. At least we have Frank Rich at the NYT keeping us on point. Frank Rich's Op/Ed article this morning (We're Not in Watergate Anymore) gets to the heart of the matter re the Plame case: Plame's husband, Joseph Wilson, revealed that Bush/Blair lied to push us into the war in Iraq, the White House decided Wilson's wife was fair game and punished Wilson by outing her status at the CIA and 1753 American soldiers have died in Iraq because of the Bush/Blair lies. Those are the facts. Bush/Blair are two little toads who lied and killed 1753 American soldiers for no reason other than to feel powerful.

To: Christoph Cardinal Schönborn

Your Eminence: God is smarter than mankind, not dumber. And that is the sticking point with all fundamentalists, far-right zealots, and now the super conservatives in the Roman Catholic Church. Yesterday, you wrote an Op/Ed piece in the New York Times. You said the Darwinian concept of evolution is nonsense. You said, "We believe that God created the world according to his wisdom. It is not the product of any necessity whatever, nor of blind fate or chance." How about this? God's wisdom ordained that man should evolve from the primordial ooze. Your problem with that idea seems to be that you want God to have created the world literally in six days 6,000 years ago. Evolutionists say it took billions of years. The only difference seems to be that you are determined to bring God down to mankind's level. Conservative fundamentalists and now the RCC have created God in man's image. According to you, God is mean, vengeful, small-minded, ignorant, arbitrary, elitist, bigoted and ornery...exactly like we are. I see no conflict with believing in God and believing that He not only set evolution in motion but that He gave mankind free will. And I believe that there are great benefits to cooperating with a creator who is wise and merciful. The real nonsense in your position, Cardinal Schönborn, is you seem to believe that the RCC has figured God out so perfectly he now is in a box and under the RCC's control. God is God, Cardinal, and you are only a wee man.

Will It Sell?

Washington Post editor Bob Woodward, who has just published a new book about W. Mark Felt titled, “The Secret Man”, said on Larry King last night that the terrorist bombings in London yesterday made George W. Bush a wartime President once again. Woodward even went so far as to say he could see that the disasters in London had stiffened Bush's spine. Woodward said the Prez became, once more, the leader he needed to be. Are the people in the USA and the world going to buy that baloney? Yesterday, Bush looked like the floundering jerk that he is. One wishes he had grown a spine. One wishes he'd said, “Homeland Security is going to see to it that the subway systems in the USA are made even safer than they already are.” But no. He said, “…I instructed them (Homeland Security) to be in touch with local and state officials about the facts of what took place here and in London and to be extra vigilant.” Extra vigilant. Translation: I'm not sure what I can say or what I can promise until I've asked for permission from Karl Rove, so I'll just say the most inoffensive thing I can think of. There was a very troubling Op/Ed piece in the New York Times this morning titled “Our Ally, Our Problem” by Peter Bergen. Bergen's position is that so far, terrorists have proven to be British citizens. And he had facts to back up his premise. But why did Bergen see fit to publish his article today of all days? And why did the NYT allow it to be published today of all days? Are we seeing the beginning of a new hidden agenda? As in, now that Prime Minister Tony Blair is a liability to the Bush administration and the Brits hate us, they have to be discredited. Peter Bergen is a fellow of the New America Foundation. Who are these people? Their mission statement says: “Powerful forces - from rapid technological change to massive demographic shifts, from economic globalization to terrorism - are remaking America. Now, more than ever, our nation needs a robust public debate, one that does justice to the complex challenges and opportunities of this unfolding era. Yet there remains a dearth of new thinking on both sides of the political divide, as well as a lack of investment in developing the creative young minds most capable of crafting new public policy solutions. The purpose of the New America Foundation is to bring exceptionally promising new voices and new ideas to the fore of our nation's public discourse. Relying on a venture capital approach, the Foundation invests in outstanding individuals and policy ideas that transcend the conventional political spectrum. Through its Fellowships and Policy Programs, New America sponsors a wide range of research, writing, conferences, and events on the most important issues of our time.” The NFA Internet site says, “The New America Foundation is an independent, nonpartisan, nonprofit public policy institute that was conceived through the collaborative work of a diverse and intergenerational group of public intellectuals, civic leaders, and business executives. New America's founding President and CEO is Ted Halstead, and its Board of Directors is chaired by James Fallows. Based in our nation's capital, the Foundation opened its doors in January 1999.” NAF certainly sounds benign. Until one name on their board of directors pops out like a zit on prom night: Francis Fukuyama, Dean of Faculty, SAIS, Johns Hopkins University. Francis Fukuyama was a founding genius of the Project for the New American Century--that Iraq war breeding ground which was masterminded by William Kristol in 1997. PNAC's signers were: Elliott Abrams, Gary Bauer, William J. Bennett, Jeb Bush, Dick Cheney, Eliot A. Cohen, Midge Decter, Paula Dobriansky, Steve Forbes, Aaron Friedberg, Francis Fukuyama, Frank Gaffney, Fred C. Ikle, Donald Kagan, Zalmay Khalilzad, I. Lewis Libby, Norman Podhoretz, Dan Quayle, Peter W. Rodman, Stephen P. Rosen, Henry S. Rowen, Donald Rumsfeld, Vin Weber, George Weigel, Paul Wolfowitz. PNAC's mission statement is more aggressive, more obviously pro-military than the New America Foundation. But PNAC's aims also were cloaked in high-minded, freedom-loving rhetoric. In case you've forgotten, here is PNAC's Statement of Principles as written by the editor of the right-of-center Weekly Standard, William Kristol: “American foreign and defense policy is adrift. Conservatives have criticized the incoherent policies of the Clinton Administration. They have also resisted isolationist impulses from within their own ranks. But conservatives have not confidently advanced a strategic vision of America's role in the world. They have not set forth guiding principles for American foreign policy. They have allowed differences over tactics to obscure potential agreement on strategic objectives. And they have not fought for a defense budget that would maintain American security and advance American interests in the new century. We aim to change this. We aim to make the case and rally support for American global leadership. As the 20th century draws to a close, the United States stands as the world's preeminent power. Having led the West to victory in the Cold War, America faces an opportunity and a challenge: Does the United States have the vision to build upon the achievements of past decades? Does the United States have the resolve to shape a new century favorable to American principles and interests? We are in danger of squandering the opportunity and failing the challenge. We are living off the capital -- both the military investments and the foreign policy achievements -- built up by past administrations. Cuts in foreign affairs and defense spending, inattention to the tools of statecraft, and inconstant leadership are making it increasingly difficult to sustain American influence around the world. And the promise of short-term commercial benefits threatens to override strategic considerations. As a consequence, we are jeopardizing the nation's ability to meet present threats and to deal with potentially greater challenges that lie ahead. We seem to have forgotten the essential elements of the Reagan Administration's success: a military that is strong and ready to meet both present and future challenges; a foreign policy that boldly and purposefully promotes American principles abroad; and national leadership that accepts the United States' global responsibilities. Of course, the United States must be prudent in how it exercises its power. But we cannot safely avoid the responsibilities of global leadership or the costs that are associated with its exercise. America has a vital role in maintaining peace and security in Europe, Asia, and the Middle East. If we shirk our responsibilities, we invite challenges to our fundamental interests. The history of the 20th century should have taught us that it is important to shape circumstances before crises emerge, and to meet threats before they become dire. The history of this century should have taught us to embrace the cause of American leadership. Our aim is to remind Americans of these lessons and to draw their consequences for today. Here are four consequences: we need to increase defense spending significantly if we are to carry out our global responsibilities today and modernize our armed forces for the future; we need to strengthen our ties to democratic allies and to challenge regimes hostile to our interests and values; we need to promote the cause of political and economic freedom abroad; we need to accept responsibility for America's unique role in preserving and extending an international order friendly to our security, our prosperity, and our principles. Such a Reaganite policy of military strength and moral clarity may not be fashionable today. But it is necessary if the United States is to build on the successes of this past century and to ensure our security and our greatness in the next.” Also on the New America Foundation Board of Directors are: Christie Todd Whitman (former Gov. of NJ, and now President of the Whitman Strategy Group) and Fareed Zakaria, editor of Newsweek International. So, what am I saying? I'm just saying…Peter Bergen doesn't sound like he's up to any good, I wouldn't let Francis Fukuyama change my cat's litter box, and the New America Foundation may not be as non-threatening as they would like us to believe.

Bush's Extempore Remarks Re London Bombings

It's interesting that when Prez Bush talked off-the-cuff about the London Bombings he sounded like the boob he is. But already it's hard to find a transcript of his remarks, even on-line. And it's only seven hours since the bombings took place. But, thanks to the Associated Press, this is what he said: “I spent some time recently with the Prime Minister, Tony Blair; had the opportunity to express our heartfelt condolences to the people of London, people who lost lives. I appreciate Prime Minister Blair's steadfast determination and restraint. He's on his way now to London here from the G-8 to speak directly to the people of London, to carry a message of solidarity with him. This morning I've been in contact with our homeland security folks and I instructed them to be in touch with local and state officials about the facts of what took place here and in London and to be extra vigilant as our folks start heading to work. The contrast between what we've seen on the TV screens here, what's taken place in London, what's taken place here is incredibly vivid to me. On the one hand, we got people here who are working to alleviate poverty and to help rid the world of the pandemic of AIDS and that are working on ways to have a clean environment. And on the other hand, you've got people killing innocent people. And the contrast couldn't be clearer between the intentions and the hearts of those of us who care deeply about human rights and human liberty, and those who kill, those who've got such evil in their heart that they will take the lives of innocent folks. The war on terror goes on. I was most impressed by the resolve of all the leaders in the room. Their resolve is as strong as my resolve. And that is, we will not yield to these people, will not yield to the terrorists. We will find them. We will bring them to justice. And at the same time we will spread an ideology of hope and compassion that will overwhelm their ideology of hate. Thank you very much.” And this is what UK Prime Minister Tony Blair said: "We condemn utterly these barbaric attacks. We send our profound condolences to the victims and their families. "All of our countries have suffered from the impact of terrorism. Those responsible have no respect for human life. We are united in our resolve to confront and defeat this terrorism that is not an attack on one nation, but all nations and on civilized people everywhere. "We will not allow violence to change our societies or our values, nor will we allow it to stop the work of this summit. We will continue our deliberations in the interest of a better world. "Here at the summit, the world's leaders are striving to combat world poverty and save and improve human life. "The perpetrators of today's attacks are intent on destroying human life. The terrorists will not succeed. Today's bombings will not weaken in any way our resolve to uphold the most deeply held principles of our societies and to defeat those who impose their fanaticism and extremism on all of us. "We shall prevail and they shall not." The print media is choosing to re-write Bush's moronic statement about telling Homeland Security to be “extra vigilant”. This is how NPR is now reporting Bush's off-the-cuff remarks: “President Bush warned Americans on Thursday to be "extra vigilant" as they head to work after the deadly explosions in London. Bush said he spoke with federal homeland security officials back in Washington. 'I instructed them to be in touch with local and state officials about the facts of what took place here in London,' Bush told reporters from a summit of world leaders here. Bush urged caution 'as our folks start heading to work.' 'The war on terrorism goes on,' he said. 'We will not yield to these people.' The president offered the 'heartfelt condolences' of the American people to the victims and their families in London. British Prime Minister Tony Blair left the summit being held at a posh resort here to rush to London. Bush said Blair would 'carry a message of solidarity with him' to London.” NPR's version certainly sounds better than what George W. Bush actually said. Because GEORGE W. BUSH IS AN EMBARRASSMENT AND AN IDIOT!!! How many times do we have to see Bush flounder and be at a loss to know what to do during times of catastrophe? How many times do we have to hear him back-and-fill and play for time waiting for instructions during moments of dire emergencies? How many times do we have to see our President shown up by other world leaders on every criterion (diplomacy, mental acuity, intelligence, extemporaneous remarks, to name a few) before the entire country screams?: IMPEACH THIS KNOW-NOTHING MENTAL DEFECTIVE DIM-WITTED NARCISSIST SOCIOPATH BEFORE HE DESTROYS OUR COUNTRY!!!!

Bush Says, “Cool Off Rhetoric on Court”

President Bush told USA Today that the people who are mobilizing support for a fight over Justice O'Connor's replacement should "tone down the heated rhetoric." “Al Gonzales is a great friend of mine," Bush said. “When a friend gets attacked, I don't like it," he added. On September 18, 2001, Bush vowed to get Osama bin Laden. "I want justice. And there's an old poster out West that says, 'Wanted: Dead or Alive,' the President said. On July 2, 2003 Bush said American troops under fire in Iraq aren't about to pull out. “Bring them on,” he said of those who might attack U.S. forces. On May 31, 2003 the Washington Post reported that President Bush told television viewers in Poland that "U.S. forces in Iraq have found the weapons of mass destruction that were the United States' primary justification for going to war.” Bush added, "And we'll find more weapons as time goes on. But for those who say we haven't found the banned manufacturing devices or banned weapons, they're wrong. We found them,” he said. On March 24, 2004 at the annual black-tie dinner for the Radio and Television Correspondents Association, Bush did a stand-up routine where he looked for WMD's. “Those weapons of mass destruction have got to be somewhere.” He was shown looking under papers, behind drapes, under his desk. “Nope, no weapons over there…Maybe under here?” he asked grinning. On January 28, 2005, Bush said in a speech at Fort Bragg, “Like most Americans, I see the images of violence and bloodshed. Every picture is horrifying, and the suffering is real. Amid all this violence, I know Americans ask the question: Is the sacrifice worth it? It is worth it, and it is vital to the future security of our country,” he said. Mr. Ratfucker suggests the next time Mr. Bush is tempted to lecture anyone, anywhere or anytime on toning down rhetoric, he find a quiet place to sit down and meditate, using an old Zen mantra: Owah tashum kyam…owah tashum kyam…owah tashum kyam….

On This July Fourth…

…the Prez said we should fly the flag, thank the men and women defending our freedom and help the military family down the street. Dear President Bush: Of course I'm flying the flag, you mindless craven toad. I always do. And I deeply thank the men and women who have defended America and ensured our freedom. I do that every year also. Ever since March 20, 2003, I have extended that thank you to the men and women in Iraq, because they had no way of knowing you lied to them about why they should be willing to die in the Middle East. They had no way of knowing they were being sent to a foreign land to fight a war planned long ago by insane zealots in America. They had no way of knowing Iraq was picked out because Iraq was weak and vulnerable and was thought to be an easy first target in a Bush administration scheme to rule the world and the world's oil. But most of all, I thank the men and women in the US military who are telling the truth about the dishonest, dissembling and deceitful Bush administration that forced us into a war with Iraq. These men and women are truly courageous. The only way I can help the military family down the street is to encourage them to rise up in protest against your war, Mr. Bush. The Bush administration has cut back aid to returning veterans. The Bush administration says Iraq veterans should pay for the drugs they need…drugs that are necessary only because these veterans were sent to die and be maimed in Iraq. The Bush administration is not giving our soldiers the basic protection of armor for themselves or for their vehicles in Iraq. I certainly am not going to assure the families of American soldiers in Iraq that the civilian population will rally round and collect money to give their sons and daughters the aid and protection that the Bush administration will not give them. I can only encourage American soldiers' families to gather together and march on Washington in protest against the illegal and unnecessary war in Iraq. That is how I'm supporting our troops this July Fourth, Mr. Bush. You, on the other hand, will be in Charleston, West Virginia telling more lies.

Boob Geldof Said About Live 8…

…“It's either crap or it's great.” Dear Boob: It's crap! The towns hosting Live 8 will benefit from Geldof's badly-produced junkathons yesterday because the attendees spent big bucks on beer, booze and fat burgers. But no one else will benefit. Geldof envisions that his rock-and-preach mobscenes will shame the world's corporations into ending famine and poverty in Africa. What a load of bull. How much did Geldof inspire The Carlyle Group to donate? How much is Rupert Murdoch donating to end famine in Africa due to the Live 8 concerts? How much was the Rev. Sun Myung Moon moved to donate? How about the dick Cheney's corporation, Halliburton? How much did Geldof shame Halliburton into donating? How much are all those has-been stars donating personally from their multi-million dollar coffers? But most importantly, how much of any of the donations will the corrupt dictators of the African nations allow to reach the African people? Boob said today that African nations don't have a corruption problem, they have a poverty problem. That would come as a surprise to the Africans who didn't get any of the money donated by misguided do-gooders the last time around because corrupt dictators glommed onto it first. Powerful nations could end the poverty problem in Africa by using military intervention. But egomaniac Bob Geldof is only adding to the problem by literally giving money to corrupt dictators. Geldof is a self-promoting ass. But the Bush administration is even more at fault by turning its back on Africa's problems. Saturday morning, the UK's Channel 4 gave its predictions re the audience at the Boob's concert in London: “Your Live 8 pie-chart guide: A. 40% Cynical freeloading industry scum. B. 20% Journalists who will later use the phrase "A gr8 day!" C. 12% Live 8 performers gathering to nod their heads respectfully during Paul McCartney's set. D. 10% Competition winners (very excited). E. 5% Politicians who've been told to go. F. 5% Politicians who've begged to go. G. 3% Madonna's bodyguards (possibly armed). H. Made up of: Chris Martin's extended family, tramps who refused to move when they were putting the fences up, Pink Floyd's biggest fans and women who at some point during the day will climb onto someone's shoulders, whip off their tops, and let 5 billion TV viewers see their tits on which they will have written 'Drop the debt!' in black marker pen. Check back on Monday to see if we were right.” Of course Channel 4 is right. Live 8 is crap. Total crap. 100% crap. Every Geldof famine-fest is complete unadulterated unmitigated pure CRAP!!!!

Rove is the White House Snitch

Last night on the McLaughlin Group political talk show, Lawrence O'Donnell said he knew who ratted-out Valerie Plame to Time mag's Matt Cooper. O'Donnell said it was Karl Rove. Not that it's any surprise that Rove would commit such a down-and-dirty act. As a matter of fact, when most people pondered the nasty episode that resulted in former diplomat Joseph Wilson's wife's identity as a CIA operative being disclosed, Karl Rove was the most obvious culprit. But for O'Donnell to divulge Rove's name on a syndicated talk show before Time mag's documents are made public is huge news. O'Donnell said, “…I know I'm going to get pulled into the grand jury for saying this but the source for Matt Cooper was Karl Rove, and that will be revealed in this document dump that Time magazine's going to do with the grand jury." The discussion then centered on whether Rove would be indicted for perjury. After all, he told the grand jury he did not leak the info to Cooper. It's obvious to me that Rove took the risk of being the Plame case leak because he was absolutely sure that 1) no one would dare reveal his identity and 2) if it did come out he was the leak, no one would dare press criminal charges against him and 3) if someone did reveal his identity and criminal charges were pressed, he would beat the rap and come up smelling like a rose. And he may be right. But the problem for the White House is that all the arrogance and bad decisions of the Bush administration are piling up and it's resulting in an avalanche of bad news for the GOP. With the 2006 elections getting closer and closer, the GOP is faced with problems it never expected to have: It's having to pull in its horns; it's having to blunt its far-right message; its have to tread carefully. And that comes as a shock to the party that only six months ago boasted that Bush and Co. had a mandate to fuck the world-which included Iraq war vets. Message to Karl Rove: You may enjoy some of the fancier sex practices JimmyJeff Gannon can provide, but those Fort Bragg soldiers looked pretty grim during the Prez's recent speech. It was clear they don't like being on the receiving end, if you catch my drift.