How's that again?

This article tracks the number of times over the last three years that Tom Friedman, one of the NYT's most prominent editorial apologists for the war in Iraq, has in interviews said that "the next six months" are do-or-die for democracy in Iraq. Funny if it weren't so tragic.

The madness of King George

A Jungian psychologist evaluates Bush and his followers. Scary.

A piece of the NSA phonecall-monitoring puzzle.

As you know, in the wake of USA Today's revelation that the NSA has possession of the phonecall records of all Americans who use Verizon, AT&T and Bellsouth, those companies have each denied turning their records over to the NSA. So what's a citizen to believe?

Well, this may be the answer.

Is there no point where someone says, Stop the madness?

Now we're going to use laser-guns to blind oncoming drivers at checkpoints in Iraq. More humane, it's claimed, than bullets.

You want humane? How 'bout getting the fuck out of their country?

Rassmussen Reports

Regular followers of this blog know that I follow Rassmussen Reports for daily polling. It's a conservative-oriented poll that regularly reports higher numbers for Bush and his policies than other polls. But even Rassmussen can't escape the facts, including this precipitous drop by Bush in the polls, to a new low of 36% approval-rating. And note the huge "strongly disapprove" numbers. And note also that these figures arose from polling largely after Bush's speech on immigration "reform."

It's getting to the never-can-recover level. Let's hope so.

CNN International

Okay, Congressman Murtha's report about the Marines' massacre of Iraqi civilians (Murtha is a former Marine) has made it to CNN International. Any more traction, or have we become immune to American atrocities.

The media scripts

In this too-long piece, the "media scripts," as the writer calls them, are examined for Senator John McCain and Al Gore. The Senator has been dubbed--"scripted"--by the media as "Saint John" and/or "Sun God John McCain," with each report of him being cast, sometimes directly, mostly by assumption, in such terms. This media scripting lies at the root of MSM reporting, the article says, and governs public perception of a candidate.

The script for Gore is akin to "buffoon," a negative sense of some sort of wayward loser. And I must admit that in my various conversation, even with kindred peacenik crazies, I get a mixed reaction to the prospect of Gore's candidacy for president in 2008. And yet he's right on on the environment, opposed the Iraq invasion, is a genuine liberal on most issues--and he beat Bush in 2000. He could be cast as the "comeback candidate" or the "happy ending" winner. But I agree with the article, that says that until we consumers of news take on this media scripting question, until we confront and attack it, we'll be stuck with "Saint John" in the White House in 2008, and Gore or Hillary or whatever Democrat on the outside, doomed by the media's characterization.

Another watch to watch

Knight-Ridder reports Congressman John Murtha's recitation of a Pentagon report of a massacre by US Marines of Iraqi civilians. An awful event, first reported months ago, but obscured by the accounts at the time.


Not on the scale of My Lai massacre in VietNam, but not very savory, either. Will we learn about this on the MSM? Don't hold your breath.

He who lives by the sword

This is fun to watch. Bush has for five years cultivated and catered to the Far Right, his base, and now with the Dubai ports deal, the half-measure immigration proposal, the sale of goodies to India and so forth he's losing them. He didn't realize what radical crazies they were. But I did. I spent five hours driving along the I-10 a few months ago listening to a radio talk show from somewhere in southern Arizona. The question was "immigration" and the language was foul. Minutemen calling in, calling their fellow citizens (lumped in with legal and illegal immigrants) Spics and losers and pachukos and worse. Calling for on-sight shootings of wetbacks (even though there's no river to cross in Arizona), calling for martial law.

So Bush finds himself caught between a rock (the bigoted base) and a hard place (the capitalist pigs). The former want all the people of color gone from America, the latter want some kind of "limited" work-release program that allows them to exploit Latino labor without having to pay benefits, a living wage, and provide any security.

Rove, I know, conjured this latest gambit, trying to play the "immigration card" to staunch the bleeding, the inexorable drop in the polls of his puppet. But he didn't realize how rotten was his base.

There's a good novel here, except that it's really happening. And I'm really enjoying the show.

What's good for General Motors is good for America.

Check out this article to learn the converse--and then tell your broker to dump your common stocks.

Out in the cold

I'm one of the disenfranchised--that is, the unpolled--because I have only a cell phone, no land line, and so am not polled by the major pollsters. Here's an article citing the effects of the exclusion of cell-phone-only folks like me on the percentages shown in poll results. Not too significant yet, but growing.

"The Americans have wristwatches, but we have the time."

A saying of the Iraqi insurgency.

Talk about your quagmire...

Check out this situation in Iraq.

King of the world

Whatever happened to "no entangling alliances"? Gone in favor of a permanent military presence in the Middle East, with bases throughout the region. This administration is America's worst nightmare, dooming it to becoming the world's policeman and enforcer of its interests eternally. Our kids and their kids will be paying for this forever.

By way of explanation

I want to tell you why I'm so fixated on the Plame-gate issue, why it's so important that it be tracked to its ultimate conclusion. It's because all the other excesses and illegalities of the Bush administration (except, of course, his social security craziness and his various other economic debacles) are cloaked in claims of "national security": the torture and rendition thingees, the invasion of Iraq, the spying on us, the secretive usurpation of power.

But this Plame thing is different. If it's proven that Rove/Libby/others leaked Valerie Plame's name and function as a CIA operative in order to denigrate Joe Wilson's reportage from Niger, that's just plain ol' politics. Just like Watergate, or, as John Dean says, Worse than Watergate, because it's possible that Plame was working on intelligence of Iran's nuclear capacity, Iran, one of the members of Bush's "axis of evil."

I'm here to tell ya, if Rove is indicted and the case proceeds toward trial in the next several months, this could be the end of Bush's administration. Not by impeachment--that's too much to hope for. But by disgrace and discredit, which will lead to revulsion by Americans, which might lead to a period of fair and intelligent government.

So--tick, tick, tick...

...tick, tick, boom.

Now it's being reported that Fitzgerald has handed Rove's attorney the sealed indictment, and that an announcement of the charges will be forthcoming next week. Jason Leopold, the author of this report and of the report I linked to above, is the same man who broke the story of the Libby indictment in the hours before it was announced by Fitzgerald, so it's hard fact. Rove is going down, baby.

Unfriendly fire

I suppose that's the word for when units of an army, in this case the US-trained Iraqi army, attack one another.

Tick, tick

Time is running out for Karl Rove.

Staking out Fitzgerald

Reliable sources--trust me on this, I don't want to surf to find them--have noted that Plame-gate prosecutor Fitzgerald released the information about Libby's indictment on a Friday afternoon, and that he's about due to announce Rove's indictment too. They've taken to roosting in front of Fitzgerald's office every Friday, and I'll roost here, waiting, waiting, waiting and wishing.

Whaaaa?

A bunch of Ugandan soldiers sodomized at a US military base in Iraq? Whazzup with that?

What are we to do?

Those of us Americans--and there are millions and millions of us--who want sanity in our foreign policy, starting with getting the hell out of Iraq, are in jeopardy of failing our mission if the Democrats are split between the sane ones and the warmongers: H. Clinton, E. Bayh, Lieberman, Biden and their ilk. That split can hand the Republicans continued control of Congress and, possibly, the White House in 2008. We've got to get a plan, as well as a much louder voice!

Remember that popular female Iraqi television reporter?

Recall that she was killed some months ago, reportedly shot, along with her cameraman? Well, recently a cellphone-camera was discovered that contained a clip of her death. Here's how she died at the hands of "two musclebound men in military uniforms."

Was it worth it?

All those dead and maimed Americans and Iraqis, all those billions of dollars, all that enmity and ruin--to establish a "democracy" that ceases to function because of a ringtone?

Boiling blood

What does it take to get my blood to boil? What about this story about a $6.1 billion--that's with a B--contract for a fleet of helicopters for the President? For some reason the story surfaced again today, but the contract was actually awarded in early 2005.

As to the earlier story, note (scroll down) that among the supporters of the contract was Hillary Clinton, quoted as saying it was "an Oval Office in the sky." Note also that the award went to a syndicate of largely foreign companies at the expense of the Sikorski Company of Connecticut.

A fleet of 23 Oval Offices, at a cost of 6.1 billion dollars! And get this:

"Measuring eight feet wide and 25 feet long, the cabin will include a lavatory and a galley kitchen. The fold-down stair spares the president from ducking during photogenic entrances and exits


These people in Washington are fucking crazy!

A milestone

but a dubious one.

I gotta agree with our soldiers in Iraq

These latest uniforms look "goofy."

Unknown site

Here's the Home page of a site that's fun to surf. Most illuminating is the page that presents, in a quick series, various newsworthy events from around the globe, using TV clips from AP, Reuters, BBC--whatever. I have cable connectivity and so am able to receive the clips as clearly as if they're televised. They're a day or so late, but the breadth of news coverage (for examples, an ominous volcano in Indonesia, a "Watergate" scandal in France) surely make me feel more like a citizen of the world, not merely a vessel for the news that American channels choose to present. And it's not apparent from the site itself what if any axe it has to grind, because its coverage is ubiquitous, or seeming so.

Ain't this grand?

A border war between Kurdish militias in northern Iraq and Turkish troops to the north; concurrent with blasts of Iranian border towns, likely the result of Kurdish incursions into Iran to the east. Need a program to follow the action? Here's a BBC article on the latest attacks, with map and links to earlier stories. This is precisely the "destabilizing effect" in the region that was predicted by those who opposed our invasion and occupation of Iraq. The Kurds, long constrained from expansionist and separatist acts, are now loosed by the American presence in Iraq to carry out a plan they've long had--to create a separate nation in the geographic center of four bordering nations: Syria, Turkey, Iraq, Iran.

The Iranian Oil Bourse

Some months ago I posted about this prospect, and now it's a-comin'. True, there won't be any immediate impact on the dollar, even if Iran pulls it off, but I think the phrase "death by a thousand cuts" came from the East, didn't it?

ROTFLOL

It's rare that I use smiley-faces or cyberinitials--I really hate them, dunno why--but if you want to roll on the floor laughing out loud check out this clip from a year-old Daily Show program. If you wonder why Porter Goss is out at CIA, the look on his face in the clip is your first clue.

Wanna bet

that the Chinese leaders realize the threat of global warming before our president does?

Ya wanna hear something really good?

Check out this rant by an LA Bush-supporting radio talk-show host as he apologizes for having supported Bush and calls him the worst president ever. Couldn't said it better myself. (Click on link for download of audio.) BTW, he's the morning drive-time talker, with a huge audience on a huge station.

Those Brits are getting quite cheeky

Two weeks ago their Foreign Secretary calls a report that Bush doesn't rule out using nukes on Iran "nuts"; and now their Attorney General calls for the US to close Gitmo.

They need a good bitch-slapping.

In case you thought the Bush tax cuts paid for themselves

by stimulating the U.S. economy and thereby creating more tax revenue, you're not just wrong, the economic concept itself is a Laffer.

Meanwhile, down south

in the supposedly tranquil part of Iraq, near the Shiite city of Basra, a military helicopter is shot down, killing four British soldiers. The supposedly tranquil Shiites' reaction?

"Sky News footage showed locals celebrating, dancing and throwing stones at British troops attempting to reach the crash site as a plume of thick smoke rose behind them.

"Two British Army Warriors (armoured personnel carriers) and a Land Rover also came under fire from petrol bombs as the scene degenerated and clashes broke out between British troops and Shiite militias.


"The scene of the crash Police Captain Mushtaq Khazim said British soldiers fired weapons over the top of the crowd in an effort to disperse it but fire was returned and at least two people, one of them a child, were killed."

Stocks and bonds and the dollar, oh my.

Okay, here's what's wrong with reliance on the U.S. stock market to determine the state of our economy. Today's weak Labor Department payrolls report, showing a gain of only 138,000 jobs in April (far fewer than the predicted 200,000 jobs, coupled with a significant downward revision of the earlier months' job creation) caused a sharp drop in the dollar against foreign currencies; but nevertheless ignited a buying spree of stocks. Why? Because the lapse of growth of jobs means, to investors, that the ecomony is cooling enough to cause the Fed to demur from further interest-rate increases as a means to quiet the prospect of inflation from a too-hot economy.

Get it? Because interest on U.S. debt instruments--related to the Fed's decision about rate increases on short-term borrowings from federal banks--won't rise, common stocks will become attractive investments, relatively.

We're in another period of "irrational exuberance" in the market. There's no basis, it seems to me, other than investment speculation, for corporate investment to be so out of kilter with reality. It's true that many companies are reporting high profits, but it's entirely at the expense of their workers; and with those workers (as consumers) saddled with debt and not receiving decent wages, we're in for a long fall. This fall.

Let's see how these amendments in the House and Senate fare. Whatever they mean--and they're hardly hard-nosed refusals to fund permanent bases--I'm absolutely certain if they survive the conference committee of the Congress they'll be subject to a Bush "signing statement" that will provide, in effect, "I'll do what I like."

Just so you know

the insurgents in Ramadi haven't quite succumbed, not when they're publicly executing Iraqi soldiers in the middle of town.

Words fail me

to capture my reaction to the summary execution by Iraqi police of a gay fourteen-year old boy. For sure, you can't know my gut feeling, but yours?

I wish I'd said that

The last line of this piece by Maureen Dowd is wonderful. After comparing Bush's position in Iraq to the kidnappers' plight in The Ransom of Red Chief (wanting, but unable, to give back their victim, who's turned out to be a nasty kid), she notes that Bush ended his recent diplomatic trip with a bike ride and noted, "When you're on the hook, play hooky."

No mystery to most folks

The TV pundits have of late been wondering how come, with the "improving numbers," Bush is doing so poorly in the polls on the question of the state of the economy. Well, if the talking heads, who rely on GDP figures and gross inflation trends, would look at the average worker's situation, he'd see this: flat or declining wage levels, increased borrowing, negative savings.
In other words, if they'd do their jobs, instead of simply spewing Wall Street's markers, they'd realize what most Americans realize. The present US economy is a hollow shell, fabricated on corporate and rich-folks' wealth and fed by consumers' borrowings.

If I were mean-spirited

I'd beat the Republicans over the head with the hypocrisy of Bush's insistence that the national anthem be sung in English.

Erik Come Lately

I know I'm the last person on the Net to know of this site--YouTube.com--but it's neater than heck...with a world of possibilities. It requires high-speed connection, but you can upload digital videos and share them with the universe, which can download them, share them, etc. Amazing. Surfing the site is truly dangerous--addictive.

What a great question

Here's a pollster question asked by the latest Wall Street Journal/NBC News survey:

"At the conclusion of the war in Iraq, do you feel that most Americans will think it is more like World War Two, which unified America and was considered an important turning point for the United States' role in the world; more like the Korean War, a stalemate in which neither side prevailed and American troops had to remain for many years; or more like the Vietnam War, which divided America and lowered the United States' international prestige?"
.
WW II--11%
Korea--35%
Vietnam--48%
Unsure--6%

I wish I'd come up with that question. And the answers: 83%--plus think we're gonna have a "Mexican Standoff" or worse.

I told you. Bush hasn't won anything in his lifetime, except his elections. Just like Hitler.

I hate to say I told you so

but I don't, not one bit. It's time to buy euros, or gold, or yen--anything but US currency and evidences of indebtedness.

What an easy job

to run the New York Times. You can plump for war, unrelentingly, and then when the war goes badly you can hammer those who plumped for war and complain about the result, unrelentingly.

I wanna be a headline-writer.

Forget about paperback writer, a headline writer's the heavy-hitting dude. I mean, check out Reuters: "GDP Growth Strongest in 2 1/2 Years." Wowzer-dowzer!

Then scroll down the article to the meat of the matter. Not the funny math that makes up the GDP, but the math that matters: Wages. Here's what you'll find:

"PAY RISES LAG
Separately, the Labor Department said employment costs measuring what employers pay in wages and benefits rose at the slowest pace in seven years during the first quarter, which should temper concerns about potential wage-induced inflation."

So--the rich get richer and the poor stay poor. The Republican paradigm.

A related subject, somewhat related

One thing I enjoy: Anticipating outcomes. Like my Hillary Watch, to see with what ugliness she navigates between being a pro-war whore and, come 2006, an "I-told-you-so" peacenik. It's gonna be fun to watch.
Another, unrelated, development, but also fun to watch. What is the LPGA--the Ladies Professional Golf Association, for you incogniti--gonna do about the emerging dominance of their tour by "Orientals"? For example, as of today, the end of the next-to-last round of a large tournament in Florida, televised by a major network, the surnames of the three leaders, who're far ahead of the field, are Kim, Miyazato and Kim. Not a gringa in the bunch.

It's because they're good golfers, but land-o-goshen, they're awful TV draws, many barely able to speak English, with on-screen personalities of shy, sweet ladies, entirely unquotable. And--to repeat--not gringas.

Call me racist, but you watch, and giggle with me, as the LPGA finds a way to prevent this from becoming a regular occurence without, of course, admitting that what they want is more ladies with Western Hemisphere surnames on the leaderboard.

A bit of history

Print this out, press it into your scrapbook to give to your grandchildren so you can tell them that we knew, we really knew, what was happening to us.

Silver foot

Recall the remark by the woman governor of Texas, Anne Richards, commenting on Bush's father at the Democratic convention: "Poor George, he was born with a silver foot in his mouth"? Well, so was his son.

Oh, Please, please

Don't let this be b.s.

Diner

I just watched it on Turner Classic Movies. What a great flick. Fine soundtrack (I knew the words to most of the songs!), and a list of male actors that reads like a Who's Who in film and TV acting, plus Ellen Barkin. And it ends on a happy note, the wedding of the girl who passes the sports quiz to the Paul Reiser character. Great movie.

A Place in the Sun

It's on Turner Classic Movies tomorrow (Sunday) evening, with a repeat later in the week. Clift/Taylor, love and loss. Don't miss it. Along with the Brando/Malden classic, One-Eyed Jacks, it's a favorite of mine.

Breaking News!

FEMA recommends abolishing the Bush administration.

Can you imagine

what Sean Hannity or Michael Savage or Rush Limbaugh would be saying if Iraqi troops killed four American soldiers "by mistake"? (Scroll down to Samarra entry.)

No wonder Rove is sweating bullets

This be the judge what sits on the Scooter Libby case.

Gasoline prices

All these proposals ($100 rebates, oil drilling in Alaska, investigation of "price gouging")--so silly. Imagine the effect on oil prices if Bush (he wouldn't do it, of course, but imagine) announces that he wants to enter into bilateral talks with Iran about their nuclear program; announces a firm date for withdrawal from Iraq; announces that he will personally intervene in the pricing of oil at all levels--production cartels, refining cartels, distribution cartels; and that he's announcing huge tax benefits for alternative fuel. Could it happen? Not for the next three years, not while Bush is president. And by the time there's another president, it may be too late.

That sound you hear

is the crash of the dollar.

Maliki unmasked and unleashed

The new PM of Iraq, according to this analysis, is as bad as it gets. His appointment by our lackeys in Iraq was at our instance--Condi's and Bush's. Is this another--the final--egregious error they make in Iraq? How many more lives will it cost us--and the Iraqis?

Hooray for us

California Assemblyman Paul Koretz of Los Angeles has introduced a resolution calling for the impeachment of Bush and Cheney. Here's a site that announces it, and if you scroll down sets out of series of supporting actions you can take.

Enjoy.

Bush's belief that God supports his foreign policy

Caught on tape. Be afraid, be very afraid.

Earth Day propaganda

This Raw Story article--make sure to click through to read the "Earth Day" site to which Raw Story refers--pulls no punches. Our tax dollars are being used by the House Republican majority to attack environmentalists in the guise of supporting Earth Day. I mean, it's so baldly transparent that you think--as did the Germans in 1934--they can't get away with this. But they keeping doing such things, and they keep getting away with it.

"Still free"

That's the sign a tagger spray-painted on Air Force One. Check out the video here.

The guy's got way more guts than I.

Blaming Bush

Here's how radicalized I've become. I blame Bush for this. Don't ask me how I can attribute it to Bush--I can. Just like the Christian Right can blame hippies for all that they see as evil, I find myself able to lay all misfortunes on my hated enemy. I've lost all objectivity. I despise Bush/Cheney/Rummie/Condi/Wolfie/Pearlie--pick a name--so deeply that it doesn't matter what goes wrong, what evil happens in the world. It's their fucking fault.

Now, ain't that grand!

The kids at my college alma mater, Stanford U, turned out in force to protest Bush's presence on the campus, so powerfully that Bush and his entourage were forced to change the location of his visit. The campus paper's report is detailed, supportive. I particularly like its recital of some of the chants and signs and slogans, of which my favorite (scroll down) is one from a Guatemalan student: "For every pig there will be a Saturday." I think it refers to a dish, like posole, made from pork, which is a weekend treat.

I was too prescient

Back before the 2004 election, I predicted that Bush would ensure his victory over Kerry (it was a close race, recall), by naming a new Vice Presidential running mate, Cheney having begged off due to "ill health." I was wrong. But maybe just premature, because in this article by John Dean, at the conclusion of his analysis of Bush's character, he virtually guarantees that Bush will pull off an October Surprise to avoid election of a confrontive Congress, and Dean's first suggestion is that Bush will receive Cheney's resignation and will appoint a more moderate VP.

(Dean also suggests an attack on Iran, of course, and given the present course of events, I agree with Dean that this is a likely, scary prospect.)

Ya gotta love it

For years, the US has backed its lackey institution, The International Monetary Fund, when it chides debtor nations for imbalances in spending, and issues calls for fiscal soundness (which means proof of an ability to pay back IMF loans) usually at the expense of social programs in the debtor nation. But now, the IMF has criticized the US for its lack of budgetary restraint and its failure to provide universal health care to its citizens, and the Bush administration doesn't like it, not one bit.

Deck chairs on the Luisitania

I'm back on the blog after a few days without a cyberconnection in Tucson--didn't even take my laptop with me!--only to find that you've done nothing in my absence but move deck chairs. Lots of them, however. We won't have Scott McClellan to kick around anymore, Rove's dodging indictment and in Iraq there's a new Prime Minister, maybe.

I'm not sure what effect this last move will have on the ongoing violence, because al-Maliki is a clone of al-Jaafari, but maybe Iraq will settle down somewhat, enough for us to begin pulling out some troops. You know--you just know--that Bush will praise the new PM to the skies and will use the event to talk about troop reductions, and will surely withdraw some thousands in time for our November midterm elections. But I wouldn't bet on any significant change in the situation in Iraq "on the ground," as opposed to the White House press releases.

BTW--The Dawa Party, which both al-Jaafari and Maliki are affiliated with, are no slouches when it comes to the use of terror and violence. I Googled Dawa to learn of its past and among other items came up with Juan Cole's recent analysis.

The end of times

This fine essay spells it out. I feel it too. We're approaching the edge of something very big in the course of humankind. The courses we now take are utterly divergent: One to peace and goodness and the shepharding of the planet and each others' liberties; the other to intolerance and war.

Am I crazy? Do you feel it too?

Who wants war with Iran?

Ya know, it's not just the NeoCons who are beating the drums for an armed intervention in Iran. Sure, they'd love it. It would fulfill, for the time being, their dream of an Americanized (and Israelized) Middle East. For the time being, because when the place catches fire, it's going to be nobody's nowhere. But I digress.

No, not just the NeoCons, not at all. Like this author, who, like me, proposes a dramatic diplomatic intervention by the US and other nations, I missed the major player. It's the media, stupid. The American networks want war, dammit. They relish the speculation about it, they nurture the prospect of it, and they adore the drama of it all, from buildup to attack to ruin.

The media won't get viewership from the comings and goings of diplomats, the announcements of protocols and dialogs. No, like they did in the buildup and "shock and awe" of the Iraq invasion, they'll benefit only from coverage of conflict, bombs and blood and guts.

It's not pleasant to admit, but we as a nation haven't progressed one little inch from 100 years ago when the Hearst papers spurred us to war with Spain. Then it was to sell papers, now it's to sell air-time.

A new low

Rassmussen Reports, which I follow daily, shows a three-point drop in Bush's approval ratings, to thirty-nine percent, with sixty percent disapproving (43% "strongly"). These are all new lows (or highs, depending on your point of view), in this poll that invariably shows figures more favorable to Bush than the other pollsters.

A tipping point?

Update: When US News & World Report--hardly a leftist rag--says that Bush's down-home, aw-shucks, manner is "wearing thin" you gotta believe it is. Indeed, it's not wearing thin, it's worn out.

Don't execute Moussaoui

For the reasons stated here.

Indeed, I was going to add this reason: That by not executing him we'd avoid handing the other side a martyr, we'd be showing them we're better than they are, and so forth. But no. The reason we shouldn't execute him is simple: It's immoral to kill a human being.

Another story to track

is this one, about the hundreds of millions of dollars that corrupt American contractors have stolen from Iraqi funds. Seems that they've also stolen huge sums of American money, and that legal proceedings are underway to recoup some of it. But the Iraqis can't recoup their money from American companies because under the "Transitional Law" that Bremer imposed on Iraq, American companies are immune from suit by Iraqis.

This story highlights (almost) everything that's wrong with the Bush administration: The evils of greed, conquest and occupation, of capitalism unchecked, of imperial hubris, of unaccountability.

Will we see/hear about it on the MSM? Let's check.

Happy talk

This report of the effect of Bush's spate of optimistic speeches on Iraq upon his poll numbers (no effect, by the way) is good reporting. Sometimes USA Today comes up with decent summaries of the news, even if it's not known for investigative reporting.

The arrogance of power

This example of egregious in-your-face federal spending is enough to make me pause over my check to the IRS and seriously consider tax protesting. I mean, my likely destination upon conviction would be Lompoc Correctional Facility, just fifty miles up the coast.

Ugly Americans

Why do they hate us? This "apology" by the US military for destroying the ruins of the city of Babylon surely is one reason. Check out, especially, the last two sentences. Straight out of VietNam's famous "We destroyed the village in order to save it."

Here's what's wrong with the Democrats

This post, offering a Democratic response to the Iran "crisis" is so wrong, so stupid, that I had to leave a comment--scroll way down on the many comments--to this effect: The post makes the classic blunder of adopting the Republicans' frame: of attacking Iran or not. That's not the issue. The issue is how to create a Middle East that doesn't adopt weapons as the only dialog. The Democrats should be demanding that Bush engage in face-to-face dealings with Iran to avert further escalation. We know Bush won't do it, but having failed to he won't be on the high ground anymore, and the Democrats will have seized the moment.

Update: Somebody's listening to me about having direct negotiations with Iran. A Republican, that's who. And not just any Republican. A heavy hitter.

A thought about despair

So many things are amiss in the world--not just the many things caused by the Bush/Cheney administration (although many are attributable to them)--that I'm inclined simply to give up, to quit the battle. Would you miss me?

No October surprise

It's not that Bush isn't going to attack Iran in October. He surely will. However, it won't be a surprise. By now, everybody on this side of the pond expects it, and Iran's latest actions are ensuring it. Indeed, Iran's systematic, trumpeted defiance of international approbrium leads one to wonder whether Karl Rove has a direct line to President Ahmadinejad and is dictating his script.

Do we have to do everything for them?

Can't the Iraqis even solve this problem ? I mean, why don't they just siphon it out of the gutters?

More than fifty million Americans voted

to put this idiot into office. Check out this video and, if you can, laugh at us.

Don't believe me

about the iffy state of affairs in Iraq, in Baghdad in particular. Believe this article in The Army Times.

Tipping points

It's not just the glaciers or the Gulf Stream. It's the economy, stupid.

I don't want to be a spoilsport, but

will somebody tell me where in this resolution authorizing Bush to use force against Iraq there's any authority granted by Congress allowing him to attack Iran? I mean, doesn't our president at least have to consult Congress before launching missles against a foreign power?

If you've stumbled onto a different constitution from mine, let me know what it says. But then again, maybe I'm just a silly strict-constructionist. A conservative, you might say.

Lying leaks

This WaPo article is long, but its gist is this: The supposed "declassification" that Bush supposedly "authorized" was supposedly the justification of Libby's statements to reporters (Woodward, Miller) to buttress the Niger-uranium claim in the face of Ambassador Wilson's revelation that it was bogus. But the leaks of the Niger-uranium claim were themselves bogus, because the Niger-uranium claim had already been discounted. So, even as leakers Bush/Cheney are liars.

A thousand words

If you want to know about John McCain, picture this.

I'm ambivalent

about this remark by British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw that an attack on Iran would be "completely nuts." On the one hand, I figure such a statement by our strongest ally when we attacked Iraq would operate to inhibit us from using military force against Iran; on the other hand, Straw's comment might merely be descriptive of Bush/Cheney, goading them to action, since they are indeed completely nuts.

He wouldn't dare

That's what they kept saying about Adolph Hitler during his five-year march to war against Poland; during his years of outrages against Jews, Poles, gypsies; during his planning and execution of war against Stalin. But he just kept on fooling them, doing precisely what they said he wouldn't dare do.

Bush has, consistently during his first term-plus one-fourth, done so many things that we thought he wouldn't dare do: withdrawing from the Kyoto treaty; conducting secret meetings to plan our energy future with fossil-fuel companies; selling out our national forests to the timber companies; trying to privatize social security; appointing reactionaries to the Supreme Court--all on top of his outrageous, he-wouldn't-dare, foreign policy moves and wars.

Now, with his poll numbers in the tank, with Iraq promising to sink him further, with scores of scandals threatening to cause the election of a Democratic House of Representatives (which has the power to conduct hearings, indeed, to pass a resolution of impeachment), "he wouldn't dare" cause an "October surprise" in the form of an attack on Iran--right?

Wrong.

Just think about it for a second...

Three bombs go off in sequence in Baghdad, killing 79 worshippers at a mosque. Baghdad's about the same population as Los Angeles. Can you imagine the horror, the furor, such an attack would cause here in the US? And this is just one day in the life of that sad, wrecked city, one attack among scores a day.

The "O J" word

Recall these interesting historical facts in view of Libby's testimony to the the grand jury that Cheney told him that Bush had authorized the leaking of selective (and, by the way, misleading) information about the state of intelligence showing that Saddam Hussein intended to build a nuclear bomb. (What is misleading, of course, is the the National Intelligence Estimate that Bush apparently authorized the disclosure of said that while some intelligence indicated that the aluminum tubes might be used to enrich uranium, other intelligence (from the State Department and the Department of Energy) indicated the tubes were merely for launching conventional rockets--and Bush authorized only the release of the former information.)

Historical fact #1.

Fitzgerald wanted to interview both Bush and Cheney about the leaks of Valerie Plame's identity, but after much resistance (even though Bush had said he wanted to get to the bottom of the leaks) Bush allowed Fitzgerald a one-hour interview, not under oath, and only in the presence of Cheney.

Historical fact #2.

Bush consulted a criminal attorney, who attended the interview, and who insisted that the interview be limited to the leak of Plame's identity.

Historical fact #3.

Bush had personally seen a summary of the National Intelligence Estimate, which included the reservations about the intelligence concerning the aluminum tubes, and so the selective leaking was done by Bush knowing it didn't tell the whole picture about the tubes.

Historical fact #4.

When the fallacy of the Niger-uranium intelligence was coming to light because of Ambassador Wilson's revelations, that left only the aluminum tubes as evidence of Saddam's nuclear plans. Thus it became vital to reveal this information to the public in advance of the upcoming election, and to withhold the qualification of the intelligence--as part of the effort to shore up Bush's standing on the invasion of Iraq, along with the attack on Wilson's status.

So now the question becomes, did Fitzgerald, in his interview with Bush/Cheney ask any questions, and did the latter give any answers, that misled Fitzgerald in his investigation of the Plame leak? If he asked Bush/Cheney something like, "Was there any effort made by you to counter the adverse impression that Wilson was giving about Saddam's potential danger to the US"? and Bush/Cheney said "no," then that would be a lie, a lie that could have the effect of obstructing Fitzgerald's investigation into the source of the Plame leak. And that could be "obstruction of justice"--the same charge that brought Nixon down.

Stay tuned.

More Riverbend

Here she's interviewed by al-Jazeera, telling about the blogging life.

Well, now, things are getting interesting

Up to now, Bush's defenses--to his lies that led to war, to his torture and endless imprisonment of enemies, to his illegal wiretapping of Americans--have been based on his claim that whatever was done was (1) not his fault, and/or (2) done in furtherance of the public's safety. But now, with Scooter Libby laying at his feet, through Cheney, the personal responsibility for authorizing the selective leaking national security information to NYT reporter Judith Miller, both defenses are down. This action is Bush's own--not Tenet's, not Gonzales'--and the leaks were authorized not even colorably to defend Americans but to defend Bush from claims that he lied about prewar intelligence, a purely political breach of national security done for personal reasons.

Bush has become Nixon, and Plamegate has now officially become Watergate II.

Chop wood, carry water

Check out Riverbend's reaction to learning of her recent awards, especially her tending to the parakeet's cage.

There's a lesson there folks.

Sometimes ya gotta lighten up

So--here's a great cartoon.

Did you know

that ten soldiers (5 Army, 5 Marines) were killed in Iraq yesterday? I thought not. You sure wouldn't know it from the MSM.

Make that eleven.

Knight-Ridder rocks

This kind of reporting--a detailed, fact-filled exposition of the administration's refusal to face the facts about the Iraqi insurgency--is what Knight-Ridder has, throughout this Iraq debacle, presented to the American people. Repeatedly, its stories have gone no farther than the wireservices that carry it. I predict that no mention of this astoundingly revealing story will make it to the MSM. Let's track it, okay?

Permanent bases in Iraq

Here's a worthwhile survey of the state of permanent bases in Iraq. Astounding figures, included, such as that of 20,000 servicepersons at one base, only 1000 ever leave its confines during a tour of duty.

Among the reasons permanent bases are likely, says one source, is that the peace movement in the US is "completely pathetic." The source has that right, for sure.

The long haul

Check out this article, an AP dispatch in Military.com, that candidly describes the present status of US air support of Iraqi operations. Bottom line: There's no way, not for years, that we'll turn over control of air support to Iraqis because there's no assurance they won't use airstrikes to settle old tribal scores. It'll take years to train them, and training hasn't even been started yet.

Another fact, quite revealing of the massive scope of the US military activity in Iraq. At just one airbase, in Balad, the Air Force launches 27,500 airplanes a month. That's 900 per day, forty per hour, almost one per minute, 24/7. Now for years I lived in Tucson, with the huge airbase, Davis-Monthan, nearby, and it launched perhaps one airplane per hour--and that noise was oppressive. Imagine, with scores of additional bases in and around Iraq, the enormity of the military might we're expending in that sad, ugly war.

Fasten your seat belts

Here comes the attack on Iran.

The latest

Okay, I was way late catching on to "Snakes on a plane," but two days ago I stumbled onto the acronym ITMFA. It's gonna catch on, bigtime, right?