Iraq: Media Should Focus Americans on the Reality

Iraq: Media Should Focus Americans on the Reality

"Iraq now faces many key issues that could tear the country apart, from the issues of Kirkuk and Mosul to that of religious law. James Zogby on Wolf Blitzer wisely warned the US public against another "Mission Accomplished" moment. Things may gradually get better, but this flawed "election" isn't a Mardi Gras for Americans and they'll regret it if that is the way they treat it."

- Juan Cole

The cheerleading in the media is misleading America about the reality on the ground in Iraq. Take a look at Juan Cole's blog entry about the reports coming in about yesterday's elections in Iraq.

Another dose of simple reality from director of a Washington think tank, Robert Weiner Public Affairs:

".. when we accept the reality of the low turnout, we will be better able to protect against the possibility that the elections will be like the war: the insurgents only committed minimal violence at the outset -- and then logarithmically increased their efforts afterward. In this case, because of the U.S. protection of the polling places, the insurgents effectively conceded; but now they could very likely go after all the hundreds of winning candidates as well as keep up their widespread violence. The possibility of civil war in Iraq remains strong -- we must not once again count our chickens too soon. This overriding instability and threat of attacks, which we have tried but not succeeded in stopping, is of course the reason for the low turnout, and the crisis continues."

In the Arab news, a plea for President Bush to finally get the international community on board (and stop bowing to the military wishes of dependent and needy Iraqis) :

"There could be a workable UN peacekeeping operation in Iraq, but first the Iraqis have to badly want it and second, the richer nations of the world have to properly fund it and man a good portion of it."

A few mainstreamers are keeping it real.

For example, Fareed Zakaria, a pundit at ABC News, reminds us that Elections are not "Democracy".

U.S. ENCOURAGED BY VOTE

U.S. ENCOURAGED BY VOTE
Officials Cite Turnout Despite Terror

The headline sounds really promising, doesn't it?

Great voter turnout despite the fear of terror.

It just so happens to have been written by Peter Grose in 1967.

About Vietnam.

When will we ever learn?

As history will show you, the mainstream media was not all that "liberal", even at the height of the civil rights/Vietnam era:

The Johnson administration sponsored "demonstration elections" in Vietnam in 1966 and 1967 to show that we were respecting the will of the Vietnamese people. Although that country was occupied by a foreign army (U.S.) and otherwise thoroughly militarized, free speech and freedom of the press were non-existent, and not only the only "mass-based political party" (NLF) but all "neutralists" were barred from participation, the New York Times took these elections seriously. Their news reports stressed the heavy turnouts, and the editorials noted the "popular support" shown by the peasants willingness "to risk participation in the election held by the Saigon regime" (ed., September 4, 1967). In both news and editorials the paper suggested that the elections might lead to peace, because by legitimizing the generals it "provides a viable basis for a peace settlement." As the whole point of the exercise was to keep in place leaders who would fight, this was promotional deception of the worst sort.

A Daily Kos reader has found a CIA discussion about the 1967 pre-election period. Take a look. Draw parallels to Iraq if you'd like. If you ask me, you can't help but draw parellels.

See LBJ's letter to Saigon in telegram 34017, September 8. (National Archives and Records Administration, RG 59, Central Files 1967-69, POL 15-1 VIET S).

"I have just received a detailed and most moving account of your election from the distinguished Americans whom you invited to Viet-Nam as observers. They returned believing in the fairness of the procedures and observed the intense interest of the Vietnamese people in this major step toward creating your own popularly chosen and constitutionally based government. Their individual reports were a testimonial to the courage and determination of the Vietnamese people to remain free and to create their own political institutions in their own way. The election was a milestone along the path toward the goal you have set for yourselves--a free, secure and peaceful Viet-Nam. But it is not the end of the journey. Many hard tasks remain. Not the least of these now is the creation of a strong, effective and broadly based government that will help you and your country achieve the objectives you set forth in your campaign. The American government and I, personally, look forward to continued close cooperation with you and your colleagues in the days and months ahead.."

Sound familiar?


At the American Street, Neil Shah says:

"What really made the South Vietnamese struggle in their battle to fend off the communist block in the North, was their ineffectiveness in crafting a government that was actually answerable to the people. Plagued by mind-boggling levels of government corruption and led by self-concerned and illegitimate leaders, there was never any real effort to establish a stable democratic state by a significant portion of SV’s themselves, despite countless efforts by the U.S. The significance for Iraq is that it will have to face many obstacles, including the current insurgency and the likelihood of communal violence, to actually establish a viable state (read: monopoly on means of violence) and that its success will depend more on Iraqis themselves than anything that can be done by the U.S."

Based upon what I've seen so far in Iraq, I don't think a sufficient number of the people have the drive and courage it currently takes to turn this into a sustained or successful Iraqi-based democratic revolution.

There is no doubt, we saw courage in the ones who voted yesterday, yet we also know how many Iraqis chose not to vote due to a feeling of injustice, the appearance of U.S. occupation, political dissent, and mistrust.

Don't expect me to opine a la "pie in the sky" about the glory of newfound determination in these people. We have not been able to train enough of them to adequately defend themselves against field mice, let alone sophisticated insurgents. Iraqi troops run at the slightest provocation. They are going to need the support and force of the world community for decades to come.

If President Bush fails to call upon the international community now, with humility, then you can expect our military to be misused and at grave risk for decades to follow.


UPDATE/9pm: See truthout.com's feature by William Rivers Pitt - The Story of the Ghost


*A tip of the hat to William Bollinger, who made me aware of this story.

'Just Say No' To Gonzales

'Just Say No' To Gonzales

I oppose the confirmation of Alberto Gonzales for one main reason:

I believe that a vote for the confirmation of Mr. Gonzales would be a vote to marginalize the slap to the face of the Rule of Law, in light of the Abu Ghraib 'torture memo'. It would be like saying that the torture just didn't matter, in the long run.

The world is watching us from a distance, but the world is not such a large place these days. We have seen how the distance has closed in upon us. We remember the morning of September 11th, 2001. Let's show the world we still have a soul, even after what we faced on 9/11, as a nation of decent and civil people.

Vote "NO" to Gonzales' confirmation!

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

The following is a statement which appears today on the main page at the Liberal Coalition website:

The Liberal Coalition opposes the nomination of Alberto Gonzales as Attorney General. As individual bloggers, many of us have written our own statements against the nomination; links to those posts are below. Promoting the man who authorized the use of torture to the nation's highest law enforcement position makes a mockery of that position and the notion that the U.S. is a nation of laws. His confirmation will signal that the United States can no longer be viewed as a champion for human rights and will diminish its ever-shrinking credibility on human rights issues.

Presidents are traditionally given a lot of leeway when it comes to their attorney general nominees. But extraordinary times call for extraordinary measures. If authorizing torture does not cross that line, nothing will. We urge the Senate to vote no on Gonzales.

Archy
Bark Bark Woof Woof
Dohiyi Mir
Echidne of the Snakes
EdwardPig
First Draft
Iddybud
Left is Right
Make Me a Commentator
Rook's Rant
rubber hose
Scrutiny Hooligans
Steve Gillard (link is to the original statement on Kos to which Steve is a signatory)
Words on a Page
Yellow Doggerel Democrat

This post has been submitted to the no to Gonzales site.

LINK-Original Post by upyernoz

What We've Purchased

What We've Purchased
With Our Treasure, Our Life, and Blood

Ignatieff Employs Fantasy-Shame to Belittle Iraq Naysayers

Ignatieff Employs Fantasy-Shame to Belittle Iraq Naysayers

Michael Ignatieff ("Apostle of He-manitarianism") has written a piece for today's New York Times magazine that reflects a Bushworld view of today's election in Iraq. He plays the role of Daddy scolding the bad, bad liberals who see the sham-election as any less than a glorious exercise. (How COULD they?!?)

The article's called The Uncommitted. (He should be 'committed' for having written it).

Warning: If you're looking at matters with any kind of realistic focus, you'll wind up either laughing hysterically, puking, or throwing the magazine directly into the trashbin.

I wish Kerry had supported Kennedy

I wish Kerry had supported Kennedy

Senator Ted Kennedy was one of John Kerry's strongest supporters and campaigners in 2004.

On this morning's Meet The Press, I would have liked to have seen Sen. John Kerry give his full support to the ideas which Senator Ted Kennedy had shared in a speech last week, suggesting we send 12,000 troops home here and now, in order to show the Arab nations that we mean what we say [when we say we are not occupiers.] There is solid truth to what Senator Kennedy was saying in that speech.

Senator Kerry elected to politically separate himself from Senator Kennedy on the issue of Iraq, emitting that "waffling" attitude that has harmed him in his political past.

I don't think it will win any political points for Sen Kerry with the true progressives of his party.

Part of Karl Rove's "genius" in Campaign 2004, if you ask me, was using adequately offensive rhetoric (and getting it out to mainstream media)in order to get the Democrats to scramble to respond defensively, thus revealing/exposing their non-united front on the issue of National Security and foreign policy.

I wish Senator Kerry would have been more firmly supportive of senior Massachusetts Senator Kennedy today. The Democrats still haven't learned.

You'll hear a lot about 'fantastic Iraqi voter turnout' in the mainstream media today. While that may be true in regards to Iraq's Kurd population and more-secure Shi'ite-majority locations (the people and places who stand to politically gain the most), there were polls in some towns that not even opened at the set time; many unvisited due to either fear or sheer protest. This election was a sham, albeit a smart-looking symbolic move toward Bush-propaganda's version of "freedom".

According to an Aljazeera.com report, there was low turnout in polling places such as Baghdad, Baquba and Samarra, which could have been prevented if there had been more time to create "a genuine election".

This statement is from a Muslim scholar - not a violent insurgent:

"The elections are not a solution to the Iraqi problem, because this problem is not an internal dispute to be resolved through accords and elections … it lies in the presence of a foreign power that occupies this country and refuses even the mere scheduling of the withdrawal of its forces from Iraq", [Muhammad Al-Kubaysi/AMS spokesman] said.

Al-Kubaysi said AMS believed political consensus among Iraqi parties could only be reached once the foreign military presence left the country and all parties had to rely on debate rather than force of arms.

"We have consistently argued that elections can only occur in a democracy that enjoys sovereignty. Our sovereignty is incomplete. Our sovereignty is usurped by foreign forces that have occupied our land and hurt our dignity."

Asked whether the influential group was looking to upset a transition to democracy by rejecting elections, al-Kubaysi replied: "These elections … are a means of establishing the foreign forces in Iraq and keeping Iraq under the yoke of occupation … they should have been postponed."

I consider Senator Kennedy's suggestion to be realistic and made in utmost good faith and judgement.

The sham is complete.

Let's start moving some of those troops away from where they've never belonged, and aim them toward home, where they've always belonged.

Enjoy the Propaganda Today - Remember Tomorrow Will Arrive

"Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable."

– John F. Kennedy

(It was not the U.S.'s place to spark or to aid a violent revolution in Iraq - or battling the resistance we knew would come. After the smoke and mirrors are cleared, we have come to understand that this was the real goal of our nation in our occupation of Iraq.
The Bush administration must be made accountable for their lies to the American people).


Enjoy the Propaganda Today - Remember Tomorrow Will Arrive

Today's news seems like an an endless video stream of hands dipping ballots into boxes followed by raised purple fingers. On a day when we are seeing maximum propaganda about an election in a land where democracy's been promoted by bombs and guns and U.S. occupation, we come to understand that authentic democratic revolutions (producing meaningful reform) must be sparked by the hearts of the people of the nation that is being changed. Could the Iraqis have achieved this on their own? Of their own free will? Not a chance. To this day, we cannot spark enough Iraqi fortitude for the "guts-n-glory" attitude that's necessary to maintain a "free Iraq". Look at the Iraqi security forces (Ahnold would call them "girly-men") who run at the first sign of danger!

What we are seeing is a violent and manufactured revolution waged by America on behalf of a foreign (hoped-for) power. The Bush administration created a violent revolution on behalf of the Iraqi people, while lying to the American people about the "national-security" reason our military was being used. President Bush deserves no less than impeachment for what he has done to the American people.

What was manufactured will become real. There will be a new Iraqi elected government as of tonight (or whenever the results are complete). And Monday will arrive. There will be freshly-elected shooting targets for insurgents who are determined to prove that violent revolutions created by foreign governments do not meet peaceably with reality.

I was reading an article at LeMonde Diplomatique titled Ukraine: the practice of protest. The truth it contains is an appropriate topic for a day like today. It reminds us that very little altruism can truly be expected from governments. It makes Bush's “Greater Middle East” policy suspect. While the project allegedly aims to “bring democracy” to the region, it has few chances of finding local allies given the level of animosity toward the US and its policies in both Palestine and Iraq.

The article states, and I agree, that it's wrong to claim that mass protests can be imported from abroad, whether we're talking a violent OR non-violent revolution. The decision to follow the politicians in one's nation, or not, must be taken by the people.

I am reminded of the real and earnest foreign-policy success of President Clinton's administration, along with the blessing and participation of the international community, which was well-proven in Serbia, 2000 (after bombs failed to produce real democracy):

From the article:

The recipe for non-violent revolution had been perfected in Belgrade. In 1999 Nato’s bombardment of Serbia failed; the US and the European Union decided to overthrow Slobodan Milosevic, which they did in the presidential elections of September 2000. Milosevic, convicted of electoral fraud, faced powerful, carefully organised demonstrations. A few skilfully prepared ingredients and a year of preparations were more effective than bombs.

Once success was certain in Belgrade, the sky was the limit for the Georgian opposition and activist movement. They made contacts in Serbia, went to look and borrowed the recipe. It worked, thanks in no small part to several million dollars from US organisations (the cold war was not yet over). Even so, these revolutions, inspired by Gandhian tactics or by the uprisings of the 1990s in eastern Europe, were more than a matter of manipulation. To believe that would imply ignorance of the social and historical context of the countries.

How different than what we're seeing today in Iraq.

9/11 allowed a mistaken and misleading administration to lead the fearful and shocked U.S. in the wrong direction. Deliberately and decisively.

A sham, I'm sad to say. By acting as de facto revolutionaries on behalf of Iraq, and by setting up these sham elections, we have eliminated the opportunity for dissenting Iraqi citizens to peacefully revolt.

We have created the perfect atmosphere for decades of civil unrest and violence in a land about which our President resorted to lying to the American people in order to spark manufactured (violent/radical) revolution there.

When Bush taunted "Bring it on", he meant it. He knew what he was saying, even if he has now apologized for it.

God help America. I'm convinced we have a mad dog as our President.

Ernest Goes to Auschwitz

Ernest Goes to Auschwitz

"At yesterday's gathering of world leaders in southern Poland to mark the 60th anniversary of the liberation of Auschwitz, the United States was represented by Vice President Cheney. The ceremony at the Nazi death camp was outdoors, so those in attendance, such as French President Jacques Chirac and Russian President Vladimir Putin, were wearing dark, formal overcoats and dress shoes or boots. Because it was cold and snowing, they were also wearing gentlemen's hats. In short, they were dressed for the inclement weather as well as the sobriety and dignity of the event.


The vice president was dressed in the kind of attire one typically wears to operate a snow blower."

Will Muslim States Unite Against West?

Will Muslim States Unite Against West?

Here's an extremely interesting and timely report from PINR/Yevgeny Bendersky, titled ''Lines in the Sand: Western State Building in the Muslim World''.

Excerpt:

"..If the world's current dependence on oil continues to grow -- as recent reports about China's oil consumption seem to indicate -- many Muslim states will assume greater clout in world affairs, making it harder to treat each of them separately as distinct "identities" vis-à-vis other states.

The latest developments in the "war on terrorism" point to unifying movements in the Islamic world, either with Iran's help or under the banner of al-Qaeda and its allies -- a more coordinated attack on Western principles and Western interests in the Muslim world that cut across the religious and ethnic divides. While U.S. efforts in Iraq have faltered since 2003, the January 30 Iraqi election following a relatively successful election in Afghanistan will prove to be one of the turning points in the development of the Islamic world, which will either accept and foster the Western model and emerge as a collection of distinct and friendly states, or will finally break under the pressure of Iran and al-Qaeda and begin to emerge as a unified religious, political and military entity, heralding a new chapter in world history."

Hersh: US Government Taken Over By Cult

Hersh: US Government Taken Over By Cult

Sy Hersh says we've been taken over by a cult. Read the transcript of Mr. Hersh's recent appearance at the Stephen Wise Free Synagogue in New York.

Excerpt:

"...we are been taken over basically by a cult, eight or nine neo-conservatives have somehow grabbed the government. Just how and why and how they did it so efficiently, will have to wait for much later historians and better documentation than we have now, but they managed to overcome the bureaucracy and the Congress, and the press, with the greatest of ease. It does say something about how fragile our Democracy is. You do have to wonder what a Democracy is when it comes down to a few men in the Pentagon and a few men in the White House having their way. What they have done is neutralize the C.I.A. because there were people there inside -- the real goal of what Goss has done was not attack the operational people, but the intelligence people. There were people -- serious senior analysts who disagree with the White House, with Cheney, basically, that's what I mean by White House, and Rumsfeld on a lot of issues, as somebody said, the goal in the last month has been to separate the apostates from the true believers. That's what's happening. The real target has been "diminish the agency." I'm writing about all of this soon, so I don't want to overdo it, but there's been a tremendous sea change in the government. A concentration of power."

What I Heard About Iraq

What I Heard About Iraq

Read this. Don't miss it. Written by Eliot Weinberger, whose '9/12' is published by Prickly Paradigm, it's destined to become a blogger's classic.

*A tip of the hat to Mathew Gross for pointing out the way.

Iraq's Election: Beyond the Rhetoric

Iraq's Election: Beyond the Rhetoric

The Iraq election is a sham. Many will not take part in the elections - not from fear, but because they're seen as phoney. Some say Iraqi democrats can't win in this desperate election. It's no wonder many see the elections as fake. [Only 10%] Of Iraqi expatriates, some not even citizens of Iraq, have begun Iraqi voting in the U.S. With a couple days to go, some Iraqis are asking: "What election?"

In other areas of Iraq, realistic Iraqis are getting ready for the worst. They've seen nothing but chaos, frustration and extreme violence as Iraq readies for this election.

Iraq is certainly no festival of democracy. It's more a travesty of democracy. Even in Baghdad, election security is terribly unsure. Iraqi forces, who run away at the first sign of danger, are expected to do little to stop election day violence. The violent intimidation campaign has nearly paralyzed Baghdad.

Meanwhile, George W. Bush continues to obscure his Iraq Quagmire.

Senator Ted Kennedy wants the troops to get back home.

On last night's NIGHTLINE episode, there was a televised townhall meeting at a church in D.C., (with staged questions). They called it "Iraq-Why Stay?" Ted Koppel moderated. Joseph Wilson laid out a wonderfully rational plan for the future of our disengagement from Iraq. I hope someone's listening. I know our President's administration abhors Joseph Wilson. He's on to their sham and trickery, you see, and he makes his knowlege loud and clear. They wouldn't have exposed Wilson's wife, Valerie Plame, as CIA - a wicked, cruel, and traitorous act - if they didn't want revenge for the SOTU/yellowcake incident. Wilson reminded the town hall audience that the only reason we should ever commit our Armed Forces to war is to protect America from imminent national security threats. And that is NOT what we are doing in Iraq today. By the Bush administration's arrogance, they will ignore the good advice of men like Wilson and gravely injure America in the process, by weakening and abusing the military. This, my friends, is the kind of leadership we have today.

_________________

*For those of you who saw last night's Nightline's so-called "town hall meeting" and heard a man shouting at the end, I have found out who he was and what he was saying!
See his own accounting here.

Excerpt:

I started chanting "GULF WAR SYNDROME" over and over again, very loudly so it filled the church and drown out Ted Koppel.

He replied, "I am sure I have no idea what you're taking about"

and I yelled, "It's about Depleted Uranium!"

Then I shut up, and he finished his closing and it was over.

As I was waiting to filter out with everybody else, I heard one of the Iraqi's, who was very upset, talking to a producer: "This is not what we expected, we were told we would get a chance to speak in the press release you sent us, and you did not give us the chance to say what we came to say."

Losing Feith

Losing Feith

Douglas Feith, one of the men highly responsible for our being in the Iraq-mess we are in today, will be leaving the DoD in six months. It couldn't happen soon enough for me.

"Someone" must have "something" on him. Something he may not be able to deny. Something incriminating, I'd guess.

Don't ask me what - I'm only guessing. Maybe he's just "damaged goods" after the implication of his involvement with Larry Franklin and the security disaster in Iraq. Sy Hersh's recent allegations certainly couldn't have helped to boost Feith's PR. It takes a major uncovering of impropriety and an elephant-sized monkey wrench to unloose the feithful..er, faithful.. from the Bush Administration these days. It seems it's been done, though.

See Laura Rozen's comments HERE and HERE.

Spongebob vs. the Missionary-Position

Spongebob vs. the Missionary-Position

Spongebob and the missionary position?!?
What could they possible have in common, you ask?

They both appear in a clever piece by SFGate columnist Mark Morford.

Excerpts:

"Note the people who look at hilarious children's cartoons and see only sinister mind control, who look at their fellow human souls and see only an army of debauched heathens, who look (reluctantly) at their own genitals and see only a gnarled clump of pain and confusion, who look up at the beautiful blue sky and see only a massive canopy of daggers.

How incredibly sad. And, for right now, how very, insidiously dangerous...[..]

[..]....They have jammed a black seed of paranoia and dread into the tired soil of American consciousness, and have made it their lifelong duty to ensure that the seed festers and erupts into a gnarled weed of hate and ignorance and bad missionary-position sex with the lights off."

Flip Flopping On The Definition of ‘Freedom’

Flip Flopping On The Definition of ‘Freedom’

The Bush administration’s had a lot of explaining to do about their meaning of “freedom”, the one little word which speechwriters had sprinkled throughout the President’s January 20th inaugural speech, leading to a lot of big questions. Washington Post columnist EJ Dionne says: “You can spin a lot of things. Freedom shouldn’t be one of them.” LINK

The day after the inaugural address, the White House basically said they didn’t really mean what we may have thought they’d meant when President Bush talked about the expansion of “freedom”. They went on to try to explain what they did mean, which in reality, had little to do with the bold speech itself. Dionne calls it the “Freedom Shuffle”. The uncertainty, after sounding oh-so certain and determined, can only increase political division in America and enhance further mistrust amongst foreign nations, according to Dionne. When it depends upon what the definition of “freedom” is on any given day, the President makes it easy for anyone to easily doubt his intent and tenacity in standing up for whatever he thinks the word means. We are only left to scratch our heads and wonder. Dionne says:

The younger Bush’s Freedom Shuffle — he’s an idealist on Thursday and a realist on Friday — may come as a relief to the many foreign policy specialists allergic to grand visions. A majority of Americans will be pleased with the elder Bush’s reassurance that the speech does not mean “newly asserted military forces.”

But the Freedom Shuffle is a terrible mistake for Bush, because the greatest barrier to Bush’s success in his second term is the intense cynicism he has inspired about his motives. This cynicism affects the near majority that voted against him at home but also a vast number of citizens in nations around the world that were once American allies. It is a cynicism that, if it spreads further through the Muslim world, could doom the very best aspirations of Bush’s policy.

Bush supporters see this cynicism as mean-spirited. In fact, it is the bitter fruit of bitter experience. A war originally justified in the name of ridding the world of weapons of mass destruction is transformed with some well-chosen phrases into — presto! — an episode in the long struggle for freedom. The shifting rationale is never acknowledged. His disquisition on this struggle did not even mention the central theater of battle in Iraq. No need to mire grand dreams in grim realities. A nation that should be the world’s leading advocate of human rights gets caught up in a torture scandal, and the president has yet to hold himself or high officials accountable for this deep stain on his country’s reputation.

Bush's Vision of America Will Mean TYRANNY

Bush's Vision of America Will Mean TYRANNY
James Madison would spin like chicken rotisserie in his grave if he knew.

Read the selected quotes below.
James Madison sternly and solemnly warned against concentration of power in all branches of government.
There stands an elected majority in both the House and Senate. (Elected or not, heed Madison's warning from Federalist 47).
We can safely predict President Bush's political intent, should a Supreme Court seat (or two or three) become vacant in the near future. (Did you get a good look at the Chief Justice at the inauguration? I don't think it will be long.)
How can the President expect any of us to believe his rhetoric about fighting tyranny when he plans to create the perfect opportunity for tyranny to reign Supreme (pun intended) in his own country?

QUOTE ONE:

"The accumulation of all powers, legislative, executive, and judiciary, in the same hands, whether of one, a few, or many, and whether hereditary, selfappointed, or elective, may justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny..[..]..From these facts, by which Montesquieu was guided, it may clearly be inferred that, in saying ``There can be no liberty where the legislative and executive powers are united in the same person, or body of magistrates,'' or, ``if the power of judging be not separated from the legislative and executive powers..where the WHOLE power of one department is exercised by the same hands which possess the WHOLE power of another department, the fundamental principles of a free constitution are subverted''

--James Madison, Federalist No 47, February 1, 1788

QUOTE TWO:

"President Bush has indicated he favors nominating justices with a strict constructionist view of the Constitution, a judicial philosophy generally regarded as anti-abortion. Mr. Bush has said he favors a justice in the mold of the high court's strongest conservatives, Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas."

--Andrew J. Baroch, Voice of America, 26 November 2004

QUOTE THREE:

"So it is the policy of the United States to seek and support the growth of democratic movements and institutions in every nation and culture, with the ultimate goal of ending tyranny in our world...[..]..All who live in tyranny and hopelessness can know: the United States will not ignore your oppression, or excuse your oppressors."

--George W. Bush, Second Inaugural Address, January 20, 2005

In his inaugural speech last week, President Bush said there could be no justice without freedom.

Heed my warning.
There can be only an end to freedom with Bush' plans for the future of the Supreme Court.

Be prepared for four years of tyranny in your own country, America. The only oppressors the Bush administration will ignore, apparently, is the Bush administration.

"An ELECTIVE DESPOTISM was not the government we fought for; but one which should not only be founded on free principles, but in which the powers of government should be so divided and balanced among several bodies of magistracy, as that no one could transcend their legal limits, without being effectually checked and restrained by the others."

----James Madison, Federalist No. 48, February 1, 1788

Kevin Sites: Tsunami Stories

Mannequin in tsunami wreckage. image: Kevin Sites

Kevin Sites: Tsunami Stories

Kevin Sites' latest blog reporting from the Tsunami zone is a must-read.

Excerpt from "Black Plastic" by Kevin Sites:

Mohammed picks up a photo album. It's covered with mud -- the pictures inside ruined. All the years of memories destroyed like the lives they depicted.

A few feet away is an inflated life jacket. I wonder whether if the force of the wave ripped it from the person who was wearing it or whether they cven had a chance to put it on.

The Indonesian soldiers who are recovering bodies here have run out of latex gloves. They improvise by tying black plastic bags around their hands to do mortuary work on a scale they likely never dreamed of.

Universal Press Syndicate Will Harbor Bush Shill Maggie Gallagher

Universal Press Syndicate Will Harbor Bush Shill Maggie Gallagher

Universal Press Syndicate explains why they'll keep Maggie Gallagher.

They hype themselves as having "The best opinions in the universe." Instead, they should call it "the best opinions the Bush administration can purchase."

I'll never trust any of their journalism from here on in. Ted Rall should remove himself from this creepy group as soon as he can. Run, Ted. Run.

Torture:The New Casual Topic

"It's not nice to fool Mother Nature Uncle Sam!...If you think it's butter torture and it's not...it's Chiffon Al Gonzales' acceptable form of interrogation!"

Torture: The New Casual Topic

Tom Tomorrow makes a comically astute point about the new/cavalier (almost breezy) attitude toward the topic of torture. He titles his latest cartoon "How Low Can We Go? The Disturbingly Brief Journey From Unthinkable to Mundane"
Arlen Specter's performance in the Al Gonzales nomination hearing comes to mind...his casual questioning about the "ticking bomb" scenario, in particular. (*Someone's watching waaay too much "24").

________________

James Wolcott says 'Just Say NO' to Gonzales nomination

At Daily Kos, they're telling us that Gonzales has pointed out the Convention Against Torture treaty, as ratified by the Senate, which doesn't prohibit the use of "cruel, inhuman or degrading" tactics on non-U.S. citizens who are captured abroad, in Iraq or elsewhere..Gonzales, White House counsel and a close Bush adviser, described recent reports of prisoner abuse as "shocking and deeply troubling." But he refused to answer questions from senators about whether interrogation tactics witnessed by FBI agents were unlawful..." LINK to News Story-San Jose Mercury

Proposal to Democrats: Disband!

Proposal to Democrats: Disband!

My idea? Nope.
If you're wondering, I didn't propose this.
It's crossed my mind many times lately, though.
I'll bet it's crossed yours, too.
Do you think it's a harsh suggestion?
I don't know....
It was absolutely revolting to hear Sen. John McCain categorizing Dems who would stand up for truth and vote proudly against Condi Rice as "sore losers". (And getting away with it. CNN and FOX are replaying it ad nauseum).

I believe the real losers are the ones who willingly ignore reality for their own cheap political gain. Losers come in Red and Blue; Elephant and Donkey. I'm not being partisan here.

This post is for the Donkeys who refuse to stand up for reality and sell their supporters out at almost every opportunity. Shame on them!

At The American Street, Emma has decided to put it up for public discussion.

I think Emma's "DISBAND" suggestion isn't a bad one.

Seeing how few of the Dems actually stood their ground and voted a resounding "NO" for a woman who lied, bold-faced, to the public about a war into which our nation should never have entered is revolting. If Democrats are so easily intimidated by GOP hacks tossing around terms such as "un-American", they aren't representing those Americans whom they are charged with the duty of representing. The word "worthless" comes to mind.

Someone commented that a proposal of this type is barely necessary. Why propose to have them disband? The Democrats, by their abandonment of duty to the left and even many moderate Democrats, are systematically destroying themselves - and the success of the American system of government hoped for by the nation's Founders.

*An Alternative Idea?
"How about we just shake up the management and put a fighter in charge. Maybe a loud-mouthed Governor from New england or something?"
--Comment by 'Fast Eddie' at American Street

Americans Catching On To Bush Voodoo Optimism on Iraq

Americans Catching On To Bush Voodoo Optimism on Iraq

See the latest AP poll. Already-shaky confidence in Iraq's future has slipped.
Even Southerners and rural Americans are becoming resistant to President Bush's Iraq-related voodoo-optimism. You can fool some of the people some of the time, but sooner or later they're going to have your number.

It won't be long before they'll be calling for the troops to come home.

My only question will be: What took them so long?

Juan Cole: The Speech Bush Should have Given

Juan Cole: The Speech Bush Should have Given

Juan Cole lays out the speech he thinks Bush should have given back in 2002, as he was trying to convince Congress to give him the authority to go to war against Iraq.

Excerpt:

"..There also isn't any operational link between a secular Arab nationalist like Saddam and the religious loonies of al-Qaeda. They're scared of one another and hate each other more than each hates us. In fact, I have to be perfectly honest and admit that if we overthrow Saddam's secular Arab nationalist government, Iraq's Sunni Arabs will be disillusioned and full of despair. They are likely to turn to al-Qaeda as an alternative. So, folks, what I'm about to do could deliver 5 million Iraqis into the hands of people who are insisting they join some al-Qaeda offshoot immediately. Or else.

So why do I want to go to war? Look, folks, I'm just not going to tell you. I don't have to tell you. There is little transparency about these things in the executive, because we're running a kind of rump empire out of the president's office. After 20 or 30 years it will all leak out. Until then, you'll just have to trust me."

Gore Vidal: Bush Inaugural Speech Was Un-American

"I’d say what we have now in the United States is working up a nice tyrannical persona for itself and for us."

--Gore Vidal

Gore Vidal: Bush Inaugural Speech Was Most Un-American Ever
US Could Become Dictatress of the World And Lose Her Soul
LINK-DEMOCRACY NOW

GORE VIDAL QUOTE: "There's not a word of truth in anything that he said. Our founding fathers did not set us on a course to liberate all the world from tyranny. Jefferson just said, “all men are created equal, and should be,” etc, but it was not the task of the United States to “go abroad to slay dragons,” as John Quincy Adams so wisely put it; because if the United States does go abroad to slay dragons in the name of freedom, liberty, and so on, she could become “dictatress of the world,” but in the process “she would lose her soul.” That is what we -- the lesson we should be learning now, instead of this declaration of war against the entire globe. He doesn't define what tyranny is. I’d say what we have now in the United States is working up a nice tyrannical persona for itself and for us. As we lose liberties he’s, I guess, handing them out to other countries which have not asked for them.."

______________________

Gore Vidal: America Has Worst Educational System of Any First World Country

GORE VIDAL: "...And that an American audience would sit there beside the capitol or reverently in front of their TV screens and watch this and not see the absurdity of what was being said -- absolute proof of a couple of things that I have felt, and most of us who are at all thoughtful feel: We’ve got the worst educational system of any first world country. We are shameful when we go abroad, because we know nothing. Just to watch the destruction of the archaeologists’ work at Babylon. Babylon is a center of our culture. Nobody knows that. Nobody knows what it is, except it's a wicked city that the lord destroyed. Well, it was the center of our civilization, the center of mathematics, of writing, of everything. And apparently our troops were allowed to go in and smash everything to bits. Why did they do it? Was it because they are mean bad boys and girls? No. They're totally uneducated. And their officers are sometimes mean and bad, and allow them to have a romp, as they also had in the prisons, none of which we heard about in the last election. We were too busy with homosexual marriage and abortion, two really riveting subjects. War and peace, of course, are not worth talking about. And civilization, God forbid that we ever commit ourselves to that."

Okay, I'll admit it: I'm paranoid about Bushites' intent toward Iran

Okay, I'll admit it:
I'm paranoid about Bushites' intent toward Iran
Knowing they lied, rushed and botched the Iraq situation, I think I have good reason.

Should we be openly promoting the idea of democracy in Iran?

Yes, I think we should... with honor, good faith, and the utmost respect for human rights and the rule of law.

Does that mean attacking them with bombs (as we've done in Iraq)?

I say no, no; one thousand times NO!

First, you do not deliver human rights with a bomb.

It never works.

You support. You do not destroy as a first means of offering your nation's support or convincing people that your nation's intent is forwarded in good faith.

NeoCons showed us how NOT to support human rights and democracy in Iraq. They provided President Bush with the perfect blueprint (a blueprint he willingly accepted) for what NEVER to do again!

Listen to the reasoning of Shirin Ebadi (quoted below-see LINK). It's time for Americans to rely on our own sense and use our own freedom to speak out now...before we enter into another damned disaster.

"Iranian Nobel Peace Prize laureate Shirin Ebadi has said that while she, too, opposes nuclear weapons, the West would do more good by focusing not on Tehran's nuclear programme but on promoting democracy in the Islamic Republic.

"In a country or a society where people supervise decisions and everything else, like a democratic country, the existence of an atomic bomb cannot be dangerous," Ms Ebadi said."

What is “expansion of freedom"?

What is “expansion of freedom”?

I have a question for you:
Who thinks that President Bush is an abuser of the word “freedom”?

In his inaugural speech today, President Bush recalled America’s “deep commitments”.
He stated he was “determined to fulfill his oath”, and for those who have disagreed with his foreign policy, that is a frightening statement to have heard him make.

He said that our duties are defined by the history we’ve seen together. He’s made some of that history, after the “Day of fire” (9-11) raised a “moral threat” to our nation. (Mortal threat may have been the better word- perhaps I heard him wrong).
President Bush wishes to redeem his narrowly-gained power in the next four years to “reward hope of the decent and the tolerant.” He stated that our liberty depends on liberty in other lands, and that our best hope is the “expansion of freedom”.

WHAT IS “EXPANSION OF FREEDOM”?

What is it going to mean to America?

What will be the dreadful cost?

Shall we ask the Neo Cons?

Shall we ask Donald Rumsfeld?

President Bush said that the urgent requirement of our nation’s security and the “duty of our time” is ending “tyranny in our world”. (This, from the guy who likened nation building to a political disease in 2000).

He vows to help others find their own voice (Or else, I wondered? Snuff their voices out with bombs and American occupation? Have you noticed how big that went over in the Middle east when we charged into Iraq?)

President Bush promises that we will use American power confidently in “freedom’s cause”.
and that freedom is “eternally right”.

The Bush administration’s definition of “freedom” is paramount to the American discussion which must follow; after this inauguration day is over.

President Bush says that human choices move events and that God chooses as He wills.

George Bush claims to have relied upon God’s voice and he made some unfortunate choices these past few years.

He said no one should live at the “mercy of bullies” (I immediately thought to myself: After what we’ve done in Iraq? Hello?)
He said that there’s no justice without freedom.
That depends on what freedom means to you, doesn’t it?

If you ask a lot of Iraq people today (the ones still alive), what their definition of “mercy”, of “bullies”, and of “justice” might be - - well - I think you might be shocked at the difference between their opinion and this American President.

The President focused on the “unfinished work” of American freedom.

I fear he truly believes he needs to finish what he has begun- and then some.

Is anyone worried? Will idealists be the ruin of America by abusing the very word, ” freedom”?

Please Cast Your Vote My Way

Please Cast Your Vote My Way

I've been nominated for The Koufax Awards: Most Deserving of Wider Recognition

Go Here to Vote

It would be deeply appreciated!

Rice admits bad Iraq decisions

Rice admits bad Iraq decisions

Oh, wow. That really does a lot to boost world trust in Ms. Rice.
(Sarcasm intended).

The headline above is a beginning of a truthful exposure - about what this administration's wrong-minded foreign policy has done to American trust - and world trust.

When will Ms. Rice be forced to admit that she willingly misled America?

She has admitted some obvious blunders (which must have really pained her deeply to have to do - she'd probably rather have had a double root canal without novacaine).

I'd heard her misinform the public many times in both the lead-up and the post-"shock and awe"-phase of the pre-emptive attack upon Iraq. I specifically recall her appearance in an interview on the PBS News Hour.

What we knew going into the war was that this man was a threat. He had weapons of mass destruction. He had used them before. He was continuing to try to improve his weapons programs. He was sitting astride one of the most volatile regions in the world, a region out of which the ideologies of hatred had come that led people to slam airplanes into buildings in New York and Washington.
Something had to be done about that threat and the president to simply allow this brutal dictator, with dangerous weapons, to continue to destabilize the Middle East.

LINK

--Condoleeza Rice, July 30, 2003

I'm glad Barbara Boxer dealt with Rice in a straight-on fashion yesterday. I wonder why so many of our Representatves and the media that follows them have been remiss for this long?

Have they learned their lessons yet?

Judging from the Rice confrontation, it looks like they may have begun to learn. When deferring to civility and rules gets us nowhere - when it puts us smack dab in the middle of a war we never should have started - when protocol is abused by bad politics, it's time for giants to awaken..if they are present ANYWHERE in our government today.

We're watching.

I don't want to hear about how we're going to be "spreading freedom" to Iran with bunker busters and a new draft to bulk up a voluntary military of withering numbers.

NEVER AGAIN!


_____________

Why the hawks are circling over Iran
As George W Bush prepares for a second term, his administration is setting its sights on Iran. But, Rupert Cornwell reports, a new foreign policy adventure could be disastrous

Checking In

Checking In

I saw the always-eloquent Pete Hamill speak about and read from his new book, "Downtown: My Manhattan" Tuesday night at Borders in Bethesda, MD. I can't wait to read the book. I'll have more on it upon my return.

I walked down by the MCI Center on Tuesday afternoon and noticed an unusually heavy presence of smartly dressed military men and women, along with tons of security all around. Turns out there was an event taking place where President Bush just happened to be in attendance. LA Times:

The audience of about 10,000 included 60 winners of the Medal of Honor, the nation's highest award for combat bravery. As he began his remarks, Bush snapped them a sharp salute.

The roads around Washington DC were an incredible mess today. There was a snowstorm that produced just enough of the white stuff to disrupt traffic.

I hope the weather will be better for the inauguration tomorrow. I hope to have an insider's report; to be written by a reliable source. A family member will be in attendance. I'll be watching CSPAN for a glimpse of him in the grandstands from my (mercifully) warm hotel room.

I'll be away for a short while

I'll be away for a short while

I'll be in D.C. during inauguration week. I'll try and get back here with blog reports when possible, but due to limited online service, I can't promise regular bloggings.

Have a great week!


- Jude

Morally Empty Absolution

Morally Empty Absolution



President Bush: Don't blame me......and whatever you do, don't ABSOLVE me or my fellow Americans on your own cheap and easy behalf.

"Cheap grace" is worthless. Worthless, worthless, worthless. See Josh Marshall's comments about Bush's latest affront to our sense of intelligence and decency.

“Cheap grace" is absolution without personal confession.
Josh pretty much hit the nail on its head.
In President Bush’s mind, Election 2004–the “great American Communion”, has washed clean what we see as his foreign policy sin.

Dietrich Bonhoeffer was executed by the Nazis, by the way.

See Melanie Mattson's comments.

See Echidne's comments.

Poor Babylon: Works of Ages Destroyed in Two Years' Time

Poor Babylon: Works of Ages Destroyed in Two Years' Time

It is with sorrow, this morning, that I quote the words of my fellow blogger Sapere Aude, a wise world historian and mystic wanderer:

"A profound thought is realized here, that a site that has survived human machinations for thousands of years can be destroyed in two years, a testament to this world's meme of "destroy or be destroyed", a parasidic attitude that has infected our civilization.

Perhaps what is left can be preserved for future generations to visit and study. It's a maudlin thought that future historians must relegate themselves to reading about the ancient city, rather than touch the edifices and stones that were touched by an ancient civilization of ages past."

MLK and the new Dream

"Let us turn our thoughts today
To Martin Luther King
And recognize that there are ties between us
All men and women
Living on the Earth
Ties of hope and love
Sister and brotherhood
That we are bound together
In our desire to see the world become
A place in which our children
Can grow free and strong
We are bound together
By the task that stands before us
And the road that lies ahead.."

- James Taylor -

MLK and the new Dream

Martin Luther King said:

"You have been the veterans of creative suffering. Continue to work with the faith that unearned suffering is redemptive."

Reverend Martin was speaking about the tribulations of the people of his time. We often think about people of color when we think of the dear Reverend. Yet, he was not a prophet for people of color alone. He was a fierce defender of righteousness and justice. I look, today, for anyone on the horizon who could match Martin's heart and wisdom. People like him are rare. I see a new group of human beings, regardless of color, who are today's "creative sufferers"; unearned sufferers.

Martin suggested that those who suffered should know that somehow their situation can and will be changed. He said:

"Let us not wallow in the valley of despair. I say to you today, my friends, so even though we face the difficulties of today and tomorrow, I still have a dream. It is a dream deeply rooted in the American dream."

Let us turn our thoughts today to Martin Luther King. We are bound together, every color, every man and woman living today...suffering today.

The task still stands before us, in our time.

Remember the American dream.

Work to see it fulfilled.

I have a dream that one day this nation will rise up and live out the true meaning of its creed: "We hold these truths to be self-evident: that all men are created equal."

I have a dream that one day in the hills and halls of America that the sons and daughters of Blue States and the sons and daughters of Red States will be able to sit down together at the table of brotherhood.



I have a dream that one day even the state of Georgia, a state sweltering with the heat of political treason borne by the likes of Zell Miller, sweltering with the heat of hatred and fear of progress, will be transformed into an oasis of freedom and justice.

I have a dream that our little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by their political ideology, but by the content of their character.

I have a dream today.

I have a dream that one day, down at FOX News and Rush Limbaugh's studio, with their vicious propaganda, with their lips dripping with the words of lies and deliberate misinformation; one day, in spite of them, right there in New York, Virginia, North Carolina, Arizona, and Alabama, Progressive Americans will be able to join hands with American Conservatives as sisters and brothers and get down to the real and meaningful business of healing a nation and a world in need of justice, mercy, and compassion.

I have a dream today.

On First Impressions: Gladwell's New Book "Blink

On First Impressions: Gladwell's New Book "Blink"

Robert Stribley has an interesting blogpost on Malcolm Gladwell's new book.

Random Ten Songs

Random Ten Songs

Roxanne asked for 10 random songs. She said:(1) Fire up your IPOD, MP3 or other digital media player
(2) Set to random play
(3) List the first ten songs

Here are the first ten that came to mind for the way I feel today:


Drug Store Truck Drivin' Man - The Byrds
From The Morning - Nick Drake
Beeswing - Richard Thompson
Streets of London - Ralph McTell
Steal My Sunshine - Len
Light and Day - Polyphonic Spree
Tiger In My Tank - Eels
Echo Park - Joseph Arthur
Boulevard of Broken Dreams - Green Day
Late In The Day - Hot Rize

-- Jude

Cartoon

Credit: Tom Toles Cartoon/Copyright Washington Post

Me, Blaire, and G Star

Hanging out at my brother's place on New Years Eve with my niece, B. Hannah, and my pal G. Star

Bring 'Em On, Li'l Dawgies

Bring 'Em On,
Li'l Dawgies

Hank says: "Bring 'em on? Oh yeah?
We'll see how you swagger when I get
through with ya! Woof!"

LINK

*Thanks, Echidne
Hank rocks. ;)

Protecting Armstrong Williams, Right-Wing Lies About Kos

Protecting Armstrong Williams, Right-Wing Spreads Lies About Kos

Desperately trying to take the "heat" off so-called "journalist" Armstrong Williams, who was caught red-handed taking a government bribe for a secret political agenda, right-wing mud-slingers are suddenly trying to claim that Kos (Markos Moulingas of Daily Kos) secretly had a political agenda while leading one of the top blogs in the world.

THAT'S A LIE.

I have been a Kos diarist a long time. I knew who Markos was and what he did for a living. He has always made it clear.

Kos has NEVER hidden what he does for a living, and the fact that his consulting firm did some work for Howard Dean was made public long ago. Markos was never ashamed and never took taxpayer's money.

The question is: What other journalists have been taking taxpayer bribes from the Bush administration? Who's bribing them?

I want to know!

______________

Related Stories:

Kos speaks (and he's pissed - and I don't blame him a bit for feeling that way.)

American Street - Echidne, who asks: "Who in the government is BRIBING journalists?"

A Story from a YEAR AGO TODAY publicizing Kos' activities. It was no secret!

Wall Street Journal's totally lame-ass attempt to impugn the ethics and integrity of Markos-as-blogger

Digby speaks (via Anonymoses' link)

Disturbed & Deranged in Alabama

Disturbed & Deranged in Alabama

This is really and truly sickening.

BIRMINGHAM, Ala. "A woman angry with her 12-year-old daughter for having sex forced the girl to drink bleach and sat on her until the child died..The girl's 9-year-old brother was forced to watch the attack...She told him that if he shed a tear that she was going to kill him, too."....she told authorities she was disturbed because "her daughter told her that she was no longer a virgin."..

LINK

WMD LIES AND BRING 'EM ON BLUNDERS

WMD LIES AND BRING 'EM ON BLUNDERS

What can YOU do?
-- Go to the above link and watch.
-- E-Mail Congress - ask them to stand up and challenge Bush's deceitful policy on Iraq.
-- E-Mail President Bush - tell him you know policy in Iraq is a failure and is based on a lie. When saving face means sacrificing and taking more precious lives, it's time to put it to a screeching halt.

This dismal puzzle has already been done for you.


credit: Christian Science Monitor, Bennett Cartoons

Want a laugh?

Want a laugh?

If you've seen the film Napoleon Dynamite, this is a must-see.

Blogging, Journalism, and Credibility

Blogging, Journalism, and Credibility

On January 9, I'd written about the upcoming invitation-only conference Blogging, Journalism, and Credibility to be held at Harvard on January 21 and 22. The schedule is here.
At Greensboro101 and Ed Cone, I was referred to a link at Raving Lunacy about the conference and
The 'Head Lemur' breaks down the strange fellowship of Blogging as tool, Journalism as occupation, and Credibility as goal. He comments that, while only time and events will bestow credibility to anybody, it's undeniable that the Internet is becoming the primary source for news and information for more and more people, and that there is both promise and danger to the intersection of blogging and journalism. Be sure to read his entire blogpiece.

Ed Cone, who will attend the conference, says that Greensboro has

"interesting things going on here with our traditional journalists as they try to figure out how blogging and newspapers co-exist."

Looking ahead to the time he gets to the Harvard conference, Ed says:

I think I have something to tell the media elite in Cambridge next week, and that is the way traditional and alternative journalism are being practiced on the web here Greensboro. It's not about blogging as punditry, or blogs as the bane of reckless TV journalists, it does not answer burning questions about the place of bloggers in the social hierarchy of Manhattan and DC, but it does address the issues of blogging, journalism, and credibility.

As a community blogger working in harmony with the Syracuse, NY newspaper, The Post Standard, I can relate to Greensboro blogger David Wharton, who will blog about a local issue one day and blog about the tsunami the next.

I wish Ed Cone and all attendees the best of luck at the conference.

Meet the next-door blogger/Syracuse.com

Meet the next-door blogger
By Brian Cubbison, Assistant News Editor
Syracuse Post Standard, January 13, 2005

My interaction with the Greensboro101 bloggers was printed on Page 2 of The Syracuse Post Standard yesterday.

If you live in Cazenovia, Parish or Camillus, your neighbor might be a blogger.

Syracuse.com is nurturing local bloggers who write about their neighborhoods. It’s a trend that’s also taking roots in communities in New Jersey, North Carolina and Washington state.

Jim Jurista writes the Cazenovia Free Press. The technology consultant writes about national politics or village events, such as the Cold War and a men’s night out.

Lou Guindon writes Positively Parish, sometimes in the classic style of a weekly newspaper: "Mr. and Mrs. James Anderson and Lloyd and Arreta Ware had dinner at a local restaurant Friday evening and then enjoyed a duel of cards, the men beating the women. Arreta’s home made chocolate cake soothed the ladies, but they pledged to get even another time."

In Faith Meets Life, the Rev. Jim Corl, of Christ Church in Manlius, wrote a post-election blog about values.

Donna Reynolds, of Syracuse, writes a daily blog, That’s Entertainment. This prolific freelancer is an assistant editor for Reality News Online, among other projects. She’s your source for Survivors, Idols, Amazing Racers and Elvis water on eBay.

Orange fans write blogs about Syracuse University sports. Downstate and Jersey fans weigh in on the Yankees, Mets, Knicks, Jets and Giants.

Gridiron Grit covers local high school football and Track Smack follows auto racing. Dr. Scott Petosa, tennis coach at LeMoyne College, writes The Fitness Fanatic.

When the News and Record of Greensboro, N.C., wondered how to turn a traditional newspaper into an online destination of the future, it turned to the local bloggers at greensboro101.com and the visionaries at the Press Think blog at New York University.

From Camillus, Jude Nagurney Camwell urged them on. She writes The Rational Liberal at syracuse.com. She vouched for her experiences with syracuse.com and The Post-Standard and urged on the Greensboro experiment. "The people in Greensboro have such talent — and such heart!" she wrote. "I wonder — is it something in the drinking water?"

Maybe blogging is in your water. To check them out, or to start your own, go to
www.syracuse.com/weblogs

— Brian Cubbison, assistant news editor

For more, plus links to sources mentioned here, see the News Tracker blog at
www.syracuse.com/newslogs/ newstracker/

* The soundtrack:From "Hometown Hero" by Mary Chapin Carpenter.

Copyright 2004 The Post-Standard

Press Think Comments on Rathergate

"If the anchorman is on the hook, you don't let him do the news from the hook position."
- Jay Rosen, speaking about Dan Rather

Press Think Comments on Rathergate

Don't miss Jay Rosen's Press Think coverage in the aftermath of the release of the CBS report on "Rathergate". I had recently said that Mary Mapes' superiors should have been held responsible. Mr. Rosen seems to agree, and gives his reasons. He says:

My other major reaction is that, like others, I am shocked that CBS News President Andrew Heyward still has his job. This is the reason.

As soon as the reporting of the Air National Guard story came under question, CBS had not one but two problems. The evidentiary problems with the story were one. The involvement--no, the immersion--of Dan Rather in the events thereafter was the other. Rather is the star of CBS News, the face of the brand, the personification of the news division. The anchor. Immediately it was clear that he had "bigfooted" the rest of the division and took over defense of a case in which he was accused. In effect, he was making policy for the network, as when he said that there is no investigation underway at CBS. There were huge dangers for Rather, for CBS News and for the network itself in allowing Rather to become so involved in defense of the story, which muted everyone else "under" Rather, leaving only Andrew Heyward, the boss, who did not act. He was the one who could have protected the brand and his friend, Dan Rather, by speaking truth to (star) power. The responsibility was his alone and he failed in the clutch.

See Mr. Rosen's Short Letter to Dan Rather.

"So I kind of resent your attitude toward your numerous critics who operate their own self-published sites on the Web. They were being more accurate than you were, much of the time. I don't speak for them, but I know my own archive." Plus: Lose the spokeswoman, Dan. Hire a blogger.

Not a bad idea, eh?

Democracy is a Means, Not an End

Democracy is a Means, Not an End
FEATURED COLUMN OF THE DAY:

Democracy is a Means, Not an End
by Michael Munger

Think carefully when reading this article by Michael Munger, Chair of Political Science at Duke University.

"When we help a developing nation design its government, we need unashamedly to advocate something like the U.S. model."

We may be totally disgusted (disappointed, at best) with the President with whom we are forced to endure for the next four years, but at the same time, we need to be careful not to abandon the hope of the PROMISE built into the American framework created by the Founders of this nation.

We can began to take matters into our own capable hands and become active in ensuring that the PROMISE is delivered, or we can watch the PROMISE of America die.

"We live together because social organization provides the efficient means of achieving our individual objectives and not because society offers us a means of arriving at some transcendental common bliss. Politics is a process of compromising our differences, and we differ as to desired collective objectives just as we do over baskets of ordinary consumption goods."

--James Buchanan, The Limits of Liberty

A good part of that PROMISE depends upon having a CONGRESS which fulfills its responsibilities to the American people. We are a people who must remember we have the Bill of Rights to protect us from the realistic tyranny that "liberal America" (I prefer to call us "Progressive America") is experiencing today.

If you are a liberal thinker and a Progressive in contemporary America, you are (sadly) in the (large-sized) minority. When you look at the big picture, a government poised to recognize pure democracy, in the United States today, is not something for which a truly liberal thinker would thirst.

Frankly, we have too many under-educated and misinformed people to trust the masses. If this sounds haughty to you, I ask you to consider that it is a reality. Americans have been systematically misinformed with false information (the most recent example is the WMD issue in Iraq). With an right-elitist mainstream media taking control of the radio and television airwaves, propaganda is allowed to reign, where a good and decent Civics/History education and an academic ability to discern truth from propaganda once took priority. Intellectualism, frighteningly, is a dirty word with today's American majority.

I do not believe, from his track record to date, that President Bush has ever carefully considered how his decided encouragement of a 'tyranny of the misinformed majority' has effected the nation he is leading. He has done tremendous damage to the spirit of civic unity of the people of America. Even after suffering the 9/11 attack, the U.S. is just as politically divided as in the Civil war era. Bush could never unite America because he has absolutely no spirit of civic compromise.

That said, we have a serious problem, in my opinion, with the Congress we have today. When I say "serious", I mean life-or-death for the PROMISE of democracy within the framework of government.

Those in the Legislative branch are not appropriately or adequately acting out the will of half the nation, fully knowing that the President exclusively embraces the (slim) majority in a nation so politically divided. 50% of the American culture and society is being politically ignored by a Congress which is too easily cowed by right-heavy popular media. They are also a Congress which has been virtually purchased, with political contributions, by corporations. ( No conspiracy theory - one look at the Open Secrets website will prove this to be true ). The fact that so many retiring Congresspeople move on to become high-paid lobbyists, perpetuating a corrupt system, takes the small amount of hope and trust that Progressive America has had in the "American PROMISE" and blows it away with an ill wind.

Chances are very good that there will be a need for Supreme Court nominations within the next four years. The odds that President Bush will offer any Judicial nominees who are from a moderate ideology is slim-to-none.

Progressives must understand that the Legislative branch is the only current hope for a change.

American Progressives tend to place all the blame for political isolation on the Bush administration, while neglecting to understand that our Congressional representatives have a duty to enact laws in accordance with the culture that actually exists in their nation. Does the Right have political capital to spend? Yes, thanks to dubious 2000 and 2004 presidential elections. Does that require them to be duty-bound to the majority and to the wishes of the Executive, exclusively? Of course not! Yet, a wholesale political neglect of half a nation has taken place for the past four years, and I see little indication that we will soon see a change.

What has become of the American public's trust in their Federal government? We must ask ourselves: Is (small "d") democracy working against the liberal Progressive in America today?

Mr. Munger recognizes the serious problem facing today's America when he says:

"Policy makers must understand the twin anachronisms that complicate the failures of voting institutions and democratic ideologies in the U.S. There really are two distinct anachronisms, each of which requires immediate attention.

First, our technology of democracy is too old, and prone to abuse or at least distrust. We must bring voting technology into the 21st century, because we accept much less than is possible. We must immediately solve the problem of guaranteeing mechanisms for recording and counting votes that are beyond reproach. As the election of 2004 shows, we are nearly out of time.

Second, our ideology of democracy, our notion of what democracy can accomplish, is anachronistic also. But in this case, the anachronism is not out of the past, but out of a utopian science fiction future. So, we must also take voting ideology back to the 19th century, where it belongs. We have come to expect much more than is possible from democracy, and democratic institutions."

Headlines

Headlines

Aljazeera.net - A US National Guard unit has defied a Pentagon request that sought to stop television news crews filming six flag-draped soldiers' coffins arriving in Louisiana.

ColumbiaTribune.com - "Louisiana community mourns fallen soldiers" Quote: In civilian life, Bradley Bergeron was an air conditioning technician. Kurt Comeaux was a probation officer, and Warren Murphy was a tugboat deckhand. You could find Christopher Babin behind the wheel of his truck. Armand Frickey and Huey Fassbender III worked in restaurants. Each of the six also had another job: Members of the Louisiana National Guard.

MediaMonitors.com - "Church at war? :: An Overview of the Religious Front" by Abid Ullah Jan, the author of "A War on Islam?" Quotes: "Everyone who loves peace on this earth earnestly hopes that this is a war for oil but reports that emerged from left and right suggest otherwise..[..]..On the media front, ABC, CNN, NBC, etc. are as much for the global domination as Fox News. The New York Times, Washington Post and LA Times are as radical in proposing solutions as the Washington Times. Friedman and Safire are as radical as Daniel Pipes.."

TLS - Tsunami myths by Wendy Doniger, Quote: "Philosophy doesn’t do the trick for most people; Leibniz failed, Voltaire failed, and in India, too, the myths pick up the pieces where philosophy throws up its hands. The great myths may help survivors to think through this unthinkable catastrophe, to make a kind of sense by analogy, to say, “This is not unlike anything else; this is like that. This tsunami is like the doomsday flood."

Democrats: How Long Before We Proudly Admit We’re a Party of Progress?

Democrats: How Long Before We Proudly Admit We’re a Party of Progress?
by Jude Nagurney Camwell
From: American Street January 13, 2005

I wonder how long the Democratic party thinks Progressive Americans can hold out on promises which never come close to realistically materializing? How long could any person dedicated to the principles of their party hold out hope for "the future" while core principles of the party are trampled upon and trivialized by both major political parties?

"[Tim] Roemer as head of the DNC sounds like a desperate effort to figure out which way the wind is blowing, long after the 2004 wind blew the Democrats away."

Boston Globe columnist Joan Vennochi is clearly not a proponent of Roemer's campaign for DNC chair. She views the current "win-at-all-costs" philosophic thrust of the DNC as nothing more than institutionalizing John Kerry's losing campaign strategy:

"When it comes to controversial issues, duck. Stand for everything and nothing. Whenever possible, avoid direct answers on issues like war and abortion."

Where the party's half-assed embrace of true values and principles may gain few firmly-entrenched Bush voters into the 'big tent', it may cause an elephant-sized hole in the rear of the tent where progressives have run from the circus of vague complacency that the Democratic party has become.