A Few of My Saturday Thoughts and Recommendations

A Few of My Saturday Thoughts and Recommendations

It's a good day for:







Alexi Murdoch makes beautiful music and has little care for fame. I am enchanted by his tunes and by his voice. His Four Songs was CDBaby's all time best selling record. Alexi performed on KCRW's Morning Becomes Eclectic earlier this month. Watch the video at KCRW - Alexi will mesmerize you with his songcraft.





Bruce Springsteen interview with Soledad O'Brien on CNN [*thanks to Atrios/YouTube]


Bruce Springsteen on Conan O'Brien, June 23rd - "Bring 'Em Home" - a beautiful song.

Paul Katcher has a good collection of online Springsteen videos.

Nick Lewis on The Eye of Power.


I wish there was some way for me to tell Mrs. Durgin how very sorry I am.


Read about the Politics and Blogging session at Saturday's BloggerCon.


Dave Taylor on Michael Pockocky [Rethinking Online Professional Networking].


Power to the People

Eric Kavanagh on Open Source Government:
Citizen Auditors: Web-Enabled, Open Source Government at PublicManager.org.



Marinela Kotsina's philosophy of life.

Michael Pockocky's Creativity is an Illusion.

Steve Forbes stands firmly against network neutrality. [Podtech.net]

Charlotte Talks [WFAE.org] will dedicate their hour-long morning radio show (9am to 10 am) this Monday to the issue of Network Neutrality. Scott Huffman, owner of Charlotte Internet, will be one of the guests on the show speaking to support the inclusion of “network neutrality” provisions in any bill passed by the federal government. Those who support network neutrality aim to prevent network operators from imposing a two-tiered pricing structure on Internet content providers.

Simon Malls Strip 10-yr old of Bandana

Simon Malls Strip 10-yr old of Bandana
Smiley faces and Peace Signs Cannot be Tolerated in 285 Malls/39 States


Peace is too disturbing and controversial a message to be tolerated in civil society today, so says the Simon group who own 285 mall properties in 39 states.

A security guard at the Battlefield Mall in Springfield, Missouri told a 10-year-old girl her bandanna decorated with peace signs, smiley faces and flowers violated the mall’s code of conduct. The bandana was one that could have been purchased right there in the same mall.

I'm seriously concerned about the state of privatization of free speech. The topic of peace is verboten in the shopping mall's "code of conduct."


*I'm in New York. Here's the list of Simon Malls near me. You can search for the malls in your state that you'd like to boycott at the same link.

John Edwards Leads with Conviction, Inspires Hope

John Edwards Leads with Conviction, Inspires Hope

Dan Balz offers an important overview of John Edwards' National Press Club policy address in today's Washington Post. He exposes the stark contrast between the partisan Republican shut-off of reasoned debate in the Senate about the Bush administration's conduct in the Iraq war and Senator Edwards' decidedly refreshing ability to speak for the vast majority of American citizens who believe that the Iraq war was a mistake to begin and is a mess today.

Mr. Balz wrote:

On a day when the Senate defeated two Democratic amendments aimed at forcing President Bush to begin pulling out of Iraq, Edwards told a National Press Club audience the administration has made a mess in Iraq. He said he favors an immediate withdrawal of 40,000 troops and called for all combat forces to be gone in the next 12 to 18 months.

His Holiness the Dalai Lama has spoken of the many difficulties that arise from ideological conflict when men fight each other for means or methods and lose sight of their human ends and goals. A person reading that might think that the Dalai Lama was speaking about the war on terror or any war between nation states. Yet, I see that happening between the Republicans and Democrats in our own halls of government today!

"Rubber-stamp" Republicans have our nation locked into a very unpopular war, considered unjust and immoral by many spritual leaders and citizens, in which more than 2500 Americans and uncounted thousands of Iraqi civilians have lost their lives.

Democrats are offering many ideas, from Senator John Kerry's time-sensitive pull-out recommendation to Senator Jack Reed's non-binding no-timetable withdrawl plan. Meanwhile, the "rubber stamp" Republicans are voting like drunken imperialists who never want the occupation to end. When pressed on the issue of the Democratic amendments on Iraq being debated in the Senate yesterday, Senator Edwards did not say that he was with Kerry, with Reed, or with anyone. In true-leader fashion, he told the interested people at the National Press Club what he believed. Not only does he express hope that America will reclaim the moral high ground with the international community, he conveys his unique ideas on how to make it happen. We can only move forward as one America. Any other way has failed and will continue to fail. The bitterly divisive GOP front has made a deliberate political assassination of reason and debate simply because it came from a Democrat. The Washington D.C. political battle for means or methods have caused "Rubber-Stamp Republicans" to lose sight of human ends and goals in our world. To be moral supporters of liberated citizens of a burgeoning democracy, you do not kill them (or their brothers and sisters) in a military occupation of their land.

When I heard Senator John Edwards speaking about Iraq yesterday, I asked myself why no one in Washington, D.C. is willing to speak so frankly about what each and every American can see so clearly for him-or-herself. Why does politics have to feel like a game of Evil Charades? Americans are sick of it - - sick to death of the game.

The people dying in Iraq are flesh and blood. It's easy to sit on your tail and crow about courage and tenacity when you're not the ones walking around with 70 pounds of armor in a steaming urban nightmare where a burgeoning democracy is leaning toward amnesty for insurgents who've already killed some of the best friends our soldiers have ever known - soldiers who'd die for one another because they loved their fellow troops and believed in a great and united America. [See this letter from soldier Sean Frerking]

I want a leader who thirsts for social justice in our world, is as strong as steel, yet has an innate and unshakeable compassion for every living being. I sense that Senator John Edwards is that kind of man. Possessing a strong independent mind and a longing to see all Americans working for the best America we can be, he doesn't rely on a bunch of consultants and speechwriters to relay his convictions to the public. He lays out his beliefs and respectfully leaves it up to each of us to decide for ourselves whether or not we find substance and personal truth in what he's saying. That respect is the strength of his ability to connect with so many Americans.

We are all jaded with the belief that all politics is dirty. It isn't so, even though it's easy to feel that way with the many disappointing tactics we've seen from the Bush administration and their Rubber Stamp Republican "division-crew". They have shown that they disdain the Democratic party and they crave power far more than they care about the unity and the individual rights of the people of this nation. It is so far flown from the ideal set down in the Gettysburg Address that I often hang my head and cry.

What has happened to the party of Lincoln?

I hope that all of America will continue to wake up to what's happening in this country and to see John Edwards for the great leader I know he will be. Bloomberg News says he sounded like a candidate yesterday. I think he sounded more like I'd hope the President of the United States would sound like. May it be!

- Jude

John Edwards to Outline Plan to End Poverty at National Press Club Today

John Edwards to Outline Plan to End Poverty at National Press Club Today

Today at approximately 1pm, Senator John Edwards, who recently surprised many by beating Hillary Clinton in an early Des Moines Register (Iowa) poll for 2008 presidential candidates, will deliver a policy address to the National Press Club about a 30-year plan to end poverty as we know it today. He will outline his plan to cut poverty by one third within a decade, lifting 12 million Americans out of poverty by 2016, and to end poverty within 30 years, lifting 37 million Americans out of poverty by 2036.

Senator Edwards will also discuss the creation of a working society for the 21st century. In the Working Society, Senator Edwards believes that everyone who is willing to work hard will be expected to work and, in turn, be rewarded for it. He will outline his initiative which includes major new policies in the areas of work, housing, education, savings, and family responsibility.

Because Senator Edwards believes that HUD has become a symbol of bureaucracy and mismanagement, he will outline a plan for a transformed HUD that promotes housing with opportunity instead of economic isolation and at the same time, cut the federal bureaucracy by promoting regional decision making.

See Bob Herbert's column today (NYT Select subsc req.)

Have we become too selfish and cynical? Or is the U.S. — despite being shaken by terror and distressed by the unending conflict in Iraq — ready to roll up its sleeves and renew its commitment to some of the goals and themes that once formed the basis of the American dream?

John Edwards is betting on the latter. In a major speech today at the National Press Club in Washington, Mr. Edwards, the former North Carolina senator who was John Kerry's running mate in the 2004 presidential election, will ask:

"What kind of America do we want — not just today, but 20 years from now? And how do we think we can get there from here?"

The speech will be aired on CSPAN3.


From today's ABC's Political Note:

2008: Democrats:

If John Edwards becomes a strong presidential candidate in 2008, historians and strategists will long study the progress he made in 2006, much of it under the normal radar.

In a must-read that gets at a full 65% of the basis of Edwards' forward motion, Bloomberg's Roger Simon has Gordon Fischer, the former chairman of the Iowa Democratic Party, saying Edwards has great support in Iowa and that the Edwards' apology on Iraq "made a big difference to Democrats here.'' LINK

In contrast with the "old-style" populism of Kerry and the "cautious middle" approach of former Gov. Mark Warner (D-VA) and Sen. Bayh, Charlie "The Kicker" Cook tells Simon that Edwards is "now offering a hybrid of populism and liberalism that works."

Former Sen. Bob Kerrey (D-NE) (who saw HRC as untouchable a year ago) says if Edwards wins Iowa, "he will be No. 1 in New Hampshire, and the people in New Hampshire are very smart when it comes to presidential politics."

Per Simon, Edwards is planning speeches on energy costs and education to follow yesterday's speech on poverty.

Note well the Big Labor angle too.

Per the Washington Post's Dan Balz, "On a day when the Senate defeated two Democratic amendments aimed at forcing President Bush to begin pulling out of Iraq, Edwards told a National Press Club audience the administration has made a mess in Iraq. He said he favors an immediate withdrawal of 40,000 troops and called for all combat forces to be gone in the next 12 to 18 months." LINK

Barbara Barrett of the Raleigh News & Observer highlights Edwards' comments on Iraq too. LINK

Tim Funk's coverage of the Edwards speech gets some space in The State in South Carolina - not unimportant, that. LINK

Whatever Happened to Debate and Joe Lieberman?

Whatever Happened to Debate and Joe Lieberman?

It's been great to see Democratic Senators coming out and debating the Iraq war and what we must do to redeploy our troops - and when - and where. These are all questions that will have to be answered unless we really do want our troops to remain in an Iraq quagmire for another 20 years.

"It's been interesting to watch the Democrats debate among themselves," said Senate Republican Whip Mitch McConnell.

I'll bet it's been interesting, since McConnell and so many of his fellow partisan Republican Senators have chosen to rubber-stamp a macabre failure of policy in Iraq and would have no idea what the word debate means or looks like. I don't think they'd know a meaningful debate if it bit them on the ass.

To me, it's been interesting watching the Republicans do absolutely nothing as gas and oil prices rise higher by the day. I was also quite interested to see the debate they didn't have when they stacked the courts with right-wing justices. One of the most interesting things was seeing Rick Santorum nearly pissing his pants with excitement over pre-1991 rusty shells found in Iraq with degraded chemicals in them - as useless and benign as Grandma's 20-year old dexedrine prescription hanging around collecting dust in the bathroom drawer.

Sen. Joseph Lieberman, a Connecticut Democrat facing a stiff primary challenge largely because of his pro-war stance, said he would oppose the Democratic amendments.

Joe's lost his heart and soul, I'm afraid. I've never said this before, and I'm really sad to be having to admit it now, but I hope he's soundly defeated come election time. Any man or woman who tells this own party that they should not criticize the president on the conduct of the Iraq war is telling individuals within his party to ignore their conscience.

As Harold Meyerson recently commented,

".. the conduct and duration of our involvement in Iraq is the No. 1 issue in the minds of the American people -- a majority of whom believe that the Bush administration has botched the war about as badly as a war can be botched."

It's a paradox. Lieberman's trying not to look partisan, so he's defending a war run by partisans who eschew and mock real, healthy, and necessary debate. I happen to think he'll be sorry for have taken such a position someday. To me, it runs against anything Thomas Jefferson ever warned us about.

I'm more than concerned about having been lied to about the reasons for being in Iraq; concerned about the total lack of security in Iraq, concerned that citizens in Iraq are being repressed by theocrats within their communities - more so than anyone who currently lives in Iran; concerned about hearing that our soldiers are being accused of murder and concerned that the people who've targeted and killed our troops are being offered amnesty by the new government while we're still occupying Iraq. If Joe Lieberman's not concerned enough about this entire mess to speak out, I respect his opinion. He should just keep himself quiet and vote with the Repubican partisans (who like their Democrats quiet and submissive) if he thinks that's the proper thing to do. Let real American leaders of conscience take the floor.

The 23rd Qualm

The 23rd Qualm

You've got to see this satirical psalm qualm that was sent to blogger Patrick Eakes by his dad on Fathers Day:

The 23rd Qualm

Bush is my shepherd; I may not relax.
He maketh trees to be cut down in national forests.
He leadeth trucks into the still wilderness.He restoreth my fears.
He leadeth me in the paths of international disgrace for his ego's sake.
Yea, though I trudge through the labyrinth of pollution and war,I will find no exit, for thou art in office.
Thy tax cuts for the rich, and media control, they discomfort me.
Thou preparest an agenda of deception in the name of thy religion.
Thou anointest the land with foreign oil.
My health insurance runneth out.
Surely megalomania and false patriotism shall follow me all the days of thy term,
And my jobless child shall dwell in my garage apartment forever.

FP Mag: Experts Assess U.S. War on Terror

FP Mag: Experts Assess
U.S. War on Terror

"We are losing the war on terror because we are treating the symptoms and not the cause. Our insistence that Islamic fundamentalist ideology has replaced communist ideology as the chief enemy of our time feeds al Qaeda’s vision of the world."

- Anne-Marie Slaughter, dean of Princeton University’s Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs
From an article called The Terrorism Index in ForeignPolicy magazine (July/August 2006}

FOREIGN POLICY and the Center for American Progress teamed up to survey more than 100 of America’s top foreign-policy experts — Republicans and Democrats alike - mining the highest echelons of America’s foreign-policy establishment for their assessment of how the United States is fighting the Global War on Terror.

10 Steps to End America's Fossil-Fuel Addiction

10 Steps to End America's
Fossil-Fuel Addiction

The most current edition of Popular Science boasts a special secion called the Future of Energy- 10 Steps To End America’s Fossil-Fuel Addiction.
• Step 1: Harness the Wind
• Step 2: End Gridlock
• Step 3: Rev Up Our Hybrid Rides
• Step 4: Brew Better Ethanol
• Step 5: Switch on the Sun Lamp
• Step 6: Go H2
Step 7: Ride the Waves for Watts
• Step 8: Dig Deeper
• Step 9: Make Gas from Trash
Step 10: Use "Negawatts"

Click here for an interactive map titled The New Power Planet.

Lookin' For a Leader

Lookin' For a Leader

Don't miss Amy (NC Dem's) animated short "Lookin' for a Leader" (as seen at Youtube)

'Matriot' Peace Majority: The New Soccer Moms

'Matriot' Peace Majority: The New Soccer Moms

Katrina vanden Heuvel introduced Voters For Peace to readers at her Editor's Cut feature of The Nation online this week.

The Matriots - mothers/patriots/peace activists - these women are the new soccer moms. They take their responsibility as citizens just as seriously as they take their responsibility as mothers. They belong to diverse families and they live in every kind of neighborhood in every state of the union. They're raising the next generation of Americans. Cindy Sheehan lost her son, who was an Eagle Scout and a soldier, to a war that all can see as a chaotic mess and a macabre mistake. These "matriots" believe that life is precious - far too precious to play rhetorical games while pursuing a failed policy. After all, their children are the ones who are asked to fight these wars - risking death and having to wound and kill others. They believe that war should always be a last resort because, as evil as the United States should choose to label anyone else, these mothers know that war brings about its own evils. Ending the war in Iraq is of the utmost importance to them. Regardless of party, they will not vote for or support any candidate for Congress or President who does not wholeheartedly a speedy end to the war in Iraq. They believe that all elected representatives should act overtly to prevent any future war of aggression. This public position must be part of the campaign of any politician who expects to get their votes.

42 House Democrats voted to pass the vacuous resolution this week (HR 861) despite convincing and heartfelt debate from so many on the Democratic side of the aisle. These are the names, and may I say that I am deeply ashamed of their vote on this issue:

Barrow (12th-GA), Bean (8th-IL), Berman (28th-CA),

Berry (1st-AR), Bishop (2nd-GA), Boren (2nd-OK),

Boswell (3rd-IA), Boucher (9th-VA), Cardoza (18th-CA),

Case (2nd-HI), Chandler (6th-KY), Cooper(5th-TN),

Costa (20th-CA), Costello (12th-IL), Cramer (5th-AL),

Cuellar (28th-TX), Davis (4th-TN), Edwards (17th-TX),

Etheridge (2nd-NC), Gordon (6th-TN), Gene Green (29th-TX),

Herseth (SD), Higgins (27th-NY), Holden (17th-PA),

Kind (3rd-WI), Larsen (2nd-WA), Lipinski (3rd-IL),

Lynch (9th-MA), Marshall (3rd-GA), Matheson (2nd-UT),

McCarthy (4th-NY), McIntyre (7th-NC), Melacon (3rd-LA),

Moore (3rd-KS), Peterson (7th-MN), Ross (4th-AR),

Salazar (3rd-CO), Smith (9th-WA), Snyder (2nd-AR),

Spratt (5th-SC), Taylor (MS), Thompson (2nd-MS)




What if millions decided to vote their conscience and said 'No More War Candidates'?

Engelhardt Interview with Andrew Bacevich

Engelhardt Interview with Andrew Bacevich:
Time to Rethink U.S. Role in the World



I am not ashamed to call myself an intelligent patriot. The writing you see me do here is not for profit of any kind. It is a direct extension of my deepest conscience. I joined a contingent of concerned and intelligent patriots last month in Washington D.C. on a two-mile walk through the streets of the city. You didn't have to belong to a special interest group to be a part of this march. One hour before the march began, I'd had no idea it was even going to take place. As the group marched, citizens on the street were invited to join and shouts of "Wake Up, America!" were echoing off the walls of tall buildings where citizens waved and gave "thumbs-up" from open windows above. Escorted by police on either end of the group of walking and chanting citizens, we made our way to the front of the home of Secretary of State Donald Rumsfeld to tell him that we would not accept a war in Iran as part of the failed course that the Bush administration has taken in America's war on terror.

Cindy Sheehan and others gather peacefully outside the Rumsfeld doorway

Last month, Tom Englehardt interviewed Andrew Bacevich, who recently took part in an eye-opening and frank discussion for Harpers magazine titled "American Coup d’Etat: Military thinkers discuss the unthinkable." Mr. Bacevich is professor of international relations at Boston University and the author, most recently, of The New American Militarism. He served as an officer in the US Army from 1969 to 1992.

Judging from the underlying tone of uncertainty represented in the interview, Mr. Bacevich is not completely convinced that Rumsfeld isn't plotting a strategy that would include militray attacks on Iran as part of his vision of a future extension of the war on terror. Mr. Bacevich reminds us that the officer corps of the U.S. military privately want none of it:

Having said that, with all the speculation about Bush administration interest in expanding the Global War on Terror to include Iran, I suspect the officer corps, already seeing the military badly overstretched, doesn't want to have any part of such a war. Going public with attacks on Rumsfeld is one way of trying to slow whatever momentum there is toward an Iran war.

I must say, I don't really think we're on a track to have a war with Iran any time soon -- maybe I'm too optimistic here [he laughs] -- but I suspect even the civilian hawks understand that the United States is already overcommitted, that to expand the war on terror to a new theater, the Iranian theater, would in all likelihood have the most dire consequences, globally and in Iraq.

Juan Cole has recently said something along the same lines, as I posted here yesterday.

Mr. Bacevich says, when we hear the generals talking about Donald Rumsfeld's incompetence and micromanagement, what they're doing is arguing against Rumsfeld's military transformation project that, in Bacevich's all-too-kind words, resulted in an outcome in Iraq that, to date, is "at best ambiguous."

He puts a counter-spin on the talking points you hear about the alleged brilliance of the vision of Rumsfeld's downsized lean-mean-and-ready military transformation, along with the "New American Century" chickenhawks and their blown expectation for the success of American military supremacy to achieve an imperialistic goal. At one point in the interview he says that he doesn't buy as readily into the "Bush lied" set of beliefs. He thinks Bush and company believed everything they were saying.:

They really believed that, once they succeeded in Iraq, a whole host of ancillary benefits were going to ensue, transforming the political landscape of the Middle East. All of those expectations were bizarre delusions and we're paying the consequences now.

He lays out some of the consequences:

This country of 290 million people has a force of about 130,000 soldiers committed in Iraq, fighting something on the order of 10-20,000 insurgents and a) we're in a war we can't win, b) we're in the fourth year of a war we probably can't sustain much longer. For those who believe in the American imperial project, and who see military supremacy as the foundation of that empire, this ought to be a major concern: What are we going to do to strengthen the sinews of American military power, because it's turned out that our vaunted military supremacy is not what it was cracked up to be. If you're like me and you're quite skeptical about this imperial project, the stresses imposed on the military and the obvious limits of our power simply serve to emphasize the imperative of rethinking our role in the world so we can back away from this unsustainable notion of global hegemony.

When Rep. John Murtha (D-Pa) and many other House Democrats argued for a change in course last week during the debate on the vacuous House Resolution 861, they were saying that we need to rethink our role in the world. How that translates to "cut and run" is rationally ambiguous, but "cut and run" is a perfect rhetorical slogan to make a political opponent look like a coward. HR861 was just that - - a perfect rhetorical tool to help partisan Republicans make Democrats look like cowards. In the meantime, the same Republicans made a collective agreement, even if it was a subconscious agreement, to abdicate their responsibility to even pretend to welcome reasoned debate on rethinking the United States' role in the modern world. I think it's going to come back and bite them in the ass unless they can turn their narrative around with Rovian stealth-craftiness when (and if) the Bush administration finally sees the dire consequences of their failed policy.

Be sure to read the Englehardt interview with Andrew Bacevich in full. Beyond the U.S. being preoccupied with trying to manage Iraq, he says he's hard-pressed to see a coherent strategy in the Middle East or elsewhere.


Seeing this for myself, I joined that walk to Rumsfeld's house last month to let him know that you can only fool the American people for so long. Rumsfeld's put on a good game face, but it's past the time we should have ended the occupation in Iraq. It surely isn't a time to be stirring up a new conflict in Iran. The longer we wait to have real debate about our nation's role in the world, the weaker a nation we will become to the world and to ourselves.

* Those readers who want some background on the issues discussed in this interview are advised, by Mr. Egelkhardt, to pick up a copy of Bacevich's book, The New American Militarism. There is also a background post about Mr. Bacevich and his ideas at TomDispatch.

Robert Zoellick Walks Away

Robert Zoellick Walks Away

I have something that I wish to say regarding the lack of commitment and responsibility that stems from what I believe has been a series of poor choices made by the Bush administration when considering the people most likely to take seriously their solemn duties to the people of this country in the positions of great responsibility to which they are assigned.

This thought came to me today when Condoleeza Rice announced that Deputy Secretary of State Robert Zoellick, 52, the department's No. 2 official is resigning his post to take a job with Goldman Sachs Group, Inc., the world's biggest securities firm by market value. Rice has not yet announced a successor to Zoellick. White House spokesman Tony Snow said that Zoellick "has been wanting to pursue opportunities in the private sector for sometime and now he's going to do it." I guess opportunity to be a chief diplomat on behalf of his nation and its people wasn't the opportunity that Zoellick found most inspiring. After having persuaded the most powerful rebel group in the western Sudanese area of Darfur to sign a peace agreement with the government after four sleepless nights of negotiations earlier this month in Nigeria, Mr. Zoellick is walking away.

Was it the lure of the green on Wall Street that tempted our #2 State chief away? I don't think so. I believe it was a matter of pride. When John Snow's replacement for Treasury secretary was made and Hank Paulson took the job, Mr. Zoellick was ready to bolt because he didn't get the job himself. It was no secret. Bloomberg News reported last month that "a prominent Republican close to the White House said Zoellick told administration officials in unmistakable terms of his plans and that the No. 2 U.S. diplomat has received indications that President George W. Bush is unlikely to tap him for the Treasury job."

It seems that Sudan was just a stepping stone to Robert Zoellick in his prideful quest for the top job at Treasury. His personal hopes fell flat and you can see how quickly he dropped the public facade of caring and commitment to the awesome responsibility that had been handed to him by the President of the United States. Simply put, Zoellick was ready to bolt because he had bigger fish to fry. I'd thank Mr. Zoellick for every significant part he'd played in securing peace when the only other option was violence, but I would hope that the person chosen to replace him has less ambition and more genuine and serious commitment to peace and diplomacy. He's leaving a hole during a period when he's needed the most. At a time when the President and his administration have made so many decisions on the side of unnecessary violence when diplomacy was the first and best option, Americans need to know they have committed and responsible people in the top positions at State.

It should be disturbing to know that Mr. Zoellick was only performing while waiting for a cushier job to come along.

On a last note, think, if you will, about another one of the poor choices that this administration has made about the people they put into top positions of responsibility. Think back to the woefully inadequate response to Hurricane Katrina and FEMA’s (Heckuva-job-Brownie) Michael Brown, the failed "Boss Hog" of the Arabianhorse show cicrcuit.

"Until one is committed, there is hesitancy, the chance to draw back, always ineffectiveness. Concerning all acts of initiative (and creation), there is one elementary truth, that ignorance of which kills countless ideas and splendid plans:

That the moment one definitely commits oneself, then Providence moves too.

All sorts of things occur to help one that would never otherwise have occurred. A whole stream of events issues from the decision, raising in one's favor all manner of unforeseen incidents and meetings and material assistance, which no man could have dreamed would have come his way.

Whatever you can do, or dream you can do, BEGIN IT.
Boldness has genius, power, and magic in it.
Begin it now.

--Goethe

Goldberg Wears An Empty Moral Hat

Goldberg Wears An Empty Moral Hat
..covering a Democrat-hating head

I'd never view Jonah Goldberg as a leader, especially after what I just read. His imagination seems to be about as wide as the walls of his closed little mind. All he seems to know and to understand is "kill or be killed."

Reading his latest attack piece on Democrats, I sense that he cannot seem to imagine any other route to settling the Iraqi situation with any scenario other than crack downs and more futile killings. Goldberg feigns shocked distaste over what appears to be a common-sense belief among many political leaders (and sensible American people) that, when Iraq's Prime Minister al Maliki gives amnnesty to murderers of Americans, it will change the conscience of the people, making more Americans much easier to target and kill. Although there is no realistic correlation, Goldberg transposes his feigned distaste about those who refuse to join him in supporting amnesty for murdering insurgents into hyperbole about Democrats wanting to "cut and run" from Iraq. Goldberg takes great pains to remain fact-free about the hundreds of entirely reasonable points that the Democrats made on the House floor this week about changing the course in Iraq while debating HR861. I guess he thinks no one was paying attention.

Blowhards come a dime a dozen these days, and I suppose Goldberg is one of the Kings of the Blowhards. I haven't seen him sign up to go and fight the war yet. I guess he'd rather sit behind a desk and make stuff up about Democrats while he defends 'get-out-of-jail-free' cards for the murderers of American troops.

He shows that he hasn't got the smarts to see beyond our military occupation in Iraq. (Or if he does have the smarts, he's reserving them for when he can best use them to make Republicans smell like roses). Dear God, I hope someone in power has the smarts to see beyond U.S. military involvement, because the time has come for the occupation in Iraq to end. For all their rhetorical complaining about Democrats having few ideas, the party enjoying majority status today has nothing to offer except for vacuous rhetoric and pundits that offer no creativity; no rationale that follows an acceptable moral course.

Fathers Day

Fathers Day


Me and Dad

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

"Certain is it that there is no kind of affection so purely angelic as of a father to a daughter. In love to our wives there is desire; to our sons, ambition; but to our daughters there is something which there are no words to express."

- Joseph Addison

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


1965

I'm wishing a Happy Fathers Day to every loving father, and a very special Fathers Day to my own Dad.

Tar Heel Tavern #69

Tar Heel Tavern #69

Erin Monahan hosted #69 beautifully. (Hey - we'll have no naughty comments!) She got a great response to her topic of Reciprocity: The joy of giving, and receiving in return. Thanks, Erin!

Rich: Dems Screwed By Lack of Narrative

Dems: Please don't tell us Karl Rove is going to push you into your corners again. 42 of you in the House voted for the vacuous HR861. Who on God's earth told you that would be a good move?


Rich: Dems Screwed By Lack of Narrative

Who knows how to spin a great web? According to Frank Rich, not many in the Democrats' camp. Last week, I read a post by "journalist3072" at the One America Committee blog about a lost opportunity for the left because of inefficient spokespeople. I saw the same thing happen throughout the last Presidential campaign. Karl Rove is a treasure to his party only because there's no Democratic spider who can spin a web quite like him. As Mr. Rich explains:

What's most impressive about Mr. Rove, however, is not his ruthlessness, it's his unshakable faith in the power of a story. The story he's stuck with, Iraq, is a loser, but he knows it won't lose at the polls if there's no story to counter it. And so he tells it over and over, confident that the Democrats won't tell their own. And they don't — whether about Iraq or much else. The question for the Democrats is less whether they tilt left, right or center, than whether they can find a stirring narrative that defines their views, not just the Republicans'.

What's needed, wrote Michael Tomasky in an influential American Prospect essay last fall, is a "big-picture case based on core principles." As he argued, Washington's continued and inhumane failure to ameliorate the devastation of Katrina could not be a more pregnant opportunity for the Democrats to set forth a comprehensive alternative to the party in power. Another opportunity, of course, is the oil dependence that holds America hostage to the worst governments in the Middle East.

Instead the Democrats float Band-Aid nostrums and bumper-sticker marketing strategies like "Together, America Can Do Better."

This war in Iraq is an issue that will never go away until we make it go away by bringing our troops home and concentrating on regaining some of the incredible amount of international respect and influence that we've lost. When the GOP is forced, by Democrats, to start facing some truth, we can get on with some kind of national reconciliation. Until then, the public will remain divided on the issue, deeply and bitterly so. And Democrats will take a hit at the polls for not standing up and hanging more tightly together with one clear message. If Democrats cannot stand up for one another and publicly reject the failed policy in Iraq, they could find the most creative, air-tight narrative in the world on all the other issues and still come up losers.

If I could tell Democrats anything, I would ask them to think about one of the last scenes from the film "The Wizard of Oz", where Dorothy discovers she never needed ruby slippers for power...she'd always possessed the power she needed to get where she wanted to go. If Democrats want to win, they have to stop looking to high-paid campaign consultants who create boring campaign slogans and listen to the people out here who are speaking from our hearts. They have to fight back like sentry dogs with a narrative so strong and tight that no Rovian teeth can break through its skin.

Last week, my high-school aged son spoke to two older friends who have come back from their respective tours of duty in Iraq and being a curious young man, he asked many questions about their war experiences. He came home and told me he'd learned a new word. FUBAR. Both soldiers had told him that they thought that the Iraq war is FUBAR (f**ked up beyond all repair). Last February, a survey of US troops found that 72 percent wanted to withdraw within a year. The troops' morale has slipped not because of what we say, but because of what they've seen.

Today's LA Times editorial sees things in a slightly different way. They seem to trust that the public will see right through the GOP's tactics this week with the meaningless resolution of flimsy rhetoric on Iraq. They give the hypocrisy of a couple of Bush's recent statements a decidedly kind treatment, saying that "there is, to put it mildly, a tension between" the two statements. Bush has said that "success in Iraq depends upon the Iraqis" while he tells us that Iraq cannot be left to the Iraqis just yet. He talks about not wanting to "fail" in Iraq, but he cannot tell us what "victory" would realistically look like or how we could expect to get there in any reasonable time frame. Do Republicans want to be in Iraq for another 10, 15, 20 years? Why don't the Democrats start asking them - or at least begin to create a narrative in which that is the case? If the totally disingenuous "cut and run" is Rove's battle cry, the Democrats can create a narrative surrounding the myriad Republican f**k-ups in Iraq, the squandering of billions of our tax dollars - a good chunk of which has never been accounted for; the legally authorized resort to torture of prisoners with official approval of the abandonment of Geneva convention agreements leading to kidnapping and mistreatment of our own troops; and the GOP's seeming desire (with their allergy to timetables, we can draw no other conclusions) for a 20-year quagmire in that same country while they fight a civil war (and the Iraqi government gives amnesty to those who kill our troops, making them fair game for murder-happy insurgents).

It wouldn't take a Charles Dickens to create a narrative that would convince the public that a change in course is not only necessary, but essential to the security of this nation.

What Neocons and Zarqawi Have in Common

What Neocons and Zarqawi Have in Common
They both would have loved the U.S. to make war on Iran

Juan Cole has something to say that I hope you will not miss. He says that the American hawks who've been connected with the Likud Party in Israel, such as Michael Ledeen and Michael Rubin, who've been hoping and "trying to get up an American war on Iran, have turned out to have the same goal as Abu Musab al-Zarqawi!

Professor Cole gives fair warning about the likelihood of an ugly outcome should the U.S. decide to do what the neocons and Zarqawi have wanted so badly:

It is the case that if you did want to see the US completely defeated and humiliated, you could not do better than have Washington open a second conventional front in Iran. Iran is much bigger than Iraq, more rugged in terrain, and 3 times more populous, and its population is politically savvy, literate and highly mobilized.

So, it doesn't matter whether you listen to Ledeen and Rubin on attacking Iran or to Zarqawi on the same subject. Either way, such a move spells disaster for the United States and should be opposed by genuine patriots who care about this country--until and unless Iran actually does something to the US that calls for a military response.

Gifts

Gifts


Sandy with Mariano Rivera

"When someone you love becomes a memory, the memory becomes a treasure."

This past week, I lost a treasure in my life. Her name was Sandy. We first met when she and her family moved next door to my childhood home when I was only six years old. Her husband worked with my Dad at the same company, General Electric. My mother and Sandy became immediate friends. My mother has always had an intuition for people and she knew Sandy was genuine in her feelings. That's what made them the best of friends for such a long time.

Sandy and her husband owned a marina in the Thousand Island region of New York State, where they'd spend each summer taking wonderful care of their clients. One customer (and friend) wrote this about Sandy:

We will cherish those nights on the porch at the Marina watching the sun set with a cup of coffee.

Even though life is not always beautiful, Sandy lived a beautiful life. She made sure that her family lived a beautiful life.

She loved to sing and play guitar - and she did both with complete joy. Her husband was a trained vocalist, too, and along with my own musical parents, I recall that my childhood was made sweet with all kinds of music. Her nephew had this to say, and I recall the song he's speaking of very well. I particularly remember Sandy performing it at one of my parents' wild and wacky Halloween parties.

I have very special memories of cousin Sandy when she played the guitar and sang "that chocolate ice cream cone".

1973 - My parents and my Uncle Howard looking a lot like Clooney's bunch in "Oh Brother Where Art Thou?"

A number of years ago, Sandy was once walking in the city when a would-be robber came from behind her and ripped her purse from her shoulder. She ran after the robber, and remained on his heels relentlessly screaming "You took my purse! Hey! That's my purse! Give it back! Drop it!" Stymied by Sandy's unusually strong will and overall excitement, the robber actually dropped the purse and ran away! Sandy's son Mark wrote this about her:

Mom would give you the shirt off her back without any hesitation. She also had a very strong will power as the thief that tried to steal her purse found out when she yelled to him to "drop it!"...

She was a major New York Yankees fan, and was thrilled to have made the acquaintance of closing Yankee pitcher Mariano Rivera while on a cruise (photo above).

What can you say when you know you have a treasure trove filled with unspeakable gifts left behind by a person that you spent so many years living with and loving? With so many years comes so much to say, yet we cannot say it all at once. It comes back to us, day by day - memory by memory. It provides warmth and reassurance on the days we feel we don't have a friend in the world.

My own brother recalled wonderful memories of childhood and the bittersweet time last Fall when my own dear mother asked for her sweet friend Sandy when Mom knew she was facing her final days on Earth. Sandy was there - with a friendship and faith never failing. She was a true and loyal friend to the end. Little did she know, when she was so selflesly tending to her best friend's last wishes, that she would soon discover that she also had a cancer that she would have to battle with valor and spiritual strength.


My grandfather with my mother (ctr) and Sandy (rt)
Note the trikes in the background

My brother Peter wrote this about his memories of Sandy:

Mike and Sandy were like my second parents, and I love them. I recall so much fun and laughter on Fremont Road. Sandy and Rose stayed the best of friends. Later in life, when my own mother was dying, Sandy was by her side always. Never missing a day. Faithful, and loving, never leaving my Mother's side. Sandy's gift of caring and giving was God given. We should all be so good. It came to her naturally. Why God takes such an Angel shall remain a mystery.

The greatest gift Sandy gave me was her lifelong example of how a good person should their life so it becomes worth more to her loved ones than all the gold in this world. She did it with faith, with humility, with hope, with caring, and with love.

How I'll miss her. Yet, I take comfort in knowing that I'll always have the gifts she left behind. I'm so very grateful. I hope to learn how to pass along those gifts myself someday.

The Angry Young Town Hall Boy

The Angry Young Town Hall Boy

This young man, who looks young enough to be my son, shows us the folly of the argument that requires a pot to call a kettle black. Says he:

"There's a reason the candidates Moulitsas backs always lose: He's a loser. The constituency he represents is an angry, radical constituency that is more concerned with being anti-Bush than pro-anything."

It seems that the only "angry" person, in this case, certainly seems to be the young gentleman (and I use the term loosely) who refers to another gentleman as "a loser." People who are real winners and who have a bit of class are generally congenial, collegial, - perhaps even conciliatory toward someone they perceive as the underdog. Make no mistake, this young man is one hundred times as angry as those who he claims harbor animosity. If young Ben Shapiro isn't angry, then it's quite possible that he's afraid that the object of his vicious comments is, indeed, a real threat.

If these possibilities do not apply, we can only surmise that this young man has little class and terrible manners.

Work a little harder at this, Ben. Even if you tell us you're not, your words make you look like an angry boy.

Dan Rather Leaving CBS

Dan Rather Leaving CBS

"Finishing details are being worked out for me to leave CBS News after 44 years," Mr. Rather said in a TelevisionWeek interview.

There's been much speculation about Dan Rather in cyberspace. The decidedly right-leaning NY Post had their snarky Page Six say:

Don't blame Katie Couric for the way CBS is treating Dan Rather, who's off the air and negotiating his severance from the network. "Katie had nothing to do with it," said one network insider. "This decision was made long before she got there." Some viewers with long memories assumed Rather, 74, was getting exactly what he gave to legendary Walter Cronkite in 1981 when he deposed Cronkite and took his anchor chair. Cronkite, known as the most trusted man in America, was eager to continue reporting for CBS News, but Rather kept him off the air. "Don't blame Katie," said our source. "They [CBS execs] just want to get rid of him." It was confirmed yesterday that CBS will not offer a new deal to Rather, whose contract expires at the end of the year. Earlier this week, Rather told The Philadelphia Inquirer he's not ready to retire: "My position is I want to work. Maybe it's my hubris, but I still think there are things I can contribute." But not at CBS

The truth would most likely be posted on CBS, so I went to check. Dan says he's leaving CBS. He said, "If it had it worked out for me to be an important contributor to CBS, I would have liked that...The work has not turned out what I hoped it would be.."

You can read between the lines.

David Blum talks about Rather's departure at the Huffington Post.

Bloomberg News Launches New Political Show

Bloomberg News Launches New Political Show

From ABC's Political Note:

Bloomberg News will launch a new weekend television show from Washington this Saturday, June 17: "Political Capital with Al Hunt." It will feature analysis of the top political, economic and international stories from Bloomberg reporters in Washington and around the world; "Simon Says" — a political debriefing from Roger Simon, Bloomberg's chief political reporter; an interview with a prominent newsmaker Sen. Obama this week, and a "Last Word" debate between Robert Novak and Margaret Carlson or Michelle Cottle.

Those in the know have been reading the text version of "Simon Says" for years — it is sort of a cross between Erma Bombeck, Richard Daley, and Jeff Zeleny's e-mail traffic.

Bloomberg television, of course, is carried in about half the cable homes around the country and also early mornings on the E! network which can be seen on virtually every cable system. More than 25 million additional homes can get Bloomberg on satellite. Because the key to Bloomberg is ametorization, "Political Capital" will air numerous times on Saturday and Sunday, starting at 6:30am (EST) and including 7:30 and 10:30pm on Saturday and Sunday mornings and afternoon.

Thank You, Reps Murtha, Skelton, Pelosi

"The American people are not naive. They know a failed policy when they see one. Iraq is a failed policy. It's time to redeploy."

- Rep. John Murtha (D-Pa) (link to story below)

Thank You, Reps Murtha, Skelton, Pelosi

We can see how you are bringing sanity and appeals for truth and reconciliation to the debate on the House floor over Iraq. When I saw little Patrick McHenry from North Carolina, who'd never seen a battlefield in his life, shaking his fists and spewing every sanctimonious Rove-flavored talking point he could remember while supporting this vacuous resolution on Iraq, I could clearly see how empty their arguments have become. I regret that they hold majority status in the House. They've abdicated a serious responsibility by drawing party lines around a meaningless "stay-the-course" slogan that is at the core of this resolution.

You are right, House Democrats. Stay strong. The Republicans in our House are acting as partisans in unison with a Pentagon-propanganda sheet by their sides. They are dividing the people of this country with their tactics. This time, however, because of your strong voices, the dividing line created by the meaningless rhetoric of this GOP resolution leaves many, many more Americans on the side of truth and reality, regardless of the outcome of this resolution.

I respect all of you House Democrats for standing up.

God bless you all.
May truth continue to prevail in the hearts of the American people after this divisive resolution vote has long passed.

_____________

ENOUGH IS ENOUGH by John Murtha

See the USA Today rebuttal that twists the truth to the extent that, if their opinion held water with reasonable peoople, it would mean that Democrats who ask for a real debate and responsiblity for oversight on the failed policy of the Bush administration in Iraq would not be honoring our troops. The opposite is true, most Americans know that, and we can only hope and pray that these misguided writers of the Fourth Estate learn that - soon. It's obvious that people with common sense and a patriotic spirit still have much to fear from misleading journalists - the same ones who followed along with the majority (with no objectivity) and contributed to the misleading wave that resulted in our nation going to a totally unnecessary war.

When will they learn?

Thank God for the Fifth Estate - the bloggers and writers of the alternative press.

The 2500th: Just a Number, Tony?

The 2500th: Just a Number, Tony?

Q: Tony, American deaths in Iraq have reached 2,500. Is there any response or reaction from the President on that?

MR. SNOW: It's a number, and every time there's one of these 500 benchmarks people want something.

Just a number, Tony?

Hardly.

He (or she) was someone's baby; someone's husband (or wife); someone's friend; someone's love; someone's life.

Never just a number.

MyDD Posts Netroots Survey Results

MyDD Posts Netroots Survey Results

Chris Bowers has graciously posted results of a Netroots survey at MyDD (cross-posted at Daily Kos) that you may have not yet seen. It was the first conducted under BlogPac's new management.

If Netroots-Democrats could give Democratic candidates any advice, the thing they'd most want to tell them would be: "Stand for something!"

Senator John Edwards received the highest "favorable" rating of any potential Presidential candidate for 2008, sharing the highest "very favorable" ratings with Russ Feingold, who is greatly admired by the Netroots. (A tip of the hat to Benny).

Bush Republicans Obsessed With Sex

Bush Republicans Obsessed With Sex

This is unacceptable, immoral, indecent...so say those in government who are obsessed with making war on something that will harm few people, but will get them a few extra votes in November from voters with warped priorities. (Dick Cheney can say a major "F**k you" to his colleagues in the Senate whenever he likes, but a schmuck on the radio will be fined for it).



Meanwhile we lead our children to believe that the circumstances shown in photo below are perfectly acceptable - even honorable, as George W. Bush and his Republican rubber stampers were (and still are) obsessed with going to an unnecessary war with another country.



Everyone sees the hypocrisy. Everyone can see that the object of the Bush administration's obsessions are a product of misplaced values-priority.

Saving life, at all costs, is a moral venture. Going to unnecessary war increases the chance that you will lay innocent life to waste.

I'd rather look at a bare breast - maybe a thousand bare breasts - than to know a child died needlessly.

Maybe you'll say that's a false choice - and heaven knows the Bush Republicans never give us any of those!

Storm Troopers' Delight

Storm Troopers' Delight

Don't bother to knock.
Just break it down.
That's what liberty sounds like.
That's what liberty feels like.
Thanks, Right Wing Supreme court.

And the New Boogey-Man Is.....

And the New Boogey-Man Is.....

Ask Ricardo. He makes a very good point.

Muhahahaha!

Rumsfeld Orders Gitmo To Go Dark for Journalism

Rumsfeld Orders Gitmo To Go Dark for Journalism

We cannot know what will happen in the last days of Gitmo. These are tales that have nothing to do with the beacon held high in the hand of the Statue in New York Harbor.

Nice Move

Nice Move

Someone, please tell me Bush didn't do this.

House Leadership Fears Open, Honest, Fair Debate on Iraq

"...what is being proposed is nothing more or less than, really, a charade."

- Walter Jones (D-NC 3rd district)

House Leadership Fears Open, Honest, Fair Debate on Iraq

The House leadership (partisan Republicans) are scrambling to cut off meaningful debate about Iraq in order to cover for the failed policy there. Raw Story is reporting that "a group of Democratic and Republican House members held a press conference today at the Capitol with their hands 'literally tied' to protest the blocking by Republican leadership of any real debate about the war in Iraq."

"Do not put us through the farce and the fraud of a pseudo-debate going nowhere and ending nowhere. This is not about a discussion of cutting and running. This is a question of whether the Congress is going to sit and watch while people are dying."

- Rep. Neil Ambercrombie (D-HI)

The House leadership continue to misjudge the hearts and minds of the American people. They've taken them for chumps - suckers - for just a little too long. You see fatheads like Karl Rove belligerently spouting, like a rebellious pimply-faced adolescent, that his party owes no one an apology for their tremendous amount of misjudgements and errors and lies told about Iraq, labeling a pointless occupation as "the central front in the war on terror."

"It is a cynical attempt to mold politics into a document that their political spinmeisters come up with to turn Iraq and Afghanistan and the war on terror, all munched in together, assuming that the American people are too stupid to know the difference."

- Rep. Martin Meehan (D-MA )

I don't personally want my government representatives to sit on their partisan asses and make cute and meaningless little "thank-you" resolutions and propaganda statements to cable news pundits while people die needlessly and soldiers fight for freedoms being blatantly denied to the People of the United States to have a realistic discussion about a war in which those soldiers are engaged.

Let's Talk Turkey.
Who Wants a Quagmire?

"Let those who believe that we should be in Iraq for the next 15 years or 20 years go on the floor and talk about it. Let the members of the House meet their constitutional responsibility and debate it and vote up or down."

- Rep. Walter Jones (D-NC 3rd district)

Quote of the Day

Quote of the Day

"....it is a good day for American jurisprudence as it has been upheld that it is not criminal to be an irresponsible, grudge-holding, power-grabbing, unethical, immoral jerk."

Xpatriated Texan on the news about Karl Rove's slithering escape out of an indictment.

Bush Looks Weak When He Defers to Gen. Casey

Bush Looks Weak When He Defers to Gen. Casey

- Iraq had no connection to 9/11. If Republicans are going to keep bringing up 9/11 as if it's connected to Iraq, they should be asked where Osama bin Laden is each time they raise the spectre. After all, wasn't he was the mastermind behind 9/11? Weren't we going to drain the swamp? The swamp has not been drained and we ran headlong to a another swamp altogether - and nearly drowned instead of drained.

- Bush is abdicating responsibility as commander in chief every time he says he's leaving it all up to General Casey to be the one who has the last say on troop levels in Iraq. Shit - who's the President, anyhow? For all his passion about defending the chaotic and unecessary path he took us down in Iraq, this abdication of the highest responsibility always makes Bush look weak and indecisive.

- Terrorist threats around the world will not fade away on their own - but the war in Iraq has created more terrorists than there ever would have been had we not precipitated an unjust and unnecessary unilateral war against a nation that had nothing whatsoever to do with the terror threat that faced the world in the first place. (That lies were told to the American public only serves to make things worse for those who participated in the knowing transmission of the lies).

- The President looked high and happy at the press conference today on the heels of killing the Bin Laden substitute boogey-man al Zarqawi. Will it be enough to remember this day when the television screens report on and on about the senseless killing that goes on in that country every day? I know of a soldier who came back after his first tour of duty in Iraq and told a classroom filled with ninth-graders that each Iraqi citizen that came up to him would say the same thing: "Thank you for getting rid of Saddam. Now you can go home." There's no sin in helping these Iraqis to find a political solution to the problems of their new democracy, and there would be myriad intelligent ways to internationalize the effort. But this occupation should have ended years ago. A foreign power killing Iraqi citizens embroiled in sectarian strife is not a good accompaniment to winning political hearts or minds and anyone with a fifth grade education should be able to see that. It never should have even taken place.

Louise Slaughter's Blogpost About Iraq

Louise Slaughter's Blogpost About Iraq

NY state Representative Louise Slaughter has written a blogpost to the Daily Kos site and even offered to answer some reader questions. She made reference to her report America for Sale: the Costs of Republican Corruption in which she'd written:

One of the ways House Republicans have made it clear they are not interested in getting to the bottom of the Bush Administration’s mismanagement of the Iraq War is by repeatedly blocking the Democratic proposal for an Iraq “Truman Commission.” During World War II, then-Democratic Senator Harry Truman conducted a series of famous oversight investigations into the Roosevelt War Department’s conduct of the war. The beneficial effects of these investigations (conducted by a Democratic Congress into a Democratic administration) were to reduce inefficiency and fraud in the defense contracting process and to strengthen our war effort. Not surprisingly, House Republicans have shown more interest in protecting the Administration from scrutiny than in ensuring that taxpayers’ funds are not being wasted and that our soldiers have the equipment they need. Republicans opposed a Democratic motion to consider the proposal in May 2005, and then blocked Representatives John Tierney (D-MA) and James Leach (R-IA) from debating the issue on the House floor during consideration of the Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2006 (H.R. 1815).

She referred to this week's "sham Iraq debate." More on the sham debate here.

Take Back America Breaks Agreement with Conscientious Citizens

Take Back America Breaks Agreement with Conscientious Citizens

"We were amazed to discover that the organizers of Take Back America treat dissent the same way that the organizers at a Bush rally do," said Ms. Murphy. "Most progressives do not support Hillary Clinton, and stifling our legitimate, heartfelt opposition to her pro-war position is an outrage. I guess we have to take back ‘Take Back America.’"


I think it's very important for you to know about suppression of dissent and a breaking of trust within the Democratic party. Officials of the "Take Back America" conference violated a trusted agreement made prior to the event regarding the logistics of protest from the moment citizens arrived at the event, which is held annually in Washington, D.C. Bear in mind the fact that this conference is supposed to be a venue for prominent progressives to gather and debate the major issues of our day. Read Medea Benjamin's story.

This, people, is not good news for America. It's telling us that, even at the doorstep of the party that boosts itself as a party that invites free speech and debate, there are limits when it suits a political purpose. Agreements they make in good faith will be crushed whenever they deem it necessary to do so.

Is that the kind of party with whom we wish to identify?

We'd best see some public statement of explanation or apology here.

If you see the injustice done to progressive citizens at this conference, please sign the pledge at Voters for Peace. (endorsed by Casey Sheehan's momCindy)

This time vote
for what you believe in.



Hear this NPR story about the Take America Back conference, along with interviews of some of the attendees by Mara Laisson.

To see Hillary Clinton’s position on the Iraq war, go to www.ListenHillary.org.

It's About Time, Bush: Now Change the Course, Bring Troops Home

The soldiers in Iraq have done their duty.
Bring them back to the green, green grass of home.


It's About Time, Bush: Now Change the Course, Bring Troops Home

President Bush needed to make his secret trip to Iraq to raise his poll numbers. It was a great photo op, but it will be meaningless unless a change is made now.

Newt Gingrich, with politics on his mind and before he knew of the secret plans for Bush to visit Iraq, sniped at Bush who he'd thought was at Camp David:

"Are they really changing anything that we're doing in Iraq? Or is this designed basically to shore up and win public support."

If Bush uses this opportunity as a turning point - convincing the new Iraqi government that the U.S. needs to change its course in Iraq and turn this into a successful political effort with an earnest attempt to fully internationalize it, and to begin redeployment of U.S. troops now, he will begin to heal what are now almost non-salvageable wounds - the deep and bleeding gashes - felt by the American public for all the lies and misleadings about why the Bush administration made pre-emptive war upon the government of Iraq and many of its people while there was no WMD, no imminent threat to the United States, and no connection found by any reputable journalist to the planning and carrying out of the 9/11 attacks. It will also force the Iraqis to get on the stick and become responsible for themselves. Bush has been covering for their responsibility for too long.

We'd won WWII in the time it's taken for our President to TELL the Iraqis that they must take responsibility for their own security. What kind of leadership is that?

Karl Rove, who has apparently snaked his way out of charges in the Patrick Fitzgerald investigation, says that Republicans owe no apology to the American public for all the lies and misleadings on the Iraq war. Karl's a day late and a dollar short. The apology was already made by Condoleeza Rice months ago when she admitted the thousands of mistakes that were made in Iraq. Public polls have been withering on the issue of our reasons for being in Iraq since then. Any apology made now is well beyond the point.

Bush said:

"...the enemy doesn't stand for anything. They have no message of hope. They have no positive philosophy. All they can do is kill and hope that the government splits up, or that the American people lose their will."

America's will to do what? Our military presence for the past three and a half years has contributed to the Iraqi people's sectarian strife. If our "will" is to win hearts and minds, it's high time for Iraqis to take responsibility for themselves and it's time to end the U.S. occupation of their country.

A significant percentage of hearts and minds of the Iraqi population has been lost to us forever because of the way this action, never necessary for U.S. security, was led by the Bush administration. There is a civil war and an increase in the terrorists' presence in Iraq today because of the inept commander in chief. In Iraq, now that he has safely snuck himself under the radar of so many Iraqi citizens who'd just as soon target him than welcome him, he has some serious repairs to do. It's been three years since he visited anyone in Iraq. It's about time. Now let's see a change.

Bring those American men and women home from Iraq. They've served you well, President Bush. Bring them home with honor - and begin now.


* Bush's remarks to Prime Minister Maliki of Iraq sound more "PR" than a move toward any substantial change.

* LA Times: Poll: U.S. Disapproves of War in Iraq ' - The death of al-Qaida leader Abu Musab al-Zarqawi in Iraq came as more Americans than ever thought the war in Iraq was a mistake, according to AP-Ipsos polling.'

Iowa Poll: John Edwards #1 for 2008

Iowa Poll:
John Edwards #1 for 2008

Senator Edwards: "It was a nice gift to see we still had friends in Iowa." - DesMoinesRegister.com

About the Poll - DesMoinesRegister.com: Experts say it's the first poll showing anyone besides Clinton as the preferred Democrat in the race for the White House.


NYPost.com: Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton was defeated by former Sen. John Edwards in an early Iowa poll - a rare blow to Clinton's front-runner status for the 2008 Democratic presidential nomination.

One America Committee blog: Edwards Leads Dems in Iowa for 2008

The blogtalk (Google)

Even more blogtalk. (Technorati)

Sweetness - From David Yepsen/DesMoinesRegister.com:
The poll is all sweetness for John Edwards. The 2004 vice-presidential nominee is the Iowa front-runner with 30 percent. That, in turn, will help his fund-raising and his ability to attract top talent and support elsewhere...A victory for Edwards here in 2008 would make him the leading alternative to Clinton and give him an important boost toward the nomination.


Geoffrey Nunberg: John Edwards' storytelling ability is a real strength [Raw Story]

America: Do You Want War, War and More War?

America: Do You Want War, War and More War?

Your President does.
Listen to Bill Christison, former CIA analyst. His most pressing point:

This writer's belief is that the only long-term hope the world has of avoiding a quite widespread further proliferation of nuclear weapons to additional nations in the coming decade is for the U.S. to undertake honest and serious multilateral negotiations aimed at eliminating nuclear weapons everywhere.

Unbelievable

Unbelievable

This headline made me want to scream "No sh*t, Dick Tracey!"

Juan Cole talks about the elevation for al Zarqawi from serial killer to legend because of the war in Iraq. Gee, thanks, Bush administration. Mr. Cole quotes what he calls a "chilling" exaggeration of al Zarqawi's importance:

'Thirty-year-old professor Ahmad Yassin said 'the martyrdom of the jihadist Abu Musab al-Zarqawi represents a grave loss for both the Arab and Islamic Worlds. We lost a great man who died defending the Islamic civilization from Zionist imperialism. I don't think this man can be replaced.' link

And Mr. Cole's informed comment:

Zarqawi would just have been a serial killer if he had lived in normal times, the sort where police are surprised to find hundreds bodies buried in his back lot, and suddenly solving missing persons cases in the region for years back. That anyone at all, much less a highly educated intellectual, could speak of him in these glowing terms sends chills down my spine. Because it means he has a legacy.

We need to rethink how we are "fighting terror." Unless the object is to generate more terrorists.

By the way, where is Osama Bin Laden, who they say actually masterminded the 9/11 attacks? Why are talking heads like Brit Hume saying that Al Zarqawi "eclipsed" Bin Laden in Iraq? Wait - I know. Because Iraq never had a thing to do with 9/11 and they have not been able to capture Bin Laden for five years.

I'm glad they got their substitute boogey-man, but if I have to see that dead head portrait with the two bloody gross-out nostrils once more, I think I'll heave.


One heartless, soulless ideologue says this today:

"The importance that the left
puts on capturing or killing Bin Laden
is almost laughable."

Dear God. After 9/11. Imagine that.
Laughable.



On the road to believing any crumb of a lie fed to these soulless Americans by a leader they blindly follow, how soon they forget.
How soon.

Tar Heel Tavern #68

Tar Heel Tavern #68

Ron Hudson has hosted an inspiring collection of posts about Belonging at 2Sides2Ron for the 68th edition of the Tar Heel Tavern. Don't miss it!




Ron's own poignant post on Belonging is here.

I enjoyed viewing Ogre's suggested pictorial collection on his perception of Belonging.

Screwy Hoolie's message runs in the same field as my own. Long and strong may they run.

Jude is Elmo

Jude is Elmo




Elmo

Jude scored
54% Organization,
76% abstract,
and 52% extroverted!
(Take the test here)

This test measured 3 variables.
First, this test measured how organized you are. Some muppets like Cookie Monster make big messes, while others like Bert are quite anal about things being clean.

Second, this test measured if you prefer a concrete or an abstract viewpoint. For the purposes of this test, concrete people are considered to gravitate more to mathematical and logical approaches, whereas abstract people are more the dreamers and artistic type.

Third, this test measured if you are more of an introvert or an extrovert. By definition, an introvert concentrates more on herself and an extrovert focuses more on others. In this test an introvert was somebody that either tends to spend more time alone or thinks more about herself.

You are mostly organized, more abstract, and both introverted and extroverted.

Most people either love or hate Elmo. I hope you love Elmo, because that's who you are.

You are both somewhat organized. You have a good idea where you put things and you probably keep your place reasonably clean. You aren't totally obsessed with neatness though. Elmo has the same basic approach. His place is pretty tidy, but he doesn't spend all of his time cleaning it up.

You both are abstract thinkers. You definitely are not afraid to take chances in life. You only live once. You may notice others around you playing it safe, but you are more concerned with not compromising your desires, and getting everything you can out of life. This is a very romantic approach to life, but hopefully you are also grounded enough to get by. Elmo's whole life is based on fantasy and his imagination. In the beginning he was a regular character, but now he spends most of his time in this fantasy world.

You are both somewhat extroverts. Like Elmo, you probably like to have some time to yourself, but you do appreciate spending time with your friends, and you aren't scared of social situations. Elmo spends some of his time with real friends, but he also needs some time just to chat it up with his goldfish.

* Jude's test tracked 3 variables.
How she compared to other people her age and gender:
Jude scored higher than 24% on Organization
Jude scored higher than 95% on concrete-abstract (wow!)
Jude scored higher than 24% on introvert-extrovert