Army: No court martial for "coward"

Army: No court martial for "coward"
 
I blogged last November about the fellow in the Army who suffered a panic attack after seeing a dead body in Iraq.

We now learn he will suffer no consequence (no--not even the death penalty).

A dreadful drug called mefloquine got him off the hook,  apparently.

I'm glad.  (Not that he was sickened by the Army-issued drug, but that he will not be punished).

Hillary given convention duty to introduce hubby

Hillary given convention duty to introduce hubby 
  
Senator  Hillary Clinton will be given the dubious honor of introducing her husband at the Democratic convention. This comes after an intense lobbying campaign by her backers angered by her non-speaking role.

She has gracefully accepted.

I don't think this will impress 21st-century female voters. It certainly doesn't impress me.

N.Y. Times talks about Convention bloggers

N.Y. Times talks about Convention bloggers

In today's N.Y. Times editorial, Convention bloggers get the spotlight.

The Democrats, needless to say, are already paying for their venturesome invitation. They received applications from 50 bloggers and later announced there was room for only 30. Conspiracy theories are already abounding on the blogs of the disinvited. Such is Web life. We do wonder whether a blogger's buccaneer self-image will suffer from having to wear a garish credential necklace just to watch conventioneers as they mainly say, "Nice to see you!" to each other. Will bloggers be tamed into centrism? Or, like Mencken, will they gleefully report that the convention's main speechmakers are "plainly on furlough from some home for extinct volcanoes"? Log on to find out.

Actually, it is my understanding that 200 bloggers had initially applied. As for me, this "disinvited" blogger, conspiracy was never a suspected motive. Administrative inefficiency was more like it. To err is human. The Times erred themselves in their reporting that only 50 applications arrived to the DNCC. Do you see how things get spun and confused? Such is the life of news reporting.

As I've said more than once, I was happy to have been invited and have hoped for (although have not expected) the reinstatement of all the "disinvited" (including the Conservative among us).

Feel free to read my words here.

While I agree that there's not anything particularly interesting about these "Nice to see you" schmooze-fests, I had hoped to follow the Kucinich camp and perhaps interview Dennis Kucinich himself. I suspect he would have offered me more than a "Nice to see you"...he never struck me as a "Nice to see you" kind of fellow.

In my opinion, the blogger's niche is the ability to get the smaller stories; the slice-of-life political stories that bare the heart and soul of the people who want to represent us. Those small stories add up to a truth for which the mainstream media simply has little time in a fast-paced and competitive environment. The good blogging stories are ones which I believe the mainstream media appreciates. They give reporters some refreshing insight. In this age of 24/7 cable news networks (such as FOX news) using manipulation, theatrical music, and secretive calculation to convince a malleable public, bloggers have been instrumental in fighting propaganda with folk-insistence upon a truthful focus on current events. The very fact that these bloggers have been credentialed for the Democratic convention should make the attending bloggers proud that they have been recognized as a legitimate source of interest and of truth. Web life is not just conspiracy theory and rumor. It's also a source of a folk-reality that the mainstream just can't seem to touch anymore.

The bloggers are the neo-pamphlateers. I don't expect an invitation to the schmoozing will shove bloggers to the center, but rather expect the bloggers (in true form) to see the schmoozing for precisely what it is...and cut right through to the heart of matters.

It's good to see us in the Times editorial. I let them know.

This Land! JibJab.com

This Land! JibJab.com

This is possibly the funniest political comedy I've seen on the web.

Don't miss it.

Media Matters shows FOX News not only unbalanced, but calculating

Media Matters shows FOX not only unbalanced, but calculating

"The memos are talking points instructing us what the themes are supposed to be. God help you if you stray.."

Media Matters has a series of articles tearing apart FOX News bit by bit and exposing them for the unprofessional, undignified, cunning and calculating network they are.

Doonesbury Cartoonist Skewers Bush

Doonesbury Cartoonist Skewers Bush

Futurballa lead me to this article where Gary Trudeau, who attended Yale with George Bush in the 1960s, speaks frankly about Bush, calling him the "best target he's worked with yet" in his Doonesbury comic strip.

Trudeau said he penned his very first cartoon to illustrate an article in the Yale Daily News on Bush and allegations that his fraternity, DKE, had hazed incoming pledges by branding them with an iron...The article in the campus paper prompted The New York Times to interview Bush, who was a senior that year. Trudeau recalled that Bush told the Times "it was just a coat hanger, and ... it didn't hurt any more than a cigarette burn."

"It does put one in mind of what his views on torture might be today," Trudeau said.

American Street: God talks to Dubya/Chuck has twins

American Street: God talks to Dubya/Chuck has twins

Congratulations to Chuck Currie and his wife on the birth of their twins. If anyone knows where he can get Kerry/Edwards baby gear, he'd appreciate hearing from you.


Photo credit: reachm.com

Doug McDaniel has written an amusing "George, we need to talk" advice-session from God to Dubya.

Jonah Goldberg had better read the Butler report

Jonah Goldberg had better read the Butler report

Jonah Goldberg had best read the Butler report (rather than the summary-snippets) before he crows about how Joe Wilson lied. Joe wasn't lying.

Read page 121, Chapter 6.4 of the Butler report, particularly sections 501 to 503.

Then read Joseph Wilson's words once again.

The argument was not whether or not an attempt was made to purchase uranium, it was whether or not our American president was using incredibly shaky information in his State of the Union speech to promote an unnecessary war. The Butler Report only serves to separate the British government's admittedly inconclusive intelligence from Bush's (ab)use of that intelligence.

Chapter 6.4
Section 503-

a. It is accepted by all parties that Iraqi officials visited Niger in 1999.

b. British government intelligence from several different sources indicated that this visit was for the purpose of acquiring uranium.

c. The evidence was not conclusive that Iraq actually purchased uranium, as opposed to having sought uranium. The British governemnt did not claim this.

d. The forged documents were not available to the British government at the time its assessment was made and so the fact of the forgery does not undermine it.

Are you red or blue?

Are you red or are you blue?

Take the quiz at Slate.

Note: I wound up in the middle.
I think far better questions could have been asked to ascertain a more accurate result. If you have a well-rounded knowlege about some of these too-obvious questions, you are relegated to a label. Such is the sad state of journalism today. Too many labels. Labels don't reflect real and whole people.

Photo- Berkeley Plantation

Photo by Iddybud

Berkeley Plantation
Charles City, Virginia

Code Red: Bush administration elevates the threat of more threat elevations

Code Red: Bush administration elevates the threat of more threat elevations

The color has gone from Yellow to Red! The chances of being scared out of your britches with daily warnings about new terror attacks and cancelled presidential elections are now 99-100%.

(This is satirical, of course.)

Bush and Lay Share same 'Sharp' attorney

Bush and Lay Share same 'Sharp' attorney

At Talking Points Memo, Wright Angle (with very interesting analysis), and Beat Bush Blog, there is discussion about the strange fact that our president G.W. Bush and Enron's Ken Lay have hired the same "estate-planning" attorney (cough) to represent them. (Bush in relation to the Valerie Plame outing incident; Lay for his recent indictment). In a comment to Beat Bush Blog, I wondered, what if this became a conflict of interest for attorney James Sharp? Perhaps Mr. Lay's interests are what will eventually be shown as the same interests (and alleged crimes) of the president himself. Wouldn't that be something?

This is not meant to sound like a conspiracy theory, although I'd imagine many people would look at these words and throw it away as just another wacky idea. There was an article I'd read recently that really got me thinking...could it be true?
I don't suffer foolish theories easily, but Mr. Ruppert's examination of the situation follows logic.

The CIA is known to protect American (big money) interests and energy/oil has much to do with National Security. Energy/oil also had much to do with the business interests of the Bush and Lay families. (And what about those secret energy-policy meetings with Cheney?) As for mutual interests, the name ARAMCO comes to mind, given Ms. Plame's part in the CIA's overall relationship with ARAMCO and the fact that ENRON is said to have been a "front" for ARAMCO.

Almost the entire Bush administration has an interest in ARAMCO.

We need to watch what happens with George Tenet (Plame's old boss) and fellow former-CIA James Pavitt in the near future. What was the real reason they quit? It's been said the CIA didn't support the Iraq-attempt-to-buy-Niger-uranium charges and that they warned the president not to use them to falsely promote a war. What if it was shown (by paper trail) that Bush misled us intentionally - taking our nation to war for his own personal business interests (and Kenny-boy's, too)? That would make it all the more interesting that those forged Niger documents are now in the hands of California Congressman Henry Waxman (D), the man who'd most likely introduce the articles of impeachment of president Bush (if it came down to that).

______________

A somewhat-related comment:
This is surely not the time to replace George Tenet with anyone who would even remotely be considered a partisan. What happens to our CIA from here is very important in these times of terror and will require mutual trust and unity amongst those who must confirm any nominee. I'm afraid Bush may hastily nominate Porter Goss as new CIA head, and I think that would be a political mistake.

Outgoing Deputy CIA Director for Operations James Pavitt made a recent plea:

In my opinion, now is not the time for radical reorganization of the intelligence community, for creating a new structure, a different framework in the hope of always getting it right and always connecting the dots. Some have said my retirement and George Tenet's resignation create the "perfect storm" for radical restructuring in the intelligence community. Let me remind you that in the book and the movie "the perfect storm," the ship sank and the crew drowned.

I would argue against change for the sake or appearance of change particularly in these politically charged times and at a time of great terrorist threat. No one really seeks a perfect storm. The aftermath of 9/11 brought about tremendous change in the way we do business; but change for its own sake is dead wrong. I believe thoughtful empowerment of the DCI and sustained executive and congressional commitment to improve our nation's intelligence capabilities will serve our nation well...


[LINK]

Vets are Fed Up with Being Called "Unpatriotic"

Vets are Fed Up with Being Called "Unpatriotic"

Today at Voice of a Veteran blog, Vet asks, after reading disabled Vietnam veteran Jack Dalton's article titled "You Calling Me An Unpatriotic Wimp?" :

The true colors of the Bush "patriots" come forth. You, my fellow veterans, are being called "wimps with no backbones" if you oppose Bush. Aren't you getting a little tired of being accused of being traitors by those who could care less about veterans?

I imagine there are many men and women serving in Iraq at this very moment who are privately dissenting while still doing their duty.

Tom Burka Funny of the Day

Tom Burka Funny of the Day

Whew! Now we won't have to worry about the elections being called off. I'm so glad we got that over with. How about you?

Have you seen Tom's Headline Contest?

More Torture?

More Torture?

This isn't going to play well for American PR. We have Sweden sore at us now.

Ron Reagan and Jeremy Glick-Of Fathers and Sons

Ron Reagan and Jeremy Glick-Of Fathers and Sons

At the funeral of former President Ronald Reagan, his son Ronald Prescott Reagan said of the attempted assassination of his father that “God had spared him in order that he might do good. But he accepted that as a responsibility, not a mandate. And there is a profound difference.”

I believe that is the key reason Mr Reagan has agreed to speak at the Democratic convention. In my opinion, he's unhappy with the Bush administration's pandering to the fundamentalist Christian base at the great expense of the public welfare of the American people.

Today in an interview with Al Franken on Franken's Air America radio show, Jeremy Glick (son of a Port Authoity worker who died 9/11) said he doesn't feel it's ethical to state "what his father would have wanted or believed" as things stand today.
It only serves to make sense, for how could he know what his father would say today? He can only tell you what he knows his father believed before his death (and the elder Glick believed the Bush election was not legitimate). The young Glick has opposed the war on Iraq and was skewered cruelly and unprofessionally by FOX's own Bill O'Reilly in a dismally one-sided interview on the O'Reilly Factor. The awful experience will be covered in the new Robert Greenwald documentary "Outfoxed".

Like Jeremy Glick, Ronald Prescott Reagan cannot speak for his father. In the younger Reagan's case, it is profoundly unfortunate that he cannot tell you what his father may have believed for at least the past ten years because President Reagan was debilitated by Alzheimer's disease. Ron P. Reagan has his own sound mind, however. In his heart, he has witnessed and experienced a sorrow only known to families of Alzheimer victims. He says his own mother, the beloved wife and soul-companion of our former president, agrees wholeheartedly with his decision to speak at the Convention. He believes stem-cell research is important to making the quality of all American lives better. Ron understood the role that God played in his father's life. I believe he's picking up the ball for his dad and taking the responsibility he believes his father would have taken based on the former president's deepest reverence of God.

Written for Daily Kos

Why Isn't Hillary Speaking at Dem Convention?

Why Isn't Hillary Speaking at Dem Convention?

As a New York woman who knows how influential and brilliant New York Senator Clinton is, I'd really like to know why Hillary won't be speaking in Boston at the end of this month.

The Kerry campaign couldn't be so petty as to allow rivalry to get in the way, could they? I surely hope not. Seeing Hillary left off of the roster is especially dismaying for me, a female blogger from New York who was "disinvited" to the Convention.

Al Gore overlooked Bill Clinton far too obviously in his 2000 campaign. Bill Clinton's spot on the 2000 Dem convention list of speakers made him far less important than he should have been. Whether or not the Bush team was more influential in their ability to steal the election, Gore's omission of Bill Clinton as a key figure in the 2000 campaign hurt his chances from the get-go.

John Kerry's campaign has asked Bill Clinton to speak. Since Bill is on the list, perhaps the Kerry campaign may think they don't need Hillary Clinton. Perhaps they believe that would be "over-Clintonizing".

I don't agree. Hillary is possibly THE most influential woman in the world. She is consistently at the top of "most admired women" polls.

Perhaps Sen Kerry and his team believe that having Ron Reagan and Hillary Clinton speaking at the same convention would be a bad idea. I would tell him they're wrong in their strategic thinking. Having a representative of both former Presidents Clinton and Reagan's families as keynote speakers at the Democratic convention is the perfect idea to show America there is finally a sense of uniting between citizens. I'd tell him to be very thoughtful and cautious about the matter. Get Hillary on the phone!

Whole Batch of FOX Memos

Whole Batch of FOX Memos

Wonkette and Anonymoses have the "whole batch" of FOX memos.

FOX tells you they pride themselves on balance and fairness. Read some of these memos from Fox News chief John Moody and decide for yourself.

Talk about controlling the facts (regardless of the truth):

"..It won't be long before some people start to decry the use of "excessive force." We won't be among that group...More than 600 US military dead, attacks on the UN headquarters...whatever happens, it is richly deserved."

It's Too Bad Pete Townshend's So Unsure

It's Too Bad Pete Townshend's So Unsure

The change, it had to come
We knew it all along
We were liberated from the fold, that's all
And the world looks just the same
And history ain't changed
'Cause the banners, they are flown in the next war

-Pete Townshend


Pete Townshend is angry with Michael Moore for being a bit of a bad sport since Townshend refused to allow Moore to use "Won't Get Fooled Again" in his "Fahrenheit 9/11" film. I can't help but think, after reading all about the situation, that Pete Townshend is a rather confused soul. He was supportive of the war on Iraq at its beginning and now he states he's not so sure anymore. He says "Won't Get Fooled Again" is not an "unconditionally anti-war song" and he was "90% sure" the song was not right for the film.(I'm 99.99% convinced he was wrong).

I guess it must be true that it's not an unconditionally anti-war tune, since the song's writer is telling us that himself. (Besides, I know that the hypnotized never lie). I've got to tell you, that song was the song I recall best when I was coming of age. It became my personal anthem. Honestly, it's one of my favorite songs of all time. I can remember exactly where I was the first time I heard it...coming through on a transistor radio while I was sitting on the front steps of my grandparents' tenement building. It hit me like a bolt of adolescent lightning. Mr. Townshend quickly made it into my top ten list of the greatest rock stars- ever.

If this marvelously blood-boiling song didn't demonstrate how we are herded from war to war and forever shall be herded, then I guess maybe I never understood the song at all.

Was I the one who was confused?

Or has Mr. Townshend become the new confused? How could he ever have supported the war in Iraq? Why can't he feel free to say Blair hooking up with Bush on Iraq was the worst thing that has happened to the UK in centuries?

I used to see Mr. Townshend smash a lot of guitars. Perhaps the lure of kiddie porn assuaged the rock-n-roll anger and helped him forget a sometimes-ugly world where the powerful reign and the powerless have no voice. (I know, I know..he only used his credit card to "see what was on" the kiddie-porn site.)

I'm really disappointed to hear Mr. Townshend speak today. And he's so very angry with Mr. Moore. Why?

I never thought, after hearing the song that changed my life, that he would "meet the new boss" with such muddled resign. Perhaps he should closely listen to the words he wrote so long ago.

The opening day box office receipts for "Fahrenheit 9/11" broke the British record for a documentary, according to the Daily Telegraph of London.

Never..and I mean never in my life did I expect to come to the realization that a dumpy fellow with a baseball hat and a camera would come along to change the world more effectively than the tremendously talented rock star with the inspiring lyrics and the guitar he would promise to smash in order to punctuate his point.


__________________

"This is certainly no way for Pete to show his anger, and frankly it is very embarrassing for him to behave in this manner, as he is the greatest rock star who ever lived."

— filmmaker Michael Moore

I STILL believe Joseph Wilson (Part II)

I STILL believe Joseph Wilson (Part II)

From the Independent on the Butler report:

Lord Butler has received submissions from Jacques Baute, who led the IAEA mission on the ground in Baghdad, and the director of the agency's Iraq Nuclear Verification Office. Mr Baute examined a set of documents supplied by the American government which purported to prove the existence of an Iraq/Niger intelligence link. At the time it was reported that the documents, which originated from a third nation, were passed to Washington by London.

It took Mr Baute and his team just a few hours to conclude that the documents were crude forgeries. Asked about the matter, Colin Powell, the US Secretary of State, said they "came from other sources. It was provided in good faith to the inspectors."

A former diplomat, Joseph Wilson, visited Niger in 2002 on behalf of the CIA, and reported that there was no evidence that Saddam had sought to buy uranium from the country. George Tenet, the CIA director at the time, declared that the Niger claim was "not tenable". And in last week's damning senate report on pre-war intelligence, a memo by a senior CIA official was revealed which said: "We told Congress that the Brits have exaggerated this issue."

Mr Blair's Iraq dossier claimed Saddam "sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa, despite having no active, civil nuclear programme that could require it." But the IAEA points out that it would have been impossible for Iraq to acquire uranium from Niger without this being discovered. The country's entire output at the time came from two mines controlled by a French company, and its entire output was pre-sold to France, Japan and Spain.


[LINK]