Zell Miller keynote speaker at GOP Convention
He's no Democrat!
The same Zell Miller who was chief of staff for the unrepentant racist Lester Maddox will be the keynote speaker at the GOP convention.
Yes, Zell Miller was right-hand man to Lester Maddox who, in 1964, smashed in the roof of a black minister's car. Maddox also publically pushed defiance of federal civil rights legislation calling for desegregation of restaurants and other public places--he pushed his racist agenda so strongly that he passed out axe handles to white customers at his eatery to prevent its integration. Later in the year, Zell Miller's boss Maddox closed the Pickrick establishment rather than be forced to serve African Americans.
Yes, my friends. Lester's ex-chief of staff Zell Miller says that today's democrats are too liberal--and maybe he thinks they should be like his old buddy. The same old buddy, Lester, who picked up a pistol and chased black protesters from the Pickrick fried chicken restaurant the day after the Civil Rights Act was signed into law.
Was that the kind of Democrat for whom Zell waxes nostalgic and for whom he has the true respect?
This lone little traitor, Zell Miller, will be staring down the rolling thunder of the unified Democratic party when he delivers the keynote speech.
How pathetic for the RNC.
The Democratic convention convinced an ex-president's (a Republican's) son to come and speak about an issue that will benefit mankind--steam cell research.
The Republicans get a man who was connected with an era of ugly violence against the black race and whose poor character would lead him to be a political traitor to his party because his fellow party members (including the North Carolianian who has been chosen to be the VP Dem candidate) did not choose to be part of his washed-up conservative Dixiecrat circle.
Hey, GOP--we saw Bush snub the NAACP this year. Your popularity poll numbers with African Americans have never been lower. You disenfranchised more black voters in 2000 than Lester Maddox bopped in the head with his axe handle in '64.
The smell of voter suppression coming out of Florida is getting stronger.
A great moment in liberalism was Lyndon Johnson signing the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
GOP, keep going backward--you can have Zell!
Internet muse.
Daring, bold, never sold.
My daily weblog of politics, humor, philosophy...and a constant and nagging reminder of the existence of universal love....
Thursday, August 19, 2004
Nick Cohen has lost the left
Nick Cohen lost the left
If he took a rational view of modern political science, he might see where it went
Part One- He blames commies and a film.
Nick Cohen begins his diabtribe against the left titled "Where Have All the Children of the Left Gone?" by blaming a movie. Why such emphasis on a piece of entertainment? I think you have to ask yourself that question because it colors much of his complaint.
Cohen imagines the millions of people who viewed 'Fahrenheit 9/11' as those who would see Iraqis as "comrades". I really think that's pushing the envelope....no...ripping the envelope.
Most of the people who viewed the movie had no strong political or ideological motivation whatsoever. I would say the major force driving them to the theater was sheer curiosity.
Just wait for the book.
Curiosity will also lead people to read Michael Moore's upcoming book of letters from Iraq war soldiers.
After 9/11, we're told that we're leaving cold war thinking behind....but are we? When will our ideas catch up with our bombs?
Cohen writes as if Marxism was still a major threat to modern societies. The Cold War ended some time ago and I think we've all seen political progress and mutation borne by the mere passing of time.
The problem with the hard right is that they cling to old ideas, therefore thay cannot imagine how the left may have evolved. Perhaps that is why they are called conservative...and perhaps that is why many of them have to be careful about what they choose to conserve. Antiquated thought is seldom a healthy thing to be clinging onto. History can be used to make a better future rather than used as a tool for division. The world has changed drastically over time and the fact that 9/11 occurred and we were shocked and unprepared was proof-positive that many of us simply didn't "get it".
So, I ask you---when will we get it? We aren't going to win any wars against terror in a divided global state.
Right/left? How utterly simplistic.
I believe Mr Cohen is far too simplistic in his analysis. If we examine the world through the eyes of a political scientist, we would see that it's full of myriad systems and movements that are vying with each other for power.
We need imagination (as the 9/11 Commission pointed out to America). We need to see fewer of our differences and more of our common decency.
Our world troubles shouldn't be posed in the tired frames of right-world vs. left-world any longer. If we use our intelligent imagination, we would see how American-style corporate capitalism and statist liberalism can work successfully together to beat terror. (The folly of Iraq exposed a gigantic crack between the two, however, and we need to mend those fences with intelligent leadership).
When are we going to learn?
This incessant mistrust and teeth-baring at the left is going to kill us--and I mean that literally.
We need to be decent and civil world vs. indecent and uncivil world.
It isn't complicated and it doesn't take a genius to understand.
To his credit, I think George W. Bush believes this in its black-and-white terms, but has never had a clue how to make it a political reality.
He's a beautiful fool who should never have been allowed to run powerfully amok. I believe he was ill-advised by those he trusted.
I do not believe he was ever a capable leader.
If Cohen can't see the left anymore, he may need to take that log out of his own eyeball and put down that old crutch of left/right division (which should have died along with the cold war).
The right has shifted backward surely as the left has progressed
If we must talk in terms of left and right (bored sigh), let's state what is real and what is true.
In reality, what was once the "left" (and is still "the left" to Cohen's rather antiquated way of thinking) is now being replaced by what we know as the radical right. Think of the NeoConservative movement and the totalitarian-leaning activities by the Ashcroft Justice department and you may begin to understand what I mean.
The Bush effect
The Bush administration has contributed to this political upheaval and unrest in our world. They've practically ruined Tony Blair by his association with them.
Until the Iraq war, I'd wager most of the world saw Blair as a rational, intelligent, and decent leader.
He got into bed with a fool--albeit a beautiful fool.
The road to hell is paved with the best of intentions.
Cohen says honorable traditions have been forgotten by 'the left'. I think Cohen needs to sift through the cobwebs in his mind and think anew. All good people desire honorable and decent goals. There are good people on the old left and on the right and in all ideological spaces in between.
If we don't seek the common angels of our better nature, the civil world will go to hell.
If he took a rational view of modern political science, he might see where it went
Part One- He blames commies and a film.
Nick Cohen begins his diabtribe against the left titled "Where Have All the Children of the Left Gone?" by blaming a movie. Why such emphasis on a piece of entertainment? I think you have to ask yourself that question because it colors much of his complaint.
Cohen imagines the millions of people who viewed 'Fahrenheit 9/11' as those who would see Iraqis as "comrades". I really think that's pushing the envelope....no...ripping the envelope.
Most of the people who viewed the movie had no strong political or ideological motivation whatsoever. I would say the major force driving them to the theater was sheer curiosity.
Just wait for the book.
Curiosity will also lead people to read Michael Moore's upcoming book of letters from Iraq war soldiers.
After 9/11, we're told that we're leaving cold war thinking behind....but are we? When will our ideas catch up with our bombs?
Cohen writes as if Marxism was still a major threat to modern societies. The Cold War ended some time ago and I think we've all seen political progress and mutation borne by the mere passing of time.
The problem with the hard right is that they cling to old ideas, therefore thay cannot imagine how the left may have evolved. Perhaps that is why they are called conservative...and perhaps that is why many of them have to be careful about what they choose to conserve. Antiquated thought is seldom a healthy thing to be clinging onto. History can be used to make a better future rather than used as a tool for division. The world has changed drastically over time and the fact that 9/11 occurred and we were shocked and unprepared was proof-positive that many of us simply didn't "get it".
So, I ask you---when will we get it? We aren't going to win any wars against terror in a divided global state.
Our world troubles shouldn't be posed in the tired frames of right-world vs. left-world any longer.
Right/left? How utterly simplistic.
I believe Mr Cohen is far too simplistic in his analysis. If we examine the world through the eyes of a political scientist, we would see that it's full of myriad systems and movements that are vying with each other for power.
We need imagination (as the 9/11 Commission pointed out to America). We need to see fewer of our differences and more of our common decency.
Our world troubles shouldn't be posed in the tired frames of right-world vs. left-world any longer. If we use our intelligent imagination, we would see how American-style corporate capitalism and statist liberalism can work successfully together to beat terror. (The folly of Iraq exposed a gigantic crack between the two, however, and we need to mend those fences with intelligent leadership).
When are we going to learn?
This incessant mistrust and teeth-baring at the left is going to kill us--and I mean that literally.
We need to be decent and civil world vs. indecent and uncivil world.
It isn't complicated and it doesn't take a genius to understand.
To his credit, I think George W. Bush believes this in its black-and-white terms, but has never had a clue how to make it a political reality.
He's a beautiful fool who should never have been allowed to run powerfully amok. I believe he was ill-advised by those he trusted.
I do not believe he was ever a capable leader.
If Cohen can't see the left anymore, he may need to take that log out of his own eyeball and put down that old crutch of left/right division (which should have died along with the cold war).
The right has shifted backward surely as the left has progressed
If we must talk in terms of left and right (bored sigh), let's state what is real and what is true.
In reality, what was once the "left" (and is still "the left" to Cohen's rather antiquated way of thinking) is now being replaced by what we know as the radical right. Think of the NeoConservative movement and the totalitarian-leaning activities by the Ashcroft Justice department and you may begin to understand what I mean.
The Bush effect
The Bush administration has contributed to this political upheaval and unrest in our world. They've practically ruined Tony Blair by his association with them.
Until the Iraq war, I'd wager most of the world saw Blair as a rational, intelligent, and decent leader.
He got into bed with a fool--albeit a beautiful fool.
The road to hell is paved with the best of intentions.
Cohen says honorable traditions have been forgotten by 'the left'. I think Cohen needs to sift through the cobwebs in his mind and think anew. All good people desire honorable and decent goals. There are good people on the old left and on the right and in all ideological spaces in between.
If we don't seek the common angels of our better nature, the civil world will go to hell.
The Press: Commercial consideration triumphs truth
The Press: Commercial consideration triumphs truth
Press contributed to unnecessary war in Iraq through soft censorship. They buried stories. We got war.
Executive editor Len Downie appeared on the August 18th Online News Hour and tried to reassure moderator Terrence Smith that his Washington Post was not a megaphone for the Bush administration.
Smith's question was this: Was there, Len Downie, a reason why those stories that did question those assumptions [about reasons for war; WMD] ended up inside and that the administration views generally ended up on page one?
Mr. Downie replied: Well, administration views ended up on page one because it was the administration deciding whether or not we were going to go to war.
He called it "accountability reporting."
He blamed the Washington Post's administration-heavy war coverage on their editorial "focus".
I believe was it their determined (soft) censorship. They buried the stories. We got war. It really wasn't all that complicated.
I hope it won't happen again.
I don't have much faith these days, however.
Mr. Downie went on to say: What we did not place in the front page enough at the same time were the voices which were in many cases anonymous and not on the record and obviously not people in the same public offices at that time, retired generals rather than active generals who were warning that perhaps this was not a wise war. In retrospect, I wish I had put more of those stories in the front page.
If any lesson is to be learned, it's that our news editors must have a new focus. Now that they know (and we know) this Bush administration cannot be trusted, anonyomous sources may have to grace more front pages.
On the same Online News guest-panel, journalist and author Michael Massing made the comment that, in the period since 9/11, "the public mood has put barriers in the place of the type of skepticism and independence that we look for in the press."
I found this to be an accurate and honest statement.
The public mood should never have a bearing on the reporting of the truth, but I know why it does.
The responsibility of journalists should be asking the hardest questions and the responsibility of editors should be to proudly and boldly place the answers to those tough questions in the typical reader's direct sight, but I understand why that didn't happen in the lead-up to the Iraq war.
The truth is not always easy for a moody public to accept.
The truth doesn't sell papers if it's too controversial.
The truth may not help you gather advertisers in controversial times.
Obviously, commercial factors have a direct bearing on censorship.
Burying important stories was a harmful form of censorship.
This is a place where capitalism is terribly flawed.
The very fact that the press has to be questioned like this is dismaying because I know it took almost a thousand deaths of our American brothers and sisters in Iraq in order for the "public mood" to shift so the press could tell us the truth without fear of financial recrimination.
_______________________________
Danny Schechter asks: Why does the term “weapons of mass deception” still apply to our media coverage of a war that is at war with the truth?
Press contributed to unnecessary war in Iraq through soft censorship. They buried stories. We got war.
Executive editor Len Downie appeared on the August 18th Online News Hour and tried to reassure moderator Terrence Smith that his Washington Post was not a megaphone for the Bush administration.
Smith's question was this: Was there, Len Downie, a reason why those stories that did question those assumptions [about reasons for war; WMD] ended up inside and that the administration views generally ended up on page one?
Mr. Downie replied: Well, administration views ended up on page one because it was the administration deciding whether or not we were going to go to war.
He called it "accountability reporting."
He blamed the Washington Post's administration-heavy war coverage on their editorial "focus".
I believe was it their determined (soft) censorship. They buried the stories. We got war. It really wasn't all that complicated.
I hope it won't happen again.
I don't have much faith these days, however.
Mr. Downie went on to say: What we did not place in the front page enough at the same time were the voices which were in many cases anonymous and not on the record and obviously not people in the same public offices at that time, retired generals rather than active generals who were warning that perhaps this was not a wise war. In retrospect, I wish I had put more of those stories in the front page.
If any lesson is to be learned, it's that our news editors must have a new focus. Now that they know (and we know) this Bush administration cannot be trusted, anonyomous sources may have to grace more front pages.
On the same Online News guest-panel, journalist and author Michael Massing made the comment that, in the period since 9/11, "the public mood has put barriers in the place of the type of skepticism and independence that we look for in the press."
I found this to be an accurate and honest statement.
The public mood should never have a bearing on the reporting of the truth, but I know why it does.
The responsibility of journalists should be asking the hardest questions and the responsibility of editors should be to proudly and boldly place the answers to those tough questions in the typical reader's direct sight, but I understand why that didn't happen in the lead-up to the Iraq war.
The truth is not always easy for a moody public to accept.
The truth doesn't sell papers if it's too controversial.
The truth may not help you gather advertisers in controversial times.
Obviously, commercial factors have a direct bearing on censorship.
Burying important stories was a harmful form of censorship.
This is a place where capitalism is terribly flawed.
The very fact that the press has to be questioned like this is dismaying because I know it took almost a thousand deaths of our American brothers and sisters in Iraq in order for the "public mood" to shift so the press could tell us the truth without fear of financial recrimination.
_______________________________
Danny Schechter asks: Why does the term “weapons of mass deception” still apply to our media coverage of a war that is at war with the truth?
Wednesday, August 18, 2004
Bush team refuses teacher admission to rally
Bush team refuses Social Studies
teacher admission to campaign rally
I'll bet she'll have a great lesson to teach her fall class.
Bush campaign staffers tore up a 55-year-old social studies teacher's ticket and refused her admission because she sported a small sticker on her blouse that touted the Democratic ticket of John Kerry and John Edwards.
"I had my ticket and photo identification, but they would not let me in because of this sticker," said Mead, a teacher at Traverse City West Senior High, who said she has seen Queen Elizabeth and Pope John Paul in person.
"I have never found this kind of screening anywhere in my travels around the world. I can't imagine being denied access to hearing the president of the United States speak."
[LINK]
teacher admission to campaign rally
I'll bet she'll have a great lesson to teach her fall class.
Bush campaign staffers tore up a 55-year-old social studies teacher's ticket and refused her admission because she sported a small sticker on her blouse that touted the Democratic ticket of John Kerry and John Edwards.
"I had my ticket and photo identification, but they would not let me in because of this sticker," said Mead, a teacher at Traverse City West Senior High, who said she has seen Queen Elizabeth and Pope John Paul in person.
"I have never found this kind of screening anywhere in my travels around the world. I can't imagine being denied access to hearing the president of the United States speak."
[LINK]
Helen Thomas Tough on Kerry
Helen Thomas Tough on Kerry
Some very tough love for Kerry from Helen Thomas. I've said this several times now. If he wants to convince those hardest to convince--the ones who want to vote for him but demand clarity--John Kerry needs to put his clearest heartfelt thoughts on leadership (his thoughts in 2002, now, and the time in-between) in black and white and send it to the N.Y. Times.
Put your finger on the pulse, Senator Kerry.
Listen to Helen Thomas.
Listen to what's in the wind.
Listen to the hearts of troops that no longer beat.
Listen to the families of those troops like Army Capt. Humayun Saqib Khan of the Germany-based, 201st Forward Support Battalion, 1st Infantry Division. He wrote home in a letter: "This is a mess, why are we here? This is such chaos. We should be coming home instead of being here."
His family wants him to be remembered as a peacemaker..someone who cared about his fellow man.
Listen to the family of Marine Lance Cpl. Gregory E. MacDonald. Like you, Senator Kerry, he was a cerebral man, but he never made it home to tell his nation what you were able to tell our nation. He was a scholar who wanted to create peace in the Middle East. Greg told his friends many times that he would support any candidate who stood up forcefully against this war because it was wrong and was not sold on evidence, but lies and ideology.
Many of us have sons and daughters who are thinking of joining the service. They are loving and caring people. Even after Viet Nam, we have been a trusting people. Until this Iraq mess; this Iraq lie.
We need to trust now more than ever.
Put your finger on the pulse, Senator Kerry.
Some very tough love for Kerry from Helen Thomas. I've said this several times now. If he wants to convince those hardest to convince--the ones who want to vote for him but demand clarity--John Kerry needs to put his clearest heartfelt thoughts on leadership (his thoughts in 2002, now, and the time in-between) in black and white and send it to the N.Y. Times.
Put your finger on the pulse, Senator Kerry.
Listen to Helen Thomas.
Listen to what's in the wind.
Listen to the hearts of troops that no longer beat.
Listen to the families of those troops like Army Capt. Humayun Saqib Khan of the Germany-based, 201st Forward Support Battalion, 1st Infantry Division. He wrote home in a letter: "This is a mess, why are we here? This is such chaos. We should be coming home instead of being here."
His family wants him to be remembered as a peacemaker..someone who cared about his fellow man.
Listen to the family of Marine Lance Cpl. Gregory E. MacDonald. Like you, Senator Kerry, he was a cerebral man, but he never made it home to tell his nation what you were able to tell our nation. He was a scholar who wanted to create peace in the Middle East. Greg told his friends many times that he would support any candidate who stood up forcefully against this war because it was wrong and was not sold on evidence, but lies and ideology.
Many of us have sons and daughters who are thinking of joining the service. They are loving and caring people. Even after Viet Nam, we have been a trusting people. Until this Iraq mess; this Iraq lie.
We need to trust now more than ever.
Put your finger on the pulse, Senator Kerry.
A Republican Clears His Conscience
A Republican Clears His Conscience
War in Iraq was a mistake
An unexpected four-page statement from retiring Rep. Doug Bereuter (R) of Nebraska must be driving Karl Rove to drink. Rep. Bereuter has stated it's his belief that it was a mistake for the Bush administration to have launched military action in Iraq, especially without a broad and engaged international coalition. He said his vote on the Iraq resolution was based on what he had been told about the WMD threat from Iraq. He stated: "Left unresolved for now is whether intelligence was intentionally misconstrued to justify military action."
I can recall, prior to the preemptive strike on Iraq, being told that "we can't wait for the smoking gun to come in the form of a mushroom cloud." The 16 words about Niger used calculatingly in the 2003 State of the Union speech stil ring out alarmingly in my mind.
Rep. Bereuter knows he's right and he won't let his conscience be erased by politics.
You may wonder why my headline is so large.
If this was Zell Miller saying something contrary about a Democratic leader, Drudge would slather it all over his front page. Instead......zippo.
War in Iraq was a mistake
An unexpected four-page statement from retiring Rep. Doug Bereuter (R) of Nebraska must be driving Karl Rove to drink. Rep. Bereuter has stated it's his belief that it was a mistake for the Bush administration to have launched military action in Iraq, especially without a broad and engaged international coalition. He said his vote on the Iraq resolution was based on what he had been told about the WMD threat from Iraq. He stated: "Left unresolved for now is whether intelligence was intentionally misconstrued to justify military action."
I can recall, prior to the preemptive strike on Iraq, being told that "we can't wait for the smoking gun to come in the form of a mushroom cloud." The 16 words about Niger used calculatingly in the 2003 State of the Union speech stil ring out alarmingly in my mind.
Rep. Bereuter knows he's right and he won't let his conscience be erased by politics.
You may wonder why my headline is so large.
If this was Zell Miller saying something contrary about a Democratic leader, Drudge would slather it all over his front page. Instead......zippo.
Kerry's Invitation from Grover
Kerry's Invitation from Grover
Political intimidator-extraordinaire Grover Norquist has sent John Kerry a cordial invitation to attend one of his infamous weekly Wednesday meetings. I guess Kerry's attendance, in these conservative minds, would be akin to Bush attending an NAACP function (which Bush, of course, has refused to do).
Sincere congratulations go out to Grover and Samah on their engagement.
Political intimidator-extraordinaire Grover Norquist has sent John Kerry a cordial invitation to attend one of his infamous weekly Wednesday meetings. I guess Kerry's attendance, in these conservative minds, would be akin to Bush attending an NAACP function (which Bush, of course, has refused to do).
Sincere congratulations go out to Grover and Samah on their engagement.
Krugman vs. O'Reilly
Krugman vs. O'Reilly
Thanks to Jim Gilliam, we have reels of the intelligent Paul Krugman facing off with the anti-intellectual "just-shut-up-you're-stupid" Bill O'Reilly at CNBC/Tim Russert.
(You'll need Quicktime in order to view them).
"This is not your show..you can't cut my mike."
--Paul Krugman to Bill O'Reilly
Here are a few of O'Reilly's fantastic Foxworld comments about his network:
"Colmes is a liberal( please!). Van Susteren is a liberal.(zzzzz) Shepard Smith is really nothing. (hmm-maybe he's right). We put more liberals on the air than conservatives (Bwah!). There are no talking points (see Outfoxed)."
Watch O'Reilly go nuts at the very mention of Media Matters. It's priceless. He compares Media Matters to the Ku Klux Klan.
Jim--a tip o'the hat to you. Thanks.
________
Popeye vs. Einstein
Here are my comments to Jim Gilliam's website:
Geez, turn down your speakers when O'Reilly bellows from the depths of his echoing "traditionalist" body cavern at the mention of "Media Matters". Ear plugs may be required.
I recommend ear plugs for most of O'Reilly's rantings. He fantasizes that if you don't agree with him you're a Commie elitist or a soft wimp or some other bullcrap generalization.
I watch him with the same expectations I'd have watching WWF. If someone chooses to enter his wrestling ring, they set themselves up for an anti-intellectual body-slamming, which only sates the bloodthirsty crowd.
I often wonder why any self-respecting liberal would grace his entertainment show and why Russert would even bother to give him the status he doesn't deserve by asking him to debate someone like Krugman. It's like watching Popeye debate Einstein. All Popeye's got is his can o'spinach. What fun is that?
Thanks to Jim Gilliam, we have reels of the intelligent Paul Krugman facing off with the anti-intellectual "just-shut-up-you're-stupid" Bill O'Reilly at CNBC/Tim Russert.
(You'll need Quicktime in order to view them).
"This is not your show..you can't cut my mike."
--Paul Krugman to Bill O'Reilly
Here are a few of O'Reilly's fantastic Foxworld comments about his network:
"Colmes is a liberal( please!). Van Susteren is a liberal.(zzzzz) Shepard Smith is really nothing. (hmm-maybe he's right). We put more liberals on the air than conservatives (Bwah!). There are no talking points (see Outfoxed)."
Watch O'Reilly go nuts at the very mention of Media Matters. It's priceless. He compares Media Matters to the Ku Klux Klan.
Jim--a tip o'the hat to you. Thanks.
Popeye vs. Einstein
Here are my comments to Jim Gilliam's website:
Geez, turn down your speakers when O'Reilly bellows from the depths of his echoing "traditionalist" body cavern at the mention of "Media Matters". Ear plugs may be required.
I recommend ear plugs for most of O'Reilly's rantings. He fantasizes that if you don't agree with him you're a Commie elitist or a soft wimp or some other bullcrap generalization.
I watch him with the same expectations I'd have watching WWF. If someone chooses to enter his wrestling ring, they set themselves up for an anti-intellectual body-slamming, which only sates the bloodthirsty crowd.
I often wonder why any self-respecting liberal would grace his entertainment show and why Russert would even bother to give him the status he doesn't deserve by asking him to debate someone like Krugman. It's like watching Popeye debate Einstein. All Popeye's got is his can o'spinach. What fun is that?
Quote of The Day-Fareed Zakaria
Quote of The Day-Fareed Zakaria
"..it's widely understood in the business world that having a good objective means nothing if you implement it badly."
--Fareed Zakaria from Why Kerry Is Right on Iraq, Newsweek
"..it's widely understood in the business world that having a good objective means nothing if you implement it badly."
--Fareed Zakaria from Why Kerry Is Right on Iraq, Newsweek
George Bush-Take That Ad Off The Air
George Bush-Take That Ad Off The Air
MoveOnPAC is going to air a new TV ad in the swing states where the Swift Boat defamers are airing their own Kerry-bashing ad. MoveOn is exposing the fact that Bush (with his own weak wartime service record) has refused to condemn the misleading commercials...allowing false advertising that attacks John Kerry, a man who asked to go to Vietnam and who served with dignity and heroism.
MoveOn thinks Bush should pay the political price for his refusal to condemn the dreadful attacks.
It's going to be a pretty hefty price if the MoveOn ads are effective. Almost everyone I speak to in my own little town--- old/young, conservative/independent/liberal--- thinks the Swift Boat ads are rotten.
__________
C-SPAN provides a video of John Kerry's 1971 appearance on the Dick Cavett Show where Kerry debates the Vietnam War with John O'Neill. O'Neill is the author of the book attacking Kerry's integrity titled "Unfit for Command".
MoveOnPAC is going to air a new TV ad in the swing states where the Swift Boat defamers are airing their own Kerry-bashing ad. MoveOn is exposing the fact that Bush (with his own weak wartime service record) has refused to condemn the misleading commercials...allowing false advertising that attacks John Kerry, a man who asked to go to Vietnam and who served with dignity and heroism.
MoveOn thinks Bush should pay the political price for his refusal to condemn the dreadful attacks.
It's going to be a pretty hefty price if the MoveOn ads are effective. Almost everyone I speak to in my own little town--- old/young, conservative/independent/liberal--- thinks the Swift Boat ads are rotten.
C-SPAN provides a video of John Kerry's 1971 appearance on the Dick Cavett Show where Kerry debates the Vietnam War with John O'Neill. O'Neill is the author of the book attacking Kerry's integrity titled "Unfit for Command".
John Kerry: Cincinnati VFW Speech
John Kerry: Cincinnati VFW Speech
"I will wage war with the lessons I've learned in war..and those lessons run deep."
"Strength is more than tough words," said John Kerry today in his speech to the VFW Convention in Cincinnati, Ohio.
Senator Kerry said that "we didn't have to become a divided nation" after 9/11, yet we did.
"I know what I have to do in Iraq", he said as he explained we need international allies' wide support in order to steer our troops safely home.
"I will wage war with the lessons I've learned in war..and those lessons run deep."
Kerry asked: "What is our long term strategy to make America safer?" (TRANSCRIPT).
About the troops, Kerry said, "Never send them into battle withouit a plan to win the peace. That is essential."
He recommended 40,000 new troops (not in Iraq) but to relieve the pressure of the overtrstretch of the U.S. armed forces today. He said the "backdoor draft" must end.
"We need to do everything we can to avoid another 9/11." Kerry said that "winning the war on terror demands a team effort", working cooperatively with other nations to secure good intelligence. About terrorists, he said that "we need to get them before they get us".
He called upon Congress to create a central national intelligence director.
Long term success demands the use of national power, international cooperation, intelligence, economic policy, diplomacy, homeland defense...and more.
"I will fight a smarter and a more effective war on terror," he said.
He stressed the use of principles as well as firepower.
He said question for November is not simply "Who will lead America?", but also, "Will America continue to lead the world?"
Kerry stated this is not the right time to redeploy 70,000 troops as Bush has recommended. He went as far as to say that the redeployment was hasty and could be dangerous, especially the redployment of 12,000 troops from South Korea.
___________
Before John Kerry got to the podium, the RNC had their uber negative attack machine in gear.
The RNC pulled out young Kerry's (circa 1971) criticism of the VFW and American Legion: "We will not quickly join those who march on Veterans Day waving small flags, calling to memory those thousands who died for the 'greater glory of the United States.' ... We will not readily join the American Legion and the Veterans of Foreign Wars." (as the Washington Times was happy to report).
Consider the reality of the Viet Nam conflict and its dreadful politics and it's not hard to understand how an incredibly intelligent young man who had fought in Viet Nam would have been disillusioned and confused about taking pride in what he'd had to do.
I respect young Kerry's confusion and disillusionment a hell of a lot more than George W. Bush never acknowledging that he wanted to avoid fighting in Vietnam altogether.
After having seen the speech, I don't think any vet in that Cincinnati audience today left with the impression that John Kerry didn't have the utmost respect for them and/or the deepest love for his country.
When he said "I will wage war with the lessons I've learned in war..and those lessons run deep," there was no question about what he meant.
They knew he was in-country back in the late 60s. A vet understand history better than you and me because he's faced the fire. I think they understand what John Kerry's talking about when he says he'll keep the faith with those who have served. It's a faith only a brother-in-arms might truly understand.
"I will wage war with the lessons I've learned in war..and those lessons run deep."
"Strength is more than tough words," said John Kerry today in his speech to the VFW Convention in Cincinnati, Ohio.
Senator Kerry said that "we didn't have to become a divided nation" after 9/11, yet we did.
"I know what I have to do in Iraq", he said as he explained we need international allies' wide support in order to steer our troops safely home.
"I will wage war with the lessons I've learned in war..and those lessons run deep."
Kerry asked: "What is our long term strategy to make America safer?" (TRANSCRIPT).
About the troops, Kerry said, "Never send them into battle withouit a plan to win the peace. That is essential."
He recommended 40,000 new troops (not in Iraq) but to relieve the pressure of the overtrstretch of the U.S. armed forces today. He said the "backdoor draft" must end.
"We need to do everything we can to avoid another 9/11." Kerry said that "winning the war on terror demands a team effort", working cooperatively with other nations to secure good intelligence. About terrorists, he said that "we need to get them before they get us".
He called upon Congress to create a central national intelligence director.
Long term success demands the use of national power, international cooperation, intelligence, economic policy, diplomacy, homeland defense...and more.
"I will fight a smarter and a more effective war on terror," he said.
He stressed the use of principles as well as firepower.
He said question for November is not simply "Who will lead America?", but also, "Will America continue to lead the world?"
Kerry stated this is not the right time to redeploy 70,000 troops as Bush has recommended. He went as far as to say that the redeployment was hasty and could be dangerous, especially the redployment of 12,000 troops from South Korea.
Before John Kerry got to the podium, the RNC had their uber negative attack machine in gear.
The RNC pulled out young Kerry's (circa 1971) criticism of the VFW and American Legion: "We will not quickly join those who march on Veterans Day waving small flags, calling to memory those thousands who died for the 'greater glory of the United States.' ... We will not readily join the American Legion and the Veterans of Foreign Wars." (as the Washington Times was happy to report).
Consider the reality of the Viet Nam conflict and its dreadful politics and it's not hard to understand how an incredibly intelligent young man who had fought in Viet Nam would have been disillusioned and confused about taking pride in what he'd had to do.
I respect young Kerry's confusion and disillusionment a hell of a lot more than George W. Bush never acknowledging that he wanted to avoid fighting in Vietnam altogether.
After having seen the speech, I don't think any vet in that Cincinnati audience today left with the impression that John Kerry didn't have the utmost respect for them and/or the deepest love for his country.
When he said "I will wage war with the lessons I've learned in war..and those lessons run deep," there was no question about what he meant.
They knew he was in-country back in the late 60s. A vet understand history better than you and me because he's faced the fire. I think they understand what John Kerry's talking about when he says he'll keep the faith with those who have served. It's a faith only a brother-in-arms might truly understand.
Norm Coleman Misleads on Jon Stewart's Show
Norm Coleman Misleads on Jon Stewart's Daily Show
I saw Minnesota Senator Norm Coleman totally mislead people last night on Jon Stewart's Daily Show. When Jon Stewart asked Coleman if it was true that a Rio Rancho, New Mexico audience for a recent Cheney-rally had to sign loyalty pledges in order to be admitted, Coleman said it wasn't true at all and it was a rumor started by "those 527s".
That was either a lie or a gross prejudice on Coleman's part.
It was in the news.
I saw Minnesota Senator Norm Coleman totally mislead people last night on Jon Stewart's Daily Show. When Jon Stewart asked Coleman if it was true that a Rio Rancho, New Mexico audience for a recent Cheney-rally had to sign loyalty pledges in order to be admitted, Coleman said it wasn't true at all and it was a rumor started by "those 527s".
That was either a lie or a gross prejudice on Coleman's part.
It was in the news.
China warns Bush to follow international law
China warns Bush to follow international law
Beijing spokesman Kong Quan from China is warning Washington not to send the "wrong signal" to the East Turkestan terrorist force by releasing Guantanamo Bay detainees (from the autonomous Xinjiang region) to a random third country (vs. returning them to the Chinese government).
China's treatment of terrorists has been tough (as tough on terror as Bush has been), and I don't see where Bush would have the lawful (or the moral) authority to ignore China's request to get them back once they're released from Guantanamo. The Chinese have supported our war on terror thus far because they have seen that resistance to their own Chinese rule is led and fanned by Muslim extremists, usually egged on from outside China's borders.
Let's hope Bush doesn't decide to flip the bird to the rule of law and get China's feathers all ruffled. It's not the time to create tensions with foreign nations we need as allies fighting against terror. This is one of those sensitive issues where I have learned, from experience, to have shaken faith in Bush's possible reaction.
Beijing spokesman Kong Quan from China is warning Washington not to send the "wrong signal" to the East Turkestan terrorist force by releasing Guantanamo Bay detainees (from the autonomous Xinjiang region) to a random third country (vs. returning them to the Chinese government).
China's treatment of terrorists has been tough (as tough on terror as Bush has been), and I don't see where Bush would have the lawful (or the moral) authority to ignore China's request to get them back once they're released from Guantanamo. The Chinese have supported our war on terror thus far because they have seen that resistance to their own Chinese rule is led and fanned by Muslim extremists, usually egged on from outside China's borders.
Let's hope Bush doesn't decide to flip the bird to the rule of law and get China's feathers all ruffled. It's not the time to create tensions with foreign nations we need as allies fighting against terror. This is one of those sensitive issues where I have learned, from experience, to have shaken faith in Bush's possible reaction.
Albany Mosque Evidence Flawed?
Albany Mosque Evidence Flawed?
It's said there are possible flaws in a key piece of evidence in the recent case against two leaders of an Albany, New York, mosque accused of supporting terrorism. The error concerns a possible incorrect translation of one particular word. The word translators mistook for "commander" may have actually merely meant "brother". One of the accused men's attorneys has said it looks as if his client has been "framed". [LINK]
It's said there are possible flaws in a key piece of evidence in the recent case against two leaders of an Albany, New York, mosque accused of supporting terrorism. The error concerns a possible incorrect translation of one particular word. The word translators mistook for "commander" may have actually merely meant "brother". One of the accused men's attorneys has said it looks as if his client has been "framed". [LINK]
Don't stay the failing course in Iraq
Don't stay the failing course in Iraq
"Withdrawal [from Iraq] would be a blow to American credibility, but less so if it were deliberate and abrupt rather than a retreat under fire imposed by surging antiwar sentiments at home. (See Vietnam.)"
--Edward Luttwak, Time to Quit Iraq (Sort Of) , N.Y.Times op-ed
"Withdrawal [from Iraq] would be a blow to American credibility, but less so if it were deliberate and abrupt rather than a retreat under fire imposed by surging antiwar sentiments at home. (See Vietnam.)"
--Edward Luttwak, Time to Quit Iraq (Sort Of) , N.Y.Times op-ed
Tuesday, August 17, 2004
A Rock Star Speaks Up for Kerry
A Rock Star Speaks Up for Kerry
I should probably talk about the swing state shows because a number of you have commented on that. The truth is we were asked to headline a set of the shows ourselves and I turned it down. This was a really tough decision for me because I happen to think this is an important moment in American history. I just couldn't do it though. I can't take another day out on the road right now....
I will tell you how I feel however. I know a lot of you get all incensed at the thought of some musician spewing out his political opinions at you. I don't care anymore.
People who don't listen to what other intelligent people have to say are simply ignorant people.
I am going to be voting for Senator Kerry. I feel that he is a serious intelligent man who will deal with the problems we are facing in a thoughtful manner. These are complex problems. They demand complex solutions. I am not one of those people who believes President Bush is an evil man. I think that's silly. I just think he views the world in terms too simplistic to combat the actual problems we are facing. And I think he puts his trust in men who view politics as a means of retaining power rather than actually solving problems.
I don't think we need people who "act tough" and project themselves as "leadership types". Leadership is not about aping John Wayne. When did it become a presidential quality to be a "regular guy"? When did intellectualism become a dirty word? I want a president who's smarter than me.
It's not enough for him to seem like a great guy to have at a BBQ.
The media would have you believe these men are good or evil or cool or uncool. They want to paint these men as trying to pull the wool over your eyes. They want you to think the people who don't agree with you are hicks or elitists or soft or tough or a million other bullshit generalizations that miss the point that these are all Americans just like you and me. We are a vast nation of many different types of people.
The other guy may not agree with everything you believe but you will never understand him if you write him off the way the media does.
I am voting for John Kerry for president. I hope you will too. If you want to convince someone to change their mind, you have to first try to understand why they believe the things they do. Reduce them to a generalization and you will never accomplish anything. That said, Rush Limbaugh is still a f**king moron.
--Adam Duritz/Counting Crows
I should probably talk about the swing state shows because a number of you have commented on that. The truth is we were asked to headline a set of the shows ourselves and I turned it down. This was a really tough decision for me because I happen to think this is an important moment in American history. I just couldn't do it though. I can't take another day out on the road right now....
I will tell you how I feel however. I know a lot of you get all incensed at the thought of some musician spewing out his political opinions at you. I don't care anymore.
People who don't listen to what other intelligent people have to say are simply ignorant people.
I am going to be voting for Senator Kerry. I feel that he is a serious intelligent man who will deal with the problems we are facing in a thoughtful manner. These are complex problems. They demand complex solutions. I am not one of those people who believes President Bush is an evil man. I think that's silly. I just think he views the world in terms too simplistic to combat the actual problems we are facing. And I think he puts his trust in men who view politics as a means of retaining power rather than actually solving problems.
I don't think we need people who "act tough" and project themselves as "leadership types". Leadership is not about aping John Wayne. When did it become a presidential quality to be a "regular guy"? When did intellectualism become a dirty word? I want a president who's smarter than me.
It's not enough for him to seem like a great guy to have at a BBQ.
The media would have you believe these men are good or evil or cool or uncool. They want to paint these men as trying to pull the wool over your eyes. They want you to think the people who don't agree with you are hicks or elitists or soft or tough or a million other bullshit generalizations that miss the point that these are all Americans just like you and me. We are a vast nation of many different types of people.
The other guy may not agree with everything you believe but you will never understand him if you write him off the way the media does.
I am voting for John Kerry for president. I hope you will too. If you want to convince someone to change their mind, you have to first try to understand why they believe the things they do. Reduce them to a generalization and you will never accomplish anything. That said, Rush Limbaugh is still a f**king moron.
--Adam Duritz/Counting Crows
Convention Protesters Gear Up-NYC Prepares
Convention Protesters Gear Up-NYC Prepares
Read about the Republican Convention sideshow here at WP.
Did you know that a group of labor activists plan to stage the world's longest unemployment line, from Wall Street to 31st Street and Madison Square Garden, on Sept. 1? The line will form at 8:13 a.m. and dissolve at 8:31 a.m.
Read about the Republican Convention sideshow here at WP.
Did you know that a group of labor activists plan to stage the world's longest unemployment line, from Wall Street to 31st Street and Madison Square Garden, on Sept. 1? The line will form at 8:13 a.m. and dissolve at 8:31 a.m.
Looking forward-Looking back
Looking forward-Looking back
As the GOP Convention draws near, I wanted to bring a six-month posting of mine back to light. Time has a way of ripening a pundit's thoughts, proving him/her a sage or a fool. Retrospection gives us all a new perspective and creates a straighter path to the future. Please read this dead-of-winter blogpost and give me any thoughts you have on the subject. Don't be shy.
As the GOP Convention draws near, I wanted to bring a six-month posting of mine back to light. Time has a way of ripening a pundit's thoughts, proving him/her a sage or a fool. Retrospection gives us all a new perspective and creates a straighter path to the future. Please read this dead-of-winter blogpost and give me any thoughts you have on the subject. Don't be shy.
Oil up to 47 bucks a barrel
Oil up to 47 bucks a barrel
Yukos took a turn for the worse Tuesday and oil prices are up to a record $47 bucks a barrel. The fighting between U.S. troops and Shiite militants intensified in Iraq. Saudi Arabians have said said they could immediately pump an additional 1.3 million barrels per day, but that doesn't seem to be calming nervous investors. At least the Venezuelan situation has not added fire to the fuel...I mean..fuel to the fire.
Yukos took a turn for the worse Tuesday and oil prices are up to a record $47 bucks a barrel. The fighting between U.S. troops and Shiite militants intensified in Iraq. Saudi Arabians have said said they could immediately pump an additional 1.3 million barrels per day, but that doesn't seem to be calming nervous investors. At least the Venezuelan situation has not added fire to the fuel...I mean..fuel to the fire.
Kerry:Troop withdrawal may undercut alliances
Kerry: Troop withdrawal may undercut alliances
John Kerry is expected to claim that the withdrawal of troops from Europe and Asia threatens to undercut alliances and weakens America's ability to project its power overseas.
Wesley Clark sees the withdrawl plan as a 'strategic mistake' while we're at a stand-off with a dangerous foe in North Korea and since European bases serve as “anchor points” for dealing with potential security threats in Africa, the Middle East and the Caucasus.
A message about bringing troops home is always a positive-sounding idea, but what will we use them for once they come back? Will they be shipped off to Iraq in 2006? Will they be on tap for more unnecessary unilateral strikes on nations that pose no imminent threat to us?
John Kerry is expected to claim that the withdrawal of troops from Europe and Asia threatens to undercut alliances and weakens America's ability to project its power overseas.
Wesley Clark sees the withdrawl plan as a 'strategic mistake' while we're at a stand-off with a dangerous foe in North Korea and since European bases serve as “anchor points” for dealing with potential security threats in Africa, the Middle East and the Caucasus.
A message about bringing troops home is always a positive-sounding idea, but what will we use them for once they come back? Will they be shipped off to Iraq in 2006? Will they be on tap for more unnecessary unilateral strikes on nations that pose no imminent threat to us?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)