No Mas(k)!

I can't take anymore.

A man wearing a John Kerry T-shirt and President Bush mask at an election office was charged with disorderly conduct for breaking a law that bans campaigning outside polling places, police said.

Kevin Dodds also was charged with the seldom-invoked crime of wearing a mask. A Georgia law aimed at the Ku Klux Klan makes it illegal to wear masks except on "holidays and special occasions."

The case started Friday, the last day of Georgia's early voting period, when Dodds' wife went to vote accompanied by an infant wearing a Kerry-Edwards shirt. Poll workers asked the woman to turn the child's shirt inside out so she could remain and vote, but she allegedly refused and left.

Later that day, Kevin Dodds went to the polling place saying he wanted to protest the objection to the baby's shirt. A police report said Dodds stood outside screaming, sometimes using foul language, and refused requests to take off his mask.

When Dodds, 35, was arrested, he "reeked of alcohol," said police Sgt. Chris Robinson.

Poll workers didn't get his wife's name. A phone call to a listing for Kevin and Susan Dodds was not immediately returned.

State law prohibits campaigning within 150 feet of a polling site. Signs outside polling places explain the law, which even bans voters from wearing stickers promoting a candidate.

All the charges are misdemeanors, punishable by up to a year in jail and a $1,000 fine.

One Nation Under A Fool

The obsession the Bush camp has with "supporters only" pep rallies is worrying me to death! A normal candidate, particularly an incumbent, should be trying to garner all of the votes they can. They have gone through such great lengths to eject detractors or those who may ask a question that he won't like that it sounds like he is not really concerned with getting new supporters. It sounds like he is trying to brainwash the ones he already has. Tell me this verbal pledge isht isn't scary?

"I want you to stand, raise your right hands," and recite "the Bush Pledge," said Florida state Sen. Ken Pruitt. The assembled mass of about 2,000 in this Treasure Coast town about an hour north of West Palm Beach dutifully rose, arms aloft, and repeated after Pruitt: "I care about freedom and liberty. I care about my family. I care about my country. Because I care, I promise to work hard to re-elect, re-elect George W. Bush as president of the United States."

They froth at the mouth if you make the Hitler comparisons but something is definitely afoul. I hope against all hopes that I am just being paranoid but this has been nagging me ever since I read about the first incident of the loyalty oath.

Mr. Bin Laden I Presume?

I was starting to think that Osama had succumbed to some illness or that he'd been secretly captured. But, just in time for the election, the nefarious OBL reappears on video - this time, it seems, just to F' with the Dubya. Bush has been getting some pretty nifty endorsements from 'the enemies' recently. But Osama shows up on a dime to yank our fearless leader's chain. It would almost be funny if there wasn't so much at stake. Kerry won't be able to fix this. We will be in a blood feud for generations to come:

"'God knows that it had not occurred to our mind to attack the towers, but after our patience ran out and we saw the injustice and inflexibility of the American-Israeli alliance toward our people in Palestine and Lebanon, this came to my mind,' he said.

Bin Laden suggested Bush was slow to react to the Sept. 11 attacks, giving the hijackers more time than they expected. At the time of the attacks, the president was listening to schoolchildren in Florida reading a book.

'It never occurred to us that the commander-in-chief of the American armed forces would leave 50,000 of his citizens in the two towers to face these horrors alone,' he said, referring to the number of people who worked at the World Trade Center.

'It appeared to him (Bush) that a little girl's talk about her goat and its butting was more important than the planes and their butting of the skyscrapers. That gave us three times the required time to carry out the operations, thank God,' he said."

What the heck! I do have to laugh. Even OBL won't cut Bush a break over that damned goat story!

Private Party 2

Okay, gotta laugh! He had all of his good little negroes rounded up and put in a corral before a rally. (link via oliverwills.com)

"Bush walks into a curtained off area to meet with African American leaders, before a rally in the Silverdome in Pontiac, Michigan October 27, 2004. (African American leaders?)"

When did Don King become an "African American" leader?

Has Anybody Here Seen My Friend Jesus?

Somewhere in this blog, I know I've mentioned that I grew up in the Catholic Church and school system. Save my last two years in high school, I went K thru college. I've never considered myself to be a religious person but one with a strong spiritual foundation. From the very beginning, charity and compassion were the core and the song "They'll know we are Christians by our love" still runs through my head every now and then. That's what I thought it was all about. According to some, I was wrong.

More so than I can ever remember (including the time of the moral majority during the Reagan years), religion is playing a huge part in politics and in this election. The people who are making it such an issue make me wonder if I was asleep during my entire childhood and young adult life because the God and Jesus that George W. Bush's conservative Christian base rant and rave about bears no resemblance to the son of God that I remember learning about. The fire, brimstone, judgment and claim to a man that I thought was in everyone's heart and soul is so far beyond who I know that I'm convinced that there must have been another Jesus. These people have decided who loves Jesus more, who Jesus loves, who can be a Christian, who knows the bible, who is going to heaven, who is evil ...

When I read opinions like the ones on this site (via debwire), where this Christian questions whether "liberals" can even be Christian, I just feel sad. According to people like her, not only am I not Christian, it is impossible for me to be because of my political views - though using the standards they use, I don't want to be.

This article, however is reminiscent of what I thought I knew about Jesus. Alas, this author is no longer a Christian either.

Let me tell you about the Christ I know. He was born poor to an unmarried woman. He was not born into a family of privilege. He was a radical. He said, "It was said an eye for and eye and a tooth of a tooth, but now I say love your enemies and bless those who curse you." He said, "Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. Blessed are those who mourn for they shall be comforted. Blessed are the meek, for they shall inherit the earth. Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called the children of God." (Matthew 5: 3-9) He said, "All those who are called by my name will enter the kingdom of heaven." He said, "People will know true believers if they have the fruit of the spirit--love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, gentleness, self control."

He knew he would be led like a sheep to the slaughter. He responded with "Father forgive them." He explained that in Christ there is neither Jew nor gentile, slave or free male nor female. He explained that even to be angry is akin to murder. He said the temple of God is not a building, but is in the hearts of those are called by his name. He was called "the Prince of Peace." His final days were spent in prayer, so that he could endure what was set before him, not on how he could overpower the evil government of that day. When they came for him he was led away and didn’t resist his death sentence.

This is a stark contrast to the call of the religious Christian right, who vote for war and weapons, and suggest towns and villages be leveled to bring freedom and peace to the people. They proudly boast this country’s superiority, suggesting God has blessed our nation. Today, as I listened to a popular Christian news network, I was reminded that in the last days, even God's elect will be deceived, (II Timothy 3:13). When the religious media moguls preaching prosperity spout their rhetoric, I am reminded of the difficulty Jesus described of a rich man's ability to enter the kingdom of God. (Matthew 19: 24) (http://www.4religious-right.info/rr_economics.htm) Some who believe they are fighting evil will cry to the Lord, and he will say I never knew you. (Matthew 22). They will have a form or godliness but will deny the power (II Timothy 3:5) to move mountains through prayer. (Matthew 17:20). Jesus explained that he has not given us a spirit of fear, but a spirit of power, love, and a sound mind. (II Timothy 1:17) I wonder if the innocent moms and dads, brothers and sisters, and aunts and uncles, and grandmas and grandpas who were the victims of US military weapons (the never reported collateral damages we are protected from in the "liberal" nightly news) felt the love of Jesus with the shock and awe. I wonder if the surviving family members now understand His radical love and that they no longer have any need for weapons or defense.

In a matter of days, we will elect a new president. I am hoping to get the Whitehouse back into the hands of a sane and competent leader. I am also hoping that my Jesus comes back.

Yet Another Private Party

I'm still not getting this "supporters only" rule with the Bush campaign rallies. We are supposed to be teaching our children about democracy yet they are told they can only wear Bush paraphernalia or neutral attire? I guess I'll never know. Why is this allowed?

"The Bush-Cheney campaign rented the local high school and applied the divine right of kings - or at least one ill-prepared and inarticulate boy king - to what had been a public school. Richland Center students were informed that they could attend the audience with His Highness only if they donned approved apparel: a Bush for President T-shirt or so-called 'neutral clothing.' What they could not wear was any clothing that promoted the cause of any dissenter to the rule of King George.

If they showed up dressed inappropriately, students were warned, they would be removed from what was perhaps the biggest-ever event at their school.

What could justify such an abuse of the First Amendment rights of freedom of speech and assembly? The principal of Richland Center High School - whose boss, the superintendent of schools for the city, is the wife of Republican congressional candidate Dale Schultz - had no problem eliminating a few basic liberties because, as he put it, students were being given a rare opportunity to spend time in the presence of their king, er, president. The principal needs to review a few American history books.

The American Revolution was fought, in Paine's words, to 'establish a new social order.' Central to that new order's philosophy of being was the notion that every American must be endowed, as Jefferson explained, with 'the free right to the unbounded exercise of reason and freedom of opinion.'

That right was denied in Richland Center by the Bush "

Catching Up To Saddam

Part of the post-rationale for invading Iraq was bringing up the fact that Saddam Hussein had killed thousands of his own people. He was in power for decades. We have been there for 18 months. It seems to me that if we calculate the deaths on a per annum basis, we're very likely to surpass Saddam's death toll if we stay much longer.

"Deaths of Iraqis have soared to 100,000 above normal since the Iraq war mainly due violence and many of the victims have been women and children, public health experts from the United States said Thursday.

'Making conservative assumptions, we think that about 100,000 excess deaths, or more have happened since the 2003 invasion of Iraq,' researchers from Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health in Baltimore, Maryland said in a report published online by The Lancet medical journal.

'Violence accounted for most of the excess death and air strikes from (U.S.-led) coalition forces accounted for the most violent deaths,' the report added. "

Pro-war folks always toss up the "would you rather Saddam still be in power?" line when someone questions our damage, but given the numbers, I'm not seeing where our presence has really bought the Iraqis a better deal.

Bush Helps Wake Up Islam

Bush lost a number of allies but he ended up gaining some new ones. First he gets an endorsement from his "axis of evil" buddy: Iran. Now an alledged al Qaeda linked "terrorist" organization is giving him the nod too!

"We change and destroy countries,' the statement said. 'We even influence the international economy, and this is God's blessing to us.'

The statement tells American voters that Abu Hafs al-Masri supports the re-election campaign of President Bush: 'We are very keen that Bush does not lose the upcoming elections.'

The statement said Abu Hafs al-Masri needs what it called Bush's 'idiocy and religious fanaticism' because they would 'wake up' the Islamic world."

Go Georgie! It's your birthday!

Pro-Life, Pro-Poverty

I'll save my pro-choice speech for another time but I think this article explains why some women make the choice to have an abortion. Under the Bush administration, the abortion rate rose after years of steady decline:

"Enter George W. Bush in 2001. One would expect the abortion rate to continue its consistent course downward, if not plunge. Instead, the opposite happened.

I found three states that have posted multi-year statistics through 2003, and abortion rates have risen in all three: Kentucky's increased by 3.2% from 2000 to 2003. Michigan's increased by 11.3% from 2000 to 2003. Pennsylvania's increased by 1.9% from 1999 to 2002. I found 13 additional states that reported statistics for 2001 and 2002. Eight states saw an increase in abortion rates (14.6% average increase), and five saw a decrease (4.3% average decrease).

Under President Bush, the decade-long trend of declining abortion rates appears to have reversed. Given the trends of the 1990s, 52,000 more abortions occurred in the United States in 2002 than would have been expected before this change of direction. "

Joblessness and economic decline during Bush's term have left many women feeling as though they have no choice.

Mutiny On The Bushie

Over the past few days, Bush has been looking rather tired. I saw him on Good Morning America the other day and I almost felt sorry for him. He looked absolutely drained and defeated. The polls are generally close though I think Kerry's numbers are probably higher because I don't think they are polling the minorities and young people who are strong supporters. Many conservatives have criticized Bush but had vowed to stick by him. Lately, more and more newspapers have been endorsing Kerry - many of which supported Bush in 2000. The news has been bad for weeks both domestically and abroad. Iraq just seems to get worse and worse. Even Allawi is blaming the US for negligence. Now, it seems that American Conservative Magazine is having problems throwing the nod Bush's way. This article is just one of several that lead me to believe that even if George W. Bush does manage to eek out a victory, he will have a tough row to hoe once he gets re-installed:

Bush has behaved like a caricature of what a right-wing president is supposed to be, and his continuation in office will discredit any sort of conservatism for generations. The launching of an invasion against a country that posed no threat to the U.S., the doling out of war profits and concessions to politically favored corporations, the financing of the war by ballooning the deficit to be passed on to the nation’s children, the ceaseless drive to cut taxes for those outside the middle class and working poor: it is as if Bush sought to resurrect every false 1960s-era left-wing cliché about predatory imperialism and turn it into administration policy. Add to this his nation-breaking immigration proposal—Bush has laid out a mad scheme to import immigrants to fill any job where the wage is so low that an American can’t be found to do it—and you have a presidency that combines imperialist Right and open-borders Left in a uniquely noxious cocktail.

During the campaign, few have paid attention to how much the Bush presidency has degraded the image of the United States in the world. Of course there has always been “anti-Americanism.” After the Second World War many European intellectuals argued for a “Third Way” between American-style capitalism and Soviet communism, and a generation later Europe’s radicals embraced every ragged “anti-imperialist” cause that came along. In South America, defiance of “the Yanqui” always draws a crowd. But Bush has somehow managed to take all these sentiments and turbo-charge them. In Europe and indeed all over the world, he has made the United States despised by people who used to be its friends, by businessmen and the middle classes, by moderate and sensible liberals. Never before have democratic foreign governments needed to demonstrate disdain for Washington to their own electorates in order to survive in office. The poll numbers are shocking. In countries like Norway, Germany, France, and Spain, Bush is liked by about seven percent of the populace. In Egypt, recipient of huge piles of American aid in the past two decades, some 98 percent have an unfavorable view of the United States. It’s the same throughout the Middle East.

The other articles in this issue aren't any more positive. Pat Buchanan lends his support solely to display party loyalty - but only after giving Bush a serious analytic beat down. I must say, if Bush thought that being President was "hard work" during his first term, he'd better step down now if he has a problem with it getting anymore harder. His party will, most certainly, do an intervention before they let him continue in the manner that he has been.

Witches For Bush

Oh my! Here's a group I'll bet Karl Rove never considered courting:

There was never a moment when I had to adjust my way of thinking to accommodate either label. I was already a Republican and a witch—I just needed to discover the names for them.

I was 12 when I knew I was a Republican. Reared in a military family, I was brought up understanding the value of freedom and self-determination. I’ve come to believe that government entitlement programs are nothing more than a redistribution of wealth--which is socialism. Socialism is incompatible with capitalism and the American way of life. Winston Churchill once said that the inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of blessings; the inherent virtue of socialism is the equal sharing of miseries.

I realized I was a witch about ten years ago. When I was 27, I picked up a book that described Pagan/Wicca; the more I read the more amazed I became. I had been brought up Catholic, and I had even attended 12 years of Catholic school. I could never fully comprehend or agree with the Catholic beliefs I was taught. That experience left me with far more questions than answers.

Many things attracted me to witchcraft. I loved the individual empowerment. I didn't need a priest to act as go-between for me to find divinity. I loved that it taught responsibility for one's own actions. There was no absolution for acting improperly or doing wrong. Meanwhile, the union of male and female is the very power of creation that permeates our existence. Among Wiccans, that union is celebrated, instead of being hushed up. And we celebrate nature itself in all of its majestic wonder instead of trying to subdue it.

MOSH is #1

This is the number one requested video on MTV right now. Here is a link to the video as well as a review:

http://www.gnn.tv/content/eminem_mosh.html

This is exactly why they didn't want integration ... I wonder what Homeland Security is going to do to him?

News They Can Use

Not to say that I don't take a peek at al-Jazeera's English website from time to time but I see that American Arabs watch the station via satellite.

Kerry Puts His Catholic Faith into Action

If I haven't said it enough, I just can't stand religious posturing and proselytizing - particularly since my personal experience has been that those who preach the most have done the most devilment. John Kerry's pastor outlines why he feels that he is a true man of faith.

I offer just a few examples of Senator Kerry putting his faith into action:

• John Kerry has voted for every major Civil Rights bill to come before the Congress since 1985, including the Civil Rights Act of 1991, the Americans with Disabilities Act, and the Equal Rights Amendment. He has also voted to include sexual orientation in non-discrimination laws.
  
  
• The Psalms have been powerful inspiration to people of faith for thousands of years. In Psalm 34, we hear: The Lord hears the cry of the poor. Faithful followers also need to be attentive to the poor. John Kerry’s pledge to increase the minimum wage is evidence of his desire to assist people in lifting themselves from the lowest levels of poverty. He continues to seek tax relief for the middle class. In 2003, the Senator sponsored a bill to establish a National Housing Trust Fund to promote the construction of new, affordable rental units for low-income, working families. In 2000, he also supported the Global Debt Relief bill, which approved $225 million for third world debt relief.
  
  
• In the Gospels, we hear many stories of Jesus’ care and healing touch for those who are sick. Senator Kerry has continued to champion the poor and every citizen in his proposal for affordable, high quality health care for all. In addition, he voted against the final version of the Medicare Prescription Drug Act, which threatened employer-provided drug coverage for millions of retirees. He is the author of the most comprehensive HIV/AIDS bill ever to pass the Senate and understands that the HIV/AIDS epidemic has implications for the life and death of millions of men, women and children around the world as well as for the global economy and international security.
  
  
• Through his far-reaching commitment to the environment, John Kerry witnesses to his faith in the God of Genesis, the God who formed all of creation and saw that it is good. His many works in this area include authoring the Marine Mammal Protection Act Amendments of 1994, which banned the use of drift nets threatening dolphins and other marine life. He is the current co-sponsor of the Clean Power Act, designed to require utility companies to control multiple pollutants.
  
  
• In his letter to the Ephesians, St. Paul wrote that Christ is our peace; we who are baptized in Christ’s name must also work for peace. Senator Kerry has consistently opposed development and funding for new, more usable nuclear weapons. He has promised to enforce gun laws and close the gun show loophole and thus require background checks for all gun sales. He is also in favor of extending the assault weapons ban.
  
  
• In the Book of the Prophet Isaiah we read: "They shall beat their swords into plowshares and their spears into pruning hooks; One nation shall not raise the sword against another, nor shall they train for war again." Pope Paul VI said if "you want peace, work for justice." We are called as People of God to respect and collaborate with people of all nations. True peace is the fruit of justice. As Senator Kerry has made clear: "As President, I will not cede our security to any nation or institution--and adversaries will have no doubt of my resolve to use force if necessary--but I will always understand that even the only super-power on earth cannot succeed without cooperation and compromise with our friends and allies." Kerry’s dedication to ending the war in Iraq, as well as his oath only to send troops as a last measure, is a clear understanding of his deep and abiding faith.
  

Not only are Senator and Mrs. Heinz-Kerry regular members of the local church where I pastor, but I sincerely believe that their lives witness to the Catholic faith. Both of them have worked diligently to safeguard the environment. Mrs. Heinz-Kerry’s work with the Heinz Family Foundation, which benefits many of the poor, especially women, is a sign of her commitment to stewarding the resources with which she has been entrusted. And Senator Kerry, as a public servant---from service in the military to his work as a district attorney to his life as an elected official---has exemplified the Catholic ethic in seeking mercy and justice for all, and especially for the marginalized in society, for the poor, the sick, and those who are persecuted.

The very last person that I allowed to bend my ear about how holy they were ended up being pretty close to the opposite. One of my last statements to them was that it did not matter what one says if it doesn't match what one does. I am not sure that they ever quite got that. I don't think many people do. That, I think, is the difference between George Bush and John Kerry. Words vs Deeds.

Why Does Interim Prime Minister Allawi Hate America?

A good leader would never critcize a brave ally ... unless he gets the sense that a new ally is about to get elected. One can only hope ...

"Iraq's interim prime minister, Ayad Allawi, said today that 'negligence' by US-led forces brought about the massacre of 49 Iraqi soldiers and warned of further 'terrorist acts'.

'There was great negligence on the part of some coalition forces, ' Mr Allawi told Iraq's national assembly. 'It was a heinous crime where a group of national guards were targeted.'"

Foxnews Does Not Favor Bush

Okay. You can stop laughing. This man must not watch his own station. When the movie "Outfoxed" came out, I believe I watched Fox and Friends and one of the hosts basically acknowledged a bias and had the "so what?" attitude. They are NOT fair and balanced, they are there and biased. They toss in a few quiet, mild mannered democrats with their rabid pack of wolves and call it a draw. Puleese!

"We're not in the least bit biased, we're a fair and balanced company."

Mr Murdoch's comments will astonish critics of the notoriously right-wing television network, which was the subject of the controversial US documentary, Outfoxed: Rupert Murdoch's War on Journalism.
The film, which accused Fox News of abandoning traditional reporting values and ushering in an era of partisan news coverage, has become a cult classic, topping Amazon.com's list of bestselling DVDs.

It alleges presenters are encouraged to accentuate points that might be helpful to the Bush administration, and includes a claim from one former Fox contributor covering news from Iraq that he was ordered to 'keep it positive' and 'emphasise all the good we're doing'."

The Buzzards Are Swarming

Castro is getting up there in age and the US is just waiting for him to croak. His fall last week prompted more buzz about him and what will happen in Cuba upon his death.

We're blocking travel and money to the Island so Fidel decides to strike back:

"Five days after falling and fracturing a knee and an arm, Cuban President Fidel Castro appeared on television yesterday with his arm in a sling to announce Cuba will end circulation of the US dollar.
[...]
'The empire is determined to create more difficulties for us,' he said, referring to Bush administration steps to restrict travel and cash flows to the island nation.

A Central Bank decree said the dollar will no longer be accepted in shops as of November 8, when Cubans and foreigners will have to exchange them for a local currency with a 10 per cent commission. "

A friend of mine went to Cuba a few years ago and the consensus she found among the natives was that when Castro was gone, it wasn't a new government they feared but Miami Cubans coming back. Listening to chat on NPR about families in Miami wanting their old property back and that being first on the list if they ever got to go back, I'd say that Cuba is going to be a disaster and we will be caught right in the thick of it. Greed will prevail and the current residents will suffer greatly - not under communism but under blind capitalism.

The Oddest Couple Ever!

In the midst of all of my political diatribes, I do manage to sneak in a few guilty pleasures on the tube. This season, The Surreal Life moved to VH1 and it has me in stitches the entire time. I don't think they ever could have guessed what would happen when they stuck Brigitte Nielson (Sylvester Stallone's ex) in a house with Flavor Flave (Public Enemy) but the chemistry between those two is not only shocking but positively (and I do mean positively) insane. That show makes me laugh so hard that I cry. VH1 must agree because they are now shooting their very own show (along the lines of The Simple Life) that will air in January. It should be a classic!

More On The Delusional Mr. Bush

I'll admit, that many times I use my intuition over tangible evidence. If I get an eerie feeling about a person, I stay cautious until proven otherwise. I may choose something because of the way it makes me feel rather than how it appears. During a rough time where there don't appear to be a lot of options, I ride with my belief that "things always work out." However, I am not the President of The United States and am not entrusted with the well-being of millions of people. I wouldn't care if George Bush was Sylvia Browne, nobody voted for him to use his "instincts" after starting a global crisis. I think the man is off his rocker and, again, I am frightened!!!:

Forty democratic senators were gathered for a lunch in March just off the Senate floor. I was there as a guest speaker. Joe Biden was telling a story, a story about the president. "I was in the Oval Office a few months after we swept into Baghdad," he began, "and I was telling the president of my many concerns" -- concerns about growing problems winning the peace, the explosive mix of Shiite and Sunni, the disbanding of the Iraqi Army and problems securing the oil fields. Bush, Biden recalled, just looked at him, unflappably sure that the United States was on the right course and that all was well. '"Mr. President,' I finally said, 'How can you be so sure when you know you don't know the facts?"'

Biden said that Bush stood up and put his hand on the senator's shoulder. "My instincts," he said. "My instincts."

Biden paused and shook his head, recalling it all as the room grew quiet. "I said, 'Mr. President, your instincts aren't good enough!'"

More Coalition Of The Leaving

I didn't forget about Poland but I did forget about The Netherlands. BTW, like Poland, they are leaving too!:

"The Netherlands will pull its troops from Iraq in March after Dutch Defense Minister Henk Kamp turned down a request from the Iraqi government to extend their mandate there, Algemeen Dagblad said, citing Kamp.

Iraqi interim President Ayad Allawi asked Kamp to keep Dutch troops in the Southern province of Al Muthanna, where about 1,200 soldiers have been on a peace-keeping mission, after the end of the current mandate in mid-March, the paper said. Coalition troops also want Dutch soldiers to stay, it said.

The paper quoted Kamp as saying that the Dutch had already made a ``large effort'' in keeping its troops in Iraq for 20 months in March and wouldn't stay longer. It also cited Kamp as saying the security situation in Iraq had worsened since his previous visit to Baghdad last year and that he expected the U.S. to remain for ``years'' in Iraq."

Freedom Shots?

Are we sure this is safe? Flu shots from France? The French, afterall, "hate America" and were not "with us" on Iraq. Are we going to tell the public to line up for their freedom flu vaccines?:

" A French pharmaceutical company will supply 2.6 million extra anti-flu shots to help the United States cope with a vaccine shortage that has sparked public concern, a top US health official said on Tuesday.

Tommy Thompson, Health and Human Services Secretary for the United States, said Aventis-Pasteur, a division of French pharmaceutical giant Sanofi-Aventis, will raise the number of vaccines available in the US to 58 million in January."

I'm Frightened Part 2

Karen Hughes was the chosen one, this time around, charged with damage control for Pat Robertson's statement that Bush said there wouldn't be any casualties in the invasion of Iraq. The problem is that it means someone is lying. Now, who would that be? One of two men who talk to God directly (and one of them needs to pull God's coat tail and tell him to tell both of them the same stuff) or a woman whose job it is to spin the President's every move?

"White House and campaign advisers denied that Bush made the comment, with Karen Hughes saying, 'I don't believe that happened. He must have misunderstood or misheard it.'"

Honestly, even though she wasn't there, what else would she say? You cannot have that kind of lunacy being repeated to the masses. I guess Georgy won't be allowed to have company from Pat anymore. He's a tattletale.

I'm Frightened!

I guess I am preaching to the choir when I rant about how ridiculous I think George W. Bush is. I am not sure why Pat Robertson even needed to share his conversation with Dubya - especially since it makes him sound like a man who is totally out of touch with reality.

'And I warned him about this war. I had deep misgivings about this war, deep misgivings. And I was trying to say, 'Mr. President, you had better prepare the American people for casualties.' '

Robertson said the president then told him, 'Oh, no, we're not going to have any casualties.'"
[...]
Robertson, the televangelist who sought the Republican presidential nomination in 1988, said he wishes Bush would admit to mistakes made.

"I mean, the Lord told me it was going to be A, a disaster, and B, messy," Robertson said. "I warned him about casualties."

More than 1,100 U.S. troops have died in Iraq and another 8,000 troops have been wounded in the ongoing campaign, with the casualty toll significantly increasing in the last six months as the insurgency there has deepened.

Asked why Bush has refused to admit to mistakes on Iraq, Robertson said, "I don't know this politics game. You know, you can never say you were wrong because the opposition grabs onto it: 'See, he admitted he screwed up.' "

Yet, Robertson still thinks Bush is "blessed" by God. I think both of them are "touched" in the head.

Waaay Too Much Information

Why can't he just talk politics?:

"California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger said his speech backing president George W Bush at the Republican Convention in August resulted in a cold shoulder from his wife, Maria Shriver, a member of the famously Democratic Kennedy family.

'Well, there was no sex for 14 days,' Schwarzenegger told former White House Chief of Staff Leon Panetta in an on-stage conversation in front of 1000 people.

'Everything comes with side affects,' he said, drawing laughter from the crowd.

Panetta, a Democrat, had asked how Shriver, whose uncle was president John F Kennedy, had reacted to his partisan convention speech.
California is expected to support Democratic challenger John Kerry in the election in two weeks, and Schwarzenegger, who faces re-election in 2006, has been careful not to offend the majority Democratic voters in his state. "

Lions and Tigers and Bears

Oh My!

There just comes a point where you just have to say ENOUGH! Some people don't want to hear about Dick Cheney's gay daughter, I don't want to hear about terrorists, attacks, weapons or who has a big enough dick to handle the threat. That record has been on playing the Victrola in the basment and it is OLD! Bush, Cheney and who-some-ever else need to find a new meme.

"CARROLL, Ohio -- Vice President Dick Cheney on Tuesday evoked the possibility of terrorists bombing U.S. cities with nuclear weapons and questioned whether Sen. John Kerry could combat such a threat, which the vice president called a concept 'you've got to get your mind around.'

'The biggest threat we face now as a nation is the possibility of terrorists ending up in the middle of one of our cities with deadlier weapons than have ever before been used against us -- biological agents or a nuclear weapon or a chemical weapon of some kind to be able to threaten the lives of hundreds of thousands of Americans,' Cheney said.

'That's the ultimate threat. For us to have a strategy that's capable of defeating that threat, you've got to get your mind around that concept,' Cheney said."

No Agreed Definition My Azz

Why is it that this administration cannot seem to tell the truth about anything? I thought it was stupid enough that Bush wouldn't sign
plan to ensure women's rights around the globe but the excuse that they used was that there was "no agreed definition" for sexual rights. It turns out that is just a load of crap.

The World Health Organization has a very clear definition that I am sure his administration is aware of:

Sexual rights embrace human rights that are already recognized in national laws, international human rights documents and other consensus documents. These include the right of all persons, free of coercion, discrimination and violence, to:

• the highest attainable standard of health in relation to sexuality, including access to sexual and reproductive health care services;
  
• seek, receive and impart information in relation to sexuality;
  
• sexuality education;
  
• respect for bodily integrity;
  
• choice of partner;
  
• decide to be sexually active or not;
  
• consensual sexual relations;
  
• consensual marriage;
  
• decide whether or not, and when to have children;
  
• and pursue a satisfying, safe and pleasurable sexual life.
  

Exactly what part of this definition does Bushco take issue with? He certainly had no qualms about his own sexual rights when he had this exchange:

... at the 1988 Republican Convention, Hartford Courant associate editor David Fink struck up a conversation with George W. "When you're not talking politics," Fink asked the vice president's son, "what do you and [your father] talk about?"

"Pussy," George W. replied.

Liar! Loser! Hypocrite!

Freudian Slip or Showing His Hand?

A few months ago, I thought Bush was being inadvertantly truthful when he said that we could ever really win the war on terrorism. Before he corrected himself, I agreed that it will be a chronic problem for decades to come. Today, however, it looks like he slipped again (link via atrios) :

"He said that, after a debate with Kerry, 'I made it very plain. We will not have an all-volunteer army.' The crowd fell silent. 'WE WILL have an all-volunteer army,' Bush said, quickly catching himself. 'Let me restate that. We will not have a draft.'"

Another Bush Family Secret

George Bush has a twin brother that no one ever talks about.

Lynne Cheney Reconstructing History

I really cannot figure Lynne Cheney out. I know she is an exceptionally bright woman. From the profiles on she and her husband, it sounds like she was the intellectual of the two. But actions like this are just confusing. She is in an uproar because John Kerry mentioned her lesbian daughter during the debates as though he'd said something derogatory. She obviously has some issue with her very open daughter as she also went ballistic on Cokey Roberts in 2000 when she brought up the subject of Mary.

But, Lynne Cheney also wrote a novel in 1981 that focused not only on the women who helped pioneer the west but also had some pretty steamy erotica between the women. It doesn't make sense for her to a) be so sensitive about her daughter and b) be at odds with history books that include emphasis the contributions, fights and struggles of women throughout American history.

"One of the marks of authoritarian regimes is their effort to stop the spread of knowledge and free speech. In May 1933, Nazi sympathizers in Berlin burned 20,000 'degenerate' books, many of them written by Jews and anti-fascists such as Albert Einstein, Bertolt Brecht and Franz Kafka. Here at home, slaveholders were so frightened by the power of the word that throughout the antebellum South legislatures made it a crime to teach slaves to read and write.

Now, Lynne Cheney, Vice President Dick Cheney's wife and the former head of the National Endowment for the Humanities, has placed herself in the company of dictators and slaveholders. At her urging, the Education Department destroyed more than 300,000 copies of a booklet designed to help parents and children learn more about America's past. "
[...]
What was so horrible about the National Standards for History that any reference to them would merit the mass destruction of several hundred thousand volumes of knowledge? According to Cheney, the standards failed to recognize the achievements of America's traditional heroes and focused instead on the accomplishments of women, minorities and radicals such as Harriet Tubman, the former slave who helped found the Underground Railroad. As Cheney wrote in 1994, "We are a better people than the national standards indicate, and our children deserve to know it."

Cheney insisted that the standards focused too much on the negatives of the past, on the presence of such stains on our democratic legacy as the Ku Klux Klan and McCarthyism, and not enough on great heroic figures such as Paul Revere, Gen. Robert E. Lee and the Wright brothers.

What Cheney really opposes is the prominent place that "social history" has assumed over the last 30 years. Known among its practitioners as "history from the bottom up," social historians argue that American history has too often been taught as the history of famous white men, political parties and industrialists.

I'd say she's working through some real inner conflict. Most certainly that is her prerogative. But she needs to keep it out academia and education.

No Agreed Definition

What is wrong with this man? In yet another non-global effort George Bush decides that he cannot sign a statement endorsing a U.N. plan (adopted 10 years ago mind you) to ensure women's rights around the world. What, exactly, needs to be defined in "sexual rights?" A woman's right not to be raped? A woman's right not to have her body ripped apart by having multiple children? A right to protect herself from the raging effect of AIDS? This is just beyond ridiculous!

More than 250 global leaders in all fields including 85 heads of state and government — have signed a statement endorsing a U.N. plan adopted 10 years ago to ensure every woman's right to education, health care, and to make choices about childbearing. But President George W. Bush's administration refused to sign because the statement mentions "sexual rights."

It notes that in 1994 "the world's governments and civil society committed to an action plan to ensure universal access to reproductive health information and services, uphold fundamental human rights including sexual and reproductive rights, alleviate poverty, secure gender equality, and protect the environment."

While progress has been made, the statement says the world is facing an exponential increase in HIV/AIDS, a growing gap between rich and poor, persistently high death rates related to pregnancy and childbirth, and inadequate access to family planning services. It calls on the international community to fund and implement the goals of the conference, known as the ICPD.

[...]

The Bush administration responded only on Tuesday to organizers who had asked for the president's support.

In a letter to organizers of the statement, U.S. Deputy Assistant Secretary of State Kelly Ryan reaffirmed the U.S. commitment to "the goals and objectives" of the Cairo conference and "to the empowerment of women and the need to promote women's fullest enjoyment of universal human rights."

"The United States is unable, however, to endorse the `world leaders' statement on supporting the ICPD," Ryan said. "The statement includes the concept of `sexual rights,' a term that has no agreed definition in the international community, goes beyond what was agreed to at Cairo and is not a component of the ICPD."

Technically, the State Department is correct. The Cairo program of action states that women have the "right to make decisions concerning reproduction, free of discrimination, coercion and violence as expressed in human rights documents." But it doesn't specifically mention "sexual rights."

Sexual rights were specifically mentioned a year later, however, in the platform of action adopted by over 180 countries including the United States at the 1995 U.N. women's conference in Beijing.

That platform, which the United States also took a leading role in drafting, states: "The human rights of women include their right to have control over and decide freely and responsibly on matters related to their sexuality, including sexual and reproductive health, free of coercion, discrimination and violence."

At a news conference, Wirth and Obaid were asked whether the U.N. General Assembly was holding a commemoration of the Cairo platform on Thursday — not a review as it did five years ago — because of opposition to some provisions by the Bush administration, the Vatican and some Islamic states.

The Vatican, some Islamic states (Gee, I wonder what life is like for women in those states) and the Bush administration united against womens' sexual rights. You see the kinds of things Bush wants to get global about!

Do I Feel Safe?

Heck No! How on earth can I feel safe in a regular, unguarded environment when 2 suicide bombers can stroll on in to the most protected part of Baghdad and blow folks up?

"In an attack that punctured illusions of a haven in Baghdad, 10 people, including four American civilians, were killed Thursday when two explosions were set off inside the heavily controlled Green Zone in the center of the capital.

Witnesses said that at least one of the explosions was set off by a suicide bomber and that the second may have been as well. Neither American nor Iraqi government officials had any immediate explanation as to how the bombs were smuggled inside.

The attack, which struck a cafeteria known as the Green Zone Caf-I and a shopping bazaar, appeared to mark the first time that insurgents have infiltrated the heavily fortified area, which houses senior officials in the Iraqi government as well as the U.S. Embassy. "

If they can slither into the "Green Zone," they can get into anywhere. God help us if they start suicide bombing here. We wouldn't have a prayer.

Let Them Eat Education

Once again the pundits gave dubya credit for being better than he was before instead of being better than Kerry. Though everyone knows that, domestically, Bush has no legs to stand on, he has enough advisors that he should have been able to come up with some convincing BS about something.

What I found particularly disturbing is that he is totally out of touch with what being unemployed means in this economy. He kept mentioning funding for people to go to community college so that they can get a more competitive job. But, what he fails to mention or realize is that many people who are trained for jobs of the 21st century are seeing their hardwork, advanced degrees being lose its value because the jobs are being shipped overseas. How insulting is to tell a computer scientist or engineer with a PhD to go to "community college" to better themselves? What kind of a slap in the face is it for someone who has toiled in institutions of higher learning to be told to go learn a trade?

Bush doesn't have a clue! That became apparent when he touted his under funded "No Child Left Behind" program as the cure all for everything from current unemployment to raising the minimum wage.

I don't want to suggest that George Bush has an unhealthy fixation with children. All I know is, every time the going got tough in the debate last night, he dusted off the young'uns for a fresh go-round. While Kerry mopped the floor with Bush, wrung him out, hung him to dry, and then used him to buff said floor to a high-gloss wax finish, the president clung monomaniacally to a single mantra: education. For a C student who doesn't read the newspaper, George W. sure is big on education—and understandably so, given the apparently magical properties of his education policy. No Child Left Behind, which we thought was just a way of getting around funding schools by blaming the system's failure on teachers and children, turns out to be an all-powerful panacea, capable of solving problems completely unrelated to either education or childhood. Job creation? Reproductive rights? No problem. We've got NCLB!

The most egregious example of the education non-answer was after Schieffer's question about the fate of the minimum wage. After Kerry promised to fight "tooth and nail" to raise the wage from $5.15 to seven dollars, Bush ignored the question entirely, using his 90 seconds to muse about how the No Child Left Behind act is "really a jobs act when you think about it." Right, because the wee tots being educated now may someday grow up to have jobs—provided they don't starve to death in the interim because their parents have no jobs now. Gotta love a piece of social policy with a 20-year delay built in.

From The Debate: Excellent!

If I had been concerned about Kerry's "article of faith," this is what I would have wanted to hear:

SCHIEFFER: Sen. Kerry, a new question for you.

The New York Times reports that some Catholic archbishops are telling their church members that it would be a sin to vote for a candidate like you because you support a woman's right to choose an abortion and unlimited stem-cell research.

What is your reaction to that?

KERRY: I respect their views. I completely respect their views. I am a Catholic. And I grew up learning how to respect those views. But I disagree with them, as do many.

I believe that I can't legislate or transfer to another American citizen my article of faith. What is an article of faith for me is not something that I can legislate on somebody who doesn't share that article of faith.

I believe that choice is a woman's choice. It's between a woman, God and her doctor. And that's why I support that.

Now, I will not allow somebody to come in and change Roe v. Wade.

The president has never said whether or not he would do that. But we know from the people he's tried to appoint to the court he wants to.

I will not. I will defend the right of Roe v. Wade.

Now, with respect to religion, you know, as I said, I grew up a Catholic. I was an altar boy. I know that throughout my life this has made a difference to me.

And as President Kennedy said when he ran for president, he said, "I'm not running to be a Catholic president. I'm running to be a president who happens to be Catholic."

My faith affects everything that I do, in truth. There's a great passage of the Bible that says, "What does it mean, my brother, to say you have faith if there are no deeds? Faith without works is dead."

And I think that everything you do in public life has to be guided by your faith, affected by your faith, but without transferring it in any official way to other people.

That's why I fight against poverty. That's why I fight to clean up the environment and protect this earth.

That's why I fight for equality and justice. All of those things come out of that fundamental teaching and belief of faith.

But I know this, that President Kennedy in his inaugural address told all of us that here on Earth, God's work must truly be our own. And that's what we have to -- I think that's the test of public service.

Can You Hear Me Now? Got Pills?

George Bush is one slithering SOB. It is bad enough that he tossed out that Dred Scott reference during the debates last week. That went over the average person's head and wrote him off as being stupid for saying that he wouldn't vote to bring back slavery. He was really assuring right wing pro-lifers that he'd appoint judges who would overturn Roe v. Wade.

Even the people I know who claim to be leaning towards being pro-life are proponents of contraception and effective family planning. But, what these same folks don't realize is that not only is he anti-abortion, without exception, he is also anti-contraception.

No one who paid attention to the May scuffle over emergency contraception should be surprised. After all, Bush stacked the Food and Drug Administration's scientific panels with appointees who succeeded in blocking the drug from becoming available over the counter. His appointees to the FDA Reproductive Health Drugs Advisory Committee weren't just religious conservatives, they were among a fringe minority of religious conservatives who object to certain kinds of contraception, insisting they're forms of abortion.

For instance, Joseph B. Stanford, a Utah physician Bush appointed to the FDA committee, refuses to prescribe the birth control pill, saying it's "incompatible with Christian values." As Stanford—and the "Human Life Amendment" plank of the Republican Party platform—would have it, pregnancy, and life, begin when a sperm and egg meet. Thus, the IUD, the birth control pill, the patch, the vaginal ring, and other hormonal contraceptive methods become objectionable because they either can or are designed to work after fertilization.

Bush started his term by removing a budget provision that required some insurance companies serving federal employees to cover contraception. Then federal National Institutes of Health and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention removed fact sheets about sex education and the effectiveness of condoms from their websites. Bush went on to cut funds for family planning throughout his time in office while pouring money into "abstinence-only" education, which forbids frank discussion of birth control. For the past three years, Bush has withheld $34 million for international family planning from the United Nations Population Fund. Meanwhile, he is promising to increase abstinence funding, already at record levels, and to insist that nearly one-third of domestic funding for HIV/AIDS be spent on abstinence.

The president has installed several far-right conservatives to wage the war against contraception. He appointed Tom Coburn, a former Republican congressman who has opposed condom use, as co-chair of the Presidential Advisory Council on HIV and AIDS. Dr. W. David Hager, another Bush appointee to the FDA reproductive health panel, is a former spokesperson for the Christian Medical Association and co-author of a book that recommends scripture reading and prayers for various ailments.

Sadly, the "prayer method" doesn't work very well when it comes to preventing pregnancies—an idea not lost on voters. When the advocacy group NARAL Pro-Choice America conducted focus groups in swing states, female voters between 18 and 39 said that the single most convincing election message about choice is that the next president will make a range of decisions that affect not only abortion, but also birth control. Yet most in the focus groups were unaware of Bush's record on contraception.

Wake up people! I am not about to live the rest of my life under the American Taliban without a fight!

Bill O'Reilly Hit With Sexual Harassment Suit

Did I not just post yesterday about some egomaniac preaching values and virtue all while behaving exactly like the people he's been bashing? So now, Mr. "Snoop Dog cannot be on The Muppets and Ludacris cannot sell Pepsi because of their perverse images", seems to have a penchant for a few deviant acts himself. This woman sounds savvy enough to have kept good records. I'll try to give the benefit of the doubt. But I've been waiting for this boom to drop:

"OCTOBER 13--Hours after Bill O'Reilly accused her of a multimillion dollar shakedown attempt, a female Fox News producer fired back at the TV star today, filing a lawsuit claiming that he subjected her to repeated instances of sexual harassment and spoke often, and explicitly, to her about phone sex, vibrators, threesomes, masturbation, the loss of his virginity, and sexual fantasies. Below you'll find a copy of Andrea Mackris's complaint, an incredible page-turner that quotes O'Reilly, 55, on all sorts of lewd matters.

Based on the extensive quotations cited in the complaint, it appears a safe bet that Mackris, 33, recorded some of O'Reilly's more steamy soliloquies. For example, we direct you to his Caribbean shower fantasies. While we suggest reading the entire document, TSG will point you to interesting sections on a Thailand sex show, Al Franken, and the climax of one August 2004 phone conversation. "

I am going to have to create a whole section just for "the greater the saint, the greater the sinner" folks. They seem to be coming out of the woodwork.

I Wish I Knew ...

why having a president who speaks in public like this is acceptable. It's funny until you realize that he is the leader of the free world. Then it is sad. I don't care if it is because he is stupid, drunk, chemically imbalanced or in stages of pre-dementia, he needs to GO!

6 U.S. More Soldiers Killed

This is certainly progress. Six soldiers in one day ...:

"BAGHDAD, Iraq - Roadside bombings killed six American soldiers, the U.S. command said Wednesday, as U.S. and Iraqi troops stepped up pressure on Sunni insurgents before this week's start of the Islamic holy month of Ramadan.

The dead included two soldiers killed Wednesday in the northern city of Mosul when a suicide driver plowed into a U.S. convoy and blew up his car, the U.S. military said. The other were four killed in separate attacks late Tuesday and early Wednesday in Baghdad, the U.S. command said.

Five soldiers were also injured in the Mosul attack -- the second suicide operation against American forces there in the past three days.

The names of the soldiers were withheld pending notification of their families."

Religious Talk Can Be Cheap

I am not sure that there is anything that ticks me off more than those who profess to be immensely religious or of deep faith yet fail demonstrate a single ounce of the behavior that should be associated with such beliefs. Faith is such a deep and personal matter. It is the very core of one's being and having someone attempt to manipulate or abuse it is, as I once told a charlatan, predatory and disgusting. I'd yet to see any religious figure take Bush to task and this Bishop thinks his tactics are downright blasphemous:

It is now widely believed that, of course, nearly all persons of religious faith will vote for President Bush. That "conventional wisdom" has originated in the Republican Party and been advanced by an uncritical media. The claim is not correct, and the statistics supporting it have been distorted and oversimplified.
The "religious right" is not the only voice of religious faith in this country!

The issues on which the religious right has focused in this campaign are almost solely abortion and same-sex marriage. While those are important issues that need and deserve discussion, they are not the only, or even the primary, issues to which the Bible is relevant. On the other issues in the campaign, the president’s policies are not in accord with Biblical teaching, or with the teaching of his own church.

The media has made much of the fact that Sen. Kerry’s position on abortion contradicts the teaching of the Roman Catholic Church and, as a result, some bishops may deny him the Eucharist. Why does the media not investigate whether or not President Bush’s policies are consistent with the teachings of his church, the United Methodist Church? Such an investigation would reveal that the president’s policies are contrary to the Social Principles of his church (official church teaching), and to the broad consensus of ecumenical church teaching on many significant issues. I will name only three:

• War and Peace: The Social Principles of the United Methodist Church, and the dominant position among the churches of the world is that war is always a last resort. Pre-emptive war, now official U.S. government policy, can never be justified by church doctrine.
  
  
• Care of the environment, or "stewardship of creation": According to Genesis, the human was made responsible for the creation "to till it and to keep it." In violation of the Social Principles of the president’s church, the policies of the administration have rolled back legislation protecting the environment that has been in force for many years under presidents of both parties, and our government has refused to sign international treaties on global warming and other threats to the environment.
  
  
• Concern for the poor: Jesus, quoting the prophet Isaiah, said "The Spirit of the Lord is upon me because he has sent me to bring good news to the poor." The teaching of the president’s church seeks fulfillment of that promise to "bring good news to the poor." However, these last years have seen a dramatic increase in the number of persons living in poverty in the United States and millions have been added to the number without health care. The gap between the wealthy and the middle class and poor has increased each year under the policies of the government.
  

More so than Bush's allusion to him being a man of great faith (we still don't know any of his practices/core beliefs and he isn't active in a church), I also find his proclamations of good vs. evil offensive and invasive. Who is he to make the final verdict on what is right and what is wrong? How did he become the second coming of Jesus Christ?

He is slow to admit a mistake because he believes his decisions are just and righteous. The dogged determination and staying on message that some so admire is self-righteous and very dangerous. It casts the current struggle against terrorism in "holy war" terms, as a conflict between absolute good on one side and absolute evil on the other, the same perspective held by the terrorists. The issues are between good and evil. The methods of the terrorists are evil. But it is very dangerous for us to see ourselves as totally righteous.

A mature understanding of scripture could help the president avoid the arrogance and hubris that have so offended the rest of the world. And in such a situation, to exploit, distort and manipulate religion for political advantage is blasphemous. It is to trivialize the holy for self-serving purpose.

Religious talk can be very cheap. Jesus said, "Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord, will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my father in heaven." What is the will of "my father in heaven"? That is a huge question. The president and his campaign would do well to reflect on that question, and to avoid the tendency to believe that they already know the answers. They also might consult with others who have studied the question who might have a different point of view. And meanwhile, they should be careful to avoid the sin of blasphemy.

Let the church say AMEN!

Hopes For The Last Debate

I'll try it again. We got Furious George from the last debate when Kerry set him off by criticizing that skeleton crew of an alliance we have with a shrinking number of countries. Though some saw that as Bush being passionate and defiant, I saw someone become unhinged. Granted, I am not sure if any domestic issue could set him off quite that way but I think Kerry needs to try.

He can interject comparison's to his dad and the failures that got him bested by Clinton in 1992. He can still interject Iraq by talking about the money we've wasted in Iraq while our own nation is in trouble. I just think Kerry should try the button pushing route now that it is apparent that Bush boy is just a scared little boy with no self control and a very short fuse.

If I were Kerry, I'd state in that strong voice: "You've failed Mr. President! You've failed the economy! You've failed with healthcare! You've failed with education! You've failed with Iraq! Your daddy can't bail you out of this one! You've failed!"

Add Another Hypocrite To The Fire

You know, I just will never be able to fathom how so many of these public figures, particularly those who take such strong positions on family values, religion and upstanding citizenship, have the most disgusting things in their, not so distant, pasts. You had Jack Ryan running for Senate in Illinois under the pretense of being a family man yet his divorce papers showed him to be a manipulative chap with the desire to have public sex. His replacement, Alan Keyes, states that VP Dick Cheney's gay daughter is a selfish hedonist, while his own daughter has been keeping an online diary which openly discusses her relationship with another young lady (not to mention that she did the campaign stump with him decked out in rainbow accessories from head to toe). Now, we have this kook whose divorce records show that he was an abusive drunk with who threatened his wife with a shotgun and pursued other women.

New York Republican state senator John Randy Kuhl, who is vying for a spot in the U.S. House of Representatives, once brandished two shotguns and threatened to shoot his wife at a dinner party, according to divorce records acquired by RAW STORY.

Kuhl engaged in cruel and inhuman treatment and other such conduct as may render it unsafe and improper for the plaintiff to cohabit with the defendant, the divorce court's finding of fact stated. According to the documents, he solicited other women, humiliated his ex-wife and refused to seek treatment for his drinking.

Not only do I wonder how these people can lead these deceptive lives then look at themselves in the mirror each day, I wonder how and why they think that no one will ever find out.

Bush Ditching Seniors

Seriously, I need to know why George W. Bush will not/cannot attend an event where he is likely to face dissention. There is a pattern and a problem. As President, it is his obligation to face all of his citizens - whether they voted for him or not and whether they agree with him or not. Now he is taking a pass on addressing 25,000 members of AARP:

"Ed Coyle, executive director of the Alliance for Retired Americans, said public opinion polling shows the law is unpopular among older Americans. 'No presidential candidate wants to risk being booed off stage by thousands of seniors. This drug benefit is not the victory for seniors the president plugs it to be and the president and his handlers know that to be true,' said Coyle, a critic of the law.

Bush signed into law a Medicare prescription drug benefit amid Republican predictions that grateful older voters would reward the GOP in the November election. But Republicans have been on the defensive over ethical concerns, questions about the law's cost and seniors' complaints that it is confusing."

For all of that Texas shouting, posturing and claims of standing tall and pat, Bush has proven, once again, that he is one big CHICKEN who is selling wolf tickets.

And Still He Lies

During the last debate, the President stood before the world and said: "I remember sitting in the White House looking at those generals, saying, "Do you have what you need in this war? Do you have what it takes?""

Well, it looks like that was yet another lie!:

"Since May, Brig. Gen. Oscar B. Hilman, commander of the 81st Brigade Combat Team, a National Guard unit from Washington state that operates the base, has requested 500 to 700 more soldiers. But he said the request has been denied.

'Because the enemy is persistent, we need additional forces. We asked twice,' said Hilman, who arrived here in April for a yearlong stint. But Hilman said he was told that 'there are no additional forces,' and that U.S. soldiers are needed elsewhere, particularly to battle insurgents and cover a large area to the north that includes the rebellious cities of Tikrit and Samarra.

The 81st Brigade's top enlisted man, Sgt. Maj. Robert Barr, said the soldiers here are frustrated, and that he often hears the same question: 'Why aren't we stopping it or killing their guys who are doing it?'

Their complaints contrast sharply with statements by President Bush and top Pentagon officials, including Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld, who say U.S. troop strength is sufficient but that more soldiers will be sent if senior commanders ask."

Still, the polls are close. This means that in a dead heat, you have 50% of people who do not care that their man lies about putting American soldiers in harms way.

He's A "No Draft" Lie!

You cannot pay me to believe that Bush is not going to find some round about way to initiate a new draft. Anytime, you are calling up retired old men to go back into active, combat duty, you know it is only a matter of time.

Charles Ham, a 67-year-old Lexington psychiatrist and grandfather, is headed back to his man-in-uniform days.

A retired Army Reserve colonel, Ham said last week he will report in February to Fort Benning, Ga. There, he will spend two to three weeks taking refresher training before he is deployed.

“They won’t tell me where I’ll be deployed,” he said. “They just told me I will be deployed.”

In July, The State newspaper reported that the Army, stretched thin by the war in Iraq, had ordered Ham to take a physical at Fort Jackson.

This is just unbelievable!

What Are The Odds?

Could it be that US oil companies are in just as deep as the other countries we are accusing of helping Saddam abuse the oil for food program?

"As Saddam Hussein pressed the UN oil-for-food relief program for more money, which he used to buy banned weapons, an unwitting ally may have been the American driver. Almost until the eve of the invasion of Iraq in March 2003, U.S. oil companies were among the largest buyers of Iraqi crude oil.

The role that the companies, including Exxon Mobil and ChevronTexaco, played in the oil-for-food program is now coming under greater scrutiny in the wake of a report by the chief arms inspector for the CIA that disclosed how extensively Saddam was abusing profits from the oil sales.

Executives at the two companies insisted over the weekend that their purchases of Iraqi oil were not illegal or unknown in international oil markets in recent years. Industry analysts also said they did not know of any improprieties by the companies."

Equal Justice ?

This is why Bush's rhetoric about liberating people in Iraq and Afghanistan is a bunch of BS. We are boll weevils in the ass of Saudia Arabia but their women have fewer rights than the women of the countries we have supposedly liberated?

"The Saudi interior minister has said women will not be allowed to vote in the country's municipal elections starting in February 2005.

In response to a question about women's getting the vote, Prince Nayef bin Sultan said simply: 'I don't think that women's participation is possible.' "

Did He Say Kennedy?

I thought I'd be online right after the debate ranting about everything I'd seen. But, like the last time, I decided to digest it a bit, watch the TV pundits spin it and read the other blog reviews. I will, however, give my take:

Bush
I'm not sure who grabbed his collar and slammed him into the wall after the last debate but he seemed to have figured out that he had to change his stage presence and behavior. It is a sad state of affairs when people, myself included, give points for someone NOT acting like a spaced out nutcase. Truly, though, the only way he would have been worse was for him to have some kind of mental breakdown right on camera. So, at least initially, he was seemingly at an even keel.

Can't touch the Kennedy flub. I almost didn't catch it when he said "First, the National Journal named Senator Kennedy the most liberal senator of all." Did he really mean Kerry or did he forget who he was talking about?

Won't really touch the internets faux pas. I guess if Gore invented it, Bush can certainly have more than one.

But, I didn't like his answers to much of anything because he never really answered the questions that he was asked. He seemed to be turning himself inside out to keep from reacting to Kerry's answers. I kept saying "he's trying, he's trying." Then came Kerry's response to a question about a draft and his reiteration of his point about the US not having adequate alliances:

Our Guard and reserves have been turned into almost active duty. You've got people doing two and three rotations. You've got stop-loss policies, so people can't get out when they were supposed to. You've got a back-door draft right now.

And a lot of our military are underpaid. These are families that get hurt. It hurts the middle class. It hurts communities, because these are our first responders. And they're called up. And they're over there, not over here.

Now, I'm going to add 40,000 active duty forces to the military, and I'm going to make people feel good about being safe in our military, and not overextended, because I'm going to run a foreign policy that actually does what President Reagan did, President Eisenhower did, and others.

We're going to build alliances. We're not going to go unilaterally. We're not going to go alone like this president did.

That set the little monkey off! Furious George (as he has been pegged in the blogsphere), ended up shouting down Charlie Gibson (who was attempting to extend the question by asking about the back-door draft), pacing and yelling:

You tell Tony Blair we're going alone. Tell Tony Blair we're going alone. Tell Silvio Berlusconi we're going alone. Tell Aleksander Kwasniewski of Poland we're going alone.

There are 30 countries there. It denigrates an alliance to say we're going alone, to discount their sacrifices. You cannot lead an alliance if you say, you know, you're going alone. And people listen. They're sacrificing with us

This was approximately 1/2 hour into the debate and he'd lost it. He looked like a two year old throwing a tantrum. Charlie Gibson then gave the floor back to Kerry who gave a great response (IMHO):

Mr. President, countries are leaving the coalition, not joining. Eight countries have left it.

If Missouri, just given the number of people from Missouri who are in the military over there today, were a country, it would be the third largest country in the coalition, behind Great Britain and the United States.

That's not a grand coalition.

The focus shifted off of Iraq at that point and on to domestic issues so Bush seemed to calm back down and turn into the class clown. He still didn't look Presidential and just served to irritate me - as usual. But, it was the response (or not) to the last question of the evening that sealed him as the arrogant SOB who will not admit he is wrong:

GRABEL: President Bush, during the last four years, you have made thousands of decisions that have affected millions of lives. Please give three instances in which you came to realize you had made a wrong decision, and what you did to correct it. Thank you.

BUSH: I have made a lot of decisions, and some of them little, like appointments to boards you never heard of, and some of them big.

And in a war, there's a lot of -- there's a lot of tactical decisions that historians will look back and say: He shouldn't have done that. He shouldn't have made that decision. And I'll take responsibility for them. I'm human.

But on the big questions, about whether or not we should have gone into Afghanistan, the big question about whether we should have removed somebody in Iraq, I'll stand by those decisions, because I think they're right.

That's really what you're -- when they ask about the mistakes, that's what they're talking about. They're trying to say, "Did you make a mistake going into Iraq?" And the answer is, "Absolutely not." It was the right decision.

Not only did he not answer her question, he basically scolded her and accused her of questioning his judgment in Iraq. I cannot imagine how she felt. Even if she had asked a direct question about Iraq, the presidential thing would have been to politely answer without going back on the defensive telling everyone that he was right. I was embarrassed for him.

Ironically, the lesson on learned by the lastest person fired on The Apprentice was that it was good to be decisive but you could also be decisive and wrong! Bush needs to hear us say "George, You're Fired!"

Kerry
Kerry definitely has the look and feel of a President and more and more people are realizing that. He was very calm and comfortable and had his facts down. I feel bad for people who need him to dumb down so that they can understand him. I feel bad that people need to hear monosyllabic words and one word solutions to complex problems. I need to hear long sentences with commas, colons, semi-colons and parentheses.

I think that he could have been a lot harder on Bush in a lot of ways. He should have made a point to use each rebuttal as a chance to point out that Bush hadn't answered the question he was asked.

One thing I liked was the way he addressed each questioner by name. When the woman named Nikki Washington asked President Bush what was his "plan to repair relations with other countries given the current situation ..." Bush went into some tangential mess about them not understanding our values and defending his decisions in Iraq and everything else people have criticized him about. When it was time for his rubuttal, Kerry addressed her question and told her he'd get back to her (after he responded to Bush's ramblings about being right). He didn't answer her during his allotted time but since the next question was his, he answered that person then came back to Ms. Washington's question and answered it AND he answered her again, by name, later on in the debate when he had another clear example.

In the end, the polls gave Kerry a narrow edge. I think basically Bush got credit for showing up and not looking like he was insane (though I have figured out who he reminds me of: Norman Bates in Psycho ... sitting with that odd smile). Still, that is KE04 3/BC04 0! The next debate should be a good one. It is totally on domestic issues. Kerry can make up ground and pound Bush on the sad state of economic affairs. He can't keep harping on what he did right in Iraq. I hope we've saved the best for last.

Hmmmmm

This 'conspiracy theory' has been brought up before. Of course you just don't want your mind to go there but remembering the way small pox blankets were used against Native American's and syphilis used against the men at Tuskegee, we cannot rule out that certain human beings can and will do things of this nature.

"Kenyan ecologist Wangari Maathai, the first African woman to win the Nobel Peace Prize, today reiterated her claim that the AIDS virus was a deliberately created biological agent.

'Some say that AIDS came from the monkeys, and I doubt that because we have been living with monkeys (since) time immemorial, others say it was a curse from God, but I say it cannot be that.
'Us black people are dying more than any other people in this planet,' Ms Maathai told a press conference in Nairobi a day after winning the prize for her work in human rights and reversing deforestation across Africa.

'It's true that there are some people who create agents to wipe out other people. If there were no such people, we could have not have invaded Iraq,' she said. "

Palestinian Pipe Dream

I just cannot see it happening.

Why a 'right of return' is necessary:

"To understand the importance of the refugee issue to Palestinians, we must understand that the Palestinian nation and Palestinian nationalism as it exists today was born following the expulsion of over half the Palestinian population from their land in 1948, and that one of the fundamental aspects of Palestinian identity is 'refugeehood.' Such an understanding obliges us to address the problem of the Palestinian refugees as fundamental to any solution of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict.
There are five reasons for this: First, as long as the Israelis do not take into consideration what happened to the Palestinians in 1948 and the expulsion of the indigenous population from 78 percent of the land of historic Palestine, they will keep bargaining about the remaining 22 percent (the West Bank including East Jerusalem and the Gaza Strip). There is no solution to the land issue without coupling it with the refugee issue. This may be the reason why the Oslo Accords failed. "

October Is ...

Breast Cancer Awareness Month.

Not Just A River In Egypt!

Cracking the heck up ... !

Bush administration in denial about lack of Iraq WMD:

"President George W. Bush's administration is in denial over the lack of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq before the US-led invasion in 2003, ex-chief US arms inspector David Kay said Thursday.

A report by the Iraq Survey Group that Kay ran until he quit at the start of the year found Iraq had no chemical, biological or nuclear weapons when Bush was saying that Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein was a growing threat.

The White House has insisted Saddam was a threat to the United States and had weapons of mass destruction (WMD) capability, but Kay told NBC television: 'All I can say is 'denial' is not just a river in Egypt.' "

My Hopes For Tonight

I really don't know what to expect tonight. This is an important debate for both sides but Bush has more to lose than ever. Given past performances throughout this term, I'd say that luck is on Kerry's side. BC04 doesn't care much for facts and neither do their followers but performance skills are also an issue and if he looks as whacked out as he did last week, even the most dedicated supporter is going to have to stop making excuses for him.

To his credit, Kerry has been on the campaign trail addressing all kinds of crowds. He isn't as stiff as people have made him out to be. He thinks well on his feet and can chat with the 'common man.' His biggest problem is overcoming the negative image that Bush, along with the press, have painted of him.

Bush, on the other hand, has been riding the crest of charm (which never worked on me for some reason)through the face of serious problems in this country and abroad. Current events, such as escalating violence in Iraq and around the world and poor employment figures, are taking over the headlines and the sunny, positive picture that Bush and Cheney keep painting for their flock is starting to crack and peel. The facts are starting to overpower their fiction.

There is a reason (and I don't know why) that they've kept Bush so sheltered. There is a reason why he's had fewer press conference during his entire term than many Presidents have had their first year. There is a reason why they have to hand pick attendees to his rallies and make them sign loyalty oaths (that sounds rather Baath Party-ish, no?). There is a reason why he either stumbles, gives blank stares, gets angry or walks away when someone questions him in anyway. I don't know the 'inside' reason. I do know that it makes it dangerous to put him on stage alone in under unpredictable circumstances. Repeating the same party lines over and over will not work in a dynamic debate and, most certainly, may not fly at a town hall meeting.

My hope, therefore, is that Bush finally cracks under the pressure. The eyes of the world are on him tonight. People on the other side of the globe will be setting their alarm clocks to get up to watch the debates. The person who showed up at the debate last Thursday absolutely cannot show up tonight. He cannot get mad. He cannot bring out the crickets with his long pauses. He cannot stumble over his words or cram half-sentences with malapropisms. He cannot try to brush off the mountains of problems with the same old lies and simple minded rhetoric.

I don't know if there is a drug or elixir they can give him that will make him lucid. I am not sure he is up for the challenge. I think the pressure may be too great. If I had my way, George W. Bush would provide the best reality performance in history. He'd have a giant meltdown on international TV (in a Mary Hartman, Mary Hartman kinda way). It would be sad but it would be sweet. It is time to get this elephant out of the room. It is time for Toto to pull back the curtain on Karl Rove and the neo-con machine. It is time for George Bush to go back to Crawford, TX so that someone else can tend to the problems of the world.

My fingers are crossed and I need to grab some snacks so that I can watch the debates!

If It Walks Like A Weasel ...

So "Mr. America's Heartland" is a diva? How do you cancel an appearance because you don't like the plane?

When Hollander and fellow law student Melinda Gorman failed to locate a jet manufactured by another company, they offered Hannity a first-class ticket on a commercial flight. He refused.

"He was very forceful on the phone," said Hollander. "It was hard to get a word in edgewise with him. He was interrupting me a lot. But that's sort of the nature of his personality-at least, his radio personality and T.V. personality."

Hannity's travel arrangements are also causing a stir at Utah Valley State College, where he is scheduled to speak Oct. 11. The Deseret Morning News reported Saturday that when Hannity's original flight plan fell through, the college agreed to foot the bill for a private Hawker jet to fly him into town. Hannity told the Morning News the "accommodations weren't arranged at his request" and he didn't "want a penny" for his appearance.

The Situation in Iraq

A Wall Street Journal reporter who is on assignment in Iraq, emailed a few friends with an personal update on Iraq and, well, you know how fast emails spread ... In any case, the author was verified and you can view the entire email here. (link via sccdp.org blog).

Iraqis say that thanks to America they got freedom in exchange for insecurity. Guess what? They say they'd take security over freedom any day, even if it means having a dictator ruler.

I heard an educated Iraqi say today that if Saddam Hussein were allowed to run for elections he would get the majority of the vote. This is truly sad.

Then I went to see an Iraqi scholar this week to talk to him about elections here. He has been trying to educate the public on the importance of voting. He said, "President Bush wanted to turn Iraq into a democracy that would be an example for the Middle East. Forget about democracy, forget about being a model for the region, we have to salvage Iraq before all is lost."

One could argue that Iraq is already lost beyond salvation. For those of us on the ground it's hard to imagine what if any thing could salvage it from its violent downward spiral. The genie of terrorism, chaos and mayhem has been unleashed onto this country as a result of American mistakes and it can't be put back into a bottle.

The Iraqi government is talking about having elections in three months while half of the country remains a 'no go zone'-out of the hands of the government and the Americans and out of reach of journalists. In the other half, the disenchanted population is too terrified to show up at polling stations. The Sunnis have already said they'd boycott elections, leaving the stage open for polarized government of Kurds and Shiites that will not be deemed as legitimate and will most certainly lead to civil war.

I asked a 28-year-old engineer if he and his family would participate in the Iraqi elections since it was the first time Iraqis could to some degree elect a leadership. His response summed it all: "Go and vote and risk being blown into pieces or followed by the insurgents and murdered for cooperating with the Americans? For what? To practice democracy? Are you joking?"

I listen to Democracy Now every morning so get regular updates from people who are in Iraq. Therefore, I am not totally mortified by this account. My issue is now, as always, that the picture we get from those who are too scared to go there is the exact opposite. The first retort out of a pro-war person's mouth is likely to be "Well, would they rather have Saddam?!" Looks like many Iraqis would answer "yes."

Yeah, But ...

This is getting just plain childish. Once again, after getting backed into a corner, BC04 decide to concede that Saddam has no WMD's. Yet, instead of just admitting the mistake and apologizing, these two arrogantly keep on acting as though they were justified.
"President Bush and his vice president conceded Thursday in the clearest terms yet that Saddam Hussein had no weapons of mass destruction, even as they tried to shift the Iraq war debate to a new issue - whether the invasion was justified because Saddam was abusing a U.N. oil-for-food program.

Ridiculing the Bush administration's evolving rationale for war, Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry shot back: 'You don't make up or find reasons to go to war after the fact.'

Vice President Dick Cheney brushed aside the central findings of chief U.S. weapons hunter Charles Duelfer -that Saddam not only had no weapons of mass destruction and had not made any since 1991, but that he had no capability of making any either - while Bush unapologetically defended his decision to invade Iraq."

Tuesday the "yeah, but" was that Saddam paid the families of suicide bombers. Today the "yeah, but" is that Saddam was scamming the oil for food program. Wow! So nearly 1100 solidiers have died and thousands of others were maimed and injured for that! I cannot believe I am watching this type of behavior being played out in front of the world. Wow indeed!

Who Zoomed Who?

Looks to me like the catastrophic success may be Saddam's - and at our expense:

"On the eve of the U.S. invasion in March 2003, Saddam Hussein instructed top Iraqi ministers to 'resist one week, and after that I will take over.'

To his generals, Saddam's order was similar - to hold off the invading coalition for eight days and leave the rest to him.

Some of those who have recounted those words to interrogators believed that Saddam was signaling that he had a secret weapon, according to an account in the new report by the top U.S. arms inspector in Iraq.

But what now appears most likely, the report said, is that 'what Saddam actually had in mind was some form of insurgency against the coalition.' (emphasis mine)

U.S. intelligence agencies have reported since last autumn that the broad outlines of the guerrilla campaign being waged against American forces in Iraq were set down before the war by the Iraqi Intelligence Service."

Is anyone having a little "Brer Rabbit and Brer Fox" moment?

Important Message To Mrs. Heinz-Kerry

Though middle America may think that Teresa Heinz-Kerrry is too opinionated and strong-willed, I'd rather hear stories of her saying "shove it" or "four more years of hell" than hear this useless dribble from Mrs. Stepford:

"Recalling the big fashion faux pas of last week's presidential debate, when she and Mrs. Kerry both wore white, Mrs. Bush told Jay Leno during her guest spot on NBC's 'The Tonight Show' that she and Mrs. Kerry probably have 'a lot in common.'

'We even chose to wear the same color suits (at last Thursday's debate),' she said. 'So now I just want to announce today that I'll be wearing a blue suit Friday night.' "

I hope Teresa wears blue too!

Saddam's Global Test

Imagine that! Saddam didn't use his WMD's when we invaded Iraq the first time because he was concerned with what the world would think. Twelve years later, we invade Iraq without caring what the world thought.

"Saddam Hussein refrained from using weapons of mass destruction during the first Gulf war because of the effect it would have had on world opinion , according to the Iraq Survey Group report.

The former Iraqi president was interviewed by interrogators compiling the report into the country's WMD, which paints a picture of a man obsessed with his own place in history as well as his own security. Asked by a US interviewer in 2004 why he had not used WMD against the coalition during Desert Storm in 1991, Saddam replied: 'Do you think we are mad? What would the world have thought about us? We would have completely discredited those who had supported us.' "

Wow! The sheer irony ...

God's Plan?

No matter who is in office after this election, I am going to have a problem with their unabashed pro-Israeli views. In the debates on Tuesday, Edwards, too defended everything Israel is and does. I think that their needs to be much more balance in my views. The Israeli/Palestinian issue has two sides just like every other issue. But, if anyone had any doubts about what type of views Bush supporters have, they need to doubt no more:

"'But ... if he touches Jerusalem and he really gets serious about taking east Jerusalem and making it the capital of a Palestinian state, he'll lose virtually all evangelical support,' Robertson said. 'I think this is the key issue.'

Bush had promised in his election campaign in 2000 to move the U.S. Embassy to Jerusalem as a sign of U.S. backing for Israel's hold on the city. But he later thwarted congressional action to move the embassy, reflecting official U.S. policy that the fate of the city should be negotiated by Israel and the Palestinians.

Robertson said Israel should not have to give up land for a Palestinian state but Jordan, Saudi Arabia and Egypt should take in the 3.5 million Palestinians living in the West Bank and Gaza Strip.

The founder of the Christian Broadcasting Network unabashedly said he favors Israel over the Palestinians, saying 'it isn't a question of politics, it's just a question of God's plan.'"

Once you bring God into land disputes, the dispute never ends.

Might Coulda Maybe

I've come to expect the ridiculous so I know that Blair and Bush will cling any strand of the evidence to continue to justify their invading Iraq. Saddam had no WMDs and no means to produce them. But now they'll lie with "well, he might coulda, maybe, one day ... tried to make some later"

Verdict: NO WMDs!:

"America's chief weapons inspector in Iraq concluded yesterday that Saddam Hussein had no stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction, had no means to produce them and posed a diminishing threat at the time of last year's invasion.

His 1,500-page report was a comprehensive demolition of the main reason stated by America and Britain for going to war: the threat of Iraqi biological, chemical or nuclear weapons.

But it also concluded that Saddam did want to manufacture weapons of mass destruction and was trying to subvert international sanctions. There was also evidence of 'idle' programmes that could have been revived.

Those conclusions were seized on in London and Washington last night to try to justify the invasion."

After 52 marriages, Husband Weds First Wife Again

And we think the sanctity of marriage is in jeopardy in the US:

A Malaysian man hopes finally to find wedded bliss after 52 failed marriages, returning to his first wife for his latest nuptials.

Kamarudin Mohammed, 72, first married Khadijah Udin, 74, nearly five decades ago.

After they split up, he went through another 51 marriages and 50 divorces, his last wife dying of cancer.

They ranged in length from two days to 20 years, and included one Englishwoman.

At the home of his new bride in Kampung Pias, he told the New Straits Times newspaper: "I am not a playboy. "I just love seeing beautiful women.

"If I like a girl, I'll ask for her hand in marriage. I don't like flings.

"I also don't believe in marrying more than one woman at a time."

His seven children include a daughter from his first marriage.

Divorce is simple in Malaysia's Muslim majority community, since a husband can end his marriage by telling his wife "I divorce you" three times.

No Second Chance

They say you never get a second chance to make a first impression. Well, Bush made quite a first impression at the first 2004 Presidential debate. It was a poor impression that cannot be justified by any stretch. But instead of spending time trying to prepare for the next debate, Bush calls a bogus press conference as though he is going to reveal some new and important information. All he really wanted was a chance to redeem himself for that bizarre, straight-jacket performance he gave last week.

"The main theme of the speech in Wilkes-Barre - Mr Bush's 38th trip to the key swing state of Pennsylvania - was changed at the last minute, though topics such as the economy and health care were mentioned.

A spokesman for the Kerry campaign, Phil Singer, said Mr Bush's new attacks was a sign of 'desperation'.

He said the president "tried to redo the debate from last week by giving a speech full of untruths he couldn't say on stage with John Kerry because he knew Kerry would knock them down".

The Bush team just needs to quit while it is ahead (or not). Cheney spent last night spinning easily disputable lies about Edwards, Kerry and his own administration's record. I don't know if Bushco is desperate, arrogant or just crazy but the lot of them seem to be taking wild shots in the dark trying to save themselves from their failures.

VP Debate

I don't think that last night's debates changed any minds that were already set. But, I am not sure how many people were swayed, one way or the other, unless they were looking for a specific response from a specific candiate.

Here's my take:

Cheney had the job of cleaning up his wartime President's mess from last week. His main goal was just to appear coherent, focused and interested in being there. Anything more was gravy even if it wasn't impressive. Post-debate pundits opinions differ but I don't think he made any slam dunks.

Since there are such clear differences in ideologies and proposed strategies, how he did depends on ones personal views. I found Cheney to be full of crap and bent on presenting the same old lies as truth and on making false analogies/dichotomies.

• No connection between Sadaam and al-Qaeda:
  The 9/11 commission as well key GOP'ers like Colin Powell and Tom Bremer acknowledge this. One of Bush's tantrums in his debate was him professing knowledge that Osama bin Laden was behind 9/11 and not Sadaam Hussein. When called out on it by Edwards, he failed to admit his inaccurate statements and slyly substituted a different premise for the one at hand. He stated that Sadaam sponsored terrorism and shifted to Sadaam paying suicide bombers in Israel as proof. What I recall about that scenario is not that Sadaam was paying in advance for attacks but assisting the families (who ultimately bear Israel's wrath in the aftermath) of the bombers afterwards. This defense and shift in rationale only serves to fuel the fire that the US is in cahoots with Israel and that our only concern is protecting and promoting their interests. Would the American public have supported a war if the sole reason was because Sadaam Hussein paid the mothers and widows of suicide bombers?
  
  
• Edwards attendance in the Senate:
  Cheney claiming that he'd never met Edwards before that night was a stupid and unnecessary lie - one that seals, in my mind, that this administration has a collective compulsion for lying. By the time the debates were over, bloggers were all over it and proof to the contrary was on the morning news. It was an instinctive, ridiculous falsehood which shows that he will lie for no good reason.
  
  Additionally, Edwards comeback (rattling off Cheney's rather cruel sounding record in Congress) to his charge that his record was "unimpressive" left him unable to formulate a reply and he forfeited his 30 second response time.
  
  
  
• "90% of coalition" vs. "50% of coalition/Iraqis": I don't know from whose ass they pulled the concept of including Iraqi police/troops in with the occupying troops but I commend him for keeping a straight face while spinning that one. Since when have we ever included those numbers and where can I see them documented? Are we, next, going to include the thousands of civilians who've been killed? Sorry, that was a bogus and desperate argument and another attempt to label Kerry/Edwards as somehow being disrespectful to our "allies."
  
  Again, he substituted a totally new and unrelated premise for the one at hand. It was Cheney's equivalent of Bush's "he forgot about Poland" but it still didn't address that we are footing 90% of the bill. It still didn't address the fact that over 1000 of OUR troops have been killed and several thousand maimed and injured.
  

On performance alone, I think Edwards won hands down. Cheney, though steady and generally unphased by Edwards' valid charges, spoke in a deep, ghoolish, monotone. His face bore a perpetual grimace. He rarely looked up unless it was over the top of his glasses. He rarely made eye contact with the moderator and definitely not with the camera/audience. By contrast, Edwards was energetic, upbeat, knowledgeable and unintimidated by the older, more experienced Cheney. This was no fight between a poodle and a doberman. It was more like a pit bull and a doberman.

Glimmer of Truthfulness

Wow! Now that we don't have him hogtied in Washington, Allawi is being a little more honest in his assessment on the way Allawi things are really going in Iraq.

"It is true that the security situation in our country is the first concern for you, and maybe for your inquiries, too," he said to the roughly 130-member national assembly, which asked him combative questions following his speech in the nearly hourlong session.

"It is true that it is a source of worry for many people concerned about the future of Iraq and the process of democracy in Iraq," he continued, calling the insurgents "a challenge to our will."

"They are betting on our failure. Should we allow them to do that? Should we sit down and watch what they are doing and let them destabilize the country's security?"

Though Allawi joined President George W. Bush last month in boasting of having 100,000 fully trained and equipped Iraqi policemen, soldiers and other security officials, he acknowledged Tuesday that there were difficulties in presenting an adequate security force.

"It's clear that since the handover, the capabilities are not complete and that the situation is very difficult now in respect to creating the forces and getting them ready to face the challenges," he said. He added that "the police force is not well-equipped and is not respected enough to lay down its authority."

Allawi hinted that it was time to start supplying the new army with sufficient heavy weapons and armored vehicles.

"We need to build our military capacity and increase the number of people to face the challenges that we have," he said. The speech, given inside the fortified government headquarters on the west bank of the Tigris River, comes as insurgents have stepped up a bloody campaign of car bombings and assassinations to cripple the interim government while American-led forces are trying to take back rebel territory.

If he is admitting this much, I'll bet there is even more that he isn't sharing. I'm keeping my fingers crossed that more truth trickles out in time to influence the election.

Box Of Rocks Dumb!

This is when you really have to question literacy rate and critical thinking skills of the average American. It seems they are non existent in at least 40% of the population and 62% of Republicans:

Poll Shows More than 4 in 10 Still Link Saddam to 9/11
While the press gave extensive coverage Tuesday to Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld’s statement that he hasn't seen "any strong, hard evidence" to link Saddam Hussein and the al-Qaeda terrorists who staged the attacks on Sept. 11, 2001, it became ever more apparent that the media still have their work cut out for them on this issue.

Rumsfeld's comments came as a new USA Today/CNN/Gallup Poll found that 42% of those surveyed thought the former Iraqi leader was involved in the attacks on New York City and Washington.

In response to another question, 32% said they thought Saddam had personally planned them.

The same poll in June showed that 56% of all Republicans said they thought Saddam was involved with the 9/11 attacks. In the latest poll that number actually climbs, to 62%

The independent commission that investigated 9/11 concluded in June that there was "no credible evidence that Iraq and al-Qaeda cooperated on attacks against the United States." The panel also said "contacts" between al-Qaeda and Iraq "do not appear to have resulted in a collaborative relationship."

Granted Bush and his neo-con puppet masters have been playing a sly game of innuendo, word games and outright lying but reading, thinking human beings should have been able to figure out that the correlation between Sadaam and al-Qaeda is neither factual nor likely in theory.

Ditto for his flock!

Tough One

"DOES BUSH THINK OUR ALLIES DON'T KNOW IRAQ WAS A MISTAKE?
This has been bugging me since the debate last Thursday. The president keeps insisting there's no way to get more allies helping out in Iraq if you keep insisting the war was a mistake, as John Kerry does. ('I can imagine him walking into the leaders of the world saying, 'We need your help, but Iraq is a mistake,'' the president said yesterday.)
But isn't the reality exactly the opposite? Pretty much every potential ally in the world thinks Iraq was a mistake. As long as that's the case, don't you stand a greater chance of winning them over by acknowledging this rather than treating them like idiots? If I'm France or Russia, I'm going to be much more receptive to a pitch that says, 'Look, we know we screwed up, but we need your help so Iraq doesn't become an even bigger problem than it already is.' The alternative pitch--'Hey, everything's going great. We'd still do it the same way if we had it to do all over again. Oh, and by the way, would you mind kicking in a few thousand troops?'--doesn't strike me as so compelling. "

Bush thinks that our allies are the ones who are mistaken. Unfortunately, he doesn't realize that continuing to scold them for not participating (as he did at the UN a couple of weeks ago) and constantly reiterating that he was right is not going to make them more pliable. Once again, his approach is bass ackwards. Now, given the dangerous state of Iraq, I cannot imagine another country coughing up troops to send - regardless of whether they get a cut in what's left of the spoils. But, if we are able to elect a man with a brain, at least they can stop covering their ears and hiding their eyes when he speaks.

Whose Site Is It Anyway?

People accuse the Dems of not really being pro-Kerry but being anti-Bush. Using this logic, I must question if the GOP is really pro-Bush or just anti-Kerry? The RNC Website currently has more pictures of Kerry than it does of Bush. The DNC Website, on the other hand, has NONE of Bush.

Pants On FIRE!

The ease with which these people lie without flinching is mind-boggling! Cheney is still lying about a connection between Iraq and al-Qaeda. Rumsfeld lied, un-lied then lied again about the exact same thing. Dubya either lies or cannot remember what they told him to say the first time. Now they are lying (or not recalling) about whether Paul Bremer asked for more troops at the onset of the war.

Man, I hope that John Edwards is taking up to the minute notes in preparation for tonight's debate. He needs to drill a new hole in Cheney's behind with all of these contradictions.

Those Free Women In Afghanistan

Again, the rhetoric on Afghanistan says that girls are allowed in school and that thousands of women will have the opportunity to vote. Unfortunately, it looks like voting could endanger their lives and shame their families.

"The women say they do not fear death. They fear the shame a public death would bring their families.

'My biggest fear is that if something happens election day, the whole town will talk afterward,' said Farida, who is 23 and unmarried, and who, like the others, uses only one name. 'There is already a general rumor that women who work outside the home are prostitutes to Americans or foreigners, that women who work outside the home lose their honor.'

There is a saying in the culture, Farida said: For a woman, a death in the home - with purdah, which literally means curtain - is a death of honor; a death outside the home is a death with dishonor.

'I just don't want to die on the street,' Farida said.

I was concerned that the high illiteracy rate among women would hinder their ability to soundly choose a candidate and that their vote would be left to the whim of their husbands or the local warlord. But now it appears that a far worse fate could be in store.

U.N. wary of getting involved in Iraq election

I think George Bush has a hard time understanding the concept of cooperation. He doesn't want a "global test" (i.e. he don't need no stinking approval to invade a country) yet he wants global support. He doesn't get that unless we (the we who, virtually alone, invaded Iraq) establish security and safety, the UN is not going to send anyone there to assist with elections. What part of global does he not understand?

U.N. wary of getting involved in Iraq election

Despite President Bush’s insistence that the United Nations is already involved in the effort to ensure democratic elections in Iraq and Sen. John Kerry's assertion that the organization should get even more involved in the reconstruction process, the United Nations is taking its time.

With four months to go before the scheduled elections, U.N. officials are still pondering how they can support the process while protecting personnel on the ground.
[...]
Prior to the bombing, the United Nations had 387 international staff members working in Iraq. That number has been reduced to 35.

For the past year, Annan has insisted that a substantial U.N. commitment is possible only with strong security guarantees, which so far have not been forthcoming, officials here said.

Not Just The Taliban

We hear a whole lot of rhetoric regarding the defeat of the Taliban. But as so called free elections approach, it seems the Taliban is not only worry in Afghanistan:

"'While many observers . . . continue to focus on the Taliban as the main threat to human rights and political development, in most parts of the country Afghans . . . are primarily afraid of the local factional leaders and military commanders,' Human Rights Watch said in a report released last week. 'Far from a Taliban problem, most Afghans tell us their main fear is of jangsalaran,' the Afghan word for warlord.

In a survey conducted by the Human Rights and Research Advocacy Consortium in June and July, 88 percent of Afghan respondents said the government must do more to reduce the power of militias and 60 percent wanted both Afghan and foreign forces to protect them. In Kandahar, 93 percent wanted more official action to curb warlordism, and nearly half thought elections should be postponed until there is more progress on militia disarmament."

I'd say the reports of success in Afghanistan have been greatly exaggerated.

"At first, people were very hopeful, and they thought America would help us," said Nyamatullah, who initially was an enthusiastic supporter of the U.S. invasion. "The [new Afghan] government promised us new schools, district offices, clinics, water pumps, but it has done nothing at all. People are so disappointed. At least the Taliban would grade roads, build madrassas, while this government has done nothing."

Nyamatullah still hates the Taliban, but he added, "If the situation continues and America does the same things, I definitely will pick up a gun and fight the Americans."

America's failure in the south is tragic because it is so unnecessary. Much of Afghanistan - the north, and even the cities in the south - is flourishing, demonstrating what would have been possible if the United States had only tried as hard to win the peace as it did to win the war.

US Bugged France

We'd already heard reports of the US tapping the phone lines of key countries in the run up to the war. No doubt, France was on the top of that list. Guess no lesson was learned with Watergate.

"A book published in France says the US regularly monitored French President Jacques Chirac's phone calls.

The book, which charts the breakdown of the leaders' relationship in the run-up to the Iraq war, says several sources reported the surveillance.

The US told a senior French military official the French-US relationship at a personal level was 'irreparable'. "

Two Faces of George

I'd say the post by this blogger (Hullabaloo) pretty much sums it up.

George W. Bush is a man with two faces--- a public image of manly strength and a private reality of childish weakness. His verbal miscues and malapropisms are the natural consequence of a man struggling with internal contradictions and a lack of self-knowledge. He can’t keep track of what he is supposed to think and say in public.

There is no doubt that whether it's a cowboy hat or a crotch hugging flightsuit , George W. Bush enjoys wearing the mantle of American archetypal warriors. But when he goes behind the curtain and sheds the costume, a flinty, thin-skinned, immature man who has never taken responsibility for his mistakes emerges. The strong compassionate leader is revealed as a flimsy paper tiger.

Ideology vs. Policy

Thomas Friedman is right with this. The question is how to find a way out of this mess.

"What happened? The Bush team got its doctrines mixed up: It applied the Powell Doctrine to the campaign against John Kerry -- 'overwhelming force' without mercy, based on a strategy of shock and awe at the Republican convention, followed by a propaganda blitz that got its message across in every possible way, including through distortion. If only the Bush team had gone after the remnants of Saddam's army in the Sunni Triangle with the brutal efficiency it has gone after Kerry in the Iowa-Ohio-Michigan triangle. If only the Bush team had spoken to Iraqis and Arabs with as clear a message as it did to the Republican base. No, alas, while the Bush people applied the Powell Doctrine in the Midwest, they applied the Rumsfeld Doctrine in the Middle East. And the Rumsfeld Doctrine is: 'Just enough troops to lose.' Donald Rumsfeld tried to prove that a small, mobile army was all that was needed to topple Saddam, without realizing that such a limited force could never stabilize Iraq. He never thought it would have to. He thought his Iraqi pals would do it. He was wrong."

For all of President Bush's vaunted talk about being consistent and resolute, the fact is he never established U.S. authority in Iraq. Never. This has been the source of all our troubles. We have never controlled all the borders, we have never even consistently controlled the road from Baghdad airport into town, because we never had enough troops to do it.

Rumsfeld Misunderstood?

What is wrong with these people? Have they all gone senile? Is there or is there not a link? Get the lie straight ... Please!

"The US defence secretary, Donald Rumsfeld, today attempted to distance himself from his earlier comments that there were no links between Saddam Hussein and al-Qaida.

In a statement issued several hours after he had told the Council on Foreign Relations in New York that 'to my knowledge, I have not seen any strong, hard evidence that links the two', Mr Rumsfeld claimed he had been 'misunderstood'.

'I have acknowledged since September 2002 that there were ties between al-Qaida and Iraq,' the statement said. 'This assessment was based upon points provided to me by [the] then CIA director George Tenet to describe the CIA's understanding of the al-Qaida Iraq relationship.'"

Letters From Iraq To Michael Moore

Michael Moore has a new book coming out ... one with letters from soldiers stationed in Iraq.

Here is one. Others are much worse:

"From: Kyle Waldman

Sent: Friday February 27 2004 2.35am

Subject: None


As we can all obviously see, Iraq was not and is not an imminent threat to the United States or the rest of the world. My time in Iraq has taught me a little about the Iraqi people and the state of this war-torn, poverty-stricken country.

The illiteracy rate in this country is phenomenal. There were some farmers who didn't even know there was an Operation Iraqi Freedom. This was when I realised that this war was initiated by the few who would profit from it and not for its people.

We, as the coalition forces, did not liberate these people; we drove them even deeper into poverty. I don't foresee any economic relief coming soon to these people by the way Bush has already diverted its oil revenues to make sure there will be enough oil for our SUVs.

We are here trying to keep peace when all we have been trained for is to destroy. How are 200,000 soldiers supposed to take control of this country? Why didn't we have an effective plan to rebuild Iraq's infrastructure? Why aren't the American people more aware of these atrocities?

My fiancee and I have seriously looked into moving to Canada as political refugees. "

1 in 4 Hold Anti-Muslim Views

People are just ignorant!:

"Anti-Islamic sentiment surged in this country after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks by terrorists who claimed to be acting in the name of the faith. Since then, anti-Muslim views have been encouraged by a continuing string of terror attacks, including decapitations, in Iraq, as well as a violent attack on school children in Russia, said Omar Ahmad, chairman of the council's board. 'They have nothing to do with Islam. People claim they are doing it for Islam, but it's really in spite of Islam,' Ahmad said.
The telephone survey of a random sample of 1,000 American adults found that just over one in four people somewhat or strongly agreed with a series of anti-Muslim sentiments including: the Muslim religion teaches violence and hatred (26 percent agreed); Muslims value life less than other people (27 percent agreed); and Muslims want to change the American way of life (29 percent agreed)."
[...]
The poll found that people most likely to have negative attitudes were male, white, less educated, politically conservative and living in the South.

Gee! What a surprise!

Not So Darling Simonas Anymore

I suppose somebody thought that in exchange for $1M, these women would come home singing the praises of their beloved country and denouncing their captors. Not quite!

"Italy's adoration of the 'two Simonas', the women aid workers abducted in Iraq, began to sour yesterday, as the extent of their sympathy for the Iraqi fight against the allied occupation became clear.

Simona Pari, Simona Torretta and Lello Rienzi talk to the press
In their first big interviews given since their release in return for a reported $1 million ransom on Tuesday, Simona Pari and Simona Torretta, both 29, gave their backing to insurgents opposing the allied forces.
[...]
'If you ask me about terrorism, I'll tell you that there is terrorism and there is resistance. The resistance struggle of people against an occupying force is guaranteed by international law.'

The women's comments are likely to cause renewed anger in government circles, following their call soon after their release for Italy's peacekeeping forces to be withdrawn.

Miss Torretta admitted that was now studying Islam, although she denied that was planning to convert.

The two women have also ruffled feathers by thanking Italy's Islamic community for working for their release before thanking the government and the Italian Red Cross.

The Italian people didn't back their country's involvement in Iraq anymore than Spain's did. The Italian Government probably isn't pleased that the young women sided with the resistance but the citizens are probably grateful for the honesty.

Campaign of Conflicting Information

I think they are doing this on purpose! Colin Powell says their is no link between al-Qaeda. Cheney insists there is a link. Bush tries to say we invaded Iraq because "the enemy attacked us" then backs down when John Kerry sets him straight. Now, Rumsfeld is now saying that there was no evidence of any between Saddam Hussein and al-Qaeda. Sorry, I just don't believe they are this disjointed. I think they are deliberately trying to confuse their 'slow to learn' followers.

Rumsfeld doubts Saddam Laden link:

"US Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld has cast doubt on whether there was ever a relationship between Saddam Hussein and al-Qaeda.

The alleged link was one of the justifications used by President Bush for the invasion of Iraq.

In front of an audience in New York, Mr Rumsfeld was asked about connections between Saddam and Osama Bin Laden. 'To my knowledge, I have not seen any strong, hard evidence that links the two,' he said."

If this isn't a deliberate 'flip-flop' in rhetoric, I wish they'd just get their lie straight!

Starting To Crumble?

Aside from a couple of cracks in some of my other posts, I haven't commented directly on Bush's antics at last week's debate. I simply can't. I am an avowed Bush basher and crowned him, long ago, as The Dunce King. I know he is a blathering idiot and I assumed that they'd wind him up and pull his string so that he'd, at least, come off as coherent. I was wrong but not surprised. What I am surprised by, though, is the surprise of so many of his followers. Where the heck have they been? In the partisan cracks of his ass? Anyhow, I still cannot write a cohesive paragraph about what I saw because I found it so frustrating. Throughout the debate I was either pounding my fist during those pregnant pauses when the pin ball in his head was trying to clink into a response, screaming "huh?" when he didn't make sense, or outright laughing.

Well, the GOP tried to do damage control but even some of his strongest supporters/pundits had to toss in the towel on this one. One of the most stinging reviews of his debacle was Joe Scarborough from MSNBC:

You know, President Bush let his supporters down last night. We're going to talk about it in tonight's "Real Deal."

George W. Bush walked on stage at the University of Miami last night as the United States commander in chief during the most important war since FDR led America through World War II. It was, of course, also the first presidential debate between the two party's nominees since the terror attacks of September 11. Now, add to that the bloody chaos in Iraq and the war of liberation in Afghanistan, and you had to the makings of the most substantive debate in decades.

Both candidates seemed to be on top of their game for the first 20 minutes, but then the president became strangely unfocused, as if he had something better to do than to explain to Americans and our allies exactly why it is that we're spending billions of dollars in Iraq and losing more young American soldiers lives every day. Now, simply put, the president's performance was embarrassing. The fact that George W. Bush could do little more than tell us 11 times that he has a hard job, and then ask for 30 additional seconds to tell us that he has a hard job, and then slump and look around during the debate like some junior high school jock thrown in debating class by his parents, was an absolute disgrace.

You know, the president of the United States not only let down his supporters at home last night. He let down his allies overseas, politicians who have put their own political careers and in some instances their lives on the line for the war that George W. Bush has been supporting.

Now, making matters worse is the fact that he has allowed his opponent to get away with advancing dangerous policy positions without consequence. This is, after all, the same John Kerry that told our most steadfast allies in Australia that they were more likely to be killed by terrorists attacks because they supported America in the war on terror. And this is the same John Kerry who still, despite his protests and that of his supporters, has still not told Americans what his position in Iraq really is.

But you know what? Republicans shouldn't be angry with John Kerry tonight. They should focus their critiques on George W. Bush. The fact that he is still unable to pick apart Senator Kerry's inconsistencies when it mattered the most and the fact that he doesn't have a long enough attention span to tell Americans for over 90 minutes where he is leading them in this war on terror points to a greater character flaw.

You know, George W. Bush had better get his act together soon or he's going to find himself following in his father's political footsteps and packing his bags next January. And that's tonight's "Real Deal."

That was an OUCH but here are some more reviews. I'm not sure what they are going to do with him. They've kept him sheltered from critics on his campaign stops, they keep his press conferences minimal. The man I saw last Thursday night didn't seem fit to be the President of anything. I don't know if he is on meds, if the effects of his drugging and boozing are finally catching up with him or if he is really just that inept. Something is not right with him and they can only hide it for so long. (This assessment coming from someone who picked up on Ronald Reagan's demise LONG before anyone else made mention of it). Iraq should have been his strongest debate. He is petrified of town hall debates where the guests aren't hand picked by his staff so the next one may seal his fate. Kerry is pulling ahead. Could this cookie finally be crumbling?

Mexed Missages

So, what kind of "mixed message" is it when the "Commander In Chief" sends thousands of troops off to war (in a backdoor draft) then wants to make cuts to the VA.

Influx of wounded soldiers strains VA:

" ... At the same time, President Bush's budget for 2005 calls for cutting the Department of Veterans Affairs staff that handles benefits claims, and some veterans report long waits for benefits and confusing claims decisions.

'I love the military; that was my life. But I don't believe they're taking care of me now,' said Staff Sgt. Gene Westbrook, 35, of Lawton, Okla. Paralyzed in a mortar attack near Baghdad in April, he has received no disability benefits because his paperwork is missing. He is supporting his wife and three children on his regular military pay of $2,800 a month as he awaits a ruling on whether he will receive $6,500 a month from the VA for his disability ..."

And this just sucks!

Robert Acosta, 21, of Tustin, Calif., said he relies on his disability checks of $2,332 a month to survive, but the VA is now reevaluating his case. Acosta's right hand was blown off and his left leg was shattered when he was ambushed at the gate to Baghdad International Airport on July 13, 2003. The passenger in a Humvee, he grabbed a grenade that had been lobbed through the window, saving his driver.

Acosta said he cannot work because his prosthetic right hand has been giving him trouble, his left leg has not returned to normal and he suffers from nightmares. Initially, he was rated 70 percent disabled — the medical board did not want to account for his leg injury, his PTSD claims and his hearing loss. After accepting those claims and rating him 100 percent disabled, the VA is questioning them again, asking Acosta to prove that some of his disabilities are service-related.

"They said there was no proof of it," Acosta said, referring to his PTSD claim. It took two months after he left the service for him to get his first disability payment, he said, and he spent his savings in the meantime. "I'm going to therapy every week. I'm working on it. I have bad dreams, I don't sleep at night and I get really jumpy. I don't know what they want me to do."

I Guess We Can Forget About Poland

POLAND TO QUIT IRAQ

Polish troops will start to withdraw from Iraq in the New Year and all will be out by the end of 2005, the country's president has promised.
Poland is the fourth-largest contributor of troops to the coalition in Iraq - with 2,500 - and there is strong opposition at home to the deployment.
President Aleksander Kwasniewski said the Iraq situation would be different after January, when general elections would take place ahead of the creation of a national Government.

'That is the reason why we decided to speak with the Iraqis and with our coalition partners, the United States, about a reduction of the Polish forces from January 1 and maybe to finish our mission at the end of 2005,' he said. "

What? No Church?

For all of Dubya's religiosity and the so-called "faith"that is guiding his administration, most of his supporters would probably find it fair to assume that he goes to church regularly and whenever possible. Apparently, however, that is not the case.

"The first excuse conservatives provide is that Bush can't possibly be expected to have time to go to church, what with being leader of the free world and all. Yet, during Jimmy Carter's four years in the White House, he found time not only to attend a Baptist church in the Washington, D.C., area, but to teach Sunday school there as well. For a presidential delegator like Bush--who has freed up enough time to spend approximately one-third of his presidency on vacation--finding a few hours for church should be a snap.

But, even if Bush had the time for church services, supporters protest, the security precautions necessary for a presidential visit would drive congregants away. This is the exact same argument the Reagan White House trotted out to explain why the patron saint of the religious right hardly ever attended church from 1981 to 1989. Bomb-sniffing dogs, metal detectors, and security personnel, so the theory goes, would pose an onerous burden for the average church. 'The president wants to avoid the sort of major weekly disruption that would be caused if he went to church,' says David Aikman, author of A Man of Faith: The Spiritual Journey of George W. Bush.

As it happens, I attended Foundry United Methodist Church for several years during the late '90s when the Clintons were members there. The only imposition was the extra ten seconds it took to walk through a metal detector. Parishioners did not leave the church in droves; on the contrary, many were pleasantly surprised to find that the Clintons played an active role in church life, particularly while Chelsea was involved in the choir and youth group.

If time and security aren't the reasons, what excuse does that leave? The very fact that the president doesn't attend church, some leading conservatives insist, is proof of what a good Christian he is. Unlike certain past presidents they could name but won't--ahem, cough, Bill Clinton--Bush doesn't feel the need to prove his religiosity. "This president has not made an issue of where he goes to church," says Michael Cromartie of the Ethics and Public Policy Center. "I find it refreshing that we don't have a president coming out of church with a large Bible under his arm." Conservatives relish this opportunity for a little gratuitous Clinton-bashing. In private, however, they admit the explanation doesn't hold up. "I really don't get it," one prominent Bush partisan told me. "There's no reason why the president couldn't find a church around here if he wanted to."

So many people wear their weekly attendance at church and bible study like a badge or honor and holiness that I wonder how many of those who are voting for Bush, strictly because of his professed faith, would think twice about that vote if they knew he were sleeping in every Sunday. Personally, though I think he had some sort of religious conversion in his desperate attempt to stop drinking, I think this "man of God" image is a brain child of Karl Rove and his belief that having the Christian Conservative block was key to getting/keeping him in office. Who knows?

Thousands of Fearful Christians Flee Iraq

This is yet another consequence of there being no plan for peace in Iraq. After hundreds of years of peaceful co-existence, thousands of fearful Christians flee:

"Fearing lawlessness and rising Islamic fundamentalism in their own country,large numbers of Iraqi Christians are fleeing to neighboring Jordan and Syria. No one knows for certain how many of Iraq's 750,000 Christians have left the country since the removal of Saddam Hussein, but estimates are in the tens of thousands.

The level of mistreatment Christians face in Iraq is disputed, even among Christians themselves, but no one can deny the fear, which is palpable among those crossing the border. Church bombings in Baghdad and Mosul only fuel that fear, but so do individual stories, even though few can be substantiated outside of Iraq."
[...]
Another fresh arrival in Amman, Bernadette Hikmat, says all this is unwarranted because Iraqi Christians are peaceful and have had a low-key presence in Iraq for the past 2,000 years.

Most of Iraq's Christians are Chaldean Eastern rite Catholics who are autonomous from Rome but who recognize the pope's authority. Other Christian groups include Roman and Syriac Catholics; Assyrians; Greek, Syriac and Armenian Orthodox; Presbyterians; Anglicans and evangelicals.

"Christians in Iraq do not instigate violent acts," Hikmat said, her large brown eyes widening. "But unlike the Sunni and Shiite Muslim communities, we have no big tribes to support or protect us against harm so that makes us vulnerable."

Teacher, He Cheated!

Oh My Gaaawd! Can it get more ridiculous? Bush's performance in the debate was just as abysmal has everything else he has done over the past four years so now they are claiming that Kerry cheated?

Section 5, pages 4-5 of the binding 'Memorandum of Understanding' that was negotiated and agreed upon by both political campaigns states:

'No props, notes, charts, diagrams, or other writings or other tangible things may be brought into the debate by either candidate.... Each candidate must submit to the staff of the Commission prior to the debate all such paper and any pens or pencils with which a candidate may wish to take notes during the debate, and the staff or commission will place such paper, pens and pencils on the podium...'

So what did Dem presidential contender John Kerry take out of his jacket as he approached the stage [with his back to the auditorium's audience]?

I'm so ready for November 2nd to get here!

Room With A View

I've been avoiding reading the news on the pounding of alleged insurgent strongholds because I know that it is impossible to execute this type of mission without excessive collateral damage. Here is a view from a room(in Iraq).

The last few days have been tense and stressful. Watching the military attacks on Samarra and hearing the stories from displaced families or people from around the area is like reliving the frustration and anger of the war. It's like a nightmare within a nightmare, seeing the corpses pile up and watching people drag their loved ones from under the bricks and steel of what was once a home.

To top it off, we have to watch American military spokespersons and our new Iraqi politicians justify the attacks and talk about 'insurgents' and 'terrorists' like they actually believe what they are saying... like hundreds of civilians aren't being massacred on a daily basis by the worlds most advanced military technology.

As if Allawi's gloating and Bush's inane debates aren't enough, we have to listen to people like Powell and Rumsfeld talk about "precision attacks". What exactly are precision attacks?! How can you be precise in a city like Samarra or in the slums of Sadir City on the outskirts of Baghdad? Many of the areas under attack are small, heavily populated, with shabby homes several decades old. In Sadir City, many of the houses are close together and the streets are narrow. Just how precise can you be with missiles and tanks? We got a first-hand view of America's "smart weapons". They were smart enough to kill over 10,000 Iraqis in the first few months of the occupation.

The explosions in Baghdad aren't any better. A few days ago, some 40 children were blown to pieces while they were gathering candy from American soldiers at the opening of a sewage treatment plant. (Side note: That's how bad things have gotten- we have to celebrate the reconstruction of our sewage treatment plants). I don't know who to be more angry with- the idiots and PR people who thought it would be a good idea to have children running around during a celebration involving troops or the parents for letting their children attend. I the people who arranged the explosions burn within the far-reaches of hell.

I Knew This Was Coming

The world just can't stand outspoken women. In a land that is supposed to be about free speech and democracy, there always seems to be a different bar of tolerance when a woman is involved. I find Teresa Heinz Kerry quite entertaining and refreshing - much moreso than the painted lady grace of Laura Bush.

"Democratic election advisers have ordered Teresa Heinz Kerry to adopt a lower profile in the final stages of the campaign by her husband, Senator John Kerry, for the White House because they fear that she may be alienating voters.

Mrs Heinz Kerry, who as the heiress to the Heinz fortune is one of the world's richest women, has been told to keep out of the spotlight because her outspoken and unpredictable manner is regarded as an electoral liability."

Just Plain Stupid

I was chatting on the phone about the debates with my TV on mute when Aaron Mc Gruder was on CNN. In a nutshell, this is what he said. I'll just say ditto!

"Boondocks" cartoonist rates Bush
While pundits on the left, right, and center agreed that John Kerry beat George Bush in the opening debate, none was more emphatic than “Boondocks” cartoonist Aaron McGruder. “Bush got his ass whupped,” McGruder told CNN’s Aaron Brown.

But the outspoken McGruder, who was relegated to “The Contrarian” segment of Brown’s news show, was not finished. “The elephant in the room” that no TV pontificators will dare acknowledge, he observed, is that Bush “is incredibly dumb...he can’t articulate, he can’t complete a full sentence, and he’s our president.”

Brown, being a member in good standing of the pontificator class, rushed to challenge McGruder, asserting that Bush was a man of strong beliefs, blah, blah, blah. But McGruder was unimpressed. Convictions don’t mean a thing if you’re just plain stupid, he pointed out.

And with that, Brown bade The Contrarian farewell.

-- David Talbot