« November 2004 | Main | January 2005 »
December 31, 2004
The United States of Ukraine
From The Free Press:
Ohio's official non-recount ends amidst new evidence of fraud, theft and judicial contempt mirrored in New Mexico
by Bob Fitrakis, Steve Rosenfeld and Harvey Wasserman
December 31, 2004
COLUMBUS -- The Ohio presidential recount was officially terminated Tuesday, December 28.
But the end comes amidst bitter dispute over official certification of impossible voter turnout numbers, over the refusal of Ohio's Republican Supreme Court Chief Justice to recuse himself from crucial court challenges involving his own re-election campaign, over the Republican Secretary of State's refusal to testify under subpoena, over apparent tampering with tabulation machines, over more than 100,000 provisional and machine-rejected ballots left uncounted, over major discrepancies in certified vote counts and turnout ratios, and over a wide range of unresolved disputes that continue to leave the true outcome of Ohio's presidential vote in serious doubt.
Officially, Republican Secretary of State Kenneth Blackwell has confirmed substantial errors in the vote count, with a shift of some 1,200 votes based on statewide recounts of about 3% of the vote. But additional new evidence of massive vote-counting fraud across the state continues to be unearthed, calling into question George W. Bush’s alleged victory in Ohio and pending re-election in the Electoral College.
Blackwell, who was co-chair of the Bush-Cheney campaign, announced that his recount awarded 734 additional votes to Kerry and 449 additional votes to Bush. Meanwhile, more than 92,672 machine-rejected ballots remain unchecked and uncounted, as do at least 14,000 provisional ballots. Conservative estimates of Kerry’s net gain among those ballots are another 36,000 to 40,000 votes. No accounting in the count or recount has been made for voters turned away at the polls due to insufficient voting machines, computer malfunction, tampering with registration data, mishandling of absentee ballots, misinformation and intimidation, or a wide range of other problems.
Blackwell's certified statewide returns now give Bush a margin of 118,775 votes. Ohio's electoral votes would give Bush the presidency if they are certified by Congress on January 6. A challenge by members of the House of Representatives is expected under an 1887 law passed in response to the disputed election of 1876, during which Republican Rutherford B. Hayes took the presidency in the Electoral College despite losing the popular vote. The challenge must be joined by at least one Senator.
Meanwhile, a new precinct-by-precinct analysis in many Ohio counties indicates that Bush's margin here was likely obtained by fraud. That is the main claim of the election challenge suit now at the Ohio Supreme Court, where Ohio's GOP Supreme Court Chief Justice, Thomas Moyer, has refused to recuse himself, even though allegations of vote switching – where votes cast for one candidate are assigned to another in the computerized tabulation stage – involve his own re-election campaign.
Ohio's official recount was conducted by GOP Secretary of State Kenneth Blackwell, despite widespread protests that his role as co-chair of the state's Bush-Cheney campaign constituted an serious conflict of interest. Blackwell has refused to testify in the election challenge lawsuit alleging massive voter fraud, as have a number of GOP county election supervisors. Blackwell also refuses to explain why he has left more than 106,000 machine-rejected and provisional ballots entirely uncounted.
The final recount tested roughly 3% of the roughly 5.7 million votes cast in the state. But contrary to the law governing the recount, many precincts tested were selected not at random, but by Blackwell's personal designation. Experts with the election challenge suit have noted many of the precincts selected were mostly free of the irregularities they are seeking to investigate, while many contested precincts were left unrecounted.
The official overall shifting of nearly 1200 votes was deemed "absolutely unacceptable" by Colby Hamilton of the Green Party, which joined the Libertarian Party in paying $113,600 to have the recount done. The Greens and Libertarians are now asking for another recount, charging that the first one was woefully incomplete and unreliable.
The Kerry campaign, which raised millions of dollars to guarantee "every vote will be counted" in the 2004 election, has challenged the results in just one county, where a technician dismantled at least one voting machine prior to the recount. Daniel J. Hoffheimer, an attorney hired by the Kerry campaign has emphasized his belief that despite that challenge, "this presidential election is over. The Bush-Cheney ticket has won."
Hoffheimer is affiliated with Taft, Stettinius and Hollister, a Cincinnati firm with deep Republican ties to Ohio's current GOP governor, Bob Taft. Hoffheimer said "the Kerry-Edwards campaign has found no conspiracy and no fraud in Ohio," but more serious researchers continue to uncover plenty. While struggling to find the financial resources necessary for the legal challenge, the Election Protection team has continued to uncover deeply disturbing evidence of manipulation, theft and fraud that went unaudited by the official recount.
Some 14.6% of Ohio votes were cast on electronic machines with no paper trail, rendering them unauditable. But on election night, electronic machines and computer software were used throughout the state to tabulate paper ballots. The contrasts are striking. Officially, Bush built a narrow margin of roughly 51% versus 48% for Kerry based on votes counted on election night. But among the 147,400 provisional and absentee ballots that were counted AFTER election night, Kerry received 54.46 percent of the vote. These later totals came from counts done by hand, as opposed to counts done by computer tabulators, many of which came from Diebold.
Many of the electronic voting machines with no paper trail also came from Republican-dominated companies, including some from Diebold, whose owner, Wally O'Dell, infamously guaranteed in 2003 that he would deliver Ohio's electoral votes to Bush.
Diebold also manufactured many of the tabulators used to count punch card ballots. In the vast majority of Ohio precincts, those tabulations were not rechecked or recounted. In at least two counties, technicians from Diebold and from Triad dismantled all or part of such tabulating machines prior to the recount. In Shelby County, election officials admitted that they discarded crucial tabulator records, rendering a meaningful recount impossible. In many cases, the recounts were conducted not by public election officials, but by private corporations, many of them with Republican ties.
In other precincts, impossibly high voter turnout figures -- nearly all of them adding to Bush's official margin -- remain unexplained. In the heavily Republican southern county of Perry, Blackwell certified one precinct with 221 more votes than registered voters. Two precincts -- Reading S and W. Lexington G -- were let stand in the officially certified final vote count with voter turnouts of roughly 124% each.
In Miami County's Concord South West precinct, Blackwell certified a voter turnout of 98.55 percent, requiring that all but 10 voters in the precinct cast ballots. But a freepress.org canvas easily found 25 voters who said they did not vote. In the nearby Concord South precinct, Blackwell certified an apparently impossible voter turnout of 94.27 percent. Both Concord precincts went heavily for Bush.
By contrast, in heavily Democratic Cuyahoga County, amidst record turnouts, a predominantly African-American precinct, Cleveland 6C, was certified with just a 07.85 percent turnout. The official count was 45 votes for Kerry versus one for Bush, in a precinct where the day's overall voter turnout would have indicated eight or nine times as many voters.
Independent statistical studies of Cuyahoga County indicate that if the prevailing statewide voter turnout was really 60 percent of the registered voters, as seems likely based on turnout in other major cities in Ohio, Kerry’s margin of victory in Cleveland alone was wrongly reduced in the certified returns by 20,000 or more votes.
New research has added confirmation to apparent widespread fraud -– most likely in the computer tabulation stage -- in at least three heavily Republican southern Ohio counties. Mathematical researcher Richard Hayes Phillips, PhD., has shown that Clermont, Butler and Warren Counties, surrounding Cincinnati, netted Bush votes on par with his margin of victory in the state. But for Bush to have built up his margins in these three counties, 13,500 Democrats would have had to have split their tickets by voting for Supreme Court Chief Justice candidate Ellen Connally while simultaneously voting for Bush, by all accounts a virtually impossible event.
The numbers are startling. In Butler Country, Bush officially was given 109,866 votes. But conservative GOP Chief Justice Moyer was given only 68,407, a negative discrepancy of more than 40,000 votes. Meanwhile, Moyer's opponent, a pro-gay, pro-abortion African-American liberal from Cleveland, was officially credited with 61,559 votes to John Kerry's 56,234.
The Blackwell-approved tally would mean that more than 5,000 Butler County voters ignored Kerry's name near the top of the ballot, but jumped to the bottom of the ballot to vote for Connally. And this was to have happened in an area where some 40,000 Republicans did exactly the opposite, voting for the President while skipping the race for Chief Justice. Few who are familiar with Butler County politics believe such an outcome to be even remotely credible.
In Warren County, Bush was credited with 68,035 votes to Kerry’s 26,043 votes. But just as the county's votes were about to be counted after the polls closed on November 2, the Board of Elections claimed a Homeland Security alert authorized them to throw out all Democratic and independent observers, including the media. The vote count was thus conducted entirely by Republicans.
Here Blackwell's certified tally says the slightly funded Connally somehow outpolled Kerry by more than 2,400 votes, nearly 10 percent of his county wide total.
Phillips’ latest analysis was conducted at the precinct-by-precinct level. When looking at returns before they have been blended into countywide figures, Phillips says the suspect nature of the outcome in these three counties is heightened by the fact that precincts within them yield wildly inconsistent data. A few municipalities show Republicans and Democrats voting along party lines – as one would expect. But throughout most of these three counties are precincts with massive margins for Bush that are inconsistent with the rest of the counties and impossible to conceive except by some sort of manipulation. This is an almost certain indicator of fraud, says Phillips.
The statistical analysis of these results show Blackwell’s certified vote is deeply flawed. It does not, however, identify how the fraud was perpetrated. Based in part on these inconsistencies, the Election Protection legal team has filed suit with the state Supreme Court, asking it to overturn Ohio's presidential election.
But despite the fact that the contention rests in large part on Moyer's own re-election campaign, the Chief Justice refuses to recuse himself from this and related cases. He has helped write decisions denying a further public investigation into the count and recount processes, and has voted to protect Blackwell from providing public testimony under legal subpoena.
Parallel problems have now surfaced in New Mexico, where a bitter recount battle is also being waged. At a public hearing in Columbus convened by Rep. John Conyers (D-MI), senior Democrat on the US House Judiciary Committee, Rev. Jesse Jackson testified that Sen. Kerry was informed in a phone conversation that optical scan machines were being used in New Mexico to steal votes. New Mexico allegedly went to Bush by some 7,000 votes in an election with widespread charges of manipulation and fraud, especially in heavily Hispanic precincts. According to Jackson, Kerry said he know that every single New Mexico precinct fitted with optical scan machines went for Bush, demographically a virtual impossibility.
But New Mexico's Democratic Gov. Bill Richardson has refused to cooperate with Green Party and Audit the Vote activists demanding a recount, acceding to decisions that could raise the price for a recount to well over a million dollars. Despite its huge leftover war chest, the Democratic Party has not come forward to help push New Mexico's recount, which many believe could give the state to Kerry. As of now, no recount has even begun, with the issue still mired in the courts over the question of finances.
On Monday, January 3, Rev. Jackson will lead a rally in Columbus demanding, among other things, an Ohio revote. Ironically, the apparently defeated Republican gubernatorial candidate in Washington is now demanding the same thing. Moreover, unlike Ohio, in Washington state the Democrat emerged victorious after that state’s Supreme Court ordered all ballots counted and certified totals adjusted.
If anything, Blackwell's refusal to testify, Moyer's refusal to recuse, and the staggering flood of new evidence from a non-credible non-recount have helped further spread the belief that the Ohio vote -- and thus the presidency -- has been stolen. The findings from New Mexico confirm that Ohio was not the only state where fraud and vote theft may have provided Bush with a margin of victory. Challenges in Florida have also reached the court system.
The alleged Bush victory could be challenged in the much-anticipated January 6 reporting of the Electoral College to Congress. But given the mounting indications of manipulation, fraud and theft, it is virtually certain the debate over who really won Ohio -– as well as New Mexico and Florida -- and the presidency will be bitterly disputed for many years to come.
--
Bob Fitrakis, Steve Rosenfeld and Harvey Wasserman are co-authors of OHIO'S STOLEN ELECTION: VOICES OF THE DISENFRANCHISED, 2004, to be published by http://freepress.org. Tax-deductible contributions to this book/film project are gladly accepted at http://freepress.org/store.php#don_pub or by check to the Columbus Institute for Contemporary Journalism at 1240 Bryden Road, Columbus, OH 43205.
Posted by Kevin at 11:46 AM |
December 30, 2004
The old face of evil
(via The Stakeholder)
Public Citizen today asked the U.S. Department of Justice to conduct a formal investigation of possible violations of federal anti-bribery statutes by House Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-Texas), Rep. Joe Barton (R-Texas) and former Rep. W.J. "Billy" Tauzin (R-La.), as well as executives and lobbyists for the Kansas-based Westar Energy, Inc.
In a letter to Noel Hillman, chief of the Justice Department's criminal division, Public Citizen wrote that substantial evidence, especially newly-released documents from a House ethics committee investigation, suggests a possible scheme using campaign contributions to buy political favors worth millions of dollars to Westar Energy and its executives.
Will the investigation happen? Not if House Republicans get their way:
In the aftermath of back-to-back ethics slaps at House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, House Republicans are preparing to make it more difficult to begin ethics investigations and could remove the GOP chairman who presided over the admonishments delivered to DeLay last fall.
A House leadership aide said a package of rules changes to be presented to the House when the 109th Congress convenes Tuesday could include a plan that would require a majority vote of the ethics panel to pursue a formal investigation. At present, a deadlock on the panel, which is evenly split between the two parties, keeps the case pending. The possible change, the aide said, would mean that a tie vote would effectively dismiss the case.
And the few ethical Republicans left in the House? Hastert wants to make sure they're powerless:
During the last Congress, Rep. Joel Hefley (R-Colo.), chairman of the House Ethics Committee, proved himself something of an inconvenience as well when it came to Mr. DeLay: Under his leadership, the all-too-often slumbering committee bestirred itself to admonish the majority leader for an array of ethical missteps. Now Mr. Hefley risks meeting the same fate as the discarded rule. House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) is poised to decide whether to let Mr. Hefley continue in the thankless task of heading the committee. According to The Post's Mike Allen, Mr. Hastert is leaning toward removing Mr. Hefley.
The Post is reporting that Hefley wants to keep the House Ethics Chair job, despite Hastert's mouthpiece saying he might be replaced because he's been Chair for "a long time".
These Republicans are thumbing their noses in the face of the American electorate. And no wonder. We continue to send them back to Washington despite their very public ethics issues.
Posted by Carla at 05:36 PM |
The new face of evil
The scourge of baseball (also known as the New York Yankees) have reportedly signed Randy Johnson. The deal is contingent on a few minor hitches..none of which should botch it up.
Johnson,41, is a five time Cy Young Award winner.
Johnson used to play for my beloved Seattle Mariners..back in the day. I went to one of his first starts. He was wild as hell but he could throw really hard. We were seated in a luxury box over home plate. Johnson threw a fastball that went high and hit the backstop. The thud from the impact echoed in the Kingdome (yeah...that long ago) and I think the batter wet himself.
With this signing, Johnson's move to the Dark Side is now complete.
I hope the Mariners light him up like a Christmas tree. (We've acquired some decent bats, finally).
Posted by Carla at 03:16 PM |
December 29, 2004
Quotes of the day
From Ezra:
The internet's been used to focus Americans on the tragedy at hand and channel their horror into concrete relief. I'd be stunned if online efforts alone hadn't reached into the tens, or even hundreds, of millions, far outpacing our government's pathetic response. In this day and age, our government is not worthy of its people, and I'm proud of us for that
It's pretty sad when Americans across the internet can possibly send more money than our government. Kudos to Amazon and Google and Apple.
Another quote from the day comes from the Bush Camp...who looking increasingly ridiculous when it comes to assisting victims of the earthquake/tsunami:
Earlier yesterday, White House spokesman Trent Duffy said the president was confident he could monitor events effectively without returning to Washington or making public statements in Crawford, where he spent part of the day clearing brush and bicycling. Explaining the about-face, a White House official said: "The president wanted to be fully briefed on our efforts. He didn't want to make a symbolic statement about 'We feel your pain.' "
Many Bush aides believe Clinton was too quick to head for the cameras to hold forth on tragedies with his trademark empathy. "Actions speak louder than words," a top Bush aide said, describing the president's view of his appropriate role.
Idiots. Bush wanted to stay on vacation while tens of thousands of people die and suffer...after promising less money for the victims than for his inauguration (let alone Iraq..where we are dumping in excess of $170 million per day).
Actions speak louder than words...indeed.
Posted by Carla at 06:16 PM |
Downtrodden=brussel sprouts
I like a good cage match as much as the next girl. So when I heard that Power Line blog was in a snit over a column by Nick Coleman of the Star Tribune, I readied my popcorn.
For those of you unfamiliar with the blokes at Power Line, they were the self congratulatory scourge who "outed" Dan Rather's documents against Bush's National Guard service. Their claims that the documents were forgeries were demonstrably false. And just in case that isn't demonstrable enough for you there's more here and here and here and here.
Power Line was named Time Magazine's Blog of the Year for 2004. This award was no doubt due to the toppling of Rather's story. Interesting how the "liberal media" dismissed the entire series of stories debunking Power Lines claims...but I digress.
Coleman eviscerates the boys at Power Line, outing their real names, vocations and employers (although I don't think that information was especially secret before Coleman's column). Coleman refers to them as "Extreme bloggers" whose lust for power so eclipses them that facts are nonexistent in the Power Line realm.
The most entertaining part of Coleman's anti-Power Line screed is his "blogger style fact checking", which I found hilarious and a bit thought provoking:
1) "It's totally unexpected," Johnson, the banker, told the newspaper after Powerline won "Blog of the Year."
But the Aw Shucks Act doesn't fly. Powerline campaigned shamelessly for awards, winning an online "Best Blog of 2004" a week before the Time honor. That online award was a bloggers' poll, and Powerline linked its readers to the award site 10 times during the balloting, shilling for votes.
2) "We keep it very much separate from our day jobs," said Hinderaker, meaning the boys don't blog at work.
But they do. Johnson recently had time at his bank job to post a despicable item sliming Sen. Mark Dayton. If I had the money they think I do, I'd put it all in TCF. Then I'd pull it out.
3) Powerline sells thousands of dollars in ads, including one for T-shirts that say, "Hung Like a Republican."
But does Powerline or its mighty righty allies take money from political parties, campaigns or well-heeled benefactors who hope to affect Minnesota's politics from behind the scenes? We don't know, and they don't have to say. They are not Mainstream.
Does Powerline get money from the Republican Party? Does Kos (the largest lefty blog) get money from the Democratic Party? I don't know the answers for sure. We certainly don't get any money from anyone. But then again we're exponentially tinier than the big boys.
Blogs are certainly a media outlet. But then so is Rush Limbaugh and he's hardly a bastion of truth and fact. Journalism is about fact, or so we're taught. Coleman also sees journalism as "in service to the downtrodden". Power Line labels this an "agenda" on Coleman's part. Perhaps it is. Interestingly though..."service to the downtrodden" is posted on Power Line in such a way as I might write about eating brussel sprouts: a nasty, disgusting, horrible thing.
"Deacon" at Power Line suggests that they have their own agenda. I'm curious what that might be...since service to the downtrodden is so enormously heinous.
Posted by Carla at 01:33 PM |
A great way to help
If you're looking for a way to help the victims of the earthquake and tsunamis of Southeast Asia, one of the very best organizations around is Mercy Corps.
Mercy Corps is a Portland, Oregon based organization that has been committed to helping communities get on their feet and teaching them how to stay there.
They're highly regarded for their work and the way donations are used. They're also local to us and get a lot of local news coverage, so I know they're legitimate.
Posted by Carla at 10:50 AM |
December 28, 2004
Did Bush really win?
Yesterday I was listening to Thom Hartmann guesthosting on the Randi Rhodes show on Air America. He had on a guest who is the staff attorney for a group in Ohio and they were talking about the recent election, particularly in Ohio. That got me to thinking about irregularities in this election.
Today for example we find out that Ohio Secretary of State Ken Blackwell (R) refused to show up at a deposition yesterday. The deposition was part of an election challenge lawsuit filed at the Ohio Supreme Court. Blackwell is not only the top elections official for the state of Ohio, he was also the Bush/Cheney04 state chairman for Ohio and was on record as promising to help deliver Ohio for Bush.
What is Mr. Blackwell hiding?
Why does there always seem to be a Republican for Bush behind every allegation of either attempted or actual vote fraud or scheme to suppress the right of legal, eligible voters to cast a vote?
Consider the following:
Recent polls suggest that Bush's approval rating is abnormally low for a just re-elected sitting President. That makes no sense for a guy who supposedly won the popular vote by a comfortable margin.
Exit polling data suggests a disparity between how voters thought they had voted and how their votes were apparently counted.
Are these little factoids part of a larger picture?
We're all familiar with the crass, brute force methods used to highjack the first election in the Ukraine. Not surprisingly such crude methods are hard to hide. How does one go about committing election fraud in a way that keeps it below the national radar screen here in America?
One way would be with electronic voting machines. It seems that Republicans have expressed interest in the past in acquiring computer programs which would allow one to rig the votes that are reported from such machines. That sworn affidavit was in Florida. In Ohio we've got a sworn affidavit from an election official in Ohio alleging inappropriate and likely illegal election tampering (PDF) by employees of the company that makes the electronic voting machines in use there.
Several statistics to come out of the Ohio vote seem very strange indeed. The Washington Dispatch noted the following: In one voting precinct in Gahanna, Ohio, 4,258 voters supposedly cast an electronic ballot for George Bush while only 260 voted for John Kerry. While it is vaguely possible that over 94% of voters in the precinct supported George W. Bush, it is a hard number to believe considering that only 638 voters were counted at the polling center. Another curious number that should be investigated is how the Gahanna District ended up with a voter turnout above 100% according to data compiled by the members of DemocraticUnderground.com and confirmed by the Washington Dispatch. Within this recent election, 20,736 voters cast ballots in all of Gahanna's districts while the City of Gahanna only shows that it has roughly 20,130 citizens of voting age. Even with 90% voter registration, 20,736 ballots cast within the City of Gahanna would be an amazing feat worthy of biblical notoriety. Others may call it fraud.
Another way would be a concerted effort to suppress the vote in areas deemed likely to vote for the other candidate.
Preemptive Karma noted several such allegations over the months leading up to this election in Florida, Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Ohio. That last one in Ohio is particularly interesting because it reveals a concerted nationwide effort by the GOP.
There are many more such allegations out there. We at PK didn't post anything close to an exhaustive list of disenfranchisement schemes by the GOP
Another way would be to collect and then throw away Voter Registration forms for anyone who wanted to register for any party other than the Republican Party. That example was from Oregon. But, the same group was known to have been operating is several other states. And who knows how many other groups did the same thing but never got caught?
Think of how many people showed up to vote believing that they were properly registered only to be handed a provisional ballot. Most provisional ballots never end up getting counted. The GOP can claim that provisional ballots by unregistered voters shouldn't be counted and most everyone would agree on the face of it. But, Republicans have got their own fingerprints all over the circumstances under which many of those voters believed that they were legitimately registered to vote.
Why does it always seem to be that we find the GOP's fingerprints all over these schemes to fraudulently win an election?
Did Bush really win?
Posted by Kevin at 12:58 PM |
Wow
Atrios lends perspective:
$15 million: Dollar amount in aid the US is pledging to help earthquake and tsunami victims in Asia.
$30-40 million: Estimated budget for Bush's Inauguration, not including security costs.
In a word: disgusting.
Update:Rox Populi takes the perspective to a whole new level.
Disgusting-er.
Posted by Carla at 11:44 AM |
The "miracle" in Argentina
Three years ago, Argentina's economy was in complete meltdown.
In 2001, Argentina had a record debt default of over $100 billion. Unemployment was at 20 percent. In early 2002, Argentinians living below the poverty line had ballooned to a massive 53.4%.
In 2004, the forecast is exponentially rosier. So how'd they do it?
Argentina's recovery has been undeniable, and it has been achieved at least in part by ignoring and even defying economic and political orthodoxy. Rather than moving to immediately satisfy bondholders, private banks and the I.M.F., as other developing countries have done in less severe crises, the Peronist-led government chose to stimulate internal consumption first and told creditors to get in line with everyone else.
And how did they stimulate internal consumption? They went the FDR route:
Some of the new jobs are from a low-paying government make-work program, but nearly half are in the private sector. As a result, unemployment has declined from more than 20 percent to about 13 percent, and the number of Argentines living below the poverty line has fallen by nearly 10 points from the record high of 53.4 percent early in 2002.
The government provided public works projects for those who couldn't get work in the private sector. In other words, they put their money into the pockets of the Argentinian poor. And what do the poor do with money? They SPEND it on food and other goods. That in turn stimulates the economy. So instead of giving all of their money to creditors and the IMF, Argentina gave it to her people and are on the way to rebuilding their economy.
Now lay this in contrast to the Bush plan. They lowered taxes on the wealthy, who invest it in stocks, mutual funds, futures, etc. Employment figures have remained stagnant. Consumer confidence continues to fall...even as the economy tries to grow based on the investment of the wealthy. But how long can this really last? Consumers are the long term drivers of the economic engine. Without money in their pockets to spend on goods and services...there won't be companies whose stocks can be invested.
And in the end...who is hurt the most by Bush's plan? The middle class and the poor.
Posted by Carla at 11:24 AM |
December 27, 2004
Do the math....
Via The Agonist
At the heart of President Bush's plan to sell Social Security private accounts is a simple notion: You're always better off investing your retirement money than letting the government do it.
By doing it yourself, you can stow some money in the stock market, and over the long run will get a better return on that investment than today's Social Security system offers.
The idea is broadly accepted. That's why the administration's plan to partially privatize the system sounds appealing to many. But that better return won't always happen.
Just ask Stanley Logue of San Diego.
For 45 years, the defense-industry analyst paid into the system until his retirement in 1994. But with all the recent hoopla over reform, Mr. Logue, a Massachusetts Institute of Technology graduate, decided to go back and check his own records. Would he have done better investing his money than the bureaucrats at the Social Security Administration?
He recorded all the payroll taxes he paid into the system (including the matching amount from his employer), tracked down the return the Social Security Trust Fund earned for each of the 45 years, and then compared the result with what he would have gotten had he been able to invest the same amount of payroll tax money over the same period in the Dow Jones Industrial Average (including dividends).
To his surprise, the Social Security investment won out: $261,372 versus $255,499, a difference of $5,873.
Taking into account that Social Security is INSURANCE and not an entitlement, this is a pretty staggering finding. Your money is actually safer with Uncle Sam than it is with Wall Street.
If you'd like to send this story to your federal legislators..click here
Posted by Carla at 05:58 PM |
Imagine that...
It seems that my fellow Americans aren't very interested in Congressional Republicans messing with the Constitution.
Posted by Kevin at 12:57 PM |
Happy New Year collegians! Now go flip burgers
If you're getting a Pell Grant now...better check to see if Bush has recalculated you right out of it.
Posted by Carla at 10:33 AM |
December 26, 2004
Naughty and Nice, 2004
The Center for American Progress emailed me their list of who they believe were the "naughty" and "nice" for 2004.
Some highlights from them...and my own follow:
Naughty: Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, for sending U.S. soldiers into battle without the equipment and armor they need to fight.
Nice: Grassroots charity groups like "Give 2 The Troops" and "Operation Gratitude," for sending care packages, supplies and reminders of home to American troops abroad.
Naughty: Congress, for underfunding the Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP). allocating "$164 million less than needed to cover the expected 24 percent increase in home heating costs" this winter.
Nice: Richard Hamann and his wife, Donna, for paying the electricity bills for the entire town of Anthon, Iowa, because they wanted to give something back to their community.
Naughty: Medicare headTom Scully, Rep. Billy Tauzin, Rep. James Greenwood and trade representatives Ralph Ives and Claude Burcky, for using public service for personal benefit, taking lucrative, top-dollar jobs with the pharmaceutical industry they had formerly regulated.
Nice: Rep. Henry Waxman, for using public service for public benefit, compiling reports on everything from the Halliburton to undue secrecy in the White House.
Mine:
Naughty:Bay Area Laboratory Cooperative(BALCO), who apparently provided performance enhancing steroids to top tier athletes in baseball and track and field.
Nice: The mighty Boston Red Sox who shrugged the curse and defeated the Evil Yankees.
Naughty:The Federal Communications Commission. The FCC ran rampant in 2004 levying ridiculous fines at the behest of a puritannical Congress. McCarthyism redux.
Nice: Shock jock Howard Stern. As one of the FCC's favorite targets, Stern abandoned the public airwaves and will probably do for satellite radio what HBO has done for pay cable television.
Naughty: The Beaverton,Oregon City Attorney who refused to charge Rosemary Kriegel of Tigard, Oregon after her physical act against Kendra Lloyd-Knox, who was protesting a Bush event.
Here's the photo...which represents PK's first foray into journalism:
Nice: The readers of Preemptive Karma. You've encouraged, cajoled, debated, inspired and made sure our cups runneth over. Thank you.
Here's to a peaceful and blessed 2005.
Posted by Carla at 05:12 PM |
So much for democracy
Kevin Drum explores the newest twist to the failed Bush Iraq policy. It seems that the... um... braintrust somewhere deep in the bowels of the administration has decided that the appearance of democracy in Iraq will work better than actual democracy.
The NY Times reports: The Bush administration is talking to Iraqi leaders about guaranteeing Sunni Arabs a certain number of ministries or high-level jobs in the future Iraqi government if, as is widely predicted, Sunni candidates fail to do well in Iraq's elections.
It's a position that the administration has been forced into because of the repeated blunders in strategic planning that can be traced directly to NeoCon ideologues contemptuously ignoring the advice of competent professionals (registration required).
The real shame of it all is that it didn't have to come down to this farce.
As Kevin Drum explains: "A year ago there were plenty of good proposals that could have avoided the worst of this fiasco. The best of them made use of geographical precincts, like an American congressional election. Under a system like that, there would have been plenty of predominantly Sunni precincts that would have elected Sunni representatives regardless of whether or not turnout was low. It wouldn't have been perfect, but it almost certainly would have been better than the kludge we're ending up with."
If these clowns were only making a laughing stock of NeoCon ideology that'd be one thing. But, they're making a laughing stock of everything that this nation has ever stood for.
“The Nation, which indulges towards another an habitual hatred, or an habitual fondness, is in some degree a slave… to its animosity or to its affection, either of which is sufficient to lead it astray from its duty and its interest… Such a passionate attachment… produces a variety of evils. Sympathy for the favorite nation, facilitating the illusion of an imaginary interest… where no real common interest exists, and infusing into one the enmities of the other, betrays the former into a participation in the quarrels and wars of the latter, without adequate inducement or justification…” George Washington
Posted by Kevin at 01:17 PM |
December 25, 2004
Santa Claus Is Coming To Town
(via Raspberry World)
Still think Christmas is a Christian Holiday?
Posted by Kevin at 09:39 AM |
December 24, 2004
Share the Holiday Spirit With Those in Harm's Way
Received via email:
During this holiday season, our hearts go out to those in harm’s way. That’s why we’re highlighting an opportunity to help a soldier in Iraq or Afghanistan call home for the holidays, and provide humanitarian assistance to refugee families in Iraq. It’s a great way to let them know we care.
Dear MoveOn member,
This is a cherished time of year, when we take time out from the workaday world to focus on our families and friends.
Our thoughts also naturally go to those in harm's way -- the young American men and women who won't be with their families this holiday season, and the Iraqi refugee families that face a long, cold winter. That's why we're highlighting two opportunities for MoveOn members to reach out in the holiday spirit to the people who are paying the true costs of war.
For the 160,000 men and women in Iraq and Afghanistan, even a holiday call home can be prohibitively expensive. That's why the United Service Organizations (USO) has launched "Operation Phone Home" to provide phone cards to every soldier who wants one in time for the holidays. With just a few days left, the USO is still trying to hit its goal, and MoveOn members can make the difference. To send a phone card, just go to:
http://www.uso.org/pubs/8_20_2733.cfm
This is a great way of showing that those of us who didn't support the Iraq war still support and appreciate the sacrifice of the people who were called to serve in it. And this kind of small-scale giving can snowball into large-scale benefits for the troops. After MoveOn members and many others donated millions of frequent flyer miles to bring soldiers home during their leave, the Pentagon was compelled to fully fund all future flights themselves. Your leadership made the difference then, and it can do so again.
War takes its toll on civilians as well as soldiers. Massive numbers of Iraqi families that have been displaced by the escalating violence. Because conditions are so dangerous, humanitarian relief organizations have withdrawn from Iraq, and the Iraqi winter is closing in. The International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies (IFRC) is one of the very few international organizations still daring to bring vital services directly to Iraqi civilians.
You can make your donation to the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies, and earmark it for Iraq, at:
http://www.ifrc.org/helpnow/donate/donate_response.asp
The IFRC is racing to help hundreds of thousands of refugees survive the winter by providing blankets, heaters, and basic medical supplies. In the face of increased insurgent violence targeted at government schools, the Red Crescent has mounted an effort to equip every school with first aid training and basic medical supplies. They've also been charged with maintaining the rapidly growing number of orphanages in the most war-torn parts of the country.
Most of our holiday traditions revolve around the simple metaphor of bringing light into the darkness. For us here at MoveOn, you're the single greatest source of light we know. We're awed and honored to be working with you. Because of you, we know there are brighter times ahead.
Have a wonderful holiday.
Sincerely,
--Adam, Ben, Carrie, Eli, James, Joan, Justin, Laura, Mari, Noah, Rosalyn, and Wes
The MoveOn.org Team
December 23rd, 2004
Posted by Kevin at 01:10 PM |
Debunking Centrism
David Sirota takes on Centrism.
My biggest personal beef with "Centrism" is that it tries to push people to give up their passionate and strongly held beliefs in the name of compromise. And as Sirota notes...compromise can sometimes conveniently be a money maker for guys like Joe Lieberman and Evan Bayh.
Either you have strongly held principles or you don't. Some centrists certainly do have them...and I'm not attempting to disparage that. But you don't see those on the Left asking the centrists to give those principles up in the name of compromise.
The opposite is rarely true nowadays.
Posted by Carla at 09:30 AM |
December 23, 2004
Gregiore Wins Washington Governor
Gregiore's GOP opponent didn't want the missed King County votes tabulated...but the Washington Supreme Court smacked that idea down.
Rossi has now decided that the military people overseas who didn't get their ballots in time should be counted. Funny how this didn't bug him when he was ahead in the race. And funny how he isn't bothered by the nonmilitary overseas who didn't get their ballots either.
What a creep.
Posted by Carla at 05:24 PM |
It's all Europe's fault
Or so Tom Friedman would have us believe.
In what can only be described as a convoluted mess, Friedman tries his best to twist and turn the escalating problems in Iraq to Europe not coming to the rescue:
We may lose because most Europeans, having been made stupid by their own weakness, would rather see America fail in Iraq than lift a finger for free and fair elections there.
As is so often the case, the statesman who framed the stakes best is the British prime minister, Tony Blair. Count me a "Blair Democrat." Mr. Blair, who was in Iraq this week, said: "Whatever people's feelings or beliefs about the removal of Saddam Hussein and the wisdom of that, there surely is only one side to be on in what is now very clearly a battle between democracy and terror. On the one side you have people who desperately want to make the democratic process work, and want to have the same type of democratic freedoms other parts of the world enjoy, and on the other side people who are killing and intimidating and trying to destroy a better future for Iraq."
What an unadulterated pile of bovine droppings.
If this is really about a significant Iraqi majority that wants to work for and fight for democratic freedoms, why are the Iraqi police/security/soldiers dropping their weapons and running when the fighting becomes intense? Why are they turning over weapons to the insurgency? Why aren't there Iraqis turning in their countrymen insurgents by the hundreds to US authorities in an effort to get security in check?
We shouldn't have invaded Iraq in the first place. Many European nations were against it and warned Bush extensively that it was a very bad idea. Then after Bush chose to ignore the warnings, disparaging our European bretheren at length for not climbing on board, Bush completely botched the occupation and rebuilding (despite lengthy and various reports explaining to him exactly what the obstacles in Iraq would be).
And now Europe is supposed to swoop in and clean up the mess. Further this swooping is supposed to take place with no apology from Bush for his actions...and a promise to "stay the course" that gave us this mess in the first place.
Bush was reelected, Tom. Europe isn't going to come in and bail him out. And I don't blame them. There's no reason for them to come in under the banner of Bush after having been trashed by him at length...only to have him continue his arrogant and inept course.
Europeans aren't the stupid ones.
Posted by Carla at 12:04 PM |
"No excuse for war on the cheap"
Andrew Borene knows about Iraq. He was there. He lived it.
Borene was part of the inital invasion of Iraq. As a Marine intelligence officer with the 1st Marine Division he understands the military and how invasions on short notice work.
But what about occupation? What about fighting insurgencies?
Borene writes today about his frustration and anxieties that go along with fighting a war on the cheap.
The politicos in DC should hang their heads in shame.
Posted by Carla at 09:48 AM |
December 22, 2004
You can't stop Christmas from coming...muhahahaha!
Mullah Falwell wants you to know that he's winning the war on Christmas.
Fantasyland isn't just part of a theme park in California. I guess.
These mullahs think that Christians own Christmas. Unfortunately for them (but historically relevant), Christmas has a lot roots...and many of them aren't Christian.
There's no war on Christmas and there's no war on Christians. There is however...a healthy fantasy life for Christians who are looking for a reason to go to war.
So much for the peacemakers...
Posted by Carla at 05:02 PM |
Republicans Claim Irreparable Harm
The Washington State Supreme Court ruled that more than 700 belatedly discovered ballots from Seattle's predominantly Democratic King County should be counted in the Gubernatorial election.
At a hearing Wednesday morning before the high court, Republicans had argued that a recount should be a mere retabulation, and that it was too late for counties to go back and correct errors. But the court unanimously said state law and previous court rulings specifically allow county canvassing boards to correct mistakes during a recount. Justices questioned Republican claims that counting the votes would cause irreparable harm. "You're looking at it from the point of view of the winner or the loser — shouldn't we be looking at it from the point of view of the voter?" asked Justice Susan Owens.
"There is a sacred American right to have legitimate votes counted," Democratic Gubernatorial Candidate Christine Gregoire said in a news release after the ruling. "The justices recognized that principle today."
Republicans said they will now seek out Rossi voters whose ballots were disqualified because of election workers' errors and fight to have those ballots counted as well.
Question: Why are the Republicans only now seemingly concerned with possible legitimate votes that might have been incorrectly disqualified? It seems crystal clear to me that at least with respect to this one race the GOP clearly isn't interested in whether votes are counted correctly or not - only with whether they win or not.
Posted by Kevin at 04:03 PM |
Bush's Folly
Some folks are born made to wave the flag,
Ooh, they're red, white and blue.
And when the band plays "Hail to the chief",
Ooh, they point the cannon at you, Lord,
It ain't me, it ain't me, I ain't no senator's son, son.
It ain't me, it ain't me; I ain't no fortunate one, no,
In a few years, that could be my son in those photos.
I've thought a lot about this. My stomach gets all tied up in knots at the thought of my beautiful son off to war/occupation for this wretched mistake. When Bush was reelected, that was the first thing that came to my mind.
Bush doesn't have a son send off to sacrifice. I don't think he knows the meaning of the word, frankly. His own questionable Guard time shows a cavalier attitude toward service and sacrifice. His shallow words and irresponsible actions with our military are evidence that sacrifice isn't a part of his lexicon.
My child won't be going, even if he's called up. We'll leave the country (I'd even go so far as to change our citizenship as a last resort) if necessary. My child won't be shedding our blood for Bush's Folly.
Posted by Carla at 01:20 PM |
Rewarding Incompetence
From today's TomPaine.common sense:
TomPaine.com seldom runs open letters. This week, however, we're making an exception. In only a few days, Christians around the country and the world will be celebrating the birth of Jesus—also called the Prince of Peace. The backdrop to Christmas this year, of course, is the war in Iraq that a majority of Americans now believe was a mistake. Sheehan's heartfelt rebuke to Time offers a perspective we hope the nation will hear more of in 2005 as we contemplate the consequences of our leaders' recklessness.
Posted by Kevin at 10:18 AM |
Gilliard: Stop whining!
Steve Gilliard finds the circular firing squad intact:
But I was irritated by the people posting that Kerry sucked and the primaries were rigged against Dean....
Yawn.
Kerry ran a good campaign, but Rove made it about the issues of evangelicals and they came out. It's real simple. It wasn't gay marriage alone, but religion in schools, and Bush's image as a religious man.
The problem is that he ran Nixon's 1972 campaign. Which means while he beat the Dems, the issues are working against him.
Both sides are wrong in this debate. Amy Sullivan and Peter Beinhart think that selling out core democratic principles will get them to power. They won't.
But the people who think Howard Dean could ever be president are also delusional. That Confederate comment pretty much closed a lot of minority doors to him. That comment helped Kerry with a lot of blacks and latinos and killed Dean as just another white liberal who took blacks for granted. You can ask Mark Green how that works as an electoral strategy.
The fact is that John Kerry got more votes than any other Democrat in history and stands a better than average chance of winning in 2008. Hillary Clinton, who I think is unlikely to run, won't make it past two primaries if she did. Her personal unpopularity is so high that it makes a national run impossible, regardless of current polls. All of this squabbling is pointless.
There's more...a lot more. Go read it.
Steve is absolutely correct. Kerry ran a good campaign. He recieved a record number of votes. You can't get that unless you've done something right. Rove ran a better campaign..but just barely.
Gilliard leaves out something else that I think is important. Democrats made substantial gains at the state and local levels. If you had told me two years ago that a Democrat would be the governor of Montana (Mon-freekin-tana!) I'd have said it was time to put down the crack pipe. The mountain states have made big gains for Dems at the local and state level, bucking the trend at the federal level.
The key of course is to maintain and increase these gains in the coming years. These gains can translate into gains at the federal level, eventually.
The other important notion here is the role of Howard Dean. I believe Steve is right when he says Howard can't be President. I think Dean's most powerful and important role is continuing to build the grassroots and Democratic Party reform. Dean is the reformer, the builder...the Goldwater of the Democrats. (Kevin is going to argue with me about this).
The time for self flagellation is over. The time for whining is done. Put down your weapons, circular firing squad.
Posted by Carla at 08:28 AM |
December 21, 2004
Iraq War Ostriches
As the death toll of Americans and Iraqis continues to mount, I've noticed that the internets has it's own special brand of denial. I've dubbed these folks the Iraq War Ostriches
A prime example of Iraq War Ostrichdom is the always neck deep in denial Arthur Chrenkoff who does his darndest to give a rosy picture of good news oozing from the pores of the Mess O'Potamia (sorry Jon Stewart). Lots of fine polling of Iraqis...telling us just what sounds like we want to hear: No Baathists and no postponing elections. Huzzah!
Arthur's previous missive of merriment from Iraq can be found here.
While it might be gloriously fun to blow sunshine up the skirts of the conservative crowd that soaks up Opinion Journal...I'm curious if Arthur considers the staggering loss of life worth it?
Posted by Carla at 08:33 PM |
The War on Social Security
The War against Social Security being waged by the Bush Administration won't be defeated by facts alone. Kevin Drum has some suggestions for the populist arguments that should be established:
1.Politicians lie all the time, and now they're lying about Social Security being in trouble. What is it they're really after?
2.Wall Street tycoons are being cagey about this, but the truth is that they can't wait to get their hands on your retirement money. Management fees is what this is really all about, isn't it?
3.Today your retirement benefits are guaranteed. With private accounts you're taking on a big risk. What happens if you turn 65 right after a stock market crash?
4.Take a look at Chile. Take a look at Argentina. They tried private accounts and look how their retirees are doing.
The election very clearly showed that those voting for Bush didn't vote based on issues but on perception, in general. They won't push back against Bush and the conservative attacks on social security insurance until the perception is planted that it's bad for Americans is firmly planted.
Sad but true.
Posted by Carla at 09:06 AM |
December 20, 2004
Look out Bernie Kerik
Posted by Carla at 02:51 PM |
We don't need no farkin answers
Bush held a press conference this morning to lay out his agenda for the minions. Sam Rosenfeld at Tapped has your one stop shop synopsis.
Most noteably was Bush's cantankerous response to questions regarding his War on Social Security. As Rosenfeld notes, Bush was cranky:
“You’re not going to get me to negotiate with myself,” he repeatedly told the perplexed reporters. “I know what you’re trying to get me to do. You’re trying to get me to answer ‘Why this,’ ‘why that,’ to take positions -- don’t bother to ask me.” Rather than merely dodge the questions, Bush seemed intent on staking out an explicit, principled position in favor of dodging the question.
This sounds more like Dr. Evil from an Austin Powers monologue than the President of the United States.
Posted by Carla at 02:06 PM |
Target Wyden
Oregon Democratic Senator Ron Wyden is under fire along with Jay Rockefeller (D-W.VA) and Dick Durbin (D-Ill) for public complaints they made about an expensive, unamed intelligence program.
During debate on the intelligence reform bill, Wyden referred to a "major acquisition program" as being "unnecessary" and "too expensive". Wyden is a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee and recieves information on intelligence programs behind closed doors. A few days later it was revealed in the Washington Post that at issue was a $9.5 billion spy satellite system.
Wyden's Chief of Staff Ron Kardon said that Wyden's remarks were approved by the Intelligence Committee staff of Sen. Pat Roberts, the Kansas Republican who is chairman of the committee to make sure it was safe for national security purposes.
The problem here as I see it is that so much information is kept classified that it keeps Congress from having proper oversight. How can a Senator properly debate a line item in a spending bill if he can't talk about the line item? Especially from the minority/opposition party, it seems unlikely that line items are being properly vetted in Committee. Democrats have complained vociferously since the GOP took over control that they've been shut out of the process.
Also at issue is the public's right to know vs the necessity of keeping intelligence issues secret for national security reasons. I believe we've erred much too far on secrecy. The public needs to have some oversight of these organizations. It's inappropriate for them to have multi billion dollar budgets and for the public to not know if the money is being spent appropriately.
Posted by Carla at 08:04 AM |
December 18, 2004
Linfield wins!
Woo Hoo!!
Linfield College wins the NCAA Division III National Football Championship!
Posted by Carla at 02:36 PM |
The ACLU Hates Christians...
...or so the Religious Right would have us believe. Some go even further and assert that the ACLU hates God. Ironically, many of their anti-ACLU rants are overflowing with hatred and profanity.
So, are they right? Does the ACLU hate Christians? Is the ACLU trying to wipe any reference to the JudeoChristian God from the public consciousness?
Following Threat of ACLU of Virginia Lawsuit, Officials to Agree Not to Ban Baptisms in Public Parks
ACLU of Pennsylvania Supports Congregation's Fight for Religious Freedom
ACLU of Nebraska Defends Church Facing Eviction by the City of Lincoln
ACLU sides with Rev. Falwell in court case
Preachers, ACLU are allies in Vegas
Indiana Civil Liberties Union defends the rights of Baptist minister
ACLU Washington Defends Christian Preacher's Right to Free Speech
ACLU of MA Defends Students Punished for Distributing Candy Canes with Religious Messages
ACLU Supports Right of Iowa Students to Distribute Christian Literature at School
ACLU Defends Church's Right to Run "Anti-Santa" Ads in Boston Subways
Those are just a small sampling of cases that I was able to find links to. Obviously neither the ACLU nor any other group has the unlimited server space to post every single such case. Suffice to say that this small listing is more than enough to disprove the lies of the Religious Right.
There are, however, some cases which might explain why the Religious Right is so opposed to the ACLU:
Michigan Court Punishes Catholic Man for Refusing Conversion to Pentecostal Faith in Drug Rehab Program. Note the ACLU's attempt to defend this man's religious liberty.
Eleven-Year-Old Muslim Girl Harassed After Declining Bible From School Principal. Note the ACLU's attempt to defend this little girl's religious liberty.
ACLU of Oklahoma Files Federal Lawsuit on Behalf of Student Accused of "Hexing" a Teacher. Um, anyone remember the Salem Witch trials?
These, of course, are an even smaller sampling of such cases. There are more which I could have linked to.
The ACLU and Religious Liberty by Margaret Crosby. This is a very succinct and brief essay on why and how the ACLU fights for the Separation of Church and State. It's not about an anti-Christian bias, or even an anti-religious bias. It's about equality under the law and about protecting the rights of every single citizen to believe and practice their own spiritual beliefs without undue interference by the government.
Update Just ran across this lovely piece of disinformation. What's instructive about it is how uncritically the author just accepts wholesale lies and half-truths.
Posted by Kevin at 10:32 AM |
December 17, 2004
Cowardly Dishonor
Zell Miller is slated to present the "Courage Under Fire" award to the Swift Boat Liars for Bush at the Conservative Political Action Conference's Feb. 18 banquet.
Of course we remember that Miller presented the keynote address at the GOP convention this past summer. There he revealed himself to be a world class demagogue by tearing into Kerry for allegedly having opposed too many defense appropriations as a Senator. Setting aside the obvious hypocrisy in that Miller is on record from just a few years ago as having lavished praise on Senator Kerry, particularly for his military service... There was Miller glibly ignoring the fact that the Vice Presidential candidate for the very ticket he was there to support had strongly opposed even more defense appropriations than Kerry ever opposed.
At that same convention, Republicans demonstrated their deep contempt for the oldest and most cherished medal our nation presents her wounded and dead servicement and women:
So yeah... "Courage Under Fire." It took a lot of courage to lie about Kerry and mock his having voluntarily risked everything in service of his country even though as a "fortunate son" he could easily have avoided it like Bush did.
Cowardly Dishonor seems a more appropriate name for the "honor."
Posted by Kevin at 07:59 PM |
Vaginally endowed Democrats need not apply
Via Josh Marshall):
According to today's Washington Post ("You Can Tell a Republican by His Stripes," 12/17/04) Viacom's Gail McKinnon sent an e-mail this week to offices in the U.S. House of Representatives regarding a job opening in Viacom's government relations department. The e-mail calls for a male, Republican to fill the open position and reads as follows: "Importance: High We need to hire a junior lobbyist/PAC manager. Attached is a job description. Salary is $85-90K. Must be a male with Republican stripes."
I'm guessing Viacom isn't on the BuyBlue Christmas List.
Posted by Carla at 04:46 PM |
The beat goes on
If you're Kofi Annan and you're running an organization (the UN) that's responsible for possible fraud and corruption in Iraq's Oil for Food Program, just allegations will prompt calls for your resignation.
If you're L. Paul Bremer and you ran an organization (the Coalition Provisional Authority) that's responsible for possible fraud, corruption, waste and abuse with the many rebuilding projects in Iraq, Bush gives you the Medal of Freedom.
OH..and if you are responsible for all the many intelligence failures, you get one of those Medals too.
Maybe that's Tenet's reward for keeping his mouth shut.
Posted by Carla at 03:30 PM |
Ecoterroists? Not so much
Acerbic wit and general curmudgeon Roger Ailes is seeking some assistance to make sure the disinformation campaign gets a proper outing.
Posted by Carla at 08:34 AM |
The real "why"
Professor Todd Gitlin gets it:
Why did the Republicans have the stronger hand? Three reasons. The first is demographic: In the course of three-and-a half decades, they developed close to a lock on the Southern, prairie and mountain states. The second is organizational: Over some thirty years, they developed a resplendently funded, intensely committed, politically sophisticated machine, not least in the suburbs that now overwhelm the cities. Starting from the premise that power is an unadulterated good, they have shrewdly combined the Christian Right and big-business components, antimodern and anti-government themes, and worked their way into local, state, and national power. When they win some power—state legislatures, governorships, judgeships (all the way up to the Supremes), Congressional committees, lobbyists—they know how to compound it into more power. Third, Republicans know how to play dirty—the Republican-financed Swift Boat deception of August, badly misplayed by Kerry, cost him one-third of all the time he had left to come from behind after the Democratic convention. Facing a president running as avenging angel against the September 11 massacres, Kerry had opted—reasonably—to run as a potential commander-in-chief, “reporting for duty.” The dirty tricks stopped him cold.
It was never about issues. It was about perception. "Liberal" has been made out to be "bad" for the better part of two decades with very little punch back.
(via Seeing The Forest)
Posted by Carla at 08:05 AM |
December 16, 2004
Smart bomb it ain't
The missile defense system was tested on Wednesday and to the surprise of everyone but those of us who pay attention...it earned a big, fat, "F":
After a rocket carrying a mock warhead as a target was launched from Kodiak, Alaska, the interceptor, which was intended to go aloft 16 minutes later and home in on the target 100 miles over the earth, automatically shut down because of "an unknown anomaly," according to the Missile Defense Agency of the Defense Department.
The price tag for this utter failure has cost the American taxpayer $85 billion since 1985. Another $50 billion is set to be added to that number over the next five years.
Bush is in an awfully big hurry to privatize Social Security..which as I've shown here isn't nearly the "problem" his hand wringing is making it out to be. If he wants to privatize something..why not make it this? It's hugely expensive,we apparently don't have the science figured out to make it work and our national debt is skyrocketing.
So why not give this project to a group of smart entrepeneurial scientist/engineer types and let them sort it out?
Posted by Carla at 05:06 PM |
..... the President we have....
"As you know, you go to war with the Army you have. They're not the Army you might want or wish to have at a later time." --Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, in a town hall meeting with soldiers at Camp Buehring in Kuwait, Dec. 8
These words have caused firestorm for Rummy.
The fire is getting hotter too...as John McCain and Chuck Hagel and Susan Collins chime in on what a lousy job Rummy has done.
Rumsfeld's ground is getting shakier, too. Trent Lott and Norm Coleman are jumping on the "Kick Rummy's Ass Out" bandwagon.
Even that amiable dunce William Kristol is piling on.
This band of Rummy Haters are too little too late. These people all supported Bush for President and they've all seen how Bush is foursquare behind Rumsfeld. It's not like they didn't know he'd keep Rumsfeld on.
And to make matters worse, this lack of vehicle armor andbody armor issue has been around for at least a year. This morning on Air America, I listened to a soldier who was badly injured in Iraq talk about the Guard even having GPS systems issued by the military that didn't work properly. He was injured in September 2003.
These Bush supporters got what they voted for...and now they're having buyer's remorse. Too bad they had their epiphanies so late in the game. Rumsfeld has Bush's support. And more of our troops will needlessly die due to their incompetence.
Posted by Carla at 02:50 PM |
December 15, 2004
Jolly Holidays
Posted by Carla at 08:08 PM |
Of Glass Houses and Stone Throwing
Circuit Judge Ashley McKathan has taken to wearing a robe with the 10 Commandments embroidered on it while he is on the bench in Southern Alabama.
McKathan told The Associated Press that he believes the Ten Commandments represent the truth "and you can't divorce the law from the truth. ... The Ten Commandments can help a judge know the difference between right and wrong."
Talk about activist judges!
It isn't the task of a judge to determine right and wrong. That is the legislative branch's task (and The People's in states that use the initiative process)... since they are the ones who write the law - which is how "right and wrong" is codified. It is the task of the Jury, not the Judge, to determine "right and wrong" in a trial. And they do so on the basis of secular law, not the 10 Commandments.
When can we expect the rightwing to demonstrate consistency by condemning this Judge's activism and attempt to in essence "legislate from the bench?"
::: peers up into the sky... :::
Nope... don't see no pigs flying, Ma.
Posted by Kevin at 10:20 AM |
He's making a list...checking it twice...
Sadly, I don't mean Santa.
Instead, Rumsfeld has decided to impart his "wisdom" to those poor suckers who will be employed by Team Bush in the second term.
He should be writing this list while standing in the unemployment line.
Posted by Carla at 07:53 AM |
If you can't beat em...
....then watch them like a hawk:
Senate Democrats announced plans yesterday for wide-ranging hearings to examine Bush administration policies and conduct, saying the Republicans who control both houses of Congress have abdicated responsibility for oversight of the GOP administration.
This is what an opposition party is supposed to do. Remember in 1992 when the Republicans were completely out of power in Washington? They scrutinized everything..and then went after every indiscretion and mistake and pounded them to death. Gingrich was magnificent at it.
The Democrats are working on the first part of that plan. It remains to be seen if they can master the second part.
Posted by Carla at 07:49 AM |
December 14, 2004
Houston...we have a "problem".
Boys and girls, the word for the week is "problem":
It's been my honor to welcome the Social Security Trustees here to the Oval Office. We had a good discussion about the problems that face the Social Security system, and there is a recognition among the experts that we have a problem. And the problem is America is getting older and that there are fewer people to pay into the system to support a baby boomer generation which is about to retire.
Therefore, the question is, does this country have the will to address the problem. I think it must. I think we have a responsibility to solve problems before they become acute. And, therefore, I want to thank the trustees for their understanding and their work. I want to thank them for their recognition that this country must deal with this issue now. I look forward to working with the members of Congress to do just that.
I had a meeting earlier on this week with members of the United States House and Senate to discuss the importance of the Social Security issue. I fully recognize it's going to require a bipartisan effort to address this issue. I have articulated principles in the course of my campaign that I think are important. And it's very important for our -- those who have retired to recognize that nothing is going to change when it comes to Social Security. And it's very important for those who are near retirement to understand nothing will change.
But for the sake of our younger workers, for the sake of younger Americans, we must be willing to address this problem. And I think it's vital to consider allowing younger workers, on a voluntary basis, set aside some of their own payroll tax in personal accounts as part of a comprehensive solution to dealing with the Social Security issue.
So I want to thank the trustees for their hard work. I want to thank you for your understanding of the issue. And I appreciate your willingness to go out and help explain to the American people that the time is now, the time is ready for us to solve this problem.
The GOP framedoctor,Frank Luntz, has been hard at work it seems.
Is Social Security the "problem" Bush says it is? The ever eloquent Paul Krugman makes a strong case that it in fact is not. The most compelling part of Krugman's argument is that Social Security is not a stand alone entity but an intregal part of the government budget. Only small adjustments need to be made in order to ensure payouts, according to Paul.
Our friends over at Centerfield seem to be conflicted on how deep the "problem" really is. You can view their thoughts here and here and here. The comments on the various posts are where you'll find the real meat and potatoes. And you can see "bk" call me names as a bonus.
The real heavy lifting on Social Security and how shallow the "problem" is has been done by Kevin Drum. There are about six posts that offer charts and links and good commentary. Go forth and click.
Me...I'm a skeptic. The "problem" framing is a way for Bush and conservatives to get their way in an effort to starve social programs, from my perspective. There really doesn't need to be a fundamental change in the program in order to make the payouts as Krugman and Drum have demonstrated.
So what's the real solution?
Posted by Carla at 08:12 AM |
"Bigotry is still bigotry"
Chuck Currie has a really wonderful piece on his blog today about Dr. Martin Luther King and the battle over whether or not he'd have supported gay rights.
Chuck's post is succinct, pointed and powerful. Take a minute to read it.
Posted by Carla at 07:15 AM |
December 13, 2004
Saving Christmas
As I was doing my blogsurfing this morning, this post by Bohemian Mama reminded me of stuff that's been littering my email of late.
There seems to be some rather serious consternation in some parts of the Christian community that the nation is moving away from allowing the free expression of religion. The complaints I'm hearing say this issue is manifesting itself by the removal of nativities from public squares, merchants choosing to use "Happy Holidays" instead of "Merry Christmas" in their signage and the removal of crosses/crucifixes from holiday displays.
From my perspective, religion seems to be playing a stronger role in our country now more than ever. "Values" discussions appear to me to currently be the providence of the religious moralists. The Christian religion specifically has inserted itself firmly into the political landscape having worked to some degree to reelect Bush (not to mention their constant presence in the media landscape).
I'm interested in what others here think is happening. Is religion truely being purged from US society? Is it in fact being shoved in our faces? Somewhere in the middle?
Posted by Carla at 04:02 PM |
Groundhog's Day
The United States manipulated intelligence on North Korea's nuclear program in a similar fashion to its use of weapons of mass destruction to justify the war on Iraq, a US foreign policy expert said in an article seen Friday.
"Relying on sketchy data, the Bush administration presented a worst-case scenario as an incontrovertible truth and distorted its intelligence on North Korea (much as it did in Iraq), seriously exaggerating the danger that Pyongyang is secretly making uranium-based nuclear weapons," Selig Harrison said in Foreign Affairs magazine.
Imagine if Team Bush actually learned from their mistakes with the handling of Iraq. Hubris trumps common sense, unfortunately. And hubris yields results:
In retaliation, Pyongyang kicked out international nuclear inspectors and resumed plutonium reprocessing at its Yongbyon facility.
It is now believed to have reprocessed enough plutonium for four to six nuclear bombs, experts say.
And just in case you were wavering on whether or not this was really a hubris based agenda:
The intelligence was manipulated for "political purposes," he said in the magazine's December 17 issue.
This was largely to waylay South Korean and Japanese efforts at reconciliation with the North and ostensibly to keep open the option of "regime change" as in the case of Iraq, Harrison claimed.
So Bush did it to try and push "regime change" in North Korea, apparently. Things in Iraq are going so well, after all.
This alledged foreign policy (and I mean "alledged" because I'm not sure they're actually thinking this through as a policy)is meant to do what, exactly? What are we planning to replace Kim Jong Il with? Another US troop occupation?
Posted by Carla at 03:16 PM |
Star Wars X: The Return of the Missile Defense Shield
The rich fantasy life of neoconservatives continues to be funded heavily by the American people despite the fact that the damn thing doesn't work when it rains. (via Oliver Willis)
So as long as they don't try to lob missiles at us during a storm, we're all set.
Except there is one other problem, we don't know if the thing will actually work when the sun is shining either. It appears that the research on the missile defense shield being conducted at MIT may have been fraudulent.
And this being Team Bush, the Pentagon has now classified all of the work done at MIT so that noone can investigate.
Thanks to all of you Bush voters for saddling us with this.
Posted by Carla at 02:55 PM |
Spin this, Karl Rove
"Knowing these realities, America must not ignore the threat gathering against us. Facing clear evidence of peril, we cannot wait for the final proof - the smoking gun - that could come in the form of a mushroom cloud." - George W. Bush, Cincinnati, Ohio, 10/7/02.
It's not exactly the kind of mushroom cloud that Bush meant. But, Iraqis in Baghdad saw one today.
Posted by Kevin at 11:56 AM |
December 11, 2004
Yay again!
My Linfield College Wildcats won their second round playoff game today in McMinnville, Oregon to qualify for the NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIP GAME!
Linfield rolled to victory over Rowan, 52-0.
They'll be playing next week in Salem, Virginia against Mary Hardin Baylor to settle who is the next NCAA Division III College Football Champion.
Who needs big school college football?
Posted by Carla at 07:39 PM |
Compassion will get you three and out.
Iraq has become such a twisted and bizarre situation that an act of compassion can get a soldier three years in prison and a dishonorable discharge:
Staff Sgt. Johnny M. Horne Jr., 30, of Wilson, N.C., pleaded guilty on Friday to one count of unpremeditated murder and one count of soliciting another soldier to commit unpremeditated murder.
His sentencing included a reduction in rank to private, forfeiture of wages and a dishonorable discharge.
The charges relate to the Aug. 18 killing of a 16-year-old Iraqi male found in a burning truck with severe abdominal wounds sustained during clashes in Baghdad's Sadr City, an impoverished neighborhood that was the scene of fierce fighting between U.S. forces and Shiite rebels loyal to anti-U.S. cleric Muqtada al-Sadr.
A criminal investigator had said during an earlier hearing that the soldiers decided to kill him to "put him out of his misery."
We're in Iraq bringing democracy to Iraqis by bombing the crap out of them..that's perfectly acceptable. But show an Iraqi mercy and compassion...and your ass is grass.
Posted by Carla at 07:24 PM |
Open thread....Christmas style
What's on your mind today? My mind has visions of sugarplums trying to kick my ass at the department store later while I'm trying to wrap up my shopping....
Posted by Carla at 08:06 AM |
December 10, 2004
Supporting the troops by screwing them over
The news cycles are still reverberating over Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld's exchange with a National Guard soldier who complained to Rumsfeld over the lack of armor for vehicles in Iraq. Rumsfeld's reply,"As you know, you go to war with the army you have, not the army you might want or wish to have at a later time..."
As usual, the Bush Administration takes no responsibility whatsoever for their foibles. And worse...the Bush apologist crowd is feverishly attempting to excuse this bad behavior, whining incessantly that a journalist "coached" the soldier to ask the question.
What Charles at Little Green Footballs fails to note is that reporters aren't allowed to question Rumsfeld at these meetings even though they're embedded with the troops. Oddly having these embedded reporters was fine with the Bush apologist crowd during the initial invasion. But the occupation isn't going so hot. So the embeddeds are a double edged sword. In addition, after the question was asked...there was a great deal of whooping and nodding in agreement from the troops present. It was pretty obvious they were glad the question was being asked.
Despite the best efforts of The Big Trunk at the rightwing blog Powerline to convince it's readership to the contrary... A LOT more armor plating can be produced than is currently under production:
"We've been telling the Pentagon for months that we have the capacity to double our production," said former U.S. Rep. Matt Salmon, a consultant for ArmorWorks of Tempe.
"We're ready, and we haven't heard a thing."
So Rumsfeld is lying and the Bush apologists will bend over backwards to excuse it.
And in other news, water is still wet.
Update: Kos has information on a second contractor, Armor Holdings, which also reports it's not running near to capacity.
Posted by Carla at 04:46 PM |
December 09, 2004
Poor Tom..those mean liberals are picking on him
From The Stakeholder:
A company that made a $50,000 contribution to a Republican political action committee has agreed to cooperate with a state investigation into possible illegal campaign contributions in exchange for the dismissal of charges against it, according to a motion approved by a judge Thursday.
Diversified Collections Services, Inc. was one of eight corporations accused of giving a total of $190,000 to Texans for a Republican Majority during the 2002 legislative campaign. The use of corporate money for political purposes is illegal in Texas.
Travis County District Attorney Ronnie Earle said in the motion to dismiss that the company agreed to cooperate with the state "in its prosecution of any other indicted person for any offense related to the corporate contribution."
Three associates of Republican U.S. House Majority Leader Tom DeLay also have been indicted in the ongoing investigation.
Diversified Collections also agreed to develop internal policies to prevent making illegal corporate political contributions.
Good thing the GOP changed their ethics rules so Tom could keep his leadership job if there's an indictment.
Posted by Carla at 09:20 PM |
Contempt of Court
A TV reporter in Rhode Island was sentenced today to six months of home confinement for refusing to divulge his source for an FBI videotape he'd used in a story.
This reporter broke no law by airing the tape. Rather he was cited for contempt of court for refusing to give up his source, who did break the law.
This got me to thinking about some of the other recent cases where reporters were cited for contempt for refusing to divulge a source. Notably in the Valerie Plume case where columnist Novak outed her as an undercover CIA agent.
On the one hand I think that reporters shouldn't have to divulge their sources under the First Amendment. But, on the other hand the outting of Plume strikes me as treason, a significantly more serious issue than having acquired an FBI surveillance tape.
My question to you is: where do we draw the line, and why?
Posted by Kevin at 07:53 PM |
Help the UCC
The United Church of Christ is taking a decidedly activist stance against the networks for not airing their new ad. They're asking the FCC to block renewal of licenses for two network TV stations because of the network refusal to air the ad.
Click here to support the UCC's stance and send a letter to the FCC.
It just takes a minute.
Posted by Carla at 02:58 PM |
Deaniacs: the doctor is in
I missed yesterday's Dean speech cuz I don't live off the GOP corporate teat (or in other words, I had to be at work).
Dean has tossed his hat into the ring for the DNC Chair...and this analysis by Ezra (at Pandagon) highlights one of the strengths Dean would bring to table as DNC Chair:
If his speech is, as it's apparently meant to be, a hint of how he'll represent as DNC Chair, we're about to give the Republicans a spoonful of their own slime. By bringing everything -- everything! -- back to responsibility, we fire up a frame connecting Republicans to all things juvenile, incompetent, untrustworthy, duplicitous, flailing, and unfocused. And the reason the message will stick is that every Democrat on TV, talk radio, op-eds, and drugstore strolls will instinctively know to tie every rightwing failing into how sadly, pathetically irresponsible they are. Even better, responsibility is such a wide concept that almost every failing can be attached to it with a minimum amount of effort.
Dean's telegraphing a comfort with message discipline and framing tricks that should do every dispirited Democrat's heart good. With a whole party lamenting our lack of message, his promise of a concise, easily articulated attack is -- and please excuse the sloganistic boosterism -- the perfect medicine for our ailing party. The Doctor, as we used to say, is in.
I've said many times that this election wasn't about issues but about perception. Dean has two very important strengths: he understands the importance of perception and he understands the grassroots.
It's a stark contrast indeed to the absolute pissing on the grassroots of Al From and Bruce Reed of the DLC.
Posted by Carla at 02:09 PM |
December 08, 2004
Hackworth:Military recruiting in trouble
Columnist (and former Colonel) David Hackworth reports very serious military recruiting problems:
“These are totals for the 41 USAREC (Recruiting Command) Battalions, so these stats represent the USAREC mission accomplishment:
Regular Army Volume (all RA contracts):
Mission: 25,322
Achieved: 12,703 (50.17 percent)
Army Reserve Volume:
Mission: 7,373
Achieved: 3,206 (43.48 percent).”
The Army National Guard is faring no better. A Guard retention NCO says: “The word is out on the streets of Washington, D.C. ‘Do not join the Guard.’ I see these words echoing right across the U.S.A.”
By the end of this recruiting year, the Regular Army, Reserves and Guard could fall short more than 50 percent of its projected requirement, or about 60,000 new soldiers. And according to many recruiters, quality recruits are giving way to mental midgets who have a hard time telling their left foot from their right.
I have a son who will be 18 a the end of Bush's 2nd term. I've maintained that if a draft is instituted, we will flee the country.
This doesn't give me much hope.
Posted by Carla at 10:28 PM |
I'll have a blue, blue Christmas
In the spirit of Elvis, kick the companies who support red states by buying BLUE.
Posted by Carla at 04:00 PM |
Reality, what a concept
From today's Oregonian:
An Oregon lawmaker who just spent a week with Oregon National Guard troops in Baghdad says he no longer believes Iraqis hunger for democracy.They want safety and stability, and they're not picky about how they get it, said Rep. Jeff Kropf, R-Sublimity, who has been an outspoken supporter of the war and of President Bush's anti-terror policies since Sept. 11, 2001.
"The average Iraqi does not care what form of government they have, as long as they have the basic necessities of life -- sewer, garbage, water, electricity, decent schools and an opportunity for a job," said Kropf, who returned Friday from Iraq.
"They don't care who gives that to them," he said. "They don't care whether it's radical Islamic fundamentalism or a free and autonomous Iraqi government."
Thus yet another Iraq War rationalization by the Bush administration Bait & Switch spin machine comes crashing down.
First it was WMD - no WMD have been found. Then it was terrorists - which were but a tiny fraction of the population in Iraq until AFTER Bush invaded. Now it's the imminently ignorant fantasy that he could force democracy on them at gunpoint.
They don't care!
Think about what Kropf said. "The average Iraqi does not care what form of government they have, as long as they have the basic necessities of life -- sewer, garbage, water, electricity, decent schools and an opportunity for a job." They had all of that under Saddam! Here is a Republican lawmaker and Bush cheerleader basically conceeding that we have made life WORSE for the Iraqi people!
At what cost?
Nearly 1300 dead U.S. Soldiers.
Billions of dollars charged to the American taxpayer's credit card.
Posted by Kevin at 12:56 PM |
Whip it good!
The whipping post with the greatest conservative cache' at the moment is the UN Oil For Food Program "scandal". As discussed here, Senator Norm Coleman (R-MN) is blowharding his way across the media landscape, screeching for the resignation of UN Secretary General Kofi Annan.
Over at Media Matters, David Brock brings to the fore several important items overlooked by the chorus of conservative outrage:
1. As members of the U.N. committee charged with monitoring the sanctions regime, the United States and other U.N. Security Council members played at least as large a role in monitoring oil-for-food as the oft-derided "U.N. bureaucracy" but apparently did little to address corruption in the program.
2.Saddam obtained a much larger portion of the illicit revenue used to prop up his regime through oil smuggling outside U.N. auspices than he did through the elaborate kickback schemes he devised under oil-for-food
3.Oil-for-food achieved considerable success in alleviating the acute suffering of the Iraqi people that resulted from U.N. sanctions following the 1991 Gulf War.
Brock offers the requisite source citations on his site.
Not surprisingly, conservatives are strangely quiet about constant scandals coming from their own albatross: Halliburton. The Veep's former company can't account for roughly 1/3 of the equipment they're in charge of in Iraq. They're also under investigation for for bilking the American taxpayer by gouging fuel prices in Iraq. Halliburton has also been in trouble for not paying subcontractors, negatively effecting troops in the field.
Imagine if Norm Coleman put his considerable screeching skills toward Halliburton, instead of trying to score points with the Bush crowd by going after Annan. Unfortunately that would require the kind of intestinal fortitude and honesty rarely seen on Capitol Hill..especially from the current crop of power brokers on the conservative side of the aisle.
Posted by Carla at 09:00 AM |
December 07, 2004
Fallujaushwitz II
To follow up on Carla's Fallujaushwitz post... Apparently some American Commanders on the ground in Iraq understand that fascism won't solve anything.
UPI is reporting that military commanders understand that there is no military solution to the fundamental problems plagueing Iraq.
For the state, success in counterinsurgency will never come from military action alone, a U.S. military commander in Iraq told UPI this week. Success only comes if the government addresses the source of the dissatisfaction in a manner that demonstrates consistency of purpose and intent -- i.e., no short term window dressings or Band-Aids.Rumsfeld is building up troop strength in the lead up to January elections in Iraq.
But troops cannot provide security, the commander in Iraq said, because they do not address Iraq's root issues.People fight against established government systems because they are dissatisfied with their current lot in life and feel that the government in power is either inattentive to their needs, actively abusing its governmental authority, or has centralized power ... (toward) its own selfish ends, he said.
Until those issues are identified and addressed in Iraq, there will not be peace or stability.
Indeed! One only needs to look back at the disasterous Vietnam War to see that killing insurgent fighters in ever increasing numbers doesn't stamp out the insurgency. American forces killed an estimated 1 million Vietnamese to our own roughly 50k dead. And yet the conflict grew steadily worse because the military is incapable of addressing the root causes with sheer firepower... short of imposing draconian repressive measures not unlike how Saddam suppressed dissent. And if we go down that road, it begs the question of what we are doing there in the first place.
Notably none of the US military commanders interviewed for this UPI piece are identified by name or rank. One wonders if they are concerned about repressive measures being used against them for daring to contradict the official party line.
Posted by Kevin at 12:59 PM |
Fallujaushwitz
From today's Boston Globe:
The US military is drawing up plans to keep insurgents from regaining control of this battle-scarred city, but returning residents may find that the measures make Fallujah look more like a police state than the democracy they have been promised.
Under the plans, troops would funnel Fallujans to so-called citizen processing centers on the outskirts of the city to compile a database of their identities through DNA testing and retina scans. Residents would receive badges displaying their home addresses that they must wear at all times. Buses would ferry them into the city, where cars, the deadliest tool of suicide bombers, would be banned.
Fascism style tactics: 1
Winning hearts and minds: 0
Posted by Carla at 10:22 AM |
Send O'Reilly's ass to the curb
The FCC has been levying fines and throwing it's weight around based on what we were told was an avalanche of complaints about various television programs.
As it turns out, 98% of complaints came from the Parents Television Council, an activist group.(via Atrios)
One group sends all this crap in and it changes the entire landscape of TV and radio???
If that's all it takes then the blogosphere should get together and start writing a slew of letters to the FCC complaining about the hate speech on Fox News.
Posted by Carla at