What have we learned from the Foley Follies?

Dennis Hastert at Oct.5 press conference

There is one thing we've learned clearly from the Foley Follies: The ability and inclination of the House Republican leadership to protect the young people who come to Washington D.C. each year to work as congressional pages is about on a par with the ability and inclination of the Republican party as a whole and the Bush administration in particular to protect all the rest of us.
According to right-wing pundit George F. Will (in Thursday's N.Y. Post), Dennis Hastert had the following to say about Foley and his alleged sexual harassment of under-age pages:
"We [Republicans] have a story to tell, and the Democrats have - in my view have - put this thing [the Foley Follies] forward to try to block us from telling the story. They're trying to put us on defense."
Right Denny, it's the Democrats, as usual.

And what is the story the statesman in the White House has to tell (presumably to build bi-partisan support to protect us all from terrorism):
In Scottsdale, Ariz. Oct. 4th, he said:
"Vote Republican for the safety of the United States."
This despite last week's "disclosure of a classified National Intelligence Estimate, first reported by the New York Times,.... The NIE, finished in April, noted that Bush's invasion of Iraq and the subsequent--inept and brutal--occupation has led to a rise in Islamic radicalism that has increased the threat posed by global jihadists. 'The Iraq conflict has become the cause celebre for jihadists,' the NIE says, 'breeding a deep resentment of US involvement in the Muslim world and cultivating supporters for the global jihadist movement.'"

The O'Reilly Factor does it again

What's wrong with this picture?

Ans: Mark Foley was not a Democrat.

Perhaps the real question is - what's wrong with the O'Reilly Factor?

Is the lesser of two evils still evil? Is it time to abandon the Democrats?

Jerry Politax on Bush watch has posed a question with which I have been struggling since the Democrats have essentially abandoned their role as an opposition party. My response to his question follows:

"Here at Bush Watch we believe that if the Democratic Party can't defend our basic Constitutional freedoms, it has no reason to exist. Not only have Senate Democrats refused to filibuster against this law that tears out the very heart of our democracy, 12 Democrats voted for it: Carper, Johnson, Landrieu, Lautenberg, Lieberman, Menendez, Nelson (FL), Nelson (NE), Pryor, Rockefeller, Salazar, and Stabenow. According to the editors of the Washington Post, 'Congress has allowed itself to be stampeded into a vote on hastily written but far-reaching legal provisions, in a preelection climate in which dissenters risk being labeled as soft on terrorism....Democrats...have been largely and cravenly absent from this month's debate...'"

"Everyone has a breaking point, a point where one says, enough is enough. Have we reached that point? Clearly, it's not enough to attempt to defeat those 12 Democrats that voted to destroy our democracy, for others with the same un-American beliefs will rise in their places, be they Republicans or Democrats. Is it time to send a clear and unambiguous signal to the Democratic Party that, even though it's presently a minority party, we will not continue to allow it to sell off our country, one dictatorial bill after the other, to allow Democrats to remain in office and serve as a false opposition to the ongoing Republican destruction of our democracy? Is it time to stop voting Democratic, hoping for the best, and being disappointed? Is it time to eradicate the Democratic Party and abandon the illusion of choice? is it time to send the only message that politicians understand? Is it time to say no to every single Democratic Party politician in the nation? Is it time for a painful regeneration?

This is what I said:

"I really appreciate your question. I have been struggling with it as well.
I'm not a Democrat, although with very few exceptions I have usually held my nose and voted for the lesser of two evils (ie. the Democrat).
At this point I think the conclusion I have arrived at is that the lesser of two evils is still evil and I will no longer vote for evil in any form."

One would think that having allowed themselves to be stampeded into voting in favor of the invasion of Iraq, the Democrats would have learned a lesson. Clearly they haven't.

What do you think we should do?

Is the Republican sex scandal pushing our constitutional crisis off the front page?

Is Karl Rove cheering former Rep. Mark Foley?

Jerry Politex (on Bush Watch) asks the question: Is the Republican sex scandal pushing the BushCo. attack on our Constitution off the front page? And how will this effect the upcoming election?


Rep. Mark Foley

One thing we know the U.S. corporate media are much more comfortable with sex and gossip than they are with serious political struggles. (If Paris Hilton was involved they'd be much happier.) This is just the latest episode in the Bill and Monica follies.

And to top off the GOP fantasy here's what Limbaugh and Denny Hastert had to say about the exposure of the scandal: (from MediaMatters for America)

"On the October 3 broadcast of his nationally syndicated radio show, Rush Limbaugh joined his guest, House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert (R-IL), in suggesting that Democrats had orchestrated the ongoing scandal surrounding former Rep. Mark Foley's (R-FL) alleged communications with former congressional pages. Limbaugh asserted that 'these emails were planted by a liberal,' and Hastert claimed that Democrats 'put this thing forward to try to block' the Republican agenda. In fact, ABC News investigative reporter Brian Ross has refuted these claims, asserting that his sources for the Foley story -- to the extent they had partisan affiliations -- were Republicans."

One thing you can always rely on is that the current Republican puppet brigade will find a way to make a political disaster even worse (See War in Iraq).

Is the Foley scandal an just another opportunity for right-wing gay bashing?

One aspect of the Foley scandal that is very disturbing is the notion that this is a gay scandal. Here's the lead sentence from Carolyn Lochhhead's San Francisco Chronicle article:
"Five weeks before a midterm election, when Republicans are already on the ropes, the last thing the GOP needed was a homosexual pedophilia scandal."
Unless Ms. Lochhead is suggesting that a "heterosexual" pedophilia scandal would not have been a problem for the GOP, I don't understand why the modifier "homosexual" is necessary in that sentence.

It seems to be in keeping with the right-wing Family Research Council's Tony Perkins' thoughts on the matter (which Lochhead quotes):
"Perkins said neither party 'seems likely to address the real issue, which is the link between homosexuality and child sexual abuse ... ignoring this reality got the Catholic Church into trouble over abusive priests, and now it is doing the same to the House GOP leadership.'"
What link?
Is the Foley scandal just another opportunity for right-wing gay bashing?
My question is quite different from what Newt Gingrich is suggesting:
"I think had they [the House leadership] overly aggressively reacted to the initial round [of sexual harassment of pages], they would also have been accused of gay bashing."
I'm not talking about the House leadership's opportunistic lack of any reaction, but what is actually being said on the Right about the scandal.
It's not a "gay" scandal, it's a sexual harassment scandal. It's of no consequence whether Mr. Foley is gay or straight. But simply, is he a sexual predator? And who knew about it? And when did they know it?

God's gift to the Democrats

Rep Mark Foley
OK! I finally believe in God.
I have been watching the Democrats constantly snatch defeat from the jaws of victory - Iraq, Katrina, Abramoff,etc. So has God, who has finally given them a pre-election gift - GOP Rep. Mark Foley - perhaps even they can't screw up.
Not only is a Republican member of the House accused of sexual harassment of under-age pages, but it seems that the House GOP leadership has known about the situation for quite some time. And they're caught between a rock and a hard place. If they investigate and indict themselves they'll be out on their asses. If they don't they're guilty of a pre-election cover-up.
Now the question is will the Democrats sit back and let the Republicans stew in their own juices or will they actually say something to which the American people can actually relate?
If they choose the former, the GOP will once again weasel out of a difficult situation. That's what happened a couple of weeks ago when the three musketeers were fighting with the Bush over how much torture is ok and the Democrats sat ringside watching this steel-cage match.
They have to speak up and condemn a political leadership that places winning elections over the welfare of the young people entrusted to their care.
"Republicans joined Democrats in a 409-0 vote to send the matter to the House's ethics panel but wouldn't commit to a 10-day deadline that Democrats sought, saying the matter was too important to rush." [Right, late November would be a good time.]

The more-and-more visible Newt Gingrich had this to say:
"I think had they [the House leadership] overly aggressively reacted to the initial round [of sexual harassment of pages], they would also have been accused of gay bashing."

Another right-wing voice, Matt Drudge, also weighed in:
"You're not going to tell me these are innocent babies [the pages]. Have you read the transcripts that ABC posted going into the weekend of these instant messages, back and forth? The kids are egging the Congressman on! The kids are trying to get this out of him. We haven't got the whole story on this."

Bush and FDR?

Having already tried unsuccess- fully to label the enemy as "Islamo- fascist" the Rove puppet seems to also have developed a somewhat desperate tendency to drop FDR's name in order to create an unflattering comparison with current Democrats. Here's what he said today:
"The party of FDR, the party of Harry Truman, has become the party of cut-and-run."
One can only thank God that these clowns who currently occupy the White House weren't commanding the real war against Fascism or we'd all now most likely be goosestepping to the strains of Deutschland Uber Alles.

Who is Newsweek trying to fool? Annie Liebowitz trumps Afghanistan in U.S.

If you still have any doubts about the degree the U.S. corporate media will go to protect the Bush administration, especially in this pre election period, check out these four Newsweek covers (from Rising Hegemon) each from this weeks edition, depending on where they will be seen.
The top three - which focus on our losing battle in Afghanistan - were distributed in Europe, Asia and Latin America. The bottom cover - which focuses on photographer Annie Liebowitz and her children - is for the U.S.
I'm not certain whether the Newsweek editors are consciously trying to protect the Dick and the Bush or whether they just don't trust Americans to handle a seriously critical article about the "war against terrorism." But I'm not sure it matters the effect - protecting Bush and the neo-CON fantasy from reality - is the same.

Toll of Bush's wars exceeds Sept. 11th

In every speech adminis-
tration spokes-
persons keep claiming there hasn't been an attack in this country since Sept. 11, 2001. But since we are bogged down in Afghanistan and Iraq without a clear exit strategy, as many U.S. kids are dying (and countless more being maimed) in Bush's wars as were killed on Sept. 11th.

"The number of U.S. military deaths in Iraq and Afghanistan has now exceeded the number of people killed in the Sept. 11 attacks. The U.S. has lost about two thousand seven hundred troops in Iraq and another two hundred eighty in Afghanistan. This surpasses the official death toll of 9/11 of two thousand nine hundred seventy three. Meanwhile the Iraqi death toll in just July and August was over sixty six hundred." (from Democracy Now).

My question is: as long as we keep sending our young people (our future) to be killed in the Big Muddy of Iraq and Afghanistan, why would terrorists need to invade the U.S.?

The neo-CON fantasy of a "new Middle East" resulting from U.S. armed intervention seems like an even greater fantasy given these new statistics.
This seems especially true now that we have confirmation that Bush's wars are increasing the threat of terrorism and not, as claimed by Republicans, decreasing it,
"The country’s intelligence agencies have concluded that the U.S. invasion of Iraq has increased the overall terrorist threat by spawning a new generation of Islamic radicalism." (also from DN)

After a week of successfully diverting attention from Iraq to the fight over torture, the Intelligence agencies report
focuses attention squarely back on Bush's war in Iraq.

Here's Greg Mitchell's comment on Bush's Sunday interview in which he said "Iraq will just be a comma."
"In an interview aired on CNN on Sunday, President Bush suggested that one day the conflict in Iraq will be looked back on as 'just a comma.' The dead, and their families, might propose different punctuation."

The three GOP musketeers cave on torture

Sens. McCain, Warner and Graham
If there is any one out there who believed that the three GOP musketeers wouldn't cave in on torture, I have a bridge for sale.
The Republican Congress - having already jettisoned habeas corpus, the fundamental right that separates free people from those who are enslaved, is about to further shame the U.S., with the collaboration of the three musketeers, by passing a bill that will give the Bush permission to torture.
From the New York Times:
"President Bush and three Republican senators said this afternoon that they had reached an agreement on legislation to clarify which interrogation techniques can be used against terror suspects and to establish trial procedures for those in military custody."
Don't think for one moment that "interrogation techniques" means anything but torture techniques.

Remember when John McCain said "It's not about who they are, it's about who we are." Well compare that with:
"The senator [McCain] said the agreement 'gives the president the tools that he needs to continue to fight the war on terror and bring these evil people to justice.'"
It's amazing the compromises you can make once you get a taste of presidential politics.
Now this all raises the question: where does this leave the ever-silent Democrats?
As long as they continue to count on the Republicans defeating themselves, they will continue to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory - as they have done all too often in the recent past.

The Bush family "fixer" is back

Remember the post-election period in 2000? Remember the name that kept cropping up during the Supreme Court-coup period? James Baker ("whose law firm has long represented some of the U.S.'s biggest oil companies"). While the mainstream media likes to give Karl Rove the credit for putting the Bush in the White House despite the fact that he lost the 2000 election (and perhaps in 2004 as well) the credit really belongs to James Baker.
Well he's back. And this time he's running the Middle East strategy for the administration. Perhaps we can look forward to a steel-cage match between the Dick and the Fixer.
Checkout this report from IPS:

"While his handlers worked assiduously Tuesday to ensure that U.S. President George W. Bush did not run into his Iranian nemesis, Mahmood Ahmedinejad, in the corridors of the U.N., a legendary fixer for the Bush family announced that the White House had cleared him to meet with a 'high representative' of Tehran's government.

"Former Secretary of State James Baker, who co-chairs a bipartisan, Congressionally appointed task force called the Iraq Study Group (ISG), said that the timing of the meeting with that representative, whom he declined to name, had yet to be arranged but that permission for such a meeting to take place has been granted.

"'I'm fairly confident that we will meet with a high representative of the (Iranian) government,' he said at a press conference at the U.S. Institute of Peace (USIP), one of several think tanks, including the Centre for Strategic and International Studies, the Centre for the Study of the Presidency, and Baker's own Houston-based Institute for Public Policy, that are supporting the Study Group's work.

"Such a meeting would no doubt feed speculation here that Baker, a consummate realist who reportedly has been privately critical of the administration's Middle East policies, could help tilt the balance of power within the administration in favour of fellow-realists, centred in the State Department. They generally support greater flexibility in dealing with perceived U.S. foes in the region, and against right-wing hawks led by Vice President Dick Cheney who have steadfastly opposed engagement with both Iran and Syria."

Throwing habeas corpus out with the bathwater

Michael Ratner
(photo by Chester HiggensJr./NYT}
This morning (Tuesday) on Democracy Now Center for Constitutional Rights' Michael Ratner explained how the debate over the Bush's proposal to emasculate the Geneva Convention has missed a crucial point:
"In both the administration bill and in the McCain-Graham-Warner bill, in both cases you abolish the writ of habeas corpus. The government, the Congress, is abolishing the writ of habeas corpus. The habeas corpus writ is the right to challenge your detention once you’re picked up by the United States. It would apply to Guantanamo. It would apply to everybody in Bagram. And it basically says that anybody picked up, now or in the future or who is there now, no longer has the writ of habeas corpus."

"For some reason, for some peculiar reason, nobody is really covering this in the media."

Bush tries to drum up GOP votes at UN

Watching the Bush speak at the UN today (Tuesday)-while hoping his speech wouldn't pre-empt "All My Children." I know what's important-I was struck by its utter emptiness. It's always striking how many words he uses to say almost nothing. Here's what Robert Parry had to say on Consortiumnews:
"Bush framed his Sept. 19 speech in the context of the U.N.Â’s 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights. 'The words of the Universal Declaration are as true today as they were when they were written,' Bush declared."

"But it’s hard to believe that Bush had the faintest idea what principles he was embracing – or perhaps he has grown so self-confident in never being challenged on his hypocrisies that he believes he can say anything he wants, no matter how false or deceptive."
It was also amazing to watch how adoringly the Condesleeza sat there looking up at him.

Why torture? Why now?

,
In case you were wondering why Bush and the boys are so avidly trying to legalize torture - besides putting the Democrats on the defensive and labeling them "soft on terrorism" - here are two suggestions.
In yesterday's (Monday's) New York Times, Bob Herbert suggests "The Kafka Strategy." He wrote: "The people at the top are getting scared.... The fog of secrecy is lifting, and the Bush administration is frightened to death that it will eventually have to pay a heavy price for the human rights abuses it has ordered or condoned in its so-called war on terror."
He continues: "Bush, Cheney & Co.are desperately trying to hold together a house of cards that is ready to collapse because their strategy and tactics for fighting terrorism were slapped together with no real regard for the rule of law."


Herbert's Op-Ed page buddy Paul Krugman has another suggestion. He writes:
"...why is the Bush administration so determined to torture people?
To Show that it can. [Despite its relative uselessness as an information gathering device.]
The central drive of the Bush administration - more fundamental than any particular policy - has been the effort to eliminate all limits on the president's power. Torture, I believe, appeals to the president and vice president precisely because it's a violation of both law and tradition [and,I would add, all civilized behavior]. By making an illegal and immoral practice a key element of U.S. policy, they're asserting their right to do whatever they claim is necessary."

It's clear that these explanations - as well as the purely political one - are hardly mutually exclusive. They are almost surely all working to some degree in what passes for the Dick and the Bush minds.

Losing the "high ground" in Bush's war

It's hardly surprising that the Rove-led Republican party would endanger the lives and safety of the U.S. people to get a few votes. It's been their modus operandi and has kept them in power.

It's obvious that the push in Congress to give the Bush's torturers greater power was designed to distract attention from Iraq and allow Rove's boys to characterize the Democrats as soft on terrorism. According to Saturday's N. Y. Times,
"Republicans boasted that their top issue, terrorism, was dominating the political news for yet another day and overtaking Democratic criticisms of the war in Iraq."
But, as usual the administration failed to be sure everyone was on the same page. So they were surprised when three key Senators (McCain, Warner and Graham) turned on them (with the support of the forgotten Colin Powell) and actually acted out of principle - something the Rove-led party doesn't understand. The three senators opposed the Bush sponsored "legisation reinterpreting a provision of the Geneva Convention...that bars 'outrages upon personal dignity.'"
Powell is arguing that the U.S. is losing "the high ground in the war on terror." This opposition has again forced the Bush to shoot-off his mouth and show how he constantly lives up to Emerson's dictum that foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of small minds.

But then we are faced with a serious question: Why are the only people speaking out against Bush's torture and speaking up for the "moral high ground" all Republicans. The Times says: "Democrats are for the most part...content to allow Republicans to fight among themselves on the terrorism [torture?] question."
This, of course, isn't exactly true, some Democrats are speaking out but not as clearly as the three Republicans.
This is at least in part the result of the mass media obsession with stars and celebrities. Which, in effect, makes Sen. Clinton the only Democrat who can command the national stage; but she hasn't yet figured out which way the wind is blowing.
It seems as if Clinton and the Democrats are unfortunately willing to let politics trump morality.

Is Iran becoming the new Iraq?

From Warren P. Strobel and John Walcott's McClatchy Washington Bureau report:

"In an echo of the intelligence wars that preceded the U.S. invasion of Iraq, a high-stakes struggle is brewing within the Bush administration and in Congress over Iran's suspected nuclear weapons program and involvement in terrorism.

"U.S. intelligence and counterterrorism officials say Bush political appointees and hard-liners on Capitol Hill have tried recently to portray Iran's nuclear program as more advanced than it is and to exaggerate Tehran's role in Hezbollah's attack on Israel in mid-July.

"The struggle's outcome could have profound implications for U.S. policy.

"President Bush, who addresses the U.N. General Assembly on Tuesday, has said he prefers diplomacy to stop Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon, but he hasn't ruled out using military force.

"Several former U.S. defense officials who maintain close ties to the Pentagon say they've been told that plans for airstrikes - if Bush deems them necessary - are being updated."

....

"'It seems like Iran is becoming the new Iraq' said one U.S. counterterrorism official."

In a further echo of the run-up to the invasion of Iraq, the report also states:

"The officials said they fear a replay of the administration's mishandling of what turned out to be bogus information from Iraqi exiles in the run-up to the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq in 2003, documented earlier this month in a Senate intelligence committee report."

(Thanks to Joshua Micah Marshall for his posting on this)

Neck-deep in the Big Muddy: The Bush 9/11 speech

On the latest anniversary of Sept. 11, 2001, The Bush chose the moment to put forward a defense of his actions and a dire prediction for the foreseeable future:
"Our nation has endured trials, and we face a difficult road ahead. Winning this war will require the determined efforts of a unified country.

"And we must put aside our differences and work together to meet the test that history has given us.

"We will defeat our enemies, we will protect our people, and we will lead the 21st century into a shining age of human liberty."

In 1967 Pete Seeger characterized this in song:

"Waist deep! Neck deep! Soon even a
Tall man'll be over his head, we're
Waist deep in the Big Muddy!
And the big fool says to push on!"

Disney/ABC speedboats Clinton on 9/11.

It seems clear at this point that Disney/ABC intends to broadcast its right-wing propaganda film "The Road to 9/11" Sunday and Monday. The film is pretty much, as far as I can tell, the speed-boating of the Clinton administration in order to get the Bush boys of the hook for 9/11, which (just like Katrina) happened on their watch.
Just to make the point Monday night's portion will bookend Bush's 9/11 speech.
I say "go for it boys." If American voters are dumb enough to believe this propaganda, more power to you - personally I think they're a lot smarter than you give them credit for being.
So what can we do to counteract this Disney/ABC blatant grab for GOP votes in November? Well, we can continue to point out in every available forum what a joke "The Road to 9/11" is.
Then we can begin a boycott of Disney movies and the new ABC TV season. They are about to roll out their new and old shows, no progressive person has to watch them. Remind every company that advertises on their shows what phonies they are.
If Disney/Abc wants to work for Karl Rove, let them pay for it.

ABC promotes right-wing propaganda version of 9/11

This is from Act For Change:

"Since publishing our original action alert regarding ABC's inaccurate and biased 'docu-drama' to be broadcast on Sept. 10th and 11th, we've learned even more disturbing details about the show - which is scheduled to occupy six hours of prime time television, less that two months before an important national election.

The film - written by an avowed conservative activist - was provided in advance to approximately 900 right-wing bloggers and media personalities such as Rush Limbaugh. However, former President Bill Clinton and two of his cabinet officials were denied when they requested preview copies of the film. Former Secretary of State Madeline Albright has called the film - which includes several scenes with no basis in reality -- "false and defamatory."

In response to mounting pressure, the film's producers are making some small changes...but according to conservative blogger Hugh Hewitt, "blame on the Clinton team is in the DNA of the project and could not be eradicated."

ABC has teamed up with Scholastic Inc., a company that sells textbooks, to send letters to 100,000 teachers across the country offering free copies of the film and "study guides," despite the fact that the film is a "docu-drama" in which important facts and events have simply been invented out of thin air.

From these latest developments, it's become clear that this film was intended from the start to convince unknowing viewers that a false and conservative view of history is in fact the truth; lay blame at Bill Clinton's feet (while completely omitting mention of the dozens of antiterrorism measures he tried to enact); and propagandize America's schoolchildren with fiction masquerading as fact. It's simply unacceptable.

Call to action:
Tell ABC, Disney and Scholastic executives that fictionalized, "blame-Clinton-first" accounts of Sept. 11th have no place on our public airwaves OR in our public schools.

Bush and Republicans exploit 9/11 for votes

Senator Russ Feingold
From Friday's edition of Democracy Now:

"President Bush continued his series of speeches around the anniversary of the September 11 attacks Thursday with a new call for Congress to approve his warrantless spy program. In a theme Republicans say they’ll pursue in the lead-up to the November elections, the President said his policies have made the country safer from future attacks.

"President Bush: 'We are safer because we've taken action to protect the homeland. We are safer because we are on offense against our enemies overseas. We're safer because of the skill and sacrifice of the brave Americans who defend our people.'
As the President spoke, a bill to authorize the spy program hit a major roadblock in the Senate after Democratic Senator Russ Feingold introduced several amendments. Feingold said: 'The president has basically said I'll agree to let a court decide if I'm breaking the law if you pass a law first that says I'm not breaking [it]. That won't help re-establish a healthy respect for separation of powers. It will only make matters worse.'"

What's with Hillary?

In an editorial last Monday (9/4) backing Sen. Clinton for re-election, The New York Times led off with this assesment:

"Mrs. ClintonÂ’s biggest flaw is her unwillingness to risk political capital for principle. That is not to say that she lacks principles, but whenever her moral convictions become politically inexpedient, she will struggle to find a way to cloak
them in vague rhetoric or deflect attention with a compromise that makes the danger go away. All that is an issue of leadership, and it will be grist for discussion if she decides to run for president in 2008."

Sometimes she just avoids delicate political issues altogether:

"Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York, one of 10 senators at a news conference yesterday [Thurs.] where the [Karl Rove-designed ABC] mini-series ["The Road to 9/11"] came up, left before she could be asked about it. A small throng of reporters who followed her out of the building toward her office were kept at bay by her aides." (NYT)

I'm not a registered Democrat, but if I were, I would proudly vote for Jonathan Tasini (and against Sen. Clinton) in the upcoming primary. Unlike the New York Times, I think the sacrifice of principle for political expedience is as much a detriment to being a good senator as it is for higher office and this trade-off seems to characterize the Senator more than anything else.

On the road again

Well, we're on the road again. (This may be the last gasp of Summer vacation)
This weekend we're at the Yarmouth Country Cabins on Cape Cod.
More when we get back on Monday.
Dan

We're back!

We're back!
We spent Saturday afternoon in Boston with Ann's old friend Gail Sullivan, from Native American Solidarity days. It was really great to see her.
Vacation photos coming soon. Next time I won't forget to take all the pieces to the digital photo puzzle with me. Be prepared for lots of lighthouse photos.

Victoria Gray Adams: 1926-2006

Victoria Gray Adams flanked
by her two MFDP co-founders,
Fannie Lou Hamer (left) and
Annie Devine (right)
Since I have not seen an obit for Victoria Gray Adams in the mainstream media, I think it's important to celebrate and remember heroes of our movement. So this is from Democracy Now:

"Victoria Gray Adams 1926-2006: Civil Rights Pioneer, Founder of Mississippi Freedom Democratic Party Dies at 79

"Civil rights pioneer Victoria Gray Adams has died at the age of 79. She was the co-founder of the Mississippi Freedom Democratic Party along with Fannie Lou Hamer and Annie Devine. In 1964 they attempted to unseat the all-white Mississippi Democratic Party delegation during the Democratic National Convention in Atlantic City.
Victoria Gray Adams began her Civil Rights work in Hattiesburg Mississippi where she taught voter registration and literacy classes that assisted other African Americans to pass the voter registration test. At that time, although 30 per cent of Hattiesburg's citizens were African Americans, only 50 of them had been allowed to register to vote.

"Victoria Gray Adams later became the first woman to run for the U.S. Senate from Mississippi. She also served on the board of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference led by the Rev. Martin Luther King."

Iran: Republican October surprise?

It seems more and more clear that the Republican strategy for the November elections is to paint the Democrats as soft on terrorism. This may provoke the Dick and the Bush as the political situation gets more desperate to invade Iran, which will make the disastrous invasion of Iraq pale by comparison. Peter Spiegel LA Times staff writer is reporting that:

"Seeking to counter the White House's depiction of its Middle East policies as crucial to the prevention of terrorist attacks at home, 21 former generals, diplomats and national security officials will release an open letter tomorrow arguing that the administration's "hard line" has actually undermined U.S. security.

"The letter comes as President Bush has made a series of appearances and statements, including a visit Tuesday to the National Counterterrorism Center in McLean, Va., seeking to promote the administration's record on security issues in advance of November's midterm congressional elections.

"The rhetoric has increased since last week's Democratic primary in Connecticut, in which antiwar political newcomer Ned Lamont defeated three-term Sen. Joe Lieberman to become the party's Senate candidate — a victory that senior administration officials are describing as a sign that Democrats are embracing their party's extreme left."

The question, of course, remains what will the Democrats do to counteract this politically-dictated Bush policy, which will undoubtedly make the entire Middle East and, therefore, the U.S. far less safe than it is now despite the catastrophic mistakes of the Republican-dictated last six years.

My guess as long as the Democrats take the advise of the DLC, whatever they do will once again snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. It will be Jon Kerry redux.

More on free speech in Canada

B'nai Brith's
Frank Dimant

A few more thoughts about Canadian Jewish leader Frank Dimant's dangerous & stupid words: Remember he has called for the Canadian government to prevent anyone from being on the streets of Canada with signs supporting Hezbollah. When I heard him on Tom Young's afternoon talk show, he said that since the Canadian government had labeled Hezbollah a terrorist organization no one should be allowed to parade in their support.
Now why is that ridiculous?
Well, I assume that murder is a crime in Canada, but no one would stop me from advocating the reduction of sentence or other human rights treatment for someone on death row for murder. Shouldn't an advocate have the same free-speech rights with regard to a "terrorist" organization.
Mr. Dimant, I would defend your "free-speech" rights to make these foolish and intolerant statements. Just as I would defend the rights of the Ku Klux Klan to march (at the same time, marching in opposition to them.
But that doesn't prevent me from being ashamed to call you a fellow Jew.

vacation update

Well! Here we are - as the song says - back in the USA. I'm not sure how I feel about that, but here we are.
We're in Bar Harbor, Maine (actually Ellsworth).
Tommorow back to World Fellowship till Saturday, then home.

Where have you gone Reverend Niemoller, when we turn our lonely eyes to you

Frank Diamant

"The vice-president of B'nai Brith Canada says his organization wants police and the federal government to crack down on pro-Hezbollah demonstrations.

"Frank Dimant says the streets of Canada should not be flooded by extremists supporting a known terrorist group. He said his group has asked police forces and government officials to target the rallies.

"'The streets of Canada will not be taken over by radical Islamic forces supporting terrorist activities,' he said Wednesday. 'B'nai Brith Canada will do its utmost to ensure that Canadians will not be intimidated by these terrorist sympathizers.'"

(For rest of article; also check out Bene Diction Blogs On, an excellent comment on Diamant's dangerous words)

In New York we have William O'Donoghue, who babbles idiocy for the Catholic Archdiocese, obviously Canada has its own form of nonsense. I was brought up in an orthodox Jewish home and Mr. Dimant doesn't represent any form of Judaism that I can understand. When "freedom of speech" goes out the window, Mr. Diamant, who do you think will be the first victims. Try reading Rev. Niemoller's famous poem written about the Nazis, perhaps you can actually learn something. - Dan

Mission accomplished II

"President Bush said Monday that Hezbollah guerillas suffered a defeat at the hands of Israel in their monthlong Mideast war.

"'There's going to be a new power in the south of Lebanon,' Bush said."

Remember the last time Bush declared "Mission Accomplished."

(Quote from Denver Post)

Middle-East news: The Neo-Cons once again mislead Washington. It ain't hard to do.

From Democracy Now:

40% Of Israelis Disapprove of War in Lebanon
Polls in Israel show support for Prime Minister Ehud Olmert’s handling of the war is plummeting. 40 percent of Israelis now disapprove of the war and less than half
support Olmert’s handling of the war.

"Israeli Peace Group: 'Nothing Has Been Gained in This Foolish War.'
On Sunday the Israeli peace group Gush Shalom took out an ad in the pages of Haaretz. It read: 'A mountain of suffering has turned into an anthill of achievements. Nothing has been gained in this foolish war. Every drop of blood that is being shed now is being shed in vain.' UN Human Rights Council Condemns Israel

On Friday the United Nations Human Rights Council condemned Israel for violating human rights and international humanitarian law in its military operations in Lebanon. The council voted to send a high-level commission to the area to investigate the "systematic targeting and killing" of Lebanese civilians by Israel. This is UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, Louise Arbour Louise Arbour: "The deaths of hundreds of civilians in documented and corroborated incidents, involving either random or targeted attacks on civilian vehicles or buildings, strongly suggest the indiscriminate use of force.” Amnesty International and other groups criticized the UN Human Rights Council for not also condemning Hezbollah’s attacks on Israeli civilians.

From Frost Illustrated
"Entering the fourth week of war between Lebanon's Hezbollah militia and Israel, the George W. Bush administration's ambitions to transform the Arab Middle East into a pro-Western, more democratic region are fading fast.

"'Not only is Washington's thusfar staunch support for Israel losing Arab 'hearts and minds' at an astonishing pace, but the 'moderate' governments and non-governmental forces which the administration had hoped would act as catalysts for reform are increasingly isolated across the region, according to Middle East specialists.

"'I have never seen the United States being so demonized or savaged by Arab commentators, by Arab politicians,' Hisham Melham, veteran Washington correspondent for Lebanon's AnNahar newspaper, told a conference two weeks ago at the Brookings Institution, an influential think tank. 'People are clinging to Hezbollah, clinging to Hamas, because they see them as the remaining voices or forces in the Arab world that are resisting what they see as an ongoing hegemonic American-Israeli plan to control the region.'

"'Right now, the United States is the kiss of death,' Shibley Telhami, an expert on Arab public opinion at the University of Maryland, observed at the same meeting.

"'If you really are trying to empower the ruling elites and nudge them to reform and be more representative, you have to deliver policies that are going to empower,' he said. 'What we see in Lebanon is a policy that is not empowering them. It is widening the gap (between the moderate elites and the people), and people are moving toward the militants.'"

Vacation update

This afternoon (Sunday) we went to the Lunenburg Folk Harbour Festival. It was really a delight. First we checked out the comic songs event at the newly rebuilt St.John's Anglican Church (a beautiful venue). Our favorite was the Winnipeg-based House of Doc. The core of the group-who we heard more from at the Knot Pub Warf-consists of husband and wife, Rebecca and Matthew Harder and her brother Daniel Weibe. We really enjoyed them at both venues and hope they come to New York. I also enjoyed Mary Knickle, who brought out another sister with each song she sang, and a wonderful guitarist and performer, Matt Andersen. More on all of these folks later when I can post my photos.

While we've been here-although we've been cooking in (and out) alot-one great restaurant we found is Rum Runner Restaurant, great seafood.

More later.

Homeland Security?

Homeland Security Chief
Michael Chertoff

I'll bet that you've been wondering how come after five years the airlines have suddenly discovered that clear liquid might be a danger. I'll bet you've wondered how come the vaunted Dept. of Homeland Security under Republican management can't do anything but react to terrorist actions. In other words, alleged airline bombers arrested in England, U.S. airlines tighten security. London bombing of subways, NYC police department checks bags for a week or so (at certain more visible stations).
Will the U.S. (under Republican control) ever get ahead of the terrorists? I doubt it.

Check out the following by John Solomon:

"As the British terror plot was unfolding, the Bush administration quietly tried to take away $6 million that was supposed to be spent this year developing new explosives detection technology. Congressional leaders rejected the idea, the latest in a series of Homeland Security Department steps that have left lawmakers and some of the department's own experts questioning the commitment to create better anti-terror technologies.

"Homeland Security's research arm, called the Sciences & Technology Directorate, is a 'rudderless ship without a clear way to get back on course,' Republican and Democratic senators on the Appropriations Committee declared recently.

"'The committee is extremely disappointed with the manner in which S&T is being managed within the Department of Homeland Security,' the panel wrote June 29 in a bipartisan report accompanying the agency's 2007 budget."

(For the rest of the article)

The Bush raises money while the world burns

The Bush makes an anti-Islamic speech at the airport and rushes off to raise Republican dollars
"The Republican Party's big spenders were rewarded with a barbecue lunch with President Bush on Friday at a $750,000 fundraiser at a ranch neighboring the president's Texas home.

(noted on AmericaBlog)

The photo-op Sec'y

Wouldn't it be nice at some point to have a Secy. of State who didn't have her nose completely up the Bush and did more than be the photo-op sec'y?

Ned Lamont is the only Democratic candidate in Conn.

Here's the latest from Ned lamont. Joe Liebereman must be defeated. His arrogance is over-
whelming. Don't be confused by his nonsense "Independent Democrat" campaign. Ned Lamont is the only Democrat. That's what primaries are all about. Don't let Lieberman fool you.

"After kind words from Dick Cheney and a condolence call from Karl Rove, it took Senator Lieberman less than 48 hours to adopt the Republican playbook for his go-it-alone re-election campaign.

"'It will be taken as a tremendous victory by the same people who wanted to blow up these planes in this plot hatched in England. It will strengthen them and they will strike again,' Joe Lieberman said specifically of Ned's, and your, desire to start bringing our troops home.

"He even went as far as calling you 'anti-security' before the election.

"Sound familiar? Of course it does. The politicizing of terror and fear-mongering peddled by Senator Lieberman and his favorite president for the past five years is part of the problem in Washington, D.C., and it's why the people of Connecticut voted for change on Tuesday.

"Joe Lieberman's fear campaign is off to a quick start, and it won't be long until Republican money starts completely funding his campaign. Will you make a donation to make sure we're prepared for for three months of attacks like this?

"It's not just his use of Bush-speak as a direct attack on Ned and the Democratic Party, it's that Joe Lieberman and President Bush are so terribly wrong on national security. Their stay the course strategy in Iraq diverts necessary human and financial resources needed to keep us safe, and prosperous, here at home.

"Joe Lieberman has provided aid and comfort for a failed foreign policy for too long, and Republicans across the country are already using his last ditch attempt to cling to political power as an election issue this fall.

"How much longer will he hurt the Party, and our country? With your help, it ends this November."

http://www.nedlamont.com/soundslikebush

Tom Swan
Campaign Manager,
Ned Lamont for U.S. Senate

Travel notes

Well here we are in Nova Scotia, Lunenberg to be exact.
This weekend there is the Folk Harbour Festival in Lunenberg. We're going on Sunday afternoon.
Meanwhile lots of lighthouses and some magnificent scenery.
As soon as I can post photos I will.

I'm watching to see how the Bush and his cohorts, particularly the unindicted co-conspiritor the Roving hit man, use the alleged London attack to advance their political chances. The Bush is already using his favorite code words - "fascists" for those he doesn't like and "Freedom" for those he likes. They have taught him the words, but not their meaning.

Michael Moore on the Democrats & the War

Here's a letter from Michael Moore about Tuesday's defeat of Joe Lieberman in Conn. and its meaning for the Democrats:

"Let the resounding defeat of Senator Joe Lieberman send a cold shiver down the spine of every Democrat who supported the invasion of Iraq and who continues to support, in any way, this senseless, immoral, unwinnable war. Make no mistake about it: We, the majority of Americans, want this war ended -- and we will actively work to defeat each and every one of you who does not support an immediate end to this war.

"Nearly every Democrat set to run for president in 2008 is responsible for this war. They voted for it or they supported it. That single, stupid decision has cost us 2,592 American lives and tens of thousands of Iraqi lives. Lieberman and Company made a colossal mistake -- and we are going to make sure they pay for that mistake. Payback time started last night."

(For complete letter)

Travel update

Well here we are at World Fellowship.
At the moment for technical reasons I can't post new photos I am taking. As soon as I can I will.
We'll be here till Tuesday, then on to Nova Scotia.

Travel plans

Well, we're still on Shelter Island, but we're leaving here tommorow (Sun.) and heading up to Boston (by ferry and train). In Boston we'll pick-up a car and drive up to North Conway, NH and visit one of our favorite places - World Fellowship and from there on to Nova Scotia on a lighthouse hunt.

As soon as I can get on line, I'll let you know what's happening.

Dan

Not even Israel buys Bush's Middle East strategy

From Consortium News (Robert Parry, "Bush wants wider war"}:

"George W. Bush and his neoconservative advisers saw the conflict between Israel and Hezbollah as an opportunity to expand the conflict into Syria and possibly achieve a long-sought 'regime change' in Damascus, but Israel’s leadership balked at the scheme, according to Israeli sources.

"One Israeli source said Bush’s interest in spreading the war to Syria was considered 'nuts' by some senior Israeli officials, although Prime Minister Ehud Olmert has generally shared Bush’s hard-line strategy against Islamic militants."

Will Rice give birth to a new "Bay of Pigs"

Rice speaks before an AIPAC convention
Having immea- surably screwed up Iraq, and having orbed in and out of the Middle East, which for her means Israel, the neo-Condesleaza has been making speeches about giving birth to a new Middle East. Now she has taken the time to announce the appointment of a Republican party hack to plan a regime change for Cuba.
I can't help but wonder who the Ahmad Chalabi of Cuba will turn out to be. There are so many candidates in Miami. But the bigger question is: who is this nut job who has taken up residence in the State Department?

From the BBC News:

"US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice has announced the creation of a new post to help 'accelerate the demise' of the Castro regime in Cuba.
"Caleb McCarry, a veteran Republican Party activist, was appointed as the Cuba transition co-ordinator.
"Ms Rice said for 50 years Fidel Castro had condemned Cubans to a 'tragic fate of repression and poverty'.
"Mr Castro accuses the US of funding unrest and vowed that dissidents would never bring down his government."

Well Fidel, you're right again. Please get well soon.

Bush, Israel, and the final resurrection

If you've been wondering where the Bush comes by his blind devotion to Israel, more than just the Neo-Cons are involved. Check out this post by Bill Berkowitz on Working for Change

"Over the past two decades, as the Christian Right has grown in political power in the United States, there has been parallel growth in support for Israel. A number of organizations made up of conservative evangelical and Jewish leaders have been founded, and millions of dollars have been raised and donated to charities in Israel.
"Now, a new group plans to take it up a notch, becoming a significant presence in any political policy debates involving Israel.


"In mid-July, while the Israeli-Hezbollah conflict continued to escalate, Christians United for Israel (CUFI) -- an organization founded less than six months ago by Texas evangelist Rev. John C. Hagee, pastor of the 18,000-member Cornerstone Church in San Antonio, Texas, and the author of "Jerusalem Countdown," a 2006 book about a nuclear-armed Iran -- rolled into Washington, D.C., for its first major get-together.

"More than 3,400 delegates from across the country attended the inaugural meeting.

"CUFI kicked off the gathering on July 19 with its A Night to Honor Israel banquet at the grand ballroom in the Washington Hilton. The festivities attracted a number of high-profile Israeli and U.S. political leaders, including Israeli Ambassador Daniel Ayalon, retired Israeli defense chief Lt. Gen. Moshe Yaalon, and Republican National Committee Chairman Ken Mehlman.

"According to a report posted at Israpundit, Hagee read greetings from President George W. Bush and Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert. ... Bush urged 'God [to] bless and stand by the people of Israel and ... bless the United States,'...."

Fair and Balanced?

Thus is from Democracy Now:

"Earlier this week, two producers working for Fox News in Amman Jordan resigned in protest. In their resignation letter, Serene Sabbagh and Jomana Karadsheh wrote 'We can no longer work with a news organization that claims to be fair and balanced when you are so far from that. Not only are you an instrument of the Bush White House, and Israeli propaganda, you are war mongers with no sense of decency, nor professionalism.'”

What's Hillary afraid of?

The following is a letter sent to Chelsea Neighbors United to End the War by the Tasini campaign:

Dear Friend

One of the worst aspects of our political system is the corrupting role played by money in election campaigns. Too often, money, not ideas or vision, decides what voters get to hear and, as a result, who gets elected to our political bodies.

NY1 has taken this a step further. It is now acting as a censor, refusing to let voters here Jonathan's views. Rather than act as a promoter of greater speech and greater knowledge for its viewers and the public at large, NY1 (which is owned by media giant Time Warner) has announced that Jonathan cannot participate in a Town Hall debate because he has not raised or spent $500,000. This is shocking.

According to NY1, in our democratic system, half a million bucks is the ante to get your voice heard. Even though we have an amazing grassroots campaign--which powered our gathering of 40,000 signatures that put Jonathan on the ballot--NY1 will act as a censor, preventing the voters from being able to fairly judge the positions and views of the two candidates in this race, Jonathan Tasini and Hillary Clinton.

We are asking you to immediately call Robert Hardt, NY1's Director of Politics, who was one of a few media power-brokers who made this decision that is closing off discussion and censoring debate. We are calling for a simple criteria for participation: any candidate who has qualified for the ballot should be allowed into the debate. Call or e-mail him TODAY: 212-379-3330 or Robert.Hardt@ny1news.com and demand that NY1 revise its criteria.
You can read Jonathan's full press statement about this issue and, then, help our voice be heard by making a donation to the campaign.
Don't let the media shut down the debate! This is YOUR DEMOCRACY!
Thanks for all you do for the campaign,

Stephanie, Anna, William, Helen, Andre, Barbara, Sam and the rest of the Tasini For New York team.

Chelsea Neighbors United To End The War
P.O. Box 821
JAF Station
New York, NY 10116-0821
212-726-1385
http://www.chelseaneighborsunited.org
join our listerv: ChelseaNeighborsUnited-Subscribe@yahoogroups.com

Chelsea Neighbors United to End the War
P.O. Box 821
JAF Station
New York, NY 10116-0821
212-726-1385
www.ChelseaNeighborsUnited.org
Yahoo! Groups Links

The Bush conspiracy?

Here's an exerpt from Dave Lindorff's latest post on This Can't Be Happening:

"If some diabolical anti-American mastermind had been trying, behind the scenes, to destroy this nation by secretly installing in the White House and Pentagon agents who would deliberately sink the ship of state, he or she couldn’t have come up with a subversive wrecking crew more adept at the job than the Bush administration. The nation is being bankrupted by tax cuts for the obscenely wealthy and by a pointless, and endless trillion-dollar war. At the same time blood enemies are being produced with every bomb dropped, every innocent victim kidnapped and locked away in America’s gulag, every child shot at a roadblock.


"Clearly, though, Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rice et al, are not the secret agents of some malevolent foreign enemy of America. Nor is their vile reign of terror around the globe and their gutting of the Constitution here at home, simply a matter of stupid policy-making. They are, rather, home-grown enemies of American democracy, bent on subverting the country to their own ends of unbridled power.


"Their goal in all this is not the stated one of "spreading democracy" at the point of a gun--a clearly ridiculous notion in any case. Rather, the goal is destroying democracy here at home, in order to establish a one-party dictatorship."

Lindorff is the co-author, with Barbara Olshansky, of The Case for Impeachment

Mel Gibson: In vino, veritas

Here's Mr.Gibson's latest publicity release, oops, I mean "apology."
"There is no excuse, nor should there be any tolerance, for anyone who thinks or expresses any kind of anti-Semitic remark. I want to apologize specifically to everyone in the Jewish community for the vitriolic and harmful words that I said to a law enforcement officer the night I was arrested on a DUI charge."

I understand he is going into a rehabilitation program (at home). I can't help but wonder: How do you rehabilitate someone from anti-Semitism?

The arrestingg officer, who is Jewish, says it was the booze talking. The booze may loosen your tongue, but it doesn't tell your brain what to say.

One of the most startling pieces of information to come out of all this is that his next project was to be a film (for Disney, since cancelled) about the Nazi holocaust. What in the world could this man say? Is there no limit to his arrogance?

Here's a prediction: If his next movie makes money, all will be forgiven. If it doesn't he will have alot more 'splainin to do.

The new Domino Theory in the Middle East

Well here we are on Shelter Island hanging out with our great good friend Eli Messinger. It's a lovely place to spend the first part of our vacation. But even in this beautiful spot, the world comes crashing in. Here's a really scary story from the Democracy Now web site.

Syrian president, Bashar al-Assad (l)
and his Iranian counterpart, Mahmoud
Ahmadinejad, walk past a guard of honour
in Damascus.
(Photograph: Khaled al-Hariri/Reuters)


"Report: U.S. Wants Israel to Attack Syria"

"The Jerusalem Post is reporting that Israeli military officials have told the paper that they have received indications from the United States that the Bush administration wants Israel to attack Syria. On Monday, Syrian President Bashar al-Assad ordered the countryÂ’s military to raise its readiness. Israel has been repeatedly bombing sites in Lebanon along the Syrian border."

Just in case you were under the misunderstanding that anything Israel is doing in Lebanon isn't part of the great "neo-con plan" for rearranging the power structure in the Middle East. That's why the CONdeSleaza has been fighting so vehemently to prevent a cease fire from working. She is the current Neo-Con voice in the Bush administration. It is, of course, the current version of the Domino Theory - with Israel as it's proxy (While it's bogged down in Iraq) the Dick and the Bush, with their new co-conspirator in the State Department, expect Lebanon to come under their control, then Syria, and followed by Iran.

That this is madness hardly needs stating, but then what else would you expect from King George.

Israel's Senator explains his absence

It's interesting that although Washington DC doesn't have a member in the U.S. Senate, Israel has two. One of them Chuck Schumer, who masquerades as a Senator from New York (as does his junior partner Hillary Clinton), had this to say about why he failed to attend the Iraqi Prime Minister's address to Congress Wednesday:

"Maliki did not denounce Hezbollah, a terrorist organization or repudiate amnesty for Iraqis who killed Americans soldiers. Therefore, I won't be attending,"

Al-Maliki's crime was to have honestly stated his humanitarian views on the Israeli massacre in Lebanon:

"The Israeli attacks and airstrikes are completely destroying LebanonÂ’s infrastructure,"

"I condemn these aggressions and call on the Arab League foreign ministersÂ’ meeting in Cairo to take quick action to stop these aggressions. We call on the world to take quick stands to stop the Israeli aggression."

Ah well, honesty isn't usually the best policy in today's Washington.

Iraq's Al-Maliki shares the Bush's fantasies

The Bush may not have taught Iraq's Al-Maliki much about democracy, but he has certainly taught him how to spin the truth, Here's what Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri Al-Maliki had to say to Congress Wednesday:

"My presence here is a testament of the new politics of a democratic Iraq. In a short space of time, Iraq has gone from a dictatorship to a transnational administration and now to a fully fledged democratic government."

Here's what right-wing pundit and NY Post columnist Ralph Peters had to say on the same day about "the fully fledged democratic government":

"Instead of working aggressively toward a solution, key elements within the Iraqi government have become part of the problem Responsible for the police and public order, the Interior Ministry has failed utterly. Instead of behaving impartially, Shia-dominated police units provide death squads to retaliate against Sunni insurgents. As a result, more Sunnis back the insurgents in self-defense. More Shias die. More Sunnis die. The downward spiral accelerates."

"This is bad news for our troops in Iraq. For the first time, we may face a problem we have no hope of fixing."

It seems as if the Bush has welcomed Al-Maliki into his own private fantasy world.

The Dick's aim is no better when he predicts the future

"The level of activity that we see today from a military standpoint, I think, will clearly decline. I think they're in the last throes, if you will, of the insurgency."

The Dick, May, 2005

"Obviously the violence in Baghdad is still terrible, and therefore there needs to be more troops"

The Bush, July, 2006

Which insurgency was that Mr. Vice President?

The N.Y. Post hits a new journalistic low

I have to admit that I didn't believe that the N.Y. Post could surprise me by how low it would stoop in its campaign to smear Sen. Clinton. But in Wednesday's edition it scraped the bottom of the journalistic barrel.

Anyone who reads Contested Terrain knows that I am not a Hillary fan, but even I was shocked by Post Correspondent Geoff Earl's article ("Heel Hails Hill" - the Post is big on alliteration).

Post readers know that the most important world news over the last week is coming out of the newly split Christie Brinkley-Peter Cook menage. I should add that Earl's piece is an "exclusive." Of course, one might wonder if any other editor would have considered it a legitimate news story.

The heel of the headline, of course, is Cook, who cheated on ex-supermodel Brinkley with "a doe-eyed teen," named Diana Bianchi. The innocent 19-year-old teen has since these revelations has hired two "high-powered" attorneys, "in case she is called as a witness" in the upcoming divorce trial, although there have been suggestions of "a great sexual-harassment claim." Her attorney might sound a little less gleeful about it.

The core of this ridiculous article is that

"Cooks Clinton donations were spread out between 2001 and 2004, long after his sex romps with pop singer Samantha Cole, who was then about 18, and just before he picked up Bianchi, now 19, last summer."

Then comes the Coup de Earl,

"Like his cheating ways, Cook's contributions to Clinton, appear to be a summer tradition."

In other words, he zipped up his fly and ran to his checkbook to pay off Sen. Clinton. Just as other people in the same situation run off to drop some money in their church collection box.

Now the fact that none of this was known until last week seems to have slipped what passes for Earl's research.

I was also amused by the fact that when "asked by the Post whether she will return the contributions , Clinton said, 'I'll have to look into it.'" And "Campaign aide Ann Lewis later said, 'Senator Clinton has met Peter Cook. We do not intend to return his contributions.'"

What I don't understand is why any moderately intelligent person wouldn't have looked at the questioner and said, "Your an idiot, go away."

Pro life in the womb and the Petri dish, not after a human being is born.

(Photo: AP/Ron Edmonds)
When I saw the Bush with all those babies at the White House for the stem-cell research veto party, I realized what was going on.

First of all they (the Republicans) need all those babies to supply human fodder for all the future "wars for democracy" these nuts plan to fight.

In fact it's becoming clear that the only life they are pro is in the womb or in the Petri dish. Once a child is born he or she becomes someone else's problem until they are old enough to get shot somewhere in the world to which the neo-cons are currently bringing democracy.

We know that god speaks through the Bush about spreading democracy to the benighted parts of the world, but unfortunately she forgot to explain to him what "democracy" means.

July 21: Emergency Action to End the War on Lebanon

Emergency Action to End the War on Lebanon
Deliver a Letter to the U.S. Mission to the United Nations
Join UFPJ and peace and justice activists:

July 21, 4:00 PM (until 5:30 PM)
140 East 45th Street (between Third and Lexington Aves)

"A call for the Bush administration to:

"Support a Security Council resolution calling for an immediate and unconditional cease-fire;

"Urge negotiations now to resolve all disputes including the release of prisoners by all sides;

"Put an end to U.S. blocking of UN action.

"There will be a picket outside the mission and we will deliver a letter signed by UFPJ and other peace and justice organizations.

"While the world is crying out for global intervention to stop the bloodshed, we have been tremendously disappointed by the response from the Bush administration.

"And instead of rallying the international community to call for an immediate cease
fire to stop further bloodshed, it has blocked the UN efforts to do just that.

"We condemn all attacks on civilians, and call for the release of prisoners held on all sides in this conflict, including the Israeli soldiers captured by Hezbollah. But while Hezbollah violated international law by attacking Israel and then firing missiles at Israeli cities, Israel's clearly disproportionate response is an act
of collective punishment against the Lebanese population -- a serious
violation of international law.

"On Friday, we will go to the U.S. mission to hold our government accountable for their negligent response to this conflict. Please join us."

July 18 - Protest Israeli invasion of Lebanon

July 18, 4:30 pm -

Protest: demand action now to stop the killing of Lebanese & Palestinians, hold Israel accountable for its crimes, and free all Lebanese & Palestinian political prisoners.

At Israeli Mission to the UN,
2nd Ave btw E 42nd &43rd Sts
(4/5/6/7 to 42nd St-Grand Central).

Info: Riham Barghouti, rihambarghouti@yahoo.com or
Issa Mikel, 917-446-8032, issamikel@gmail.com

(There may also be a counterdemo July 17, 12-3 pm
at Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations pro-Israel rally, at Israeli Mission to the UN)