January 04, 2007
It Couldn't Happen Here, Huh?
He's out of control.
That clueless, rudderless, soul-less, dishonorable treasoner in the White House -- after having decided earlier in the week to completely disregard not only the will of the people but the best counsel of his father's wise men, and rather than trying to get us out of a war he started and lost, will instead deepen our troop commitment in Iraq, condemning yet more Americans to die over his war -- and after having eroded or directly violated more of your rights as an American citizen than any person in history INCLUDING J. Edgar Hoover... has taken it upon himself to abuse an act of Congress in ways that not even its Republican sponsors intended. Your rights are being trampled yet again by that irresponsible traitor... and this time even Republicans are dismayed.
George W. Bush has just unilaterally decided that he has the right to open your mail.
Doesn't matter if you've done nothing. Doesn't matter if you're a perfectly loyal American citizen. If he wants to see your mail, he's going to open it... whether Congress likes it or not.
Federal law has long required a search warrant to open first class mail unless postal inspectors suspect it contains something dangerous, like a bomb or a hazardous chemical... But in signing a postal bill just before Christmas, President Bush said federal law also gives the government authority to open the mail "for foreign intelligence collection." ... But members of Congress — Republicans and Democrats alike — say that's not what they intended the law to do. And they call it another example of a president claiming new legal authority while signing a bill into law.
“I was really surprised. There was absolutely nothing in the Postal Reform bill that in any way diminished or changed the privacy protections for domestic sealed mail,” Sen. Susan Collins of Maine said.
This SOB is completely out of control, and needs to be stopped. Congress passes a bill, and he reinterprets it to suit his own perverse agenda while signing it into law, despite the will and intent of the Congress?
I hadn't planned on supporting impeachment during the Democratic Congress. Bush and the neocons have so badly screwed up this country and bungled every single thing they've touched so irreversibly that I felt the Congress should focus on trying to clean up the mess instead. But it's become even more clear that this administration, beyond being dangerous and de.ceitful, is also intent on seizing power it has not been granted. For the protection of all American citizens, this president has to be removed. Sign me up for the impeachment hearings
Posted by Christopher at 09:47 PM | Comments (0)December 26, 2006
Merry Christmas From George W. Bush
As of today, 2,978 Americans have died in George W. Bush's war in Iraq.
Which means that George W. Bush is now responsible for more American deaths than Osama bin Laden.
Merry Christmas from the Bush administration.
Posted by Christopher at 08:31 PM | Comments (0)October 18, 2006
Things That Make You Go Hmmm
So if George W. Bush invaded Iraq (in defiance of the international community) on the premise that Saddam Hussein was a brutal, ruthless dictator who had tried to acquire Weapons of Mass Destruction, and despite his denials was believed to have a stockpile of WMD at his disposal...
... then how come Zippy the Wonder Chimp has not invaded North Korea yet? I mean, Kim Jong Il is a brutal and ruthless dictator. He's not only rumored to have pursured WMD, but he's officially conducted a test of a nuclear bomb, and is defiantly threatening to detonate a second one. If there's ever been a slam-dunk case in which to invoke the Bush doctrine, this would appear to be it. Yet Bush sits meekly in the White House, only making vague pronouncements about what is unacceptable. I wonder why?
It wouldn't have anything to do with North Korea having no oil for Dick Cheney and his war profiteering Halliburton' to go into the country and plunder, would it?
I report. You decide.
Posted by Christopher at 06:40 AM | Comments (1)October 05, 2006
Famous Last Words
-- "Mission Accomplished." -- Dumbya, more than three years ago, talking about a war that still rages; 2,596 more American military personnel have died since W declared the war had been won.
"You're doing a heckuva job, Brownie." -- Dumbya to Michael Brown in the immediate aftermath of Hurricane Katrina.
Bush referred to [Hastert] as a "father, teacher, coach"... "I know Denny Hastert. I meet with him a lot. I know that he wants all the facts to come out," the president said.
Anyone else see a pattern here?
Friday is coming, kids -- the afternoon upon which bad news is often broken because it's the quietest day -- people are leaving for their weekends, and there's an entire weekend ahead for something else to happen before the news cycle renews itself with gusto again on Monday morning. Will Hastert resign? Who knows... but if I were betting on it happening, I would place all my chips on Friday afternoon.
Posted by Christopher at 06:38 AM | Comments (2)September 29, 2006
Preach On, President Carter!
Okay, so maybe he wasn't the most successful president we ever had. But he's been a champion of the ideals that America is supposed to stand for in the world for two decades now, and he's the best example in history of what an ex-President of the United States can be. Yesterday in Nevada, former President Jimmy Carter hit the nail so directy on the head that I am unable to add anything to it. I'll just post his words verbatim... because the man got it right. Sadly, angrily right.
"I've been deeply embarrassed as a civil rights advocate that we have had the American government stand convicted around the world as one of the greatest abusers of civil rights," said Carter, the 2002 winner of the Nobel Peace Prize... "What has happened the last five years has brought discouragement and sometimes international disgrace to our great country," he said.
"What has happened in the last five years has been a radical departure from what all previous presidents have done, including George Bush Sr., and Ronald Reagan and Gerald Ford and Richard Nixon and Dwight Eisenhower," the former president said, listing the last five Republican presidents.
"We have never before in this nation had a policy of pre-emptive war, which means we go to war against people not because they are a danger to our country, but because our government feels another leader will not comply with the demands that come out of Washington," he said. As a result, the U.S. mounted "an ill-advised invasion of Iraq based on false premises, false statements and this has been the major international debacle that our country has brought on Americans," he said.
Carter, who also planned a speech Thursday night at a fundraiser sponsored by the Washoe County Democratic Party, said when the United States entered Afghanistan after the terrorist attacks on Sept. 11, 2001, the country was "perhaps as united as we have been since the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor in 1941."
"We also had the unanimous support of every country on earth. ... Every country pledged to the United States, `We will stand by you and be a partner with you in a unanimous commitment to root out terrorism around the world,'" he said. "We frittered that away. We gave it up by going into Afghanistan in the beginning and then in an ill-advised departure from the war on terrorism, we decided to invade Iraq and we let Al-Qaida build up its strength and we let Osama Bin Laden escape."
Not sure you're going to find a more "there it is" list of the crimes George W. Bush and his idiotic neocon regime have perpetrated against the American image around the world. Preach the Truth, Brother Carter.
Posted by Christopher at 08:59 AM | Comments (0)September 18, 2006
Isn't It Ironic? Don'tcha Think?
It's not quite like rain on your wedding day or a free ride when you've already paid, but it's ironic all the same.
At the United Nations, Bush will try to highlight his goal of spreading democracy.
The man who's authorized warrantless wiretapping, is fighting his own Congress for the right to torture, presides over a political environment in which people are arrested at rallies simply for wearing t-shirts with slogans opposing him, has cracked down on civil liberties in his own country, took office in 2000 by having his brother steal Florida and kept it in 2004 by chicanery in Ohio... is going to the UN to promote... democracy.
In other news, Tom Cruise is going to the American Psychiatric Association's convention to promote healthy ways to deal with mental illness, Britney Spears is going to Lincoln Center to promote opera, and Lindsey Lohan is going to a Baptist convention to promote sobriety.
The next time we want to talk to the UN about democracy, we really ought to send somebody who actually knows even a sliver about it, don'tcha think?
Posted by Christopher at 07:17 AM | Comments (2)August 21, 2006
Lies, Damn Lies, and Statistics
"Nobody has ever suggested in this administration that Saddam Hussein ordered the 9/11 attack" -- George W. Bush, press conference, 8/21/06
"[Iraq was] the geographic base of the terrorists who have had us under assault for many years, but most especially on 9/11." -- Dick Cheney, Meet The Press, September 14, 2003
"There was a relationship between Iraq and al-Qaeda that stretched back through most of the decade of the ’90s, that it involved training, for example, on BW and CW, that al-Qaeda sent personnel to Baghdad to get trained on the systems that are involved. The Iraqis providing bomb-making expertise and advice to the al-Qaeda organization." -- Dick Cheney, Meet The Press, September 14, 2003
Cheney, however, insisted the case was not closed into whether there was an Iraq connection to the Sept. 11 attacks. "We don't know." -- CNBC interview, June 18, 2004
"Our intelligence sources tell us that he has attempted to purchase high-strength aluminum tubes suitable for nuclear weapons production." -- Bush's State of the Union address, January 29, 2003
This administration is engaging in a disgusting game of hair-splitting and nuance-drawing, continuing the pattern of deliberate deception that has been its hallmark since it seized control in 2000. They massage their words carefully, drawing as close a connection between Saddam Hussein and 9/11 as they possibly can (an allegation that has been definitively proven to be a patent and blatant lie), without saying the actual words "Saddam ordered 9/11." Then, when called out on the lie by reporters or the American people, they weasel their words again by arguing that they never claimed that Saddam ordered the 9/11 attacks. Perhaps not, but the administration -- especially that treasonous, evil son of a bitch Cheney -- has gone out of their way to draw as direct a connection as possible without actually saying the words.
Bush lied today, like he has lied every day since seizing power. Meanwhile, in Iraq, more than 2,610 American miltary personnel have lost their lives in Iraq, the direct result of the Bush administration's lies and deception. Meanwhile, Halliburton recorded more than $13.6 billion in Iraq-related revenue from March 2003 through September 2005.
A pretty heavy price for deliberate and calculated lies by George W. Bush and the Dick, wouldn't you say?
Posted by Christopher at 09:51 PM | Comments (1)August 13, 2006
Who's Paranoid Now?
The morning after the London terror plot was exposed and the arrests made, I was having an instant message conversation with a work colleague. I genuinely like this guy; he's funny, he's smart, and I consider us friends. His major flaw, however, is that he's a Republican. (Dude... I know you're reading; it's all in fun.) He IM'd me out of genuine exasperation that morning, having been reading DailyKos (call it opposition research) and seeing comments questioning the timing of the revelation of the terror plot. He became even more exasperated when, while not making the direct accusation myself, I refused to rule out the idea that the Bush/Cheney administration had somehow orchestrated the timing of the arrests to deflect attention from the reasons behind Joe Lieberman's loss and to try and regain the upper hand in the whole "who's stronger on terrorism" discussion in US politics. He became so frustrated with me, in fact, that we've pretty much agreed not to talk politics with one another anymore, seeing as how we get on so well when politics isn't in the discussion, and quickly become angry with one another when it is.
In frusrtation, he asked me if I really believed that Scotland Yard plays politics. I said that I thought Tony Blair's government does whatever Dick Cheney and George W. Bush tell it to. And I told him that, given what we'd observed during the 2004 campaign -- when there always seemed to be new threats and raised alerts and trips to the "orange" part of the color code that curiously coincided with Bush's dropping in the polls -- and the thoroughly discredited attempt by Bush and especially Dick Cheney to connect Iraq with 9/11, I thought it was foolish and naive to rule out the possibility that this administration manipulated events to support its own selfish aims. This administration has already proven that it is willing to use fear to its own political benefit, I told him, and has shown itself capable or preying on Americans' worst fears in order to protect itself. So why should we rule out that it had done so in this case? He typed, "Sigh," and that was the point where we decided to agree to disagree.
But lo and behold, lookee what we have in today's news: The Brits didn't think the time was right for arrests last week; they wanted to continue surveillance for a little while longer... but the United States heavily pressured the UK authorities to make the arrests last week.
A senior British official knowledgeable about the case said British police were planning to continue to run surveillance for at least another week to try to obtain more evidence, while American officials pressured them to arrest the suspects sooner. The official spoke on condition of anonymity due to the sensitivity of the case.
In contrast to previous reports, the official suggested an attack was not imminent, saying the suspects had not yet purchased any airline tickets. In fact, some did not even have passports.
Gee, now why do you suppose that is? How do you think it happened that the arrests came before an attack was imminent? Why do you think the US government would risk exposing the plot prematurely and perhaps hindering the eventual legal cases against those arrested, by having them arrested before they'd even obtained passports? It wouldn't have anything to do with the fact that the administration had been dealt a stinging reubke via the defeat of one of its staunchest supporters, now would it?
If you don't think so, you're extremely naive.
Wednesday, the day after Lieberman's defeat, Dick Cheney was running around telling any reporter who would listen that the voters' rejection of Lieberman and his pro-Bush agenda was reflective of Democrats not being willing to stand up to terrorism. And lo and behold, the very next day, a terror plot gets exposed that chills the blood of any sane person and reminds us all of the threat we do face. And lo and behold, Bush's poll numbers on terrorism immediately go up.
If you think that's coincidence, I have a bridge in Brooklyn I'd love to sell you at a steal of a price.
The US pressured the UK to act sooner than it would have preferred. Go ahead and keep believing in the Easter Bunny, the Tooth Fairy, leprechauns, Santa Claus, and the pure or benevolent intentions and motivations of the Bush administration if you want to. As for me, I know that mommy and daddy wrapped the presents, put 'em under the tree, ate the cookies, and drank the milk... and I know what this administration really is.
Posted by Christopher at 01:59 PM | Comments (1)August 01, 2006
Hot Like Stupid
The majority of the United States was over 100 degrees with the heat index today. Here in New York, it was 100 degrees for the high, with the heat index passing 110 degrees. More than 300 Americans have died of heat-related conditions in the past two weeks. Last summer's hurricane season featured three of the 20 most intense hurricanes ever recorded.
But global warming isn't real. Just ask the chuckleheaded moron in the White House.
Posted by Christopher at 08:07 PM | Comments (0)July 18, 2006
The Best Protection Money Can Buy
Courtesy of Linkmeister, here's the latest example of the disgrace that is the Bush Administration and how it is miserably failing to uphold the oath that W swore. Even though he bears the ultimate responsibility for protecting and defending the lives of American citizens, George W. Bush won't evacuate American citizens from war-torn Lebanon unless they pay him to do it.
Americans have been told to wait for a telephone call that could come in hours — or days. They've also been told they can't board a ship unless they've signed a contract agreeing to repay the U.S. government for the price of their evacuation.
Dick Cheney's Halliburton gets billions in no-bid contracts and has fattened itself (and Cheney, for that matter) on the war that Bush started under false pretenses in Iraq... but US citizens have to pay for their own safety. Bush will hand out billions in tax breaks to fat rich businessmen, but when it comes to protecting Americans' lives, well, that has a cost?
It's only fitting from this administration. They came into power in a manner befitting a third world banana republic; why shouldn't we expect them to behave like third world banana dictators? Well, except that this is the United States of America, and we're supposed to deserve better. This administration is a disgrace.
Another element worthy of a dictatorship: after Karl Rove and Dick Cheney leaked an undercover operative's name and identity in an act of political retribution and pique... after people have been arrested in this country for showing up at Bush rallies with anti-Bush t-shirts... the people have finally gotten the message. Under this criminal administration, American citizens now feel that they cannot criticize the Bush government without fear of retribution.
The rules have angered Americans who are already fatigued and nervous after days of explosions. "I'm freaked out that our government is treating us this way," snapped a Rutgers University student who had been studying Arabic at the American University of Beirut. She declined to give her name for fear she would be taken off the passenger list in retribution for criticizing the evacuation effort.
Last time I checked, Americans had the right to criticize anything they wanted without being afraid that someone in the government was watching and might engage in retribution. Only in George W. Bush's Republican America do our own people have to fear that their own government behaves like the Middle Eastern theocrats we make such a show of being more free than.
And the line between supporting Bush and treason grows dimmer every day.
Posted by Christopher at 06:29 AM | Comments (2)February 19, 2006
Don't You Feel Safer?
So Karl Rove wants to make "security" the focus of the 2006 elections... I think it's time we said, "Bring it on, you classified information-leaking-to-extract-political-revenge piece of donkey refuse." I mean, we've already seen that the Bush Administration is thoroughly incompetent at protecting the American people from standing water (thank you, Keith Olbermann) or protect 78 year old men from a Vice President with a gun. (Hell, the old guy even had to apologize to the Vice President for getting in the way of his rifle.)
Now, the party that wants you to believe that they will keep you safe has sold over the rights to managing American ports... to a foreign company. Not just a foreign company, but one from the Middle East. Yes, you read that right, kids: the Bush Administration has sold control of operations at six key American ports to an Arabic company. No, not one owned and run by an Arab-American businessman who loves his country as much as you do. One owned and based in the United Arab Emirates.
The Bush Administration spies without warrants on Americans in the name of the "war on terror;" it invades sovereign nations with leaders we find unappealing while letting those who attacked the United States escape and regroup, leaving us vulnerable to another attack. But it has no problem selling off control of some of America's most vulnerable assets off to a company based in the same part of the world as the people who've been attacking us for 20 years. So being Arabic in this country means warrantless searches from the Bush Adminstration; being Arabic with lots of money from another country means they'll give you the keys to our ports with a wink and smile.
Lest you think this is merely a partisan rant from someone who hates George W. Bush and anyone connected to him more than the Yankees or brussels sprouts, I give you the words of new blood conservative Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina:
“It’s unbelievably tone deaf politically at this point in our history,” Sen. Lindsay Graham, R-S.C. said on “Fox News Sunday.” “Most Americans are scratching their heads, wondering why this company from this region now,” Graham said.
When even conservatives are going on Faux News and railing against the Bush Administration's moves, you know it's particularly boneheaded. Add it to the cover up of the Dick's potential drink-and-shoot incident, the utterly bungled Katrina response (and if you haven't watched Keith Olbermann's angry on-air denunciation of the government's inaction, it's one for the record books, one of the most angrily patriotic declarations of disgust at Americans not getting the government we deserve ever issued), and the continuing debacle in Iraq -- one based on exaggerations and flat-out falsehoods -- and it's a wonder how any true, patriotic American can possibly still support this administration. They're sure not doing anything that resembles protecting the American people when they're selling off control of our ports to Arab companies.
Rove, if you want to make security the core issue in 2006, bring... it ... on.
Posted by Christopher at 06:00 PM | Comments (3) | TrackBackJanuary 20, 2006
Rhetorical Question #353,975
So how come the United States has spent 50 years punishing Fidel Castro for being a Communist, and yet engages in billions of dollars of trade with China? It can't be about human rights; China's government routinely commits some of the worst human rights abuses anywhere on the planet.
I couldn't help but juxtapose a couple of news stories this week: 1)Wham-O, the maker of such quintessential American toys as the Hula Hoop and the Frisbee, has been sold to a Chinese company -- joining several other high profile Chinese purchases of US companies in recent years; and 2) the US, led of course by the Bush Adminsiration, will not allow Cuba to play in the first World Baseball Classic -- a move that could lead to the cancellation of the tournament.
I don't get it. If communism is so bad that we need to have sanctions so severe that we can't even allow a baseball team to enter our country to play a game, then why the billions of trade every year with China and US firms building offices in Shanghai like it was SimCity? If free market economies can be used to break down walls of control and shatter the false economic precepts of communism, then why aren't we selling Wham-O to a Cuban company and letting Cuba play freaking baseball? (By the way... Cuba participated in the 1996 Olympics in Atlanta. The world didn't end.)
Sometimes, hypocrisy isn't just maddening, it's stupefying.
Frank Deford had an article in Sports Illustrated a month ago that I just found, but in it he explains what a stupid decision this is, and why. If you're a baseball fan, I strongly suggest that you read it. If you're an anti-Castro nutjob whose hatred blinds you to common sense, I insist that you read it. You can't have a World Baseball Classic without Cuba, whose people are among the world's most passionate fans of the game; if the Bush adminstration insists on trying, the rest of the world -- including US baseball players -- should just say, "forget it, then."
Posted by Christopher at 05:38 AM | Comments (4) | TrackBackJanuary 19, 2006
Betcha He's Still Too Stupid To Listen
Global warming isn't just a liberal conspiracy or a Hollywood fabrication anymore... now even Republicans are admitting it. In a damning indictment of George W. Bush's irresponsibility and individual fault over global warming, six former heads of the EPA -- five of them Republicans -- clobbered the current administration's ostrich-like position on global warming on Wednesday.
“I don’t think there’s a commitment in this administration,” said Bill Ruckelshaus, who was EPA’s first administrator when the agency opened its doors in 1970 under President Nixon and headed it again under President Reagan in the 1980s.
Russell Train, who succeeded Ruckelshaus in the Nixon and Ford administrations, said slowing the growth of “greenhouse” gases isn’t enough. “We need leadership, and I don’t think we’re getting it,” he said at an EPA-sponsored symposium centered around the agency’s 35th anniversary. “To sit back and just push it away and say we’ll deal with it sometime down the road is dishonest to the people and self-destructive.”
Gee, imagine that: the Bush administration being dishonest to the people. In other news, Pamela Anderson has implants.
Christie Whitman, the first of three EPA administrators in the current Bush administration, said people obviously are having “an enormous impact” on the earth’s warming. “You’d need to be in a hole somewhere to think that the amount of change that we have imposed on land, and the way we’ve handled deforestation, farming practices, development, and what we’re putting into the air, isn’t exacerbating what is probably a natural trend,” she said. “But this is worse, and it’s getting worse.”
Yeah well, Christie, Bush is most certainly in a hole somewhere. He's got his head up his...
Posted by Christopher at 10:02 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBackJanuary 12, 2006
Dissent and the Regime
After a short stretch in which he actually conceded mistakes or the first time and sinking poll numbers forced him to say publicly that disagreeing with him wasn't unpatriotic, the dictator in the White House is back to his real self. Apparently buoyed by a stabillization in the polls, General Bush (yeah, to get a rank you actually have to have served in the military instead of going AWOL and lying about it, but since he and his administration behave like a third world banana republic tin can military junta, we might as well give him the honorific) this week accused anyone who disagrees with him of giving "comfort to our adversaries."
While it's obvious that Bush and the dwindling number of Republicans who still support his regime would far prefer an unthinking, unquestioning, cattle-like America of zombie drones -- or would simply love to amend the Constituion to make dissent illegal -- unfortunately the whole "the only way to be patriotic is to agree 100% with Bush" BS has finally begun to wear thin on the American people, and it impacted his poll numbers recently. (Well, that and lying about the war, bungling the response to Katrina, and allowing his oil cronies to jack gasoline above $3.00 per gallon.) I doubt it'll work this time.
As for giving comfort to adversaries, I am proud to call myself an adversary of George Bush, and yeah -- every time an American citizen actually thinks or dares to ask questions of this regime, it absolutely brings me comfort.
Posted by Christopher at 06:52 AM | Comments (2) | TrackBackDecember 29, 2005
Priorities
Good men buried their sons this week.
Tony Dungy, head coach of the Indianapolis Colts, is by all accounts one of the classiest men in the NFL, a true leader and role model not only for his players but for kids anywhere. The outpouring of grief and geuine sympathy for Dungy after the death of his 18 year old son James is indicative of the esteem in which Dungy is held by his peers and colleagues in football's fraternity. Dungy's eloquence and strength during his eulogy for his son at the funeral service was admirable and inspirational, and it's impossible not to cheer for the Colts to win the Super Bowl this year now, so deep is the respect and compassion that Dungy has earned from anyone who pays even passing attention to the NFL.
Master Sgt. Joseph Andres Jr. was a 34 year old communications officer assigned to Fort Bragg who was servving in Iraq. He was supposed to be home for New Year's Eve in his hometown of Cleveland, but he never made it home. His unit came under small arms fire in Baquoba on Saturday, and he died on Christmas Eve. His sister described the family's loss in simple terms. "It's devastation," she said.
Each death was tragic in its own way, and the only connection or comparison between the two is their shared sad conclusion this week. But we can learn a lot about someone else's priorities in the aftermath of their losses. A professional football coach's teenage son dies of an apparent suicide, just days before Christmas; an American soldier carrying out his duty in a combat zone is killed in an ambush on Christmas Eve, just a week before he was supposed to come home. Guess which family got a personal note from the Commander in Chief?
If you guessed the military family, you guessed wrong.
George W. Bush, ever advertising his "man of faith"-ness, sent a personal note to the Dungy family to be delivered during the funeral. At one point, while testimonies were being read, an attendant hurried down the aisle carrying a piece of paper. A minister took it to the podium. It was a letter from President Bush, an announcement that brought a gasp from the congregation. Bush expressed his and his wife Laura's sadness and condolences to Tony Dungy and his wife, Lauren. "I pray for you," the president wrote. "May God keep you. May his light shine upon you."
Gee, George. It sure was swell of you to take the opportunity to show your compassion and faith in such an ostentatious fashion as a hand-delivered letter during the funeral service. You could have sent private condolences, I suppose, or phoned the family before or after the service, but then no one would have seen your display -- and what good would that have done you? A neutral observer might conclude that Bush's note was delivered not out of compassion but out of the desire to appear compassionate.
Meanwhile, there were no reports of the Andres family receiving a personal letter of condolence from George W. Bush, despite his role as commander in chief of the armed forces in which Joseph Andres served so admirably. No phone calls to a family who lost their son on Christmas Eve, for whom the holidays will never be the same. No presidential letters containing prayers or invoking God's blessing came for the Andres family during Joseph's funeral service. There was no acknowledgement at all by this president of Joseph Andres' death.
Actually, there have been no acknoweldgements by George W. Bush of any of the 2,172 American military deaths since he started the war in Iraq over what even he now admits were false pretenses. He has not attended one military funeral for a serviceman or woman killed in Iraq. There have been no personal notes of condolence delivered in the flashiest of fashions during funeral services for all the world to see, no individual prayers offered or wishes for God's light to shine on military families who've lost a loved one in George W. Bush's war.
A respected football coach tragically loses a son, and George W. Bush is all over it, in as public a fashion as possible. A military family tragically loses a son, and just like each time before it, George W. Bush is nowhere to be found. Bush's actions speak volumes about the man's priorities and sincerity.
I feel heartsick for the Dungy family, and I wish them peace and comfort during this terrible time; if they find it in their faith, then I am glad it brings them solace.. I also feel heartsick for the Andres family, and I wish them peace and comfort during this terrible time; I hope there is some solace for them in the pride and thanks of a grateful nation for their son's sacrifice. Neither man's death diminishes the shock and sadness of the loss of the other; each was heartbreaking for the families and loved ones left behind. I hope that there is a lesson to be learned in each man's death about compassion, about faith, and about what's really important in life.
"I urge you not to take your relations for granted," Dungy said. "Parents, hug your kids each chance you get. Tell them you love them each chance you get. You don't know when it's going to be the last time."
We promise, Coach.
Posted by Christopher at 07:56 AM | Comments (4) | TrackBackDecember 27, 2005
Priorities
There's troops in Iraq, which keeps turning into more of a quagmire every day. People inside the White House have been indicted for leaking the names of covert CIA employees to the press in retaliation for their politics. The White House has not only okayed the use of the NSA to violate the Constitution, but defiantly insists that it's going to continue. There's a far right wing extremist who's about to start confirmation hearings to the US Supreme Court. Osama bin Laden is still at large, as is Zarqawi. The housing bubble is in the process of bursting. Two thirds of the American public believes that the country is headed down the wrong track. With all these serious and important things to focus attention on, what are George W. Bush and his administration paying attention to?
A coked out, slurring embarrassment of a has-been celebrity.
Yep, the Bush administration can't be bothered to give you an honest answer about Iraq, and doesn't want to talk about its NSA spying policies... but the administration has deemed it a prudent use of its resources and time to get involved in Anna Nicole Smith's estate battle.
Playboy playmate Anna Nicole Smith has an unusual bedfellow in the Supreme Court fight over her late husband's fortune: the Bush administration. The administration's top Supreme Court lawyer filed arguments on Smith's behalf and wants to take part when the case is argued before the justices.
If you were president right now, isn't this where you'd place your priorities? This administration's as phony and plastic as Anna's most famous assets.
Posted by Christopher at 09:53 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBackDecember 18, 2005
Impeach. Now.
You know, when the rumor first broke about George W. Bush growling that the U.S. Constitution was "just a god-damned piece of paper,", I didn't really believe it. You might think that odd, coming from a guy who makes no secret of the fact that I think Bush is a treasonous snake and a criminal. But even I admit, we Bush-haters love to believe the worst about the sonuvabitch -- most of us would believe it and start blogging about it if we heard a rumor that the Bush family dined every night on freshly killed and grilled milk carton kids.
But I figured, no one who grew up in the United States of America (much less someone whose daddy was once president and whose father's lawyers managed to fraudulently install in the White House) could ever really think something like that, much less actually say it aloud. It's too obvious a thing to ascribe to Bush, I thought. Every American knows what the Constitution is and means, and even if we have varying opinions as to how it should be implemented in today's world, we all know its symbolic -- and its real -- meaning, and we all know it's so much more than a piece of paper; it's the very foundation of our identity as a self-governing people. No way Bush really said that, I thought.
Silly me.
First of all, it was a stupid supposition on my part, because if George W. Bush showed any respect for the Constitution today, it would be the first time in his miserable presidency that he'd have done so. But moreover, with the weekend's revelations that Bush personally ordered warrantless domestic spying on American citizens, in direct violation of our Constitutional rights (enumerated in at least two Amendments), it seems clear that Bush is perfectly willing to violate the Constitution he swore to uphold. Even worse, the treasonous snake is angrily defending his right to do so.
Bush said he had reauthorized the program more than 30 times since the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, and plans to continue doing so. "I intend to do so for as long as our nation faces a continuing threat from al-Qaida and related groups," he said.
And then, in tried and true conservative fashion, Bush defaulted to the same tired old whine that we always get from conservatives: it's the media's fault. Instead of apologizing to the American people for the crimes he's admitting to committing against us, Bush instead attacked the New York Times for publishing the story.
"As a result, our enemies have learned information they should not have," he said. "The unauthorized disclosure of this effort damages our national security and puts our citizens at risk."
Hmm... unauthorized disclosure of intelligence information damages national security and puts our citizens at risk, eh? Would that include the names of covert operatives whose husbands are public critics of your administration, you treasonous son of a bitch?
Amazingly, Bush is whining about the Times even though they inexplicably sat on the story for a year, and worked directly with the White House to strike some of the more sensitive information from the report. The Times bent over, grabbed its ankles, and squealed like a pig for the Bush Administration on this story, and he has the audacity to argue that it's the media endangering national security? Especially when his administration deliberately exaggerated or falsified intelligence information to justify the invasion of Iraq (which took our eye off of al Qaeda and actually destabilized Iraq and gave terrorists a new home to train in)?
Predictably, this disgusting slimeball retreated to his traditional position tonight; whenever there's trouble, fall back on Iraq and try and link it to the war on terror. But we shouldn't let him get away with it. George W. Bush has shown a willingness to violate the Constitution and the oath he swore to uphold it. He's defiantly proud of having done so. Not even RIchard Nixon ever violated the sanctity of the office of the presidency, or his responsibility to the citizens of the United States, so egregiously. George W. Bush is a criminal; he has not only committed treason against the United States Constitution, but he's said openly that he's going to do it again. He needs to be impeached, and then tried for his crimes against our people and our nation.
I really am loathe to suggest that anyone holding a particular set of political beliefs is somehow "un-American" -- because I find it uniquely disgraceful and disgusting when the uber-conservative brownshirts try to argue that liberalism is unpatriotic. But with the revelations of Bush's actions this weekend -- and his stubborn, defiant refusal to refrain from committing any more Constitutional crimes -- continued support for this man and his presidency begins to walk dangerously close to support for the continued trashing of the Constitution. Anyone still supporting George W. Bush is saying they're okay with a president who willfully ignores the very foundations of our democracy and the oath he swore to uphold them. Anyone still supporting George W. Bush is saying that they're okay with the erosion -- not gradual, but sudden and dramatic -- of the privacies and rights that we have taken for granted for 220 years now.
I don't think it's okay, and I don't believe that even most Republicans think it's okay. The only ones left supporting this criminal are the theocracists and the power-mad neoconservatives, neither of whose agendas have ever really represented democracy anyway. It's time, America. It's time for the House Judiciary Committee to begin impeachment hearings designed to remove this criminal from office -- and then once he's out, he must be tried for his crimes. If a lie about oral sex warrants it, then deliberate and defiant violation of the Constitution most certainly warrants impeachment. If you believe in democracy, America... it's time.
Impeach. Bush. Now.
Posted by Christopher at 08:21 PM | Comments (2) | TrackBackNovember 13, 2005
Would You Believe...??
Now that the chickens are coming home to roost, and the criminals in the Administration can no longer escape their own lies,they're trying an interesting response: they're accusing their critics of "rewriting history."
First of all, it's worth noting that Bush chose Veterans' Day -- a day when we as a country ought to be united in respect and gratitude for those who've worn our nation's military unifrorm -- to revisit an unrelated, divisive issue, and to make a divisive, partisan charge on that occasion. If this was Bush's approach, November 10 or November 12 would have been perfectly appropriate for it. But on November 11, it was just one more proof of this man's willingness to use division as a distraction tactic when he's in trouble. It's kind of sad, really.
But I think that the charge of rewritiing history is one worthy of consideration, don't you?
Here's the text of George W. Bush's 2003 State of the Union address -- taken from the official White House site itself -- discussing the Bush Administration's justification for war:
The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa. Our intelligence sources tell us that he has attempted to purchase high-strength aluminum tubes suitable for nuclear weapons production. Saddam Hussein has not credibly explained these activities. He clearly has much to hide. The dictator of Iraq is not disarming... Before September the 11th, many in the world believed that Saddam Hussein could be contained. But chemical agents, lethal viruses and shadowy terrorist networks are not easily contained. Imagine those 19 hijackers with other weapons and other plans -- this time armed by Saddam Hussein. It would take one vial, one canister, one crate slipped into this country to bring a day of horror like none we have ever known. We will do everything in our power to make sure that that day never comes. -- George W. Bush, Janurary 28, 2003
Now let's see what he had to say this summer about why we're in Iraq:
"Our mission in Iraq is clear. We're hunting down the terrorists. We're helping Iraqis build a free nation that is an ally in the war on terror. We're advancing freedom in the broader Middle East." -- George W. Bush, June 28, 2005
Anyone hearing any reference to those big bad weapons of mass destruction?
Meanwhile, as the Washington Post pointed out, it's Bush who's been doing some rewriting of the facts.
Bush, in his speech Friday, said that "it is deeply irresponsible to rewrite the history of how that war began." But in trying to set the record straight, he asserted: "When I made the decision to remove Saddam Hussein from power, Congress approved it with strong bipartisan support."
The October 2002 joint resolution authorized the use of force in Iraq, but it did not directly mention the removal of Hussein from power. The resolution voiced support for diplomatic efforts to enforce "all relevant Security Council resolutions," and for using the armed forces to enforce the resolutions and defend "against the continuing threat posed by Iraq."
Hmm... that resilution said nothing about regime change, now did it George? Congress authorized military force to enforce UN Security Council resolutions. That whole eliminating Saddam Hussein thing? All you and your neocon flunkies. Just like the selective use, release, and interpretation of intelligence was all you and your neocon flunkies.
Nowhere to run, nowhere to hide, George. I see 30% in your miserable future (not to mention a possible indictment for your puppet master, Dick Cheney).
Posted by Christopher at 10:11 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBackSeptember 17, 2005
Brick Walls and Headaches
You'd think that after seeing this month just how dire the costs of a tax-slashing, cut-spending-on-everything-except-Halliburton-contracts economic plan can be, George W. Bush might be chastened into reassessing his post-Katrina plans for rebuilding not only the Gulf Coast, but America. You'd think the man would be smart enough and practical enough to deviate from his Little Red Book-styled adherence to the Grover Norquist school of running a country. You'd think that seeing devastation with his own eyes might rouse Bush from inaction and keep him from making the problems worse.
You'd be wrong.
Unbelievably, despite the direct connection between cuts in FEMA spending for levee upkeep and Katrina's devastating impact on New Orleans, Bush still hasn't learned a thing. His recovery plan for New Orleans and the Gulf Coast involves no tax increases, but plenty more ... wait for it... spending cuts.
"It'’s going to cost whatever it’s going to cost, and we're going to be wise about the money we spend," Bush said a day after laying out an expensive plan for rebuilding New Orleans and the Gulf Coast without spelling out how he would pay for it. "The key question is to make sure the costs are wisely spent and that we work with Congress to make sure that we are able to manage our budget in a wise way, and that is going to mean cutting other programs," he added.
Looking beyond the fact that Repubicans have spent decades complaining that Democrats' big proposals never included specifics on how to pay for the grandiose programs they envisioned (which makes this high hypocrisy in a rhetorical sense), we now have the president of the United States demonstrating himself to be such a programmed tool of the Norquist school that not even the reality of death and devastation can jar him from the mantra. Spending cuts in favor of other priorities, forced by sharp decreases in tax revenue due to cuts that overwhelmingly favored the wealthy, contributed to the failure of New Orleans' levees. What's he going to cut to pay for New Orleans -- surveillance and protection of New York's economic targets or Washington's political ones?
We already have a $300 billion budget deficit (n.b.: Bush inherited a surplus from Clinton), and the rebuilding of the Gulf Coast could equal that amount. And yet apparently, George W. Bush is incapable of even considering a tax increase to cover these unforseen costs.
I remember the Contract On -- I mean, Contract "With" -- America that the Repubicans rode to power in 1994. Their very first tenet was that a balanced budget was critical to our long term economic stability, and was in fact every American's right to expect of our elected officials. After ten years of Republican control, that philosophy has obviously faded from existence, replaced with unyielding adherence to tax-cuts dogma no matter the price the country has to pay. It's a sad decline, really. Not just for the so-called "party of Lincoln," but for the rest of us who live under their regime and have to live with the consequences.
What am I suggesting? Despite Republicans' 20 year campaign to paint Democrats as undisciplined, irresponsible big spenders who never met a tax increase they didn't like, I'm not a fan of giant programs funded by en masse tax increases. That said, I don't see how the Gulf Coast gets rebuilt without tax increases to cover the cost -- especially when we're also paying for an irresponsible, ill-conceived war that we were lied to and tricked into entering. It's not like we can pretend Katrina's aftermath is business-as-usual or situation normal. This was an emergency, an unforseen (though not unavoidable, Mr. FEMA spending cuts) disaster with which we must now deal. And just like extenuating circumstances force you and I to make adjustments we'd prefer not to have made (like taking out a consumer loan, for example, or putting a large sum on a credit card), extenuating circumstances are forcing our government into having to take care of its people by doing something it may prefer not to do.
Or at least, they ought to be forcing the government to do so. Unfortunately, the Bush administration appears to prefer continued pandering to its base over actually taking care of the people Bush swore an oath to protect.
Posted by Christopher at 12:33 PM | Comments (8) | TrackBackSeptember 01, 2005
Zero Fiddles While The Big Easy Churns
It seemed just wrong to vent political rhetoric during a natural disaster when our fellow Americans were suffering. So despite a deteriorating situation in New Orleans, I've held my tongue. But after today, I can't stay silent about the "leadership" by the incompetent frat boy.
First of all, you can say what you want about Clinton and his eye for the cameras, but it's a dead lock cinch that by Tuesday afternoon, he'd have been in Louisiana feeling someone's pain or waiting to praise the rescuers from the incident below.
You want to know what Bush was doing during the hour this incident occured?
2000 years ago, Nero famously fiddled while Rome burned. In the modern day empire, a zero strummed while the city drowned. Rather than, oh, say do his job, Bush was gladhanding and playing for photo-ops at one of the few remaining places where people still like him. When the people needed him to be selfless, he was doing something self-serving. That's not leadership. It's cowardice.
Meanwhile, as New Orleans descends further into chaos every hour, Bush and FEMA haven't managed to control the situation well enough to even get constant rescue missions running. Granted, no one should expect rescue workers to risk gunshot or rape in order to save people. But why haven't we mobilized enough National Guardsmen to New Orleans to restore order? Of course, one reason is that 40% of Louisiana's National Guard is in Iraq fighting Bush's Halliburton war. I bet if there had been a profit motive for Bush's friends down there, we'd have 60,000 military there on Tuesday morning. Maybe New Orleans' mayor should have offered to give Halliburton a no-bid contract to control all the oil that comes out of the Gulf of Mexico. Then he could have gotten some help.
Moving further into his administration, it's truly incomprehensible that anyone who could watch this happening in New Orleans could possibly issue a statement like this:
"I am satisfied that we have not only enough," insisted Chertoff, "but more than enough forces there and on the way."
You know, if this guy had been in charge on 9/11, I do believe he might have sent a fire truck.
As you probably can guess, I'm on about a dozen Democratic mailing lists. In the last four days, I have received mass notes from Howard Dean, John Kerry, Ted Kennedy, and Nancy Pelosi. Not one of them has mentioned the word "Democrat" or "Republican." All of them have simply said that Americans needed help, and could I please consider donating to the Red Cross or other charity (which they linked to). Nothing else. No propaganda, no villianizing, no anything other than asking me to help. Know what the Republican National Committee sent out today (September 1) (Courtesy of Daily Kos)?
Dear XXX,
For the last four years, President Bush and Republicans in Congress have championed a pro-growth agenda that has brought tax relief to millions of Americans. Historic legislation in 2001 and 2003 put America on the track to economic growth, and today our economic outlook is bright. There is more work to do, however, to ensure that tax-paying Americans can keep more of their own hard-earned income.
When they return from their August recess, Senators will consider a key issue: elimination of the death tax. The death tax is an unfair double taxation of income, which hurts America's small businesses and farms and threatens job growth. Unfortunately, Senate Democrats are working hard to oppose our efforts to eliminate this unfair tax.
Will you help bring tax relief to more hard-working Americans? Call Senator George V. Voinovich at 202-224-3353 today and ask them to eliminate the death tax.
Americans are struggling with the most extensive natural disaster in US history, and the Republican National Committee cares about giving the richest Americans another tax break, a chance to inherit daddy's wallet without paying taxes on it.
Yes, the Dems send propaganda e-mail too... just not during a national disaster and crisis. The Republicans appear to have other priorities. Maybe that explains why we don't have adequate Guard presence in New Orleans.
Posted by Christopher at 08:34 PM | Comments (4)August 28, 2005
It Hurts When I Laugh
Lifted from McSweeney's, here's a few jokes for you...
BY MATT ALEXANDER
A doctor, a lawyer, and an accountant all die and go to heaven on the same day. When they get to the Pearly Gates, they are greeted by St. Peter. St. Peter says, "Scott McClellan is a lying sack of shit and I'd tell him so myself if he weren't going straight to hell when he dies."
- - - -
Q: What do you get when you cross an elephant and a rhino?
A: I'm not sure, but if the answer is "A cure for Parkinson's disease," then Bush will try to stop scientists from breeding them. Because he likes it when people get Parkinson's.
- - - -
This guy walks into a bar carrying a small poodle in one hand and a bowling ball in the other. The guy says, "I'd like a glass of milk for me and a whiskey for my poodle." The bartender says, "Yeah? Well, I'd like an impartial and independent judiciary, but try telling that to Bush, Frist, and the rest of the GOP!"
- - - -
Q: What do you get when you cross a giraffe and a monkey?
A: I'm sorry, I can't think about that right now because I'm too busy wondering why Congress hasn't launched an official investigation into Bush lying to the American public about WMDs and leading us into a war under false pretenses. Tell you what -- as soon as I solve that little riddle, I'll get to work on your little genetic experiment.
- - - -
Q: How many eggs does it take to make a good omelet?
A: Three. By the way, Tom DeLay is a hypocrite of the highest order.
- - - -
Did you hear that Bill Clinton hired a new intern? It turns out that his old intern had to go home and spend time with her family after her brother was killed in Iraq.
- - - -
Q: How many golf players does it take to screw in a light bulb?
A: The answer may be locked away in the minutes of Cheney's secret energy meetings. However, conventional wisdom says that the meetings were probably about finding a Cabinet-level position for a pre-scandal Ken Lay or about arranging no-bid contracts for Halliburton.
- - - -
Knock-knock.
Who's there?
Under the Patriot Act, we don't have to tell you.
August 21, 2005
An Honest Republican
As often as I excoriate Republicans around here, it would be unfair of me to not acknowledge when one displays some integrity and honesty.
Senator Chuck Hagel (R-Nebraska) came out with the strongest Republican statement yet about the result of George W. Bush's Halliburton war. On ABC's "This Week" this morning, Hagel said what we've all realized about Iraq - but until now, no Republican has said.
"We should start figuring out how we get out of there," Hagel said on "This Week" on ABC. "But with this understanding, we cannot leave a vacuum that further destabilizes the Middle East. I think our involvement there has destabilized the Middle East. And the longer we stay there, I think the further destabilization will occur."Hagel said "stay the course" is not a policy. "By any standard, when you analyze 2 1/2 years in Iraq ... we're not winning," he said.
Hagel knows something about what a fruitless war led by people who mislead the American people looks like; he won two Purple Hearts in Vietnam (you know, that war that Bush and Cheney were too cowardly to serve in?). And he's no longer afraid to draw the connection that many of us have seen for years now.
"What I think the White House does not yet understand — and some of my colleagues — the dam has broke on this policy," Hagel said. "The longer we stay there, the more similarities (to Vietnam) are going to come together."
Now it's true that Hagel is considering a run at the Presidency in 2008 (a race that, given current skepticism about Iraq reflected in the polls, may well cost anyone associated with its prosecution), so he may be trying to position himself for that candidacy. But it's highly ironic that a Republican has finally determined that honesty about Iraq just might be the best positioning. Sadly for our nation, none of his party-mates seem to have come to that realization yet.
Posted by Christopher at 06:53 PM | Comments (4)
