Thursday, September 30, 2004

Bush loses it.

Bush's grimaces, coupled with John Kerry's references to bin Laden and Tora Bora (getting Bush to say "bin Laden" after frist saying "Saddam Hussein") has pretty much nailed Bush's electoral coffin.

Give a big Al Gore sigh of relief - Bush is toast.

Great link on lying

via Kos here.

Now, if they ask Bush about his desertion...

Wednesday, September 29, 2004

Kerry's TAN????? And stupid media bias...

I see hints of this on DU and Freepers.

Are you guys kidding?

The US is sliding towards militarism, impoverishment of the middle class, kleptocratic authoritarian goverment, and these clowns are talking about "Kerry's tan????"

I heard CNN in Japan say that an unconstitutional move by Bush was a "setback in the war on terror for the Bush administration."

No, CNN. It was a "an unconstitutional power-grab using the 'war on terror' as a pretext."

That, righties, is the truth: and the above is a perfect example of CNN's right-wing bias.

In Japan, the Daily Yomiuri has bits of the Washington Post in it- and after a few weeks of reading foreign media in foreign countries, it looks like a a circus fun-house mirror image of reality.

For example, there's an article that claims Kerry needs a "grand, yet simplcy communicated vision," by one Kenneth S. Baer, purportedly a speechwriter for Gore.

Kerry has it: Stronger at home, respected aborad. Bush failed miserably on both counts.

With said article is a graphic showing presidents Carter, Reagan, Clinton, and Bush II, with Bush I "read my lips" air-brushed out of history, like one of those Stalin-era Soviet media pictures.


Kerry just has to be himself in the debates tomorrow, but bringing up "My Pet Goat," wouldn't be a bad idea.

Sunday, September 26, 2004

I have seen Yasukuni Shrine

and I have to say it's profoundly moving, but not in a nice way.

Yes indeed, they do leave out alot of stuff. In their museum, they neglect to think about China as an independent country, they do neglect to mention Japanese imperialism against China, they neglect to disucuss the fact that Manchukuo was a puppet goverment, they neglect to admit anything about unit 731, they neglect to mention the reality of Nanking. Just like the Bush junta, they neglect to mention war crimes.

That said, can we, who have not come to terms with Vietnam, or Iraq, really fault them? Can we, who have created Savannah, Andersonville, and Wounded Knee really fault them?

Bush and his cronies have done great damage to the United States. This is undeniable.

Everyone should visit Yasukuni Shrine and its museum, and look at the pictures of the 6,000 kamikazes who died for their country  instead of Americans. 

Such idiocy- to die for lies that are told by the rulers of a country, which are re-told as "historical" lies.

I love Japan, and its people, and they largely hate militarism, despite Yasukuni(and those that would re-take Sakhalin islands. And I do not want America do go down that road.

Friday, September 24, 2004

E. J. Dionne tells the truth

about Bush`s pathological inability to tell the truth.

At the top of my personal hit parade of Bush Distortions is a statement the president has made over and over, notably during his speech at the Republican National Convention. "If you say the heart and soul of America is found in Hollywood," Bush said to loud cheers, "I'm afraid you are not the candidate of conservative values." ...

What Kerry actually said, after a fundraiser in which a group of stars performed on his behalf (and, yes, during which some of them said distasteful things about Bush), was this: "Every performer tonight, in their own way, either verbally or through their music, through their lyrics, have conveyed to you the heart and soul of our country."

Kerry gave a tough speech attacking Bush's policies there. Bush fired back, as he had every right to do, and denounced what Kerry said.

"Incredibly," Bush said of his opponent, "he now believes our national security would be stronger with Saddam Hussein in power, not in prison." Then Bush quoted Kerry. "Today he said, and I quote, 'We have traded a dictator for a chaos that has left America less secure.' He's saying he prefers the stability of a dictatorship to the hope and security of democracy."

Now, to have a Democratic nominee preferring dictatorship to democracy would be big news indeed. But here is a full rendition of the passage from Kerry's speech that Bush partially quoted: "Saddam Hussein was a brutal dictator who deserves his own special place in hell. But that was not, that was not in and of itself, a reason to go to war. The satisfaction that we take in his downfall does not hide this fact: We have traded a dictator for a chaos that has left America less secure."

Anybody who knows the above and still supports Bush by spouting remarks like this has their own sewer to wallow in, evidently.

Better chances for justice in Oregon

Now that Swift Boat Liar Al French has been suspended.

Hopefully the Oregon State Bar will make sure he never collects money for practicing law again.

Inage Kaigan, Japan...

saw a "I Hate Texas" t-shirt. I think the guy knew why he hated Texas.

The coverage of the presidential campaign is a mirror image of what it is in the United States, mostly because folks outside of the US just happen to know what`s going on in the world.

Lots of coverage on UN meetings- Israel was calling for dismantling Iran`s nuclear capability according to an Associated Press article, which failed to mention the fact that Israel is an outlaw nuclear state.

The US is sending a fleet outside of N. Korea. Is this the October Surprise?

Wednesday, September 22, 2004

Kevin Phillips IS must reading...

I am almost through reading American Dynasty: Aristocracy, Fortune and the Politics of Deceit in the House of Bush, and I have to say that it makes (after many pages) the most coherent explanation for what has gone on the past few years.

Whas Iraq about oil? Democracy? Privatization of assetts?

It's about the money.

Phillips makes clear that the interlocking interests of the Bushes and their cronies go back generations; their interests have included armaments, oil, and investment banking.

And the extrapolations based on this are fascinating to say the least. Think about every Republican scandal over the past 50 years: the Bushes are either connected to them through financing (Watergate, BCCI,...) or directly (Iran-Contra, Iraqgate, Haliburton), etc.

Iraq, for example represents a very interesting play by these guys: if Iraq continues to be destablized, these guys make money from "counterterrorism" and armaments. If it's stable, these guys make money from oil, and from "privatization," and financing thereof. However, the smart money was always on destabilization of Iraq (and continuance of that), since looking at the history of these guys over the past 50 years (Nicaragua, Iran, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Colombia, Panama, Cuba) destabilization is what these guys do best.

But they have a classic hedge strategy, and that's why these guys will fight tooth and nail to stay in power, and it's also why those who think that Iraq is about removing an "evil dictator" and brining "democracy" to the region are candidates for the Brooklyn Bridge sales pitch.

Wow- what are you folks doing over there?

I see Dan Rather's said that they were misled at CBS- and that's good enough for me.

And I see the Air Force Times has pretty much said what we all knew: Bush was AWOL.

On May 26, 1972, Bush asked in writing for reassignment to an Air Reserve squadron in Alabama so he could work on the U.S. Senate campaign of Republican Winton “Red” Blount, a close friend of his influential father. That was rejected because Bush was obligated to serve as a Ready Reservist until May 26, 1974, and was ineligible for assignment to the Air Reserve. About three months later, on Sept. 5, Bush asked to perform “equivalent duty” with the Alabama unit from September to November. Killian approved the request a day later. The orders went through on Sept. 15, and while Bush had missed the Sept. 9-10 unit training assembly, the document noted he could make the next two. Bush’s Officer Military Record shows an Oct. 1, 1973, discharge from the Texas Air National Guard and transfer to the Alabama unit.

Another White House-released document shows a total of 56 points Bush apparently earned during this 12-month period, but it’s awarded in one lump sum rather than credited for each training period. But this document also contains an error, listing Bush’s status as “PLT On-Fly” — meaning he was on flight status — when he had not been for a year. This, said retired Army Lt. Col. Gerald A. Lechliter, who has done an in-depth analysis of Bush’s pay records (, makes the form’s authenticity suspect.

There’s also the record of a Jan. 6, 1973, dental exam performed on Bush at Dannelly Air National Guard Base, Ala. There’s nothing that documents why Bush, who reportedly returned to Texas after the election, didn’t get this work done closer to home.

Bush’s attendance and participation in weekend drills had been meticulously recorded up through May 1972. But other than the points record and the dental exam record, the year following Bush’s request for reassignment to Alabama is a blank.

In a fitness report supplement released by the White House this year, an administrative officer wrote, “Not rated for the period 1 May 72 through 30 Apr 73. Report for this period not available for administrative reasons.”

In the remarks section, Killian wrote that Bush “has not been observed at this unit during the period of report. … He cleared this base on 15 May 1972 and has been performing equivalent training in a non flying status” with the Alabama unit. Bush, however, was only authorized to be gone from September to November

See, that's the problem with these right wing bloggers: they'd rather lambast CBS news than admit that the Pretender and Thief is guilty of far more heinous high crimes and misdemeanors, and whose morality is as repugnant as sewage.

And I mean that in the kindest possible way.

Meanwhile, what is Bush's exit strategy for Iraq?

Oh, yeah, scripted "debates."

Saturday, September 18, 2004

Berlin update

Turkish cabdriver decries Bush as we drive to the airport. It's embarassing, somewhat to be an American in this time and place. Clinton he liked, but Bush- he conveyed to me that he was crazy. I didn't disagree.

The Brandenburg Gate has a "Room of Silence," which is quite profound.

These people, despite the hype (see for example a recent article in the International Herald Tribune) know what war is and appreciate peace. This is something the Bush regime has little knowledge.

I read Kevin Phillips' book on the plane. Phillips' style is dry, and its dryness highlights its intensity. Given Enron, arms dealing, and give-aways to the rich (not to mention the abortion that Texas has become under Republicans), I cannot imagine why Kerry is not ahead in the polls. Enron alone should be enough to sink Bush.

Thursday, September 16, 2004

Freer today? Safer?

I don't know why Republican enthusiasts often get all hot and bothered about being called fascists.

The governments they produce look, walk and quack like the duck.


A Muslim chaplain imprisoned for 76 days in solitary confinement and then cleared in an espionage investigation will receive an honorable discharge, his lawyer said Wednesday.

The Army approved the request from Capt. James J. Yee on Monday, a year and three days after Yee was arrested at Guantanamo Bay, carrying what authorities alleged were classified documents.

"It's amazing to think just over a year ago, he was behind bars ... and being vilified throughout the country," attorney Eugene R. Fidell said. "On a certain level, justice has triumphed."

Yee has declined to comment on the case, but in his letter of resignation to the Army last month he expressed resentment.

"Those unfounded allegations -- which were leaked to the media -- irreparably injured my personal and professional reputation and destroyed my prospects for a career in the United States Army," Yee said.

And in Republican-controlled New York City:

Republican National Convention protesters told a City Council hearing on Wednesday that the police department engaged in a series of abuses, including using unnecessary force against them, refusing to allow them medical attention and arresting people who weren't taking part in demonstrations.

The New York Civil Liberties Union said hundreds of the 1,800 arrests made during the four-day convention were unjustified.
Twenty percent of the people who were arrested were not demonstrators, they were bystanders," said Donna Lieberman, executive director of the NYCLU....

Several people told the committee they had been unfairly arrested and mistreated.

Father Johnathan Harris, a member of the War Resisters League, a pacifist group, said he and others were arrested during a protest for no apparent reason. He said he asked a police officer whether he was being detained and on what charge.

"The officer said, `I don't know what the heck's going on,"' Harris said.

Simone Levine, a representative from the National Lawyers Guild, which monitored many of the demonstrations, said 15 of her group's legal observers were arrested during protests, including one who was hit by a police club and another who was thrown to the ground.

Civil rights attorney Norman Siegel said one man who'd just bought a pastrami sandwich at a delicatessen stepped outside, was arrested and was held for 27 hours. Other arrestees, including a man who had his jaw broken, a pregnant woman and a man who suffered a collapsed intestine were denied medical attention, he said.

"This needs to be discussed instead of being denied and minimized," he said.

The NYCLU also questioned the widespread use of police videotaping of protesters, which it said might be a violation of city law, and the detainment of some demonstrators for nearly three days at a pier building they claimed was contaminated.

Lawyers for the protesters alleged during the convention that people were detained to keep them off the streets the night of President Bush's acceptance speech. The police department denied that accusation, but a judge ordered the city to release hundreds of detainees within hours.

The fact is, this is not the America I was taught about in school, and it's time to get these people out. Their contempt for people is repulusive.

Wednesday, September 15, 2004

Bush has made us much less safer, and Iraq is FUBAR

Right now many right wing bloggers are still focused on trivia such as fonts on allegedly forged memos relating to Bush going AWOL (as though that gives Bush's dishonorable behavior during the Vietnam war a pass).

Meanwhile, Salon has two excellent articles on the REAL issues of this campaign, and why Bush wants to avoid that discussion at all costs.

First, regarding Iraq...

Retired Gen. William Odom, former head of the National Security Agency, told me: "Bush hasn't found the WMD. Al-Qaida, it's worse -- he's lost on that front. That he's going to achieve a democracy there? That goal is lost, too. It's lost." He added: "Right now, the course we're on, we're achieving [Osama] bin Laden's ends."

Retired Gen. Joseph Hoare, the former Marine commandant and head of the U.S. Central Command, told me: "The idea that this is going to go the way these guys planned is ludicrous. There are no good options. We're conducting a campaign as though it were being conducted in Iowa, no sense of the realities on the ground. It's so unrealistic for anyone who knows that part of the world. The priorities are just all wrong."

"I see no ray of light on the horizon at all," said Jeffrey Record, professor of strategy at the Air War College. "The worst case has become true. There's no analogy whatsoever between the situation in Iraq and the advantages we had after World War II in Germany and Japan."

"I don't think that you can kill the insurgency," said W. Andrew Terrill, professor at the Army War College's Strategic Studies Institute, the top expert on Iraq there. According to Terrill, the anti-U.S. insurgency, centered in the Sunni triangle, and holding several key cities and towns, including Fallujah, is expanding and becoming more capable as a direct consequence of U.S. policy. "We have a growing, maturing insurgency group," he told me. "We see larger and more coordinated military attacks. They are getting better and they can self-regenerate. The idea there are X number of insurgents and when they're all dead we can get out is wrong. The insurgency has shown an ability to regenerate itself because there are people willing to fill the ranks of those who are killed. The political culture is more hostile to the U.S. presence. The longer we stay, the more they are confirmed in that view."

After the killing of four U.S. contractors in Fallujah, the U.S. Marines besieged the city for three weeks in April -- the watershed event for the insurgency. "I think the president ordered the attack on Fallujah," said Gen. Hoare. "I asked a three-star Marine general who gave the order to go to Fallujah and he wouldn't tell me. I came to the conclusion that the order came directly from the White House." Then, just as suddenly, the order was rescinded, and Islamist radicals gained control, using the city as a base, al-Qaida ("base" in Arabic) indeed.

"If you are a Muslim and the community is under occupation by a non-Islamic power, it becomes a religious requirement to resist that occupation," Terrill explained. "Most Iraqis consider us occupiers, not liberators." He describes the religious imagery common now in Fallujah and the Sunni triangle: "There's talk of angels and the prophet Mohammed coming down from heaven to lead the fighting, talk of martyrs whose bodies are glowing and emanating wonderful scents."

"I see no exit," said Record. "We've been down that road before. It's called Vietnamization. The idea we're going to have an Iraqi force trained to defeat an enemy we can't defeat stretches the imagination. They will be tainted by their very association with the foreign occupier. In fact, we had more time and money in state building in Vietnam than in Iraq."

"This is far graver than Vietnam," said Gen. Odom. "There wasn't as much at stake strategically, though in both cases we mindlessly went ahead with a war that was not constructive for U.S. aims. But now we're in a region far more volatile and we're in much worse shape with our allies."

Things are not getting better- Iraq has been a strategic disaster, and Bush supporters bear a great deal of the blame here, for supporting a man who would, through sheer hubris, get us into such a debacle.

The other article in Salon concerns the so-called "War on Terror":

Before 9/11, as we know from Bush's former top anti-terrorism advisor, Richard Clarke, the Bush administration cavalierly downplayed the terrorist threat. Prisoners of its own "pre-9/11 mind-set," it focused on extremely expensive and technically unproven Cold War programs such as ballistic missile defense, utterly irrelevant to the war on terror, and exhibited only lukewarm interest in ongoing programs to limit WMD proliferation. ...

A reasonable answer requires a reasonable question. The question should not be: Would the world be better off if Saddam Hussein were still in power? The politically responsible question, instead, is: Has the U.S. invasion and occupation of Iraq made the world and the U.S. safer than before? The answer to this question, obfuscated by Bush electioneering, is most certainly no, and that means, as perverse as it may seem, that the world is not better off with Hussein removed from power in this way, at this cost, with these consequences. The invasion and occupation of Iraq has weakened American national security because Bush's unimaginably clumsy management of postwar Iraq has swollen the ranks of young, enraged and lethally armed anti-American jihadists; has irritated and alienated potential partners around the world; and has tied down scarce national-security assets that we desperately need to confront much more dangerous and imminent threats.

The rest of this article makes a very damning case why Republicans have so completely botched the "War on Terror." Being hostile to the use of goverment means being hostile to the use of the very powers that can be used to make America safer.

And, of course, being so hostile to the concepts of civil rights and civil liberties makes it all the more likely that this hostility will mean that the "War on Terror" will take the form as a war on American's liberty.

People who hate goverment should not be running it. People who hate civil rights and civil liberties should not be entrusted to the powers of state. Period. End of story.

This, in a nutshell is why the Bush junta must be turned out of power.

The future of the United States as a free country depends on it.

Widows for 9/11...sink Bush some more...


Over the last three years, the group of 9/11 widows turned activists dubbed the "Jersey Girls" have become a fixture on the Washington political scene. Some of them are Republicans, others Democrats or independents. But they are all determined to hold official Washington accountable for the attacks that killed their husbands and nearly 3,000 others. They have held news conferences, lobbied members of Congress, pored over documents, and forced the White House to accept an independent commission to investigate the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks. Along the way, the women have learned about coverups, obfuscation, political cowardice, deceptions and the dangers of eschewing international alliances for a go-it-alone foreign policy.

And their conclusion: For the sake of the country's future, John Kerry must replace George W. Bush.

Who cares about SwiftBoat righties?

Tuesday, September 14, 2004

Daily Kos inventories a few of Bush's possessions


"Mr. president, Colin Powell told you about this war that 'if you break it, you own it.' And now you're going around talking about an 'ownership society.' Well, Mr. President, let me tell you what you own. A million jobs lost. You own that. A thousand soldiers lost. You own that. 1.4 million new people living below the poverty line. You own that. 1.2 million less people covered by health insurance. You own that. A seventeen percent medicare increase. You own that. Health care costs skyrocketing. You own that. The tax burden increasing amongst the middle class. You own that. Mr. President, if you want to talk about an ownership society, let's talk about what you own."

And of course, al Qaeda criminals are still at large. Bush owns that. Abu Ghraib as shamed America. Bush owns that.

Monday, September 13, 2004

CNN International Reports that the N. Korean Cloud

was a result of a "planned demolition."

OK, but was it a terroist attack?

CNN International Reports that the N. Korean Cloud

was a result of a "planned demolition."

OK, but was it a terroist attack?

Saturday, September 11, 2004

Bush AWOL IS relevant- Swift Boat Liars Aren't. What's next?

Servicemen and Veterans are not happy with Bush.

Moreover, those "Newseek" polls- one of the ones that overstated Bush's support in the first place, shows him dropping 5 points in 1 week.

AWOL is relevant and sticky, evidently, despite what righties say and try to spin.

Meanwhile despite the money pouring into the coffers of the Swift Boat Liars, to voters, the issue is played. Well, folks, thanks for neutering that money. I guess you have nowhere else to spend it, like, say, trying to say why Iraq was good or why Bush's administration being asleep at the switch on 9/11 means we should vote for Bush?

What's next? Well, we've seen the cyber-brownshirt tactics from the right already. Looks like they're going to try real brownshirt tactics now.

Will be on the road in the next few days...

outside the country. Will post from Europe & Asia.

Good way to remember 9/11


"9/11: For the Record" addresses a critical question that continues to haunt America's national psyche: how could the most powerful nation on earth have been so utterly unprepared to protect its homeland? On the eve of the third anniversary of 9/11, NOW analyzes the commission report and connects the dots of what happened that day and the warning signs leading up to it. Bill Moyers once again teams up with a long-time colleague, the award-winning producer Sherry Jones, to take a look at what the 9/11 Commission found. Jones, whose credits include, "Watergate Plus 30: Shadow of History," highlights the agonizing close calls, missteps, and outright failures of two administrations and America's intelligence and security agencies in the months and years leading up to 9/11.

Catch Bill Moyer's show NOW this week, which is about 9/11: you cannot but come to the conclusion, reached in a sober and rational way (what else for Moyers?) that the Bush regime fumbled the ball NUMEROUS times regarding 9/11, and al Qaeda, and places the blame sequarely where it belongs for the failure of Clinton to catch bin Laden: at the feet of the Republicans, who were screaming "wag the dog" at every opportunity, that Clinton feared for the political damage if innocent civilians were hurt.

But there was no such political liability for the Bush regime- and their incompetence and malfeasance leading up to 9/11, and attempting to cover up their incompetence have made America less safe.

It is clear that the "managerial" (and I use that word because no other comes to mind) style of Bush- supporting subordinates regardless of their behavior as long as they're "loyal," the authoritarian, "top-down" style of management, the presumption of non-accountability (remember, Bush's behavior with Harken, the National Guard, Cheney's with Halliburton, etc.) and a complete lack of regard for independent oversight are the real causes of 9/11: the mistakes of 9/11 happened because of the essential character of this regime.

And there isn't a damned thing that righties can do that will un-spin this.

Part 2 of the righties assist to the Kerry campaign...


As expected, the Boston Globe is steppin in to get scoops on AWOL Bush. This is getting to be like the competition between the NY Times and WaPo in 1973.

Boston Globe pretty much puts in place the claims of the "experts" who questioned the authenticitiy of the Bush documentns.

The next step, though, will be to get more scoops - and remember thre's lots to scoop in this administration, whose errors and malfeasance make Watergate look like a pratfall.

AND it's happening in campaign season.

Friday, September 10, 2004

THANK YOU, Right Wing Blogosphere!


The REAL beauty of this CBS thing is...

(a) right-wing bloggers invented a conspiracy theory.

(b) the Faux media (CNN, Fox, Newsmax, Free Republic types) picked up on it- and directed everyone to CBS news, just to see their response, and CBS...

(c) let loose with both barrels, and let loose with MORE damaging info on Bush/AWOL, and thereby converted undecideds to our camp.

If you know a right-wing blogger, thank him. We need help like that!

Daily Kos nails Cheney on terrorism...


3 words refute any suggestion that the Bush regime is more effective on "terrorism" than Kerry: My Pet Goat.

When the Great Tao is lost, there springs forth righteousness...

Two interesting articles in the MY Times today...

Paul Krugman links Bush's National Guard duty-shirking to the lies about tax cuts.

It's the same pattern of dishonesty, this time involving personal matters that the public can easily understand, that some of us have long seen on policy issues, from global warming to the war in Iraq. On budget matters, which is where I came in, serious analysts now take administration dishonesty for granted...

For example, back in February the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities accused the Bush administration of, in effect, playing three-card monte with budget forecasts. It pointed out that the administration's deficit forecast was far above those of independent analysts, and suggested that this exaggeration was deliberate.

"Overstating the 2004 deficit," the center wrote, "could allow the president to announce significant 'progress' on the deficit in late October - shortly before Election Day - when the Treasury Department announces the final figures."

Was this a wild accusation from a liberal think tank? No, it's conventional wisdom among experts. Two months ago Stanley Collender, a respected nonpartisan analyst, warned: "At some point over the next few weeks, the Office of Management and Budget will release the administration's midsession budget review and try to convince everyone the federal deficit is falling. Don't believe them."

He went on to echo the center's analysis. The administration's standard procedure, he said, is to initially issue an unrealistically high deficit forecast, which is "politically motivated or just plain bad." Then, when the actual number comes in below the forecast, officials declare that the deficit is falling, even though it's higher than the previous year's deficit.

Goldman Sachs says the same. Last month one of its analysts wrote that "the Office of Management and Budget has perfected the art of underpromising and overperforming in terms of its near-term budget deficit forecasts. This creates the impression that the deficit is narrowing when, in fact, it will be up sharply."

This is the natural consequence of people being inculcated to clamor for "moralists," especially on matters like abortion- they get people who appeal to them on moral grounds, but who are inflicting great damage to this country. This is also the result of demagogues.

The other article: Cracking Under the Pressure? It's Just the Opposite, for Some...

"People who are high in hardiness enjoy ongoing changes and difficulties," said Dr. Salvatore R. Maddi, a professor of psychology at the University of California, Irvine, and the author of a forthcoming book, "Resilience at Work." "They find themselves more involved in their work when it gets tougher and more complicated. They tend to think of stress as a normal part of life, rather than as something that's unfair.''

Chronic stress has been linked to an array of illnesses, including heart disease and depression. But people who cope successfully, studies have found, punch in at work with normal levels of stress hormones that climb during the day and drop sharply at night. Their coworkers who complain of being too stressed have consistently higher levels of hormones that rarely dip very far, trapping them in a constant state of anxiety.

At the same time, resilient people seem to avoid stress-related health and psychological problems, even as colleagues are falling to pieces, say researchers who have studied strenuous work environments.

"Some of it is genetic, some of it is how you were raised, and some it is just your personality," Dr. Bruce McEwen, director of the neuroendocrinology laboratory at Rockefeller University, said.

Now, given Mr. Bush's behavior years ago, as well as his behavior on September 11, I submit that he's not one of those who are able to take high stress.

And so he's really temperamentally unfit to be president.

Thursday, September 09, 2004

Meltdown in the Bush campaign...


Wow. First they have the morass in Iraq, then they've lost the elderly with the Medicare gouging, now it turns out their campaign staff is in a shake-up over the Swift Boat Liars backfiring.

Wait till the AWOL stuff affects 'em.

Well, that about wraps it up for the "forgery" tin-foil hat crowd...


The Selectric II had a Dual Pitch option to allow it to be switched (with a lever at the top left of the "carriage") between 10 and 12 characters per inch, whereas the Selectric I had one fixed "pitch".
The Selectric II had a lever (at the top left of the "carriage") that allowed characters to be shifted up to a half space to the left (for inserting a word one character longer or shorter in place of a deleted mistake), whereas the Selectric I did not.

That seems to debunk well stories such as this.

Now I, myself, used a typewriter in the mid-70's with a variable pitch and correction mechanism, that did superscripts.

So, it looks right now like the "forged" documents aren't forged, but the real McCoy.

Sorry, right-wingers. Game, set match. Bush was AWOL and violated a direct order.

Credts here and here.

Bush WAS AWOL, and a deserter.


Michael Moore was RIGHT.

Bush lied about AWOL numerous times, and has fought release of his National Guard documents, because he was AWOL.

This man cannot even tell the truth with the American people, his employers, about his previous work history.

That's grounds for firing.

"Vote for us or we'll kill you."

Maureen Dowd and the Editorial page of the New York Times weigh in on DICK Cheney's remarks about 9/11...

If John Kerry was elected president, Mr. Cheney warned the crowd, "the danger is that we'll get hit again." In a long, rather rambling statement, he said the United States might then fall back into a "pre-9/11 mind-set" that "these terrorist attacks are just criminal acts."

At the very best, Mr. Cheney was speaking loosely and carelessly about the area in this campaign that deserves the most careful and serious discussion. It sounds to us more likely that he stepped across a line that the Bush campaign team had flirted with throughout its convention, telling his audience that re-electing the president would be the only way to stay safe from another attack.

There is a danger that we'll be hit again no matter who is elected president this November, as President Bush himself has said on many occasions. The danger might be a bit less if the current administration had chosen to spend less on tax cuts for the wealthy and more on protecting our ports, securing nuclear materials in Russia and establishing an enforceable immigration policy that would keep better track of people who enter the country from abroad.

I'd say it's worse than the Times tut-tutting here suggests...the fact is, all indications we have show that Bush and company were asleep at the switch regarding 9/11, that we had an Attorney General who was more concerned with fighting porno than real threats to the safety of this nation, and that this "preisdent's" policies have - as the example above shows, made us less safe.

If Bush wins the terrorists WILL have won.

Wednesday, September 08, 2004

Bye-Bye Bounce for Bush

First, the New York Times is bringing up George W. Bush's failure to serve in Vietnam.

He made it an issue, remember, with that "flyboy" Mission Accomplished stunt on the carrier. If he hadn't done that it might not be an issue.

The release of the documents came as a new Democratic group, Texas for Truth, said it would start running a television commercial this week questioning Mr. Bush's National Guard attendance. The commercial features Bob Mintz, a lieutenant colonel in the Alabama Air National Guard, who served at a Montgomery, Ala., base and says that he never saw Mr. Bush there, even though he was actively looking for him.

Will the Republicans and their shrill Ehrenburg propagandists report this?

No, they won't.

But we WILL tell families and friends, and this commercial will have an effect.

On Tuesday night, the White House put the blame on the Pentagon for the belated release of the newly unearthed documents.

Can anyone name one damned thing for which this regime has ever taken responsiblity?

The latest National Guard records do not place Mr. Bush in Alabama during the time in dispute. But they do show that Mr. Bush ranked 22nd out of class of 53 pilots when he finished his flight training at Moody Air Force Base in Georgia in 1969.

The Associated Press reported that the records also show that Mr. Bush's last flight was in April 1972, which would be consistent with previously released pay records showing that Mr. Bush had a lapse of Guard duty between April and October of that year.

Nicholas Kristof, who's generally moderate, brings this up, too...

...Bush claims that in the fall of 1972, he fulfilled his Air National Guard duties at a base in Alabama. But Bob Mintz was there - and he is sure Mr. Bush wasn't...

Mr. Bush signed up in May 1968 for a six-year commitment, justifying the $1 million investment in training him as a pilot. But after less than two years, Mr. Bush abruptly stopped flying, didn't show up for his physical and asked to transfer to Alabama. He never again flew a military plane.

Mr. Bush insists that after moving to Alabama in 1972, he served out his obligation at Dannelly Air National Guard Base in Montgomery (although he says he doesn't remember what he did there). The only officer there who recalls Mr. Bush was produced by the White House - he remembers Mr. Bush vividly, but at times when even Mr. Bush acknowledges he wasn't there.

In contrast, Mr. Mintz is a compelling witness. Describing himself as "a very strong military man," he served in the military from 1959 to 1984. A commercial pilot, he is now a Democrat but was a Republican for most of his life, and he is not a Bush-hater. When I asked him whether the National Guard controversy raises questions about Mr. Bush's credibility, Mr. Mintz said only, "That's up to the American people to decide."

So Republican Party has nominated a candidate with the morals of a sewer rat, who, despite his alleged "conversion" cannot level with the American people about his previous failings, who cannot tell the truth about his personal life, nor...

about Iraq...

As American military deaths in Iraq operations surpassed the 1,000 mark, top Pentagon officials said Tuesday that insurgents controlled important parts of central Iraq and that it was unclear when American and Iraqi forces would be able to secure those areas. ...Their comments, which came after a two-day spike in violence in Iraq led to a surge in American military deaths, represented an acknowledgment that the Americans had failed to end an increasingly sophisticated insurgency in important Sunni-dominated areas and in certain Shiite enclaves. Fighting raged on Tuesday in Sadr City, in Baghdad, as Shiite militiamen loyal to Moktada al-Sadr ended a self-declared cease-fire. [Page A14.]

The officials' assessment also underscored the difficulty of pacifying Iraq in time for elections scheduled for January. The cities of greatest rebel control are Ramadi, Falluja, Baquba and Samarra, in the so-called Sunni triangle, west and north of Baghdad, where Saddam Hussein remains popular and many forces loyal to him have gathered strength.

There is increasing concern in the administration over plans for the election, with some officials saying that if significant parts of the Sunni areas cannot be secured by January, it may be impossible to hold a nationwide balloting that would be seen as legitimate. Putting off the elections, though, would infuriate Iraq's Shiite majority. The elections are for an assembly that is to write a new constitution next year. Mr. Rumsfeld warned that the violence would intensify as elections approached.

This is what reporters like Robert Fisk have been saying all along. Naturally these have been subject to all kinds of abuse by some righties, who just can't stomach the fact that they've been repeating lies spoon-fed to them by propagandists.

Mr. Rumsfeld said that Prime Minister Ayad Allawi recognized that his government could not continue to allow rebel control in crucial areas of the country, but that it would take time for him to determine how to proceed.

No kidding- as Fisk pointed out, Mr. Allawi doesn't exactly have a real army.

So, let's see:

1. Bush's "guard service" was a sham.

2. Iraq is a miserable failure

3. Bush covered up Saudi involvement in 9/11.

4. Record Medicare premium hikes. But, but they got those meaningless discount cards!

And we haven't even gotten to "My Pet Goat."

What a difference less than a week makes...

Monday, September 06, 2004

Are we safer today???


The normally reprehensible Pat Buchanan on Meet the Press yesterday, mentioned "the T word." That's T as in "treason."

FBI counterintelligence investigators have in recent weeks questioned current and former U.S. officials about whether a small group of Iran specialists at the Pentagon and in Vice President Cheney's office may have been involved in passing classified information to an Iraqi politician or a U.S. lobbying group allied with Israel, according to sources familiar with or involved in the case...

The investigators have asked questions about personnel in the office of Pentagon Undersecretary for Policy Douglas J. Feith as well as members of the influential Defense Policy Board, an advisory panel for Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld, according to former U.S. officials who have been questioned and others familiar with the case.

Investigators have specifically asked about a group of neoconservatives involved in defense issues, including Feith, Deputy Defense Secretary Paul D. Wolfowitz, Iraq and Iran specialist Harold Rhode and others at the Pentagon. FBI agents also have asked current and former officials about Richard Perle of the defense board and David Wurmser, an Iran specialist and principal deputy assistant for national security affairs in Cheney's office, according to sources familiar with or involved in the case...

The officials whose names came up during questioning have strong ties to Israel. They also share a long-standing position on Iran and other radical regimes. Wurmser, Feith and Perle were co-authors of a 1996 policy paper for then-Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu titled "A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm." It called for removing Hussein from power in Iraq as part of a broad strategy to transform the region and remove radical regimes.

Between kow-towing to Israel, and kow-towing to Saudi Arabia, the Bush's foreign policy has been disastrous for America, resulting in the loss of literally thousands of lives.

Are we better off....?


"After almost three years of recovery, our job market is still too weak to broadly distribute the benefits of the growing economy. Unemployment is essentially unchanged, job growth has stalled, and real wages have started to fall behind inflation. Today's picture is a stark contrast to the full employment period before the recession, when the tight labor market ensured that the benefits of growth were broadly shared.

"Prolonged weakness in the labor market has left the nation with over a million fewer jobs than when the recession began. This is a worse position, in terms of recouping lost jobs, than any business cycle since the 1930's."

What is happening is nothing less than a deterioration in the standard of living in the United States. Despite the statistical growth in the economy, the continued slack in the labor market has resulted in declining real wages for anxious American workers and a marked deterioration in job quality.

From 2000 through 2003 the median household income fell by $1,500 (in 2003 dollars) - a significant 3.4 percent decrease. That information becomes startling when you consider that during the same period there was a strong 12 percent increase in productivity among U.S. workers. Economists will tell you that productivity increases go hand-in-hand with increases in the standard of living. But not this time. Here we have a 3.4 percent loss in real income juxtaposed with a big jump in productivity.

Americans are not better off today than they were 4 years ago...

We are not freer today...

The Justice Department has asked an appellate court to keep its arguments secret for a case in which privacy advocate John Gilmore is challenging federal requirements to show identification before boarding an airplane.

A federal statute and other regulations "prohibit the disclosure of sensitive security information, and that is precisely what is alleged to be at issue here," the government said in court papers filed Friday with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit. Disclosing the restricted information "would be detrimental to the security of transportation," the government wrote.

Attorneys for Gilmore, a San Franciscan who co-founded the Electronic Frontier Foundation, said the civil liberties group does not accept the government's argument and that its latest request raises more questions.

"We're dealing with the government's review of a secret law that now they want a secret judicial review for," one of Gilmore's attorneys, James Harrison, said in a telephone interview Sunday. "This administration's use of a secret law is more dangerous to the security of the nation than any external threat."

Gilmore first sued the government and several airlines in July 2002 after airline agents refused to let him board planes in San Francisco and Oakland without first showing an ID or submitting to a more intense search. He claimed in his lawsuit the ID requirement was vague and ineffective and violated his constitutional protections against illegal searches and seizures.

While I don't have a problem with the ID requirement (usually), the shoe thing, the laptop thing, and the intrusive searches are too much, and I suspect that the real reason for these things has less to do with "security," than with impressing the populace with some measure of "power."

Unfortunately for our security, terrorists probably don't give a bowel movement about displays of power...

Good news and bad news...


President Bill Clinton, in a 90-minute telephone conversation from his hospital room, offered John Kerry detailed advice on Saturday night on how to reinvigorate his candidacy, as Mr. Kerry enlisted more Clinton advisers to help shape his strategy and message for the remainder of the campaign.

In an expansive conversation, Mr. Clinton, who is awaiting heart surgery, told Mr. Kerry that he should move away from talking about Vietnam, which had been the central theme of his candidacy, and focus instead on drawing contrasts with President Bush on job creation and health care policies, officials with knowledge of the conversation said.

It's good Clinton's helping Kerry- in fact, it's essential to our nation's survival, but the NYT is wrong, I think, to keep bringing up Vietnam.

We do hope Clinton mentioned "My Pet Goat."

As today's NYT also shows, with this latest attack on the Marines, George W. Bush's "wartime leadership" has amounted to nothing more than quagmires and photo-ops.

Saturday, September 04, 2004

Push Polls and other Right-Wing Bias...

Daily Kos explains why the "Time" poll showing the literally unbelievable 9 point margin is erroneous.

In effect, it was a "push poll."

Friday, September 03, 2004

Memorable lies...

Ol' Mossback is hyped about the misleads of George W. Bush.

Our strategy is succeeding.

Really? Tell that to the victims of the Madrid bombing.

Or the folks who are the kin of the anthrax victims.

Four years ago, Afghanistan was the home base of al-Qaida,...

From which Osama bin Laden was allowed to escape...

Pakistan was a transit point for terrorist groups, ...

Still is...

Saudi Arabia was fertile ground for terrorist fundraising, ...

Still is...

Libya was secretly pursuing nuclear weapons,...

Previous overtures were blocked by Bush I...

Iraq was a gathering threat,...

Not according to Colin Powell. This is another flip-flop...

al-Qaida was largely unchallenged as it planned attacks. ...

Only because Ashcroft was asleep at the wheel.

Today, the government of a free Afghanistan is fighting terror, ...

When did they have elections, numb-nuts?

Pakistan is capturing terrorist leaders, ...

Where's Osama?

Saudi Arabia is making raids and arrests,...

Apparently staged for foreign conusmption...

Libya is dismantling its weapons programs, ...

But Pakistan isn't...

the army of a free Iraq is fighting for freedom,

When did they have elections?

...more than three-quarters of al-Qaida’s key members and associates have been detained or killed.

What, they publish their membership rosters?

Finally saw the "damning" Swift-Liars ad...

The one with Kerry's testimony.

This was the lamest, most impotent attack I'd seen yet from these clowns.

Kerry's testimony is really "ho um" to anyone who's seen Platoon, Apocalypse Now, Casualties of War, and A Few Good Men.

We know armies do nasty things, and we know alot of nasty things happened in Vietnam.

Covering it up, like the Swift-Liars would want, and denying that these war crimes took place, is not only living in fantasy land, but is at odds with the American conventional wisdom about Vietnam.

Any viewer seeing it, sees angry old men and John Kerry telling the truth, and is going to say, "What's their gripe?"

Sorry, W, you got a record- maybe a rap-sheet too?


Kerry rightly points out:

"Let me tell you in no uncertain terms what makes someone unfit for office and unfit for duty," Mr. Kerry said, turning to Mr. Bush. "Misleading our nation into war in Iraq makes you unfit to lead our country. Doing nothing while this nation loses millions of jobs makes you unfit to lead this country. Letting 45 million Americans go without health care for four years makes you unfit to lead this country.

"Letting the Saudi royal family control the price of oil for Americans makes you unfit to lead this country. Handing out billions of dollars in government contracts without a bid to Halliburton while you're still on the payroll makes you unfit lead this country.

"That, my friends, is the record of George Bush and Dick Cheney - and that only begins to scratch the surface."

It does only begin to scratch the surface, but we know about soundbites.

But really amusing was the Bush junta's response to this uncomfortable look at the truth:

A Bush campaign spokesman, Steve Schmidt, called the remarks "another example of John Kerry's trying to divide America over the past."

It's called a record, dummy, Bush has one, and America isn't divided over the fact that we're less safe, less free, and less well off than 4 years ago.

To extend Kerry's point about Bush who was saying he had a new plan when the old one was a disaster, and expecting people to vote for him is expecting that peple have the classic 12 step group example of insanity- making the same mistake twice hoping it will come out differently.

Bush's speech and Kerry's response...

Anybody who saw Bush last night- anybody but the brainwashed that is- must have a few questions, and observations as I do:

1. Isn't saying you're going to make "tax relief" permanent and then - less than 5 minutes later- saying you're going to "reform" the tax code a flip-flop, especially since most people remember the bait-and-switch tax increases under Reagan (remember Graham Rudman)?

2. Where's Osama?

3. Does Bush really think he's fit for the presidency because he staged a few photo-ops?

4. Why do they have to lie about Kerry's record? Oh, yeah, because they don't want to talk about their own.

Kerry's speech- what I saw of it- wasn't bad, but he should have laid into "My pet goat."

But he hit the Bush junta hard on their cowardice, and I think it's working.

Thursday, September 02, 2004

Fun with Focus on the Family...


As a religious moderate (and a Buddhist) I like to keep tabs on what the religious right is doing.

Here's a sampling of Focus on the Family's News items:

GOP Convention Protests Unruly

Gotta love that headline...did you know that "most" of the protesters appeared to be " anarchists, communists and homosexual activists?"

400,000 of 'em on Sunday alone! Heck the Communist Party USA must be having a banner year!

And for "balance," they quote a Repub delegate:

"The demonstrators, she added, need to show respect for the democratic process "because once they lose that respect and they create chaos, then we have problems with our elections and it's very disruptive."

Geez, I thought that that thing in Florida with protesters being disruptive had to do with Freepers!

Here's another special tidbit from them:

Bai Macfarlane says she and her husband had a legally binding agreement to seek help before they ended their marriage.

When Catholic couples get married, they make a verbal agreement to follow the laws of the church before getting a divorce. When Macfarlane's husband left, she said, he broke that agreement....

"It resulted in this defense that essentially there's a de facto prenuptial agreement when two people marry within the church," said Macfarlane's friend, Judy Parejko, a marriage advocate.

Macfarlane is asking the judge to remand the case to the Catholic Church for counseling. In the process, she's hoping to make it harder for any couple to divorce, according to her attorney, Robert Lynch.

"In theory, it applies to every marriage where you promise," Lynch said. "A promise is a promise."

Uh, somebody who's actually a lawyer needs to tell this woman the fundamental point of contract law: a broken contract is null and void.

Of course, FOTF's not above leaving out uncomfortable truths.

One last word on Zel Miller


"For it has been said so truthfully," said Miller, "that it is the soldier, not the reporter, who has given us the freedom of the press. It is the soldier, not the poet, who has given us freedom of speech. It is the soldier, not the agitator, who has given us the freedom to protest."

Not exactly, Zel.

The soldier has also taken away freedom of speech in places like China, Chile, El Salvador, and a host of other places.

The soldier has, at times, fought for liberty, true enough.

But that liberty is only realized by people putting liberty in action, by uttering and penning and disseminating uncomfortable and upopular truths, and by assembling in places that many wish they would not. Civil liberties are meaningless unless they are used.

It's clear that Miller, Cheney, and Bush would rather the civil liberties not be used, but would like people to think they have them. But thinking you have them is like thinking you have an imaginary dollar- it won't buy you anything.

Civil liberties are really only a first step, but are implied by the broader intent of the United States founding principles: government is only legitimate with the informed consent of the government. Power ultimately rests with the people- not the soldiers Zel.

Fred Kaplin tells the truth about Miller


The main falsehood, we have gone over before (click here for the details), but it keeps getting repeated, so here we go again: It is the claim that John Kerry, during his 20 years in the Senate, voted to kill the M-1 tank, the Apache helicopter; the F-14, F-16, and F-18 jet fighters; and just about every other weapon system that has kept our nation free and strong.

Here, one more time, is the truth of the matter: Kerry did not vote to kill these weapons, in part because none of these weapons ever came up for a vote, either on the Senate floor or in any of Kerry's committees.

This myth took hold last February in a press release put out by the RNC. Those who bothered to look up the fine-print footnotes discovered that they referred to votes on two defense appropriations bills, one in 1990, the other in 1995. Kerry voted against both bills, as did 15 other senators, including five Republicans. The RNC took those bills, cherry-picked some of the weapons systems contained therein, and implied that Kerry voted against those weapons. By the same logic, they could have claimed that Kerry voted to disband the entire U.S. armed forces; but that would have raised suspicions and thus compelled more reporters to read the document more closely.

What makes this dishonesty not merely a lie, but a damned lie, is that back when Kerry cast these votes, Dick Cheney—who was the secretary of defense for George W. Bush's father—was truly slashing the military budget. Here was Secretary Cheney, testifying before the Senate Armed Services Committee on Jan. 31, 1992:

Overall, since I've been Secretary, we will have taken the five-year defense program down by well over $300 billion. That's the peace dividend. … And now we're adding to that another $50 billion … of so-called peace dividend.

Cheney then lit into the Democratic-controlled Congress for not cutting weapons systems enough:

Congress has let me cancel a few programs. But you've squabbled and sometimes bickered and horse-traded and ended up forcing me to spend money on weapons that don't fill a vital need in these times of tight budgets and new requirements. … You've directed me to buy more M1s, F14s, and F16s—all great systems … but we have enough of them.

You do have to wonder about these Republicans.

Arthur Schlesinger Jr. has some unpleasant news for the "wartime leader."


Really bad news for the Bush junta... history ain't really on their side.

More bad news for the Bush junta

Not only is Ben Barnes going to be on 60 Minutes, but the whole series of lies about Bush's time in the Texas Air National Guard is about to go out big time.

Sept. 2, 2004 | NEW YORK -- Before there was Karl Rove, Lee Atwater or even James Baker, the Bush family's political guru was a gregarious newspaper owner and campaign consultant from Midland, Texas, named Jimmy Allison. In the spring of 1972, George H.W. Bush phoned his friend and asked a favor: Could Allison find a place on the Senate campaign he was managing in Alabama for his troublesome eldest son, the 25-year-old George W. Bush?

"The impression I had was that Georgie was raising a lot of hell in Houston, getting in trouble and embarrassing the family, and they just really wanted to get him out of Houston and under Jimmy's wing," Allison's widow, Linda, told me. "And Jimmy said, 'Sure.' He was so loyal."

Linda Allison's story, never before published, contradicts the Bush campaign's assertion that George W. Bush transferred from the Texas Air National Guard to the Alabama National Guard in 1972 because he received an irresistible offer to gain high-level experience on the campaign of Bush family friend Winton "Red" Blount. In fact, according to what Allison says her late husband told her, the younger Bush had become a political liability for his father, who was then the United States ambassador to the United Nations, and the family wanted him out of Texas. "I think they wanted someone they trusted to keep an eye on him," Linda Allison said.

After more than three decades of silence, Allison spoke with Salon over several days before and during the Republican National Convention this week -- motivated, as she acknowledged, by a complex mixture of emotions. They include pride in her late husband's accomplishments, a desire to see him remembered, and concern about the apparent double standard in Bush surrogates attacking John Kerry's Vietnam War record while ignoring the president's irresponsible conduct during the war. She also admits to bewilderment and hurt over the rupture her husband experienced in his friendship with George and Barbara Bush....

Remember, folks, the Swift Boat Debunking began in Salon, then made it over to WaPo & NYT.

This has legs this time. Long, long legs, and it's going out.

The de-branding continues.

Looks like the Zel and Cheney show is this year's Buchanan/Robertson-fest


Maybe Zel is being ironic, but this gimmick seems to be tanking big time.

Meanwhile, Chris Matthews & Keith Olberman give a little blowback.

Hatriots and Liars


What else to call them?

"He talks about leading a more sensitive war on terror, as though Al Qaeda will be impressed with our softer side,'' Mr. Cheney said of Mr. Kerry, speaking in a somber tone to a crowd that interrupted him with shouts of "U.S.A." as he recalled the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11.

No, DICK. He meant one that didn't alienate our allies, unlike your junta's inept and cowardly and impotent version.

Of course this is what we expect from Mr. "over 400,000 shares of Haliburton, and there's no conflict of interest."

"He declared at the Democratic Convention that he will forcefully defend America -- after we have been attacked,'' Mr. Cheney continued.

Another bald-faced, out and out lie. Don't believe me? Check back the links on this blog- I've linked to Kerry's speech.

And turncoat Zel Miller wonders:

"At the same time young Americans are dying in the sands of Iraq and the mountains of Afghanistan, our nation is being torn apart and made weaker because of a Democrat's manic obsession to bring down our commander in chief,'' Mr. Miller said, staring sternly across the hall. "What has happened to the party I've spent my life working in?"

I guess, Zel, ever since the Democrats led the struggle for civil rights, you've been kind of, well, hanging on to your white-sheet base, and now that this gambit doesn't work, you've gone over to where most of the white sheets are still at home. (Ooooh, that's insulting to him!!! No, Mr. Conservative thin-skin- it's true. Miller - like Jimmy Carter- actually after 1964 made appeals to win by doing their lil' ol' Southern strategy.)

Oh, and he's not my commander in chief. He's my employee.

But it looks like Kerry gets it:

Mr. Kerry, breaking from a tradition in which opposing candidates strike a low profile during nominating conventions, flew from his vacation home in Nantucket to Nashville to tell veterans that "extremism has gained momentum" across the globe under Mr. Bush's policies

Wednesday, September 01, 2004

The True Heros of 9/11 Support John Kerry


"Firefighters for Truth" sure beats "Swiftboat Liars" any day of the week.

What will be the response to Ben Barnes on AWOL?

Most likely Republicans will bring up the Sharpstown stock fraud scandal, but apparently, Ben Barnes wasn't ever charged, let alone convicted of anything.

Of course, that never stopped smear mongers...

What "implosion" of the Kerry campaign???


Looks more like Kerry's winning still - despite the fact that the media hasn't played up (yet) Bush's AWOL-ness, his "My Pet Goat" cowardice, "ribbongate," ...

Will Hastert be sued for defamation?


I certainly hope so.

It's about time such slanderous attacks were met head on.

I think the greatest pollution of our political discourse comes from folks such as Hastert, who can make baseless charges merely because someone find the "War on Drugs" repugnant.

Which it is.

Is it any wonder that the word "repugnant" is often attached to outlooks such as Hastert's?

Michael Moore's viewpoint on McCain


Out of nowhere, he began to attack my movie, Fahrenheit 9/11, calling me a "disingenuous filmmaker." The problem is, he hasn't seen the movie, a fact he later admitted to Chris Matthews on MSNBC....

He claimed that I portrayed Saddam's Iraq as an "oasis of peace."

Some of the 20 million who have seen the film must have wondered, "Did I miss that scene? I knew I shouldn't have gone out for those Goobers." All I can imagine McCain was referring to was a brief cutaway just as President Bush announces the commencement of the bombing of Baghdad on March 19, 2003.

Human-rights groups say thousands of civilians were killed because of our bombing. I thought it would be worthwhile to show some of the faces of Iraqi people who might

Maybe I'll call up McCain and treat him to a movie down the block, one I know he will enjoy, considering he agreed that I was right when Chris Matthews said a main point of my movie is that "war is often fought by people without power."

Gee, you'd think that if Michael Moore and John McCain can see eye to eye, that maybe, just maybe, the Moore hatriots can put a sock in all the dissembling they've done about him.

The truth hurts sometimes...

As I was mentioning about F9/11, there is a person who saw it who still espouses support for George W. Bush, despite the the factual content presented there, not to mention the debacle in Iraq, the explosive budget deficit, an energy policy crafted by the folks who brought us Enron, withdrawing from the Kyoto treaty, withdrawl from the nuclear test-ban treaty, the deployment of an untested anti-missile "defense" system, despite economic policies that has resulted in wealth being transferred from the poor and middle class to the wealthy, and a judiciary that has demonstrably violated the constitutional rights of the Americans.

This person told me that it was "insulting" to tell a conservative even factual content that basically illustrates that the emperor has no clothes, when it comes to making the case for voting Republican.

We are not talking about being rude and abusive here- note- we are talking about presenting factual information. And the message I was given, was basically, regardless of how the information is being presented, offense will be taken.

It's too bad he's insulted, but the truth is the truth, and if someone feels offense at being confronted with the truth, perhaps the offended person had bettter re-examine what he says, why he says it, how he says it, and the whole ethical basis on which he speaks. To espouse the truth is to espouse who we are, and it is evidence of the extreme personal, spiritual, and social sickness in America today that someone would rather not have their feelings hurt than be confronted by the reality that the people they support have given rise to policies that have created more poor, more sick, and more maimed and murdered. It is really the quintessence of a closed mind to attempt to avoid the truth by caliming to be "insulted."

I do wonder though, if this is why conservatives see fit to repeat lies originating in right wing circles about, among other things, Michael Moore's movie, and the Swift Boat Liars. E.g., with Moore's movie, the lie about Moore "intending" to show Iraq as an idyllic place has been repeated. ( For the umpteenth time, the movie shows, 20 seconds of women and children in a park in Iraq. Does the Republican deny that, prior to the US invasion there were women and children playing in Iraq, whose lives were turned upside down by the US invasion? To espouse the Republican lie aobut Moore's movie is to crowd out this truth, whereas Moore's images exist in the context of what we all know about Iraq: it was a brutal dictatorhip crippled by sanctions. Moore never, never denies this context, despite the clumsy dishonesty of Republican conservates on this point. And if the Republican lie were true, why would Michael Moore have wanted to do this in Iraq, despite the "left wing position" that sanctions had seriously crippled Iraq?)

But lies are lies. If one wants to avoid being offended at being told the truth, one should start to realize that "offense" happens in between one's ears. Offense has an origin, it's connected to everything done/willed/experienced in one's life.

Regardless of the nature of the "offense," this ain't talk radio, almost all conservatives ain't Rush Limbaugh, and I am going to be myself. I might also add that despite the vitriol and lies that I hear from the right I do not feel insulted, despite the personal attacks that I get when the right-wing aresenal of arguments and lies is bare.

Know why?

Because frankly, I'm too damned busy, and anyway, it's better to actually hit what you're trying to hit, and being insulted, frankly is extra. Maybe I don't hit what I'm trying to hit, but I try to avoid distractions.

I hope my conservative friend finds peace- but he's going to have to accept the first noble truth of the political process: whether right wing or left wing, life is suffering. And while I'm at it, there's something calle "right speech," and it involves not repeating somebody else's lies.

It's not my intention to hurt people, it's my intention to avoid hurting people- and if that requires feelings to be hurt to avoid embezzlement, impoverishment, and violence, then better hurt feelings than hurt people.