In this case it is the series of 'family values', meaning anti-gay or sexual behavior obsessed, Republican who have violated their own declared behavioral standards.
We have seen:
Mark Foley who spent his time chatting up almost and recently legal young men who had served as pages.
Glenn Murphy Jr., One time Chairman of the Young Republicans, who appears to have developed a habit of sexual assaulting other men in their sleep.
David Vitter, who sought 'professional help' for his diaper fetish.
We have a one time Bush administration spiritual advisor, Ted Haggard, who enjoyed the pleasures of male prostitutes and illegal drugs.
Coy C. Privette, one time Republican state legislator in North Carolina, and president of Christian Action League, caught with a pro in a N. Carolina hotel.
Rep. Bob Allen of Florida, who was caught offering to pay other men for the opportunity to preform fellatio on them in a public restroom.
And we add Sen. Larry Craig who, like Bob Allen, seems to have found the allure of public restrooms and other men irresistible.
While I do not understand these men, I do find them objectionable. It is not their sexual activity that I find that objectionable. It is their hypocrisy.
If they want to wear soiled diapers, or date young men (of legal age) or have paid or anonymous sexual liaisons, that is their business. If they are attracted to men, or women, or both, is no matter to me.
What does matter is the gross hypocrisy of trying to enact laws against the very behaviors that they are caught engaging in.
Folly promotes laws to make the Internet 'safe' then uses it to work his way into the lives of young pages. Craig, and Allen, and Haggard work to deny homosexuals civil rights, and then engage in homosexual activity.
If these men had embraced the view that every person's sexual lives is no ones business, I would argue that these are non stories. But each has made their name by insisting that a person should be defined, at least in part, by their sexual behavior or orientation. And if your orientation or desires ran counter to their view of normal, you must also then be denied rights to some civil protections.
In each case, they are now get to reap what they sow, and while I do not understand these fools, I can enjoy the absurd positions they have put themselves into.
Thursday, August 30, 2007
Monday, August 27, 2007
Gonzales Quits?
If the rumors are true, I hope this clears the way for aggressive investigation and legal action against him for lying to Congress and other various questionable activity.
There are few things that can destroy a nation quicker than having legal system headed by people who wilfully break the law, and the are not punished for it.
There are few things that can destroy a nation quicker than having legal system headed by people who wilfully break the law, and the are not punished for it.
Thursday, August 23, 2007
Now He Brings Up Vietnam
For 4 years many on the left raised concerns that the brain dead leadership on the right were leading us into another Vietnam, an untenable quagmire that that will eat up men and machines without any significant overall change.
These statements were dismissed as not relevant and alarmist.
Now it appears that George Bush agrees. He is now admitting that, in his foolishness, he has led this nation into another Vietnam. But, staying true to the idiocy that made him believe that invading Iraq was a good idea, he is trying to sell that wrong idea about why we lost Vietnam.
He claims the lesson from that war is that we didn't stay long enough. He promotes the rather foolish notion that with more men, more weapons, more freedom of activity, we could have won.
He is wrong.
Iraq and Vietnam have this one simple fact in common, the overwhelming majority of the population do not want us in their nation. When this is the case, there is no amount of force, no real change of strategy, short of genocide, that can prevent the eventual defeat of the occupying force.
It is about hearts and minds, and if you can not win them, you have lost. In Vietnam we could not win them, and it is very clear that we have failed at this in Iraq. This is the lesson that we should have learned from Vietnam, and the one we need to remember when we consider out next steps in Iraq.
Yet, this deserter from service during the Vietnam war, is telling us that the failure in Vietnam was a lack of commitment ( a commitment that his desertion from the armed forces indicates the he also lacked ).
Iraq is lost. It was lost the day we decided to invade. The only, very slim, chance to win with the course we are on would be to insert 400,000 or more troops to end the game of Wack-a-mole that we are currently engaged in. Since there is no place to get 400,000 more troops, we have to admit it is over.
These statements were dismissed as not relevant and alarmist.
Now it appears that George Bush agrees. He is now admitting that, in his foolishness, he has led this nation into another Vietnam. But, staying true to the idiocy that made him believe that invading Iraq was a good idea, he is trying to sell that wrong idea about why we lost Vietnam.
He claims the lesson from that war is that we didn't stay long enough. He promotes the rather foolish notion that with more men, more weapons, more freedom of activity, we could have won.
He is wrong.
Iraq and Vietnam have this one simple fact in common, the overwhelming majority of the population do not want us in their nation. When this is the case, there is no amount of force, no real change of strategy, short of genocide, that can prevent the eventual defeat of the occupying force.
It is about hearts and minds, and if you can not win them, you have lost. In Vietnam we could not win them, and it is very clear that we have failed at this in Iraq. This is the lesson that we should have learned from Vietnam, and the one we need to remember when we consider out next steps in Iraq.
Yet, this deserter from service during the Vietnam war, is telling us that the failure in Vietnam was a lack of commitment ( a commitment that his desertion from the armed forces indicates the he also lacked ).
Iraq is lost. It was lost the day we decided to invade. The only, very slim, chance to win with the course we are on would be to insert 400,000 or more troops to end the game of Wack-a-mole that we are currently engaged in. Since there is no place to get 400,000 more troops, we have to admit it is over.
Thursday, August 16, 2007
War Profiteering, S.C. Style
It appears that a couple of patriotic South Carolinian have been busy helping with the war effort.
Lovely, just lovely
The owners of C&D Distributors in Lexington, South Carolina -- twin sisters -- exploited a flaw in an automated Defense Department purchasing system: bills for shipping to combat areas or U.S. bases that were labeled ``priority'' were usually paid automatically
.....
The scheme unraveled in September after a purchasing agent noticed a bill for shipping two more 19-cent washers: $969,000. That order was rejected and a review turned up the $998,798 payment earlier that month for shipping two 19-cent washers to Fort Bliss, Texas, Stroot said.
The Pentagon's Defense Logistics Agency orders millions of parts a year. ``These shipping claims were processed automatically to streamline the re-supply of items to combat troops in Iraq and Afghanistan,''
Lovely, just lovely
Monday, August 13, 2007
Punching Out
Karl Rove is running for the hills.
There probably was no better sign of how far this White House has fallen than at the Iowa Straw Poll in Ames this weekend, a gathering of probably the most committed Republicans in the country. This was where Mr. Rove displayed his political skills to the country in 1999, steering Mr. Bush to a victory in a nonbinding poll that nonetheless cemented his position as his party’s prohibitive favorite.
Mr. Bush’s name was barely mentioned in Ames on Saturday, much less Mr. Rove’s. The winner of the contest, Mitt Romney of Massachusetts, offered a pretty grim verdict on the last seven years in Washington when he said, “If there has ever been a time that we needed to see change in Washington, it is now.”
Saturday, August 11, 2007
While the US Media Tells Us Happy Tales
from Iraq, the Guardian brings us another view.
When the soldiers talk like this there is resignation. There is a corrosive anger, too, that bubbles out, like the words pouring unbidden from a chaplain's assistant who has come to bless a patrol. 'Why don't you tell the truth? Why don't you journalists write that this army is exhausted?'
Wednesday, August 08, 2007
Right-wing Authoritarian
Over at Orcinus, a great piece on the behavior and thinking of many on the right wing.
This ties in quite nicely with the revelation that the Kansas Republican party is now considering some form of loyalty oath
In fact, that naivete -- deceptively packaged as purity and innocence -- is one of the main things people are seeking when they're drawn into authoritarian systems. They join up because they feel overwhelmed by the complexity and nuance in the world. There's just too much to keep up with, too much responsibility, too much chaos. Often, they've been caught in the gears of the machinery of modernity, and have had large parts of their lives chewed up by the works. It all feels out of control. (Chris Hedges, in his new book American Fascism, describes how Christianist proselytizers are taught to seek out people going through hard times-- they're the hottest conversion prospects.)
This ties in quite nicely with the revelation that the Kansas Republican party is now considering some form of loyalty oath
The state committee's actions struck a sour note for some Republicans, particularly moderates on issues such as abortion. Bob Beatty, a Washburn University political scientist, suggested the loyalty committee could prove a "public relations disaster."
"Ironically, it smacks most of the Communist Party," Beatty said Monday. "That's the kind of public irony that most parties try to avoid -- the party of freedom telling people they have no freedom."
To Freaking Funny
Yet another closeted gay Republican leader has outed himself, details at Outside the Tent.
Monday, August 06, 2007
Escalation In Iraq
Based upon the tone of discussion that is developing about the surge, I think that either I, or those promoting the surge, must not understand what the goal of this mis-adventure is.
As I understand it, the plan is for the US to apply force to bring stability to a small region of the city of Baghdad, we then turn over the security of this area over to the Iraqi's to maintain, freeing US forces to more into a new region.
I have seen some claiming success because US forces have been able to bring stability to portions of Iraq.
The only trouble I see with this report it, this is only phase one, and phase one is the only phase anyone should expect could work. I think you would find few people who did not expect US forces to be able to impose peace and stability onto small areas of Baghdad.
The test of this escalation is phase two, where the Iraqi's maintain the security. Even this foolishly positive story about 'The Surge' can not ignore this and one additional unpleasant fact about this plan. The first is well stated here:
A true sign that the surge is failing. This is because it is the Iraqi forces that must provide the security, not the US troops, and the second issue:
Without being able to form some degree of effective lockdown nationwide, we make no true gains.
So the key to the determining the success of the escalation is not performance of US forces, but the ability of the Iraqi forces to hold the areas the US has secured.
And no evidence has been provided that indicates any improvement in that area. In fact most evidence indicates that there is little likelihood of this working.
Hundreds of thousands of weapons that the US has delivered to the Iraqi forces are missing. They have no doubt been sold off for profit, or routed to some of the various insurgent groups. Reports of wide spread desertions continue to be common, and a good argument can be made that our efforts to train the Iraqi defense force is a total failure.
Now look at the test area for the current surge plan, an area Bush once declaired a success, Tal Afar. They have had another bombing in Tal Afar. We used US forces to clear the city, the turned it over to Iraqi forces to hold, a couple of time now. There is no reason to suspect that Haifa St, Baghdad or any other part of Iraq will be any different form Tal Afar.
The surge in Baghdad, and Iraq as a whole, can only work if there is a viable force in place to hold the territory the US forces have cleared. To declare this current plan a success, without seeing if any of the Iraqi troops have been able to hold any area, either indicates a failure to understand the objective or dishonesty.
As I understand it, the plan is for the US to apply force to bring stability to a small region of the city of Baghdad, we then turn over the security of this area over to the Iraqi's to maintain, freeing US forces to more into a new region.
I have seen some claiming success because US forces have been able to bring stability to portions of Iraq.
General David Petraeus went out to show off a success story,
...
Haifa Street is an example of how the general's counter-insurgency plan is supposed to work.
Haifa Street used to be another way of saying utter chaos.
In January this year, it was the scene of the bitterest and bloodiest street fighting that Baghdad has experienced.
These days it's a good place not just for Iraqis but for the general to practice street politics and public relations.
The only trouble I see with this report it, this is only phase one, and phase one is the only phase anyone should expect could work. I think you would find few people who did not expect US forces to be able to impose peace and stability onto small areas of Baghdad.
The test of this escalation is phase two, where the Iraqi's maintain the security. Even this foolishly positive story about 'The Surge' can not ignore this and one additional unpleasant fact about this plan. The first is well stated here:
"As Americans stay here, there is safety,"
A true sign that the surge is failing. This is because it is the Iraqi forces that must provide the security, not the US troops, and the second issue:
The insurgents merely retreated across the Tigris River to infest another neighborhood that the U.S. military must clear and rebuild.
Without being able to form some degree of effective lockdown nationwide, we make no true gains.
So the key to the determining the success of the escalation is not performance of US forces, but the ability of the Iraqi forces to hold the areas the US has secured.
And no evidence has been provided that indicates any improvement in that area. In fact most evidence indicates that there is little likelihood of this working.
Hundreds of thousands of weapons that the US has delivered to the Iraqi forces are missing. They have no doubt been sold off for profit, or routed to some of the various insurgent groups. Reports of wide spread desertions continue to be common, and a good argument can be made that our efforts to train the Iraqi defense force is a total failure.
Now look at the test area for the current surge plan, an area Bush once declaired a success, Tal Afar. They have had another bombing in Tal Afar. We used US forces to clear the city, the turned it over to Iraqi forces to hold, a couple of time now. There is no reason to suspect that Haifa St, Baghdad or any other part of Iraq will be any different form Tal Afar.
The surge in Baghdad, and Iraq as a whole, can only work if there is a viable force in place to hold the territory the US forces have cleared. To declare this current plan a success, without seeing if any of the Iraqi troops have been able to hold any area, either indicates a failure to understand the objective or dishonesty.
Monday, July 30, 2007
Is Anyone Suprised
Bush Drove Drunk, Gonzales helped to hide that fact.
His willingness to do almost anything to cover-up Bush's acts makes is stream of lies told to congress even more disturbing.
Questions about Gonzales's willingness to shade the truth on Bush's behalf came to prominence in the 1996 episode in which Bush was excused from Texas jury duty in a drunken-driving case. Bush was then the state's governor, and Gonzales was his general counsel. If Bush had served, he probably would have had to disclose his own drunken-driving conviction in Maine two decades earlier.
His willingness to do almost anything to cover-up Bush's acts makes is stream of lies told to congress even more disturbing.
Wednesday, July 25, 2007
I Thought Lying To Congress Was A Crime
Bust based on the actions of our Attorney General, Alberto Gonzales, it must now be an accepted behavior.
he tripped himself up repeatedly during his testimony to the Senate Judiciary Committee -- quite possibly entering perjury territory.
At lease a few Senators are unhappy with his lying
he tripped himself up repeatedly during his testimony to the Senate Judiciary Committee -- quite possibly entering perjury territory.
At lease a few Senators are unhappy with his lying
Monday, July 23, 2007
Bill Kristol, A Dishonest Repubican Gasbag
I know, it is nothing new, but the last few days have presented him as shining example of what is wrong with our current class of talking heads.
Of late he has been busy trying to redefine the activist left, and attacking one of the founders of Daily Kos for a comment made 3 years ago.
This from a man who as said some of the dumbest and more disgusting things that any self professed respectable pundit has ever uttered.
About Abu Ghraib
“It is insane for this country to be obsessing … about a small prisoner abuse scandal,”
Yes, gross violations of international law (some still not publicly disclosed), done in the name of the US should just be ignored.
When Sen. Reid expressed the view that the war in Iraq was lost (a view that is quite rational and supported by many in the officer corp), Bill said;
“is much more disgraceful than anything Trent Lott said”
So it is better to look back fondly on segregation and racial oppression than it is to consider one of the possible (and in this case most likely) outcomes of warfare.
On Sen. Barack Obama, he was describes a:
“sort of the opposite of Lincoln. He would have been with Stephen Douglas in 1858″
Sure, I can see how he could think that Barak Obama would be big supporter of slave holders.
Yet, this man who has said so many stupid, offensive and just wrong things, is pretending to be mad because someone was not that upset that mercenaries ( you know, people who get paid great deals of money to do life threatening work in a war zone, up to and including combat ) were killed in a war zone.
It is amazing that people this dishonest, this stupid, are still given airtime by our news media.
Just for a laugh here is a look at some of the other wonderful pearls of wisdom that Billy has shared can be found in the Washington Post
Of late he has been busy trying to redefine the activist left, and attacking one of the founders of Daily Kos for a comment made 3 years ago.
This from a man who as said some of the dumbest and more disgusting things that any self professed respectable pundit has ever uttered.
About Abu Ghraib
“It is insane for this country to be obsessing … about a small prisoner abuse scandal,”
Yes, gross violations of international law (some still not publicly disclosed), done in the name of the US should just be ignored.
When Sen. Reid expressed the view that the war in Iraq was lost (a view that is quite rational and supported by many in the officer corp), Bill said;
“is much more disgraceful than anything Trent Lott said”
So it is better to look back fondly on segregation and racial oppression than it is to consider one of the possible (and in this case most likely) outcomes of warfare.
On Sen. Barack Obama, he was describes a:
“sort of the opposite of Lincoln. He would have been with Stephen Douglas in 1858″
Sure, I can see how he could think that Barak Obama would be big supporter of slave holders.
Yet, this man who has said so many stupid, offensive and just wrong things, is pretending to be mad because someone was not that upset that mercenaries ( you know, people who get paid great deals of money to do life threatening work in a war zone, up to and including combat ) were killed in a war zone.
It is amazing that people this dishonest, this stupid, are still given airtime by our news media.
Just for a laugh here is a look at some of the other wonderful pearls of wisdom that Billy has shared can be found in the Washington Post
Sunday, July 22, 2007
I Am Still Not Much Of A Hand Raiser
Your Score: Hand-Raiser
You are 85% Rational, 57% Extroverted, 14% Brutal, and 42% Arrogant.
You are the Hand-Raiser, that annoying kid in class who always had an answer for everything. No doubt, as a child you probably sat in the front of the class, anxiously waving your hand back and forth in the air while your teacher desperately tried to avoid calling on you because you were the ONLY fucking kid that answered her questions. Clearly, the key traits of your personality are your rationality and your extroversion. You are like a little talkative calculator, in other words. You also tend to be rather gentle and less arrogant than most people. Your presence is a bane to everyone's existence, because you are too nice for your own good and you absolutely will not shut up. So what is your defect, then? Well, you're boring, and when you're not boring, you are just plain annoying with your ultra-logical responses and constant need to talk to others. So keep waving that hand in the air, son. I'm still not calling on you. You are too logical, you talk too much, and your humility and gentleness only makes me hate you more, because they make me feel like I almost SHOULDN'T hate you. But I do. Big time. And by the way, the more you wave your hand in class--your extended hand becoming nothing more than a blur as you insanely wave it, thinking we can't see it--the more smug satisfaction the teacher takes in watching the look of excrutiating pain cross your face as you agonize over not being called on, and the longer we'll wait to call on you, just because we absolutely love torturing you so.
To put it less negatively:
1. You are more RATIONAL than intuitive.
2. You are more EXTROVERTED than introverted.
3. You are more GENTLE than brutal.
4. You are more HUMBLE than arrogant.
Compatibility:
Your exact opposite is the Brute.
Other personalities you would probably get along with are the Braggart, the Haughty Intellectual, and the Robot.
*
*
If you scored near fifty percent for a certain trait (42%-58%), you could very well go either way. For example, someone with 42% Extroversion is slightly leaning towards being an introvert, but is close enough to being an extrovert to be classified that way as well. Below is a list of the other personality types so that you can determine which other possible categories you may fill if you scored near fifty percent for certain traits.
The other personality types:
The Emo Kid: Intuitive, Introverted, Gentle, Humble.
The Starving Artist: Intuitive, Introverted, Gentle, Arrogant.
The Bitch-Slap: Intuitive, Introverted, Brutal, Humble.
The Brute: Intuitive, Introverted, Brutal, Arrogant.
The Hippie: Intuitive, Extroverted, Gentle, Humble.
The Televangelist: Intuitive, Extroverted, Gentle, Arrogant.
The Schoolyard Bully: Intuitive, Extroverted, Brutal, Humble.
The Class Clown: Intuitive, Extroverted, Brutal, Arrogant.
The Robot: Rational, Introverted, Gentle, Humble.
The Haughty Intellectual: Rational, Introverted, Gentle, Arrogant.
The Spiteful Loner: Rational, Introverted, Brutal, Humble.
The Sociopath: Rational, Introverted, Brutal, Arrogant.
The Hand-Raiser: Rational, Extroverted, Gentle, Humble.
The Braggart: Rational, Extroverted, Gentle, Arrogant.
The Capitalist Pig: Rational, Extroverted, Brutal, Humble.
About Saint_Gasoline
I am a self-proclaimed pseudo-intellectual who loves dashes. I enjoy science, philosophy, and fart jokes and water balloons, not necessarily in that order. I spend 95% of my time online, and the other 5% of my time in the bathroom, longing to get back on the computer. If, God forbid, you somehow find me amusing instead of crass and annoying, be sure to check out my blog and my webcomic at SaintGasoline.com.
| Link: The Personality Defect Test written by saint_gasoline on OkCupid Free Online Dating, home of the The Dating Persona Test |
Wednesday, July 18, 2007
American Media, Clueless
In the Senate there was an effort to force a vote on establishing a time table for troop withdrawal from Iraq. The Democrats wanted this, and the Republicans did not. Democrats had enough votes to win, but the Republicans were filibustering it to block the vote.
So how does the St. Louis paper report this?
"Filibuster Fails to Force Iraq Vote."
To many of the media are just dumb and lazy. So a quick note for the Paper's editors.
It was the Republicans who were filibustering to block the Iraqi vote.
And, yes there is great irony is seeing all the Republicans who moaned, whined and cried for 5 years about how cruel the Democrats were for blocking up or down votes, now proudly blocking up or down votes
So how does the St. Louis paper report this?
"Filibuster Fails to Force Iraq Vote."
To many of the media are just dumb and lazy. So a quick note for the Paper's editors.
It was the Republicans who were filibustering to block the Iraqi vote.
And, yes there is great irony is seeing all the Republicans who moaned, whined and cried for 5 years about how cruel the Democrats were for blocking up or down votes, now proudly blocking up or down votes
Haircuts, Makeup, and Media Reaction
John Edwards got a lot of less than favorable media attention when it was noticed that his presidential committee paid for what many consider grossly overpriced haircuts.
It makes me wonder how much notice will be paid to Mitt Romney's presidential committee paying at least $300.00 for beauty tips and services.
I say at least $300.00 because it is clear that someone on his staff tried to hide the expense by using a creative line item to shield it from notice. One is left to wonder what other consultants and services may be lurking behind other bland titles on his expense reports.
You are also left to wonder if Mitt will get the same level of outraged and snickering reporting that John Edwards got from the US media.
It makes me wonder how much notice will be paid to Mitt Romney's presidential committee paying at least $300.00 for beauty tips and services.
Mr Romney listed the fees as “communications consulting” to a California company that describes itself as “a mobile beauty team for hair, makeup and men’s grooming and spa services.”
I say at least $300.00 because it is clear that someone on his staff tried to hide the expense by using a creative line item to shield it from notice. One is left to wonder what other consultants and services may be lurking behind other bland titles on his expense reports.
You are also left to wonder if Mitt will get the same level of outraged and snickering reporting that John Edwards got from the US media.
Friday, July 13, 2007
Who Knows
| Your Personality is Very Rare (ENTP) |
 Your personality type is optimistic, curious, enthusiastic, and open. Only about 4% of all people have your personality, including 3% of all women and 5% of all men. You are Extroverted, Intuitive, Thinking, and Perceiving. |
Monday, July 09, 2007
Impeachment
One unintended consequence of the commuting of Scooter Libby's jail sentence seems to be a massive uptick in the willingness of mainstream media outlets to talk about impeachment.
It has been a topic on the left for at least three years now, but studiously avoided by the overwhelming majority of conventional news outlets.
For some, impeachment has been the goal since they got their first whiff of some of the questionable behavior of the Bush administration. I was not in that camp. Now the call is gathering up steam, but I still can not yet call for impeachment.
For me, Impeachment should be the result of the process, not the goal of it. Our members of congress owe us good oversight of the administration. One of their most important jobs is to assure that the government is working within the laws of the land and is being honest with the people they have been elected to represent. As part of this process there should be hearings and investigations.
Only when these events present us clear indications of wrong doing, is it time to call for corrective and punitive measures.
In my opinion we are not there. But, I hold little doubt that in time we will be faced with enough evidence that Impeachment is an option that must be considered. For the time being I just wish that we could keep the horse in front of the cart, and do the job of looking into the actions of the Bush Administration, not with the goal of Impeachment, but with the goal of finding the truth.
And just see where that road leads us.
Heck, based on the way the White House is responding to the investigations, their efforts at obstruction of justice alone may warrant Impeachment.
It has been a topic on the left for at least three years now, but studiously avoided by the overwhelming majority of conventional news outlets.
For some, impeachment has been the goal since they got their first whiff of some of the questionable behavior of the Bush administration. I was not in that camp. Now the call is gathering up steam, but I still can not yet call for impeachment.
For me, Impeachment should be the result of the process, not the goal of it. Our members of congress owe us good oversight of the administration. One of their most important jobs is to assure that the government is working within the laws of the land and is being honest with the people they have been elected to represent. As part of this process there should be hearings and investigations.
Only when these events present us clear indications of wrong doing, is it time to call for corrective and punitive measures.
In my opinion we are not there. But, I hold little doubt that in time we will be faced with enough evidence that Impeachment is an option that must be considered. For the time being I just wish that we could keep the horse in front of the cart, and do the job of looking into the actions of the Bush Administration, not with the goal of Impeachment, but with the goal of finding the truth.
And just see where that road leads us.
Heck, based on the way the White House is responding to the investigations, their efforts at obstruction of justice alone may warrant Impeachment.
Tuesday, July 03, 2007
Disgusted
But in no way surprised.
Bush lets one of his convicted evil minions go free.
It is one heck of a great system we have here: Break any law you want, obstruction investigations, lie to those investigating, and once your are brought to trial and become aconvicted felon, get released by the man who was in charge during the whole process.
It makes one wonder why the Bush administration is refusing to answer congressional subpoenas, since it is clear that Bush is willing to pardon criminal wrongdoing done in his name.
And there appears to have been a great deal of criminal wrongdoing in his name
Firedoglake covers this very well
Bush lets one of his convicted evil minions go free.
It is one heck of a great system we have here: Break any law you want, obstruction investigations, lie to those investigating, and once your are brought to trial and become aconvicted felon, get released by the man who was in charge during the whole process.
It makes one wonder why the Bush administration is refusing to answer congressional subpoenas, since it is clear that Bush is willing to pardon criminal wrongdoing done in his name.
And there appears to have been a great deal of criminal wrongdoing in his name
Firedoglake covers this very well
Saturday, June 30, 2007
Amature Hour In The UK
While the US (and no doubt the UK) media are now in a full feeding frenzy, it should be clear to everyone that the 'terror attacks' in London and Glasgow were highly amateurish.
While they had the potential to some light damage, it is clear that raw anger and desperation, not professional calculation and terrorist training fueled these attempts at terror.
It should also be clear that these attacks are not being driven so much by the ideology of Bin Laden and radical Islam, but anger at the ideology of Tony Blair (and George Bush). Their incredible stupid and fouled up attempts at reducing terror has only grown it, both abroad, and at home.
My only real concern about these type of terrorist (and calling them terrorist is an insult to terrorist {if you can insult a terrorist}) is one day, a group like these idiots in Scotland, or the foolish saps who dreamed of attacking Ft. Dix, or the lost souls who formed their own religion and army in Miami (or the JFK crew), may get 'lucky' and do damage far beyond what they are actually capable of.
For starters, gasoline is not a high explosive. If we were talking 50 pounds of Semtex or the Al Qaeda standby, TATP, I would be impressed. Those are real high explosives with a detonation rate in excess of 20,000 feet per second. Gasoline can explode (just ask former owners of a Ford Pinto) but it is first and foremost an incendiary. If the initial reports are true, the clown driving the Mercedes was a rank amateur when it comes to constructing an Improvised Explosive Device aka IED. Unlike a Hollywood flick the 50 gallons of gas would not have shredded the Mercedes into lethal chunks of flying shrapenal.
The fact that "officers courageously disabled the trigger by hand" coupled with the report of the smoke in the car leads me to believe that the mad London "bomber" tried to construct a Molotov cocktail of sorts and lit a cloth fuze. Fortunately he left the windows in the car up and there was not enough oxygen to really get the fire going. Looks like the brave British police reached in and snuffed the flame.
Judging from the overreaction to this non-incident I think we can safely conclude that Osama Bin Laden will remain holed up in Pakistan and let the fear mongers at CNN, MSNBC, and FOX do the dirty business of scaring the shit out of people.
While they had the potential to some light damage, it is clear that raw anger and desperation, not professional calculation and terrorist training fueled these attempts at terror.
It should also be clear that these attacks are not being driven so much by the ideology of Bin Laden and radical Islam, but anger at the ideology of Tony Blair (and George Bush). Their incredible stupid and fouled up attempts at reducing terror has only grown it, both abroad, and at home.
My only real concern about these type of terrorist (and calling them terrorist is an insult to terrorist {if you can insult a terrorist}) is one day, a group like these idiots in Scotland, or the foolish saps who dreamed of attacking Ft. Dix, or the lost souls who formed their own religion and army in Miami (or the JFK crew), may get 'lucky' and do damage far beyond what they are actually capable of.
Tuesday, June 26, 2007
Sunday, June 24, 2007
Abject Failure, Again
The current administration, and our leaders in the Pentagon, have again been proven to be total failures.
If the Iraqi army is unable to hold the territory, and we lack the manpower to hold the territory, why are we bothering with this farce of an escalation?
Are our Political leaders so stupid that they do not understand that this is a huge waste? of course they are this stupid, this is George Bush and his cohorts we are talking about.
Are our military leaders now so spineless they lack the courage to tell the politicians in DC the results of their idiocy? It appears that they are.
What is the result of this latest display of criminal stupidity, and craven fear?
BAQOUBA, Iraq (AP) -- The U.S. commander of a new offensive north of Baghdad, reclaiming insurgent territory day by day, said Sunday his Iraqi partners may be too weak to hold onto the gains.
The Iraqi military does not even have enough ammunition, said Brig. Gen. Mick Bednarek: "They're not quite up to the job yet."
His counterpart south of Baghdad seemed to agree, saying U.S. troops are too few to garrison the districts newly rid of insurgents. "It can't be coalition (U.S.) forces. We have what we have. There's got to be more Iraqi security forces," said Maj. Gen. Rick Lynch.
If the Iraqi army is unable to hold the territory, and we lack the manpower to hold the territory, why are we bothering with this farce of an escalation?
Are our Political leaders so stupid that they do not understand that this is a huge waste? of course they are this stupid, this is George Bush and his cohorts we are talking about.
Are our military leaders now so spineless they lack the courage to tell the politicians in DC the results of their idiocy? It appears that they are.
What is the result of this latest display of criminal stupidity, and craven fear?
At least 12 soldiers were killed on Saturday from roadside bombings and other causes, leaving at least 31 dead for the week.
Wednesday, June 20, 2007
Reflection On Past Decisions, And Iraq Today
Almost 30 years ago, a nation in the middle east (OK, South Asia) was in in disarray, suffering from internal divisions, political murders, coups, and open warfare. A Superpower saw this as an opportunity, and Russia sent 80,000 men into the country to 'stabilize' it and to tie it securely into it's sphere of influence.
The locals were not amused, and the unrest continued, and in places grew much worse.
Soon the number of troops rose to about 150,000, and still the resistance grew stronger.
The US saw an opportunity. We could destabilize the southern border of our enemy, and tie down a sizable fraction of our biggest foe's army in a manner very similar to what happened to us in the 60s in Vietnam. So in July 1979 Jimmy Carter ordered the initial aid to the 'freedom fighters' of Afghanistan.
When Regan took power in 80s, the aid was continued, and by the mid 80s it was not a trickle, but a flood. Russia was trapped in it's own Vietnam, and faced many of the same difficulties we saw in the 67-73 period. Eventually Russia left, and Afghanistan was left to fight a continuing civil war that was eventually won by their religious right, the Taliban.
This group was an immediate international pariah, a supporter of international terrorism and became the eventual protector of Al Qaeda.
Another by-product of this war was the training and eventual dispersion of as many as 40,000 mujaheddin. During the war years, the lure of battle for a just cause, and the funds and tools to wage war attracted tens of thousands of fighters from across the whole of the Islamic world. They were trained by the US (by proxy at least) and bloodied in battle, and when it was over, they moved on.
There is little doubt that some of these very same US trained fighters are now involved in Iraq.
All of this as a result of a decision to stick it to the Russians. Our goal was not a terrorist supporting fundamentalist Islamic government in control of Afghanistan, our goal was not to train tens of thousands of mujaheddin, and then disperse them across the globe, our goal was not the elevation of Bin Laden and Al Qaeda to the point where the world knew who he was, but that was the end result.
That is why I have to ask, have we thought the wisdom of arming Sunni freedom fighters.
This clearly show just how bad the current situation in Iraq is. We are arming the very people that we have spent the last 5 years trying to kill. In our effort to find a path to victory, we are now forced to making very dangerous alliances and aiding uncontrollable groups. The forces we are arming are not part of the government, not part of the Iraqi army, they are fighting the Iraqi government as it currently exist. These are the armies of the Sunni population who are already at war with the Shia population, who happen to control the government at this time.
This may work, desperate situations call for bold action, but I fear that the law of unintended consequences will lead us to look back on this decision, and wish we had not chosen this path.
The locals were not amused, and the unrest continued, and in places grew much worse.
Soon the number of troops rose to about 150,000, and still the resistance grew stronger.
The US saw an opportunity. We could destabilize the southern border of our enemy, and tie down a sizable fraction of our biggest foe's army in a manner very similar to what happened to us in the 60s in Vietnam. So in July 1979 Jimmy Carter ordered the initial aid to the 'freedom fighters' of Afghanistan.
When Regan took power in 80s, the aid was continued, and by the mid 80s it was not a trickle, but a flood. Russia was trapped in it's own Vietnam, and faced many of the same difficulties we saw in the 67-73 period. Eventually Russia left, and Afghanistan was left to fight a continuing civil war that was eventually won by their religious right, the Taliban.
This group was an immediate international pariah, a supporter of international terrorism and became the eventual protector of Al Qaeda.
Another by-product of this war was the training and eventual dispersion of as many as 40,000 mujaheddin. During the war years, the lure of battle for a just cause, and the funds and tools to wage war attracted tens of thousands of fighters from across the whole of the Islamic world. They were trained by the US (by proxy at least) and bloodied in battle, and when it was over, they moved on.
There is little doubt that some of these very same US trained fighters are now involved in Iraq.
All of this as a result of a decision to stick it to the Russians. Our goal was not a terrorist supporting fundamentalist Islamic government in control of Afghanistan, our goal was not to train tens of thousands of mujaheddin, and then disperse them across the globe, our goal was not the elevation of Bin Laden and Al Qaeda to the point where the world knew who he was, but that was the end result.
That is why I have to ask, have we thought the wisdom of arming Sunni freedom fighters.
these groups have been provided, usually through Iraqi military units allied with the Americans, with arms, ammunition, cash, fuel and other supplies.
American officials who have engaged in what they call "outreach" to the Sunni groups say the groups are mostly ones with links to Al Qaeda but are disillusioned with Al Qaeda's extremist tactics, particularly suicide bombings that have killed thousands of Iraqi civilians. In exchange for American backing, these officials say, the Sunni groups have agreed to fight Al Qaeda and halt attacks on American units.
Commanders involved in these negotiations say that in some cases, Sunni groups have agreed to alert U.S. troops to the location of roadside bombs and other lethal booby traps.
This clearly show just how bad the current situation in Iraq is. We are arming the very people that we have spent the last 5 years trying to kill. In our effort to find a path to victory, we are now forced to making very dangerous alliances and aiding uncontrollable groups. The forces we are arming are not part of the government, not part of the Iraqi army, they are fighting the Iraqi government as it currently exist. These are the armies of the Sunni population who are already at war with the Shia population, who happen to control the government at this time.
critics of the strategy, including some U.S. officers, say it could amount to the Americans arming both sides in a future civil war.
This may work, desperate situations call for bold action, but I fear that the law of unintended consequences will lead us to look back on this decision, and wish we had not chosen this path.
Tuesday, June 19, 2007
Ravelel Shows Us How To Keep Those
Bank accounts and campaign coffers full, start trafficking in drugs.
He is innocent till proven guilty, but, a federal indictment is a very serious step.
South Carolina Treasurer Thomas Ravenel has been suspended from office, following his indictment by a federal grand jury for distribution of cocaine.
He is innocent till proven guilty, but, a federal indictment is a very serious step.
Sunday, June 17, 2007
Sen. Graham (R-SC)
gets a little attition from Firedoglake.
They make a very good point. For a man who is said to have no ambition for a higher office, he sure gets a lot of face time with the national media.
They make a very good point. For a man who is said to have no ambition for a higher office, he sure gets a lot of face time with the national media.
Wednesday, June 13, 2007
Badtux
makes a great point.
Paris Hilton is America. Where once America was steelworkers and freedom fighters, today America is... Paris. Vacant empty-headed useless people with no conception of "reality", who mostly spend their days selling things nobody needs to people who don't need them but hey, they're neat things, so buy, buy, buy!
Monday, June 11, 2007
Gallup Confirms, The Majority Of Republicans
Are idiots.
This is a great debate to follow, and regular visits to science blogs, like pharyngula, make it fun and easy to learn.
PS
The overwhelming stupidity of theist republicans also extends to US History
The majority of Republicans in the United States do not believe the theory of evolution is true and do not believe that humans evolved over millions of years from less advanced forms of life.
This is a great debate to follow, and regular visits to science blogs, like pharyngula, make it fun and easy to learn.
PS
The overwhelming stupidity of theist republicans also extends to US History
Monday, June 04, 2007
Jefferson (D-La) To Be Indicted
All I can say is what took so freakin long.
A Justice Department official familiar with the case said the indictment outlining the evidence against Jefferson is more than an inch thick and charges the congressman with crimes that could keep him in prison for up to 200 years. The official spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to discuss the case.
Sunday, June 03, 2007
Bush Administration Starts to Admit
They want us to stay in Iraq for ever.
This should be a surprise to no one.
In other news from Iraq, after the first 3 days of June, at least14 more US troops have been killed
For the first time, the Bush administration is beginning publicly to discuss basing American troops in Iraq for years, even decades to come
This should be a surprise to no one.
In other news from Iraq, after the first 3 days of June, at least14 more US troops have been killed
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)