Saturday, November 04, 2006

GOP "leadership"

House majority leader John Boehner:

"Rumsfeld is the best thing that's happened to the Pentagon in 25 years. There was no indication that he was kidding. I think he's done a marvelous job....let's not take the problems in Iraq, the tough fight that we're in there and blame it on anyone. We're in a tough fight. Al Qaeda is doing everything they can to disrupt our efforts in Iraq, to disrupt the new government, creating more violence than anyone can imagine and defeating al Qaeda there is important, because if we were to pull out before we win, we will embolden every terrorist in every corner of the world and then instead of fighting them in Iraq, we'll be fighting them on every street in America."

John, your coat's back from the cleaners:

And now for something completely different...

We need a little break from Deathmatch 2006:

‘You can’t get much more concealed than that’
Police arrest naked man after he allegedly said he had a tool in his rectum

EL CERRITO, Calif. - A man was arrested on suspicion of carrying a concealed weapon after police found him outdoors — naked — and he told them he had a tool in his rectum, authorities said.The man was lying on a tree stump, masturbating beside a nature path, near a Bay Area Rapid Transit station Thursday, police said.

John Sheehan, 33, of Pittsburg, was initially arrested on suspicion of indecent exposure. But when asked whether he was carrying anything police should know about, Sheehan mentioned the tool, said El Cerrito Detective Cpl. Don Horgan.

“You can’t get much more concealed than that,” Horgan said.

Officers drew their weapons and firefighters were called to the scene. Sheehan removed a 6-inch metal awl wrapped in black electrical tape without incident. Sheehan, who was paroled from state prison last week, was then booked into jail on suspicion of parole violations, indecent exposure and one felony count of possessing a concealed weapon.

“When you’re talking about an awl or an ice pick and you’re dealing with somebody who’s fresh out of prison, it’s a weapon. That’s a stabbing instrument,” Horgan said. It was not immediately clear what Sheehan was on parole for. A person answering the phone at the jail Friday night did not know whether Sheehan had a lawyer.

Why, it's a looking-glass book of course!

Alice: "Why, it's a looking-glass book of course! And if I hold it up to a glass, the words will all go the right way again!"

The International Herald Tribune: Iraqis Shiites see diminishing U.S. support for their postwar domination

BAGHDAD, Iraq: Iraq's ruling Shiites have voiced growing concern that the United States is subtly shifting support to Sunni Arabs, the bulwark of Saddam Hussein's dictatorship, in a bid to salvage 43-months of democracy building in Iraq and tamp down violence. The perceived re-energized bid to draw the Sunni insurgency into Iraq's political process marks, in the eyes of anxious Shiites, a worrisome and major alteration of American policy in a period that has seen growing strains in the U.S.-Iraqi relationship.

Shiites in Iraq were not alone in sensing the change. "There is much talk of such a shift, and it is in part driven by the (American) desire to contain Iran," said Vali Nasr, an expert on Shiites who lectures at the U.S. Naval Postgraduate School in Monterey, California.

OK, kids, ponder that one. We overthrew a stable, secular albeit brutal Sunni regime and handed at least nominal power over to the Shi'a majority. We've maintained 140,000 troops in this hellhole to suppress domestic Sunni resistance and support the Shi'a dominated government, and now we're "frustrated with the inability of Shiites to govern??" Gosh, who would have guessed?

When asked for a response, the president's senior policy advisor had the following comment:

Back to the future

MANAGUA, Nicaragua -- Daniel Ortega has retired his combat fatigues and talk of revolution. Instead of calls to arms, the balding comandante preaches love and reconciliation at campaign rallies set to the tune of "Give Peace a Chance."

Nearly two decades since his Sandinista government battled U.S.-financed contra rebels, Ortega is poised to win back the country's presidency Sunday by the narrowest of margins, a victory that would once again bring him to the front lines of Latin America's raging ideological battles over the U.S. vision for the hemisphere.

Ronald Reagan, who sacrificed the dignity of our country and the sanctity of our constitution (not to mention really fouling up the Iran-Iraq situation in the process) to remove Ortega from power once referred to Ortega's enemies, the drug-trafficking, gun-running, Somazo death-squadding contras as the "moral equivalent of our founding fathers."

The former president could not be reached for comment at his new permanent retreat:

How to Sabotage the "War of Turr (tm)"

Just when I think that the McLiar/Vader Junta has fully plumbed the depths of depraved, thoughtless stupidity, I read the NY Times and find that they've now expanded their efforts to include the creation of a fully sustainable sabotaging of their "War on Turr (tm)."

It seems that the Rethuglican-controlled congress teamed up with the Junta to publish on the INTERNET hundreds and hundreds of pages from Saddam Hussein's WMD program circa 1991. They did this in an effort to gain political advantage over the democrats for THIS election cycle. They figured that by publishing the reams of data, they'd expose just how dangerous Saddam was to the region and to the U.S.

Two problems: 1- they didn't bother to VET the information, as most of it was written in ARABIC, and a full translation would take too long - thus losing valuable democrat-bashing time. 2- They were right, as there WAS information in there which could be used to destabilize the region and threaten the U.S.... -- key steps to building a fission weapon (yep, a nu-clu-ler bomb).

Insert ghastly scenarios here....

We knew it was coming...

Baghdad under heavy security ahead of expected Saddam verdict

(Note: my pal Joshua Holland over at Alternet and Gadflyer has been all over this)

BAGHDAD (AP) — Iraqi authorities have ordered a 12-hour curfew in Baghdad and three surrounding provinces coinciding with Sunday's expected announcement of a verdict in the trial of former leader Saddam Hussein, Iraqi officials said Saturday. The curfew, to cover both vehicles and pedestrians, will run from 6:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Sunday, said a close aide to Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki and an Interior Ministry general. Both spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to release the information.

The curfew will cover Baghdad, Baghdad province, Salahuddin province which includes Saddam's hometown of Tikrit, and the neighboring provinces of Diyala and Anbar that are the hotbed of the Sunni insurgency battling U.S. troops and the Iraqi government. Baghdad was placed under a heavy security clampdown on Saturday, with additional road blocks, stepped up patrols and all leave canceled for Iraqi troops.

Fears of violence greeting the verdict underscore the trial's failure to bring reconciliation to a country that has fractured ever deeper along sectarian lines. Many of Saddam's fellow Sunni Arabs, along with some Shiites and Kurds, are predicting a firestorm if the ex-president is sentenced to death. On the other hand, most of the majority Shiites, who were persecuted under Saddam but now dominate the government, are likely to be enraged if he escapes the gallows.
Setting the tone, Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, a Shiite, said late last month that he expects "this criminal tyrant will be executed." That, he said, would help break the will of Saddam followers in the largely Sunni Arab-led insurgency.

First of all, I found this very interesting from Maliki--the verdict "would help break the will of Saddam followers in the largely Sunni Arab-led insurgency." It isn't centuries of hostility, hopelesness, a shattered infrastructure, no legitimate authority,or rule by militias--it is Saddam. You can hear W now, "hard work--making progress--evil tyrant." We know that George also lists "executions" as his hobby on his MySpace page (where he has 0 friends!)

But beyond that, it isn't a surprise. We knew dirty tricks were coming to distract ADD America away from this republic-threatening GOP debacle. On a broader scale, though, we hould have seen it coming. America has embraced authoritarianism, gulags, torture, aggressive militarism, the suppression of dissent and violently hostile jingoism.

Why not show trials?

Fundamentalist Family Values

I'm sure you're all familiar with the sordid Rev. Ted Haggard sex scandal. First of all, how stupid does he think we are? I don't care about any polygraph results, let's apply the "walks like a duck" test to the drug dealer/masseuse issue--when my neck tightens up, the ol' male prostitute is the first place I turn.

Beyond that, though, is this remarkable paradigm. He'll ADMIT to "Sure, I bought this"

which can cause this

but for the love of all that is holy I NEVER did this !

(And need I say, like Mark Foley, this has nothing to do with being gay. It is about miserable hypocritical miscreants.)

The best Countdown to ever play

Friday, November 03, 2006

From the Rothenberg Report

From the Rothenberg Report, widely watched by people inside the Beltway

The Senate:

"While Senate control is in doubt, with Democrats most likely to win from 5 to 7 seats, we do not think the two sides have an equal chance of winning a majority in the Senate. Instead, we believe that state and national dynamics favor Democrats netting six seats and winning control of the United States Senate."

The House:

"Going into the final days before the 2006 midterm elections, we believe the most likely outcome in the House of Representatives is a Democratic gain of 34 to 40 seats, with slightly larger gains not impossible. This would put Democrats at between 237 and 243 seats, if not a handful more, giving them a majority in the next House that is slightly larger than the one the Republicans currently hold. If these numbers are generally correct, we would expect a period of GOP finger-pointing and self-flagellation after the elections, followed by a considerable number of Republican House retirements over the next two years."

Today's Discussion Question

If you had to pick one, would you rather have control of the House or Senate?

Which one's going to get you?

I was watching Prof. John Mueller of Ohio State (oddly enough, for you sports fans, the holder of the Woody Hayes Chair of National Security Studies) on the Daily Show. He authored a great book, Overblown: How Politicians and the Terrorism Industry Inflate National Security Threats, and Why We Believe Them, pointing out how the "security industry"--airport x-ray machine makers, defense contractors, etc. are making huge profits off a relatively minor threat. He commented to Jon that Americans are about as likely to die by

than by

Looking for something to do before the election?

GOTV events from Democracy for America.

Move On

90 Hours until the polls open

Is it Tuesday yet? I'm going to go batty waiting for this election. I don't want to read any more about politics or campaigns at all - I mean, at some point (like, say, 2000), I knew I hated Drinky McCokefiend and his band of Constitution shredders, but it's gotten ridiculous. You can't turn around without meeting another Republican/neocon/Evangelical liar, hypocrite, thief, violent, ignorant, selfish bastard.

I could come up with a list of reasons why the Republicans are sucking the life out of the country and never mention Bush, Cheney, Rummy, Condi, all the good folks who brought us the war in Iraq - Wolfowitz, Bremer, etc., or anyone the country had heard of before, say, 2001.

Hastert - coverup
Foley - pervert
Reynolds - coverup
Gibbons - liar, creep
Haggard - liar, hypocrite
Boehner - coverup, liar
Pryce - "Iraq's not my responsibility."
Santorum - Dan Savage was dead on with this one
Burns - crook
Ney - crook
DeLay - crook
Abramoff - master crook
Harris - psycho
Pombo - crook
Doolittle - crook
Cunningham - crook
Shimkus - coverup
Roskam - coward
Sweeney - drunk, wife beater
Murphy - this is a new one today
Sherwood - adulterer, choked his mistress

And most of that's just off the top of my head. These people are sick, power-mad, and need to go far, far away.


Hoekstra - liar
Roberts - liar, power-hungry
Sensenbrenner - psycho

Feel free to add your own.

Today's word from Mr. Dictionary

OVERSIGHT (o·ver·sight) (noun)---Watchful care or management; supervision.

Iraq investigator's job eliminated
New law quietly ends special oversight of reconstruction work
By James Glanz

New York Times News Service

November 3, 2006

Investigations led by a Republican lawyer named Stuart Bowen Jr. in Iraq have sent American occupation officials to jail on bribery and conspiracy charges, exposed disastrously poor construction work by well-connected companies like Halliburton and Parsons, and discovered that the military did not properly track hundreds of thousands of weapons it shipped to Iraqi security forces.

And tucked away in a huge military authorization bill that President Bush signed two weeks ago is what some of Bowen's supporters believe is his reward for repeatedly embarrassing the administration: a pink slip, in the form of an obscure provision terminating the federal oversight agency that he heads, the Office of the Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction. The provision, inserted by the Republican side of the House Armed Services Committee over the objections of their Democratic counterparts during a closed-door conference on the bill, has generated surprise and some outrage among lawmakers who say they had no idea the line was in the final legislation.

Bowen's office, created in January 2004 to examine reconstruction money spent in Iraq, was always envisioned as a temporary organization, permitted to continue its work only as long as Congress saw fit. Some advocates for the office, in fact, have regarded its lack of a permanent bureaucracy as key to its aggressiveness and independence. By some interpretations, the office might have run through its list of projects around the time of the October 2007 deadline set by the new legislation anyway.

But as the implications of the provision in the new bill have become clear, opposition has been building on both sides of the political aisle. That bipartisan reaction may not be unexpected given Bowen's Republican credentials--he served under George W. Bush both in Texas and in the White House--and deep public skepticism on the Bush administration's conduct of the war.

Susan Collins (R-Maine), who followed the bill closely as chairwoman of the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Government Affairs, says she still does not know how the provision made its way into the conference report, which reconciles differences between House and Senate versions of a bill. Neither the House nor the Senate version contained such a termination clause before the conference, all involved agree. "It's truly a mystery to me," Collins said. "I looked at what I thought was the final version of the conference report, and that provision was not in at that time."


The Iron Countdown

Thursday, November 02, 2006


Our friend Jimbow left a comment down below about a wingnut who was inciting his fellow mouthbreathers to kill progressive talk show host Stephanie Miller. Pretty amazing stuff (link)

The Stepford Wife on Free Speech

"We must be mindful that people around the world are listening to these discussions [about Iraq]. Responsible candidates understand that the men and women of our military are risking their lives for us overseas, and that we must conduct the debate here at home in a way that does not jeopardize our troops in harm's way." (here)

So according to Mrs. Bush--criticize the president, kill a soldier.


From, about the last few days of the VA Senate race:

"Webb was scheduled to campaign Thursday at Virginia Union University with Sen. Barack Obama, of Illinois. He was then to be joined at an evening rally in Arlington by actor Michael J. Fox and retired Gen. Wesley Clark.

Allen was to campaign in Roanoke, then head to Richmond to talk to employees of Philip Morris USA."

So Webb is working with a military expert and trying to rally support from those who look forward to the potential of embryonic stem-cell research, and Allen is going after money from a company that has helped kill millions.

Hope and Strength vs. Death. You decide.

Get crackin' there, Mr. Maliki

Yahoo news headline:

Iraqi leader may reshuffle Cabinet

John, great to see you again....

Eric Alterman's column had this story:

Congressman's wife called police

Sweeney campaign says the document concerning a domestic incident is ``false and concocted''

By BRENDAN J. LYONS Senior writer

CLIFTON PARK (NY)-- The wife of U.S. Rep. John Sweeney called police last December to complain her husband was ``knocking her around'' during a late-night argument at the couple's home, according to a document obtained last week by the Times Union. The emergency call to a police dispatcher triggered a visit to the couple's residence by a state trooper from Clifton Park, who filed a domestic incident report after noting that the congressman had scratches on his face, the document states. No criminal charges were filed. Gaia M. Sweeney, 36, told a trooper that her husband had grabbed her by the neck and was pushing her around the house, according to the document.

Sweeney, Sweeney, where have I heard that name before? Then I remembered....



Patient: .........The American Population
Condition: .....American Attention Deficit Disorder
Prescription: Take one of pill below daily

until election day--FOCUS, PEOPLE, FOCUS!!! John Kerry is not an issue. The Saddam trial is not an issue. Nothing they throw at you is an issue. The issues are, and will remain 1) a pointless, never-ending war that is killing, maiming, destroying eqipment, making the world hate us and burning through $1 BILLION a week, 2) preserving what is left of the constitution and 3) GOP corruption, criminality, incompetence, etc. etc. etc.

/s/ Dr. Peter

[a Ritalin user, by the way, so I'm not pulling a Rush mocking the afflicted.]

Thanks, and a couple of suggestions

I would like to echo Doc's sentiments, thanks for visiting and reading our ramblings.

Here is something that is far from rambling, a great piece by one of the best, Patrick Cockburn, on why Iraq is America's greatest strategic blunder--EVER.

I would also encourage you to visit Families of the Fallen for Change.

This organization was founded by an Ohio father who lost a son to the madness and wants it to end. I heard him on the Bill Press radio show this morning, an impressive man.


Here at the Thinker, we just hit 15,000 "unique" visitors. I know many of them are me, but not all of them. Thanks to those who stop by and visit, comment, and hopefully enjoy some of what we write here. Any of you who stop by and want to say hi, or tell us why you visit or where you found us, we'd be glad to hear from you.

Once again, thanks for visiting, and we'll keep writing!

Get Your War On

An excellent webcomic, truly snarky and insightful. Here's an oldie but a goodie (thanks for the reminder, Bartcop).

One more quick point guard countdown hit..indulge me

Same position, different level...

Countdown is clutch from outside

Wednesday, November 01, 2006

Business as usual.....

The top three "news" stories on my MSN homepage:

WASHINGTON - The Justice Department isn't penalizing states that fail to upgrade voting systems by next week's elections, a requirement passed by Congress in 2002.

Wow, there's a stunner.

WASHINGTON - President Bush said Wednesday he wants Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and Vice President Dick Cheney to remain in his administration until the end of his presidency, extending a job guarantee to two of the most-criticized members of his team.

He's the decider...

and of course..

WASHINGTON - Thrust into the midst of the midterm election campaign, Sen. John Kerry apologized Wednesday to “any service member, family member or American who was offended” by remarks deemed by Republicans and Democrats alike to be insulting to U.S. forces in Iraq.

Nice work again, John. You were RIGHT yesterday and you cave and apologize because these freaks hide behind "the troops." You can't even screw up right. Go away. Now.

Person or party

In another forum I read, the group has been discussing whether you should vote for the "person" or the "party." My answer is below.

I can remember sitting in my introductory political science class in the fall of, ahem, 1975, with the professor explaining how party affiliations were less important here than in Great Britain, that we didn't have a structure comparable to the British system of the party forming the government, etc. Here we governed by consensus, politics were local, parties were not ideoplogical, etc. Today of course, that just no longer applies. Perhaps at the state and local level one would vote "person," (like here in Illinois where we effectively have one-party rule, the Corruptocrats) but at the national level, in today's politics, party control over Congress is key. SO here would be my ballot in the Illinois 10th if both of these candidates were running, instead of just the bottom one:

SATAN, Prince of Darkness (D)


A Tale of Two Jokes

"It was the best of times, it was the worst of times..."

White House insists Kerry apologize

You mean this White House?

It doesn't mean anything

But you've got to like those graphics off to the right. Them's some pretty potential election results.


Countdown takes a day at the links

The number of Masters titles this guy has won:

A Hall of Fame Countdown

Tuesday, October 31, 2006

Happy Halloween (thanks to Schmidlap)

What a difference 60 years can make...

Fatman and Little Boy, 1945

Fatman and Little Boy 2006

Too much time on our hands...

We are aproaching a little milestone here, just a few away from Post #1500.

Nice work, folks.

Thanks a bunch there John--now go away.

"You know, education -- if you make the most of it, you study hard and you do your homework and you make an effort to be smart, you can do well. If you don't, you get [us] stuck in Iraq." (Link)

Ah, for the want of an "us," John Kerry just gave the mouth-breathers and "liberals are troop haters" one great big present to unwrap. Now of course, any person with a brain knows what he meant, but that "with a brain" is a HUUUGE assumption.

I tend to agree with one unnamed "Democratic strategist" who said ""He has already cost us one election. The guy just needs to keep his mouth shut until after the election." I haven't gotten over my 2004 anger at him yet. Bye, John. Please.


Recently, we heard from Mr. Paul Burgess, a former White House staffer and a self-admitted hater. In the comments to that post, jimbow8 brings us this comment from Digby:

One thing to keep in mind about this: he's not getting his hate on about politicians. It's about his fellow citizens. They complain mightily about "Bush hatred," and there's been plenty of it. But there's a difference between hating the leader of a political party and hating your fellow Americans.

When I get up to Chicago, I am greeted by some wonderful billboards from a local conservative radio station (which also happens to carry the Illini). The slogan they've chosen to attract listeners is "Liberals Hate Us." As Digby pointed out, there are plenty who hate the President and others in his administration, and there are a number of popular media figures (the sort who would be on said radio station) who inspire a great many to a fearsome level of anger and hate. On the other hand, I don't think most liberals hate most conservatives. (Schmidlap, I'm not speaking for you.) We have the (amazing) ability to hate a policy without hating the person. To hate a president without hating a country. To understand that the world is complex, not black-and-white.

In his venom-filled screed, Mr. Burgess starts off by suggesting that there was some sort of resistance within the White House to attacking the President's opponents before 2005. I'm not going to dig up all the evidence to the contrary, but you know it's there. He then tells us that he is no longer "immunized". He can hate. Apparently, so can the President, since he's on a never-ending hate spree against his political opponents. Mr. Burgess attacks some people who've gotten notoriety, some of whom are considered whackos by most everybody, and brushes half of America with the same brush he uses to go after, say, Ward Churchill.

However, he saves his biggest spout of vitriol for those who opposed the war from the beginnning:

Most detestable are the lies these rogues craft to turn grief into votes by convincing the families of our war dead that their loved ones died in vain. First, knowing what every intelligence agency was sure it knew by early 2003, it would have been criminal negligence had the president not enforced the U.N.'s resolutions and led the coalition into Iraq. Firemen sometimes die in burning buildings looking for victims who are not there. Their deaths are not in vain, either.

Second, no soldier dies in vain who goes to war by virtue of the Constitution he swears to defend. This willingness is called "duty," and it is a price of admission into the highest calling of any free nation--the profession of arms. We have suffered more than 2,300 combat deaths in Iraq so far. Not one was in vain. Not one.

This is a delusional pack of lies. Every intelligence agency did not come to the same conclusions as our CIA, or Germany, Russia, France, etc., would have been in Iraq with us. We know that the data was weak at best, and that the Bush White House deliberately used data which wasn't corroborated to promote the invasion of Iraq, even after the CIA asked them to stop. There was also the subtle point that perhaps killing someone for a crime they have not yet committed violates a few precepts of basic reality, much less causality.

Our soldiers have not gone to war by virtue of the Constitution (BTW, what the hell does that mean?). We're in an undeclared war against people who were no threat to us, and our soldiers are dying in the middle of their civil war. We haven't accomplished a damn thing over there. That's dying in vain, Mr. Burgess. Their deaths have meaning, but not that we associate with the men and women who died on the beaches of Normandy or on the fields of France. Their deaths are a tragic reminder of an adminstration that wanted war at any expense and would brook no delay or opposition. Of too many politicians from both parties who were afraid to stand up and oppose this aggression. Of voters, who, when given a chance in 2004, failed to act. That, Mr. Burgess, is something I hate, and my hate grows with every soldier's death. I don't hate you - you're not important enough.

What are you doing on Election Day?

I've got some pretty optimistic predictions up below, but then again, I've always been somewhat of a reckless optimist. What we need to make them come true is for Democratic and Independent voters to show up next Tuesday and then to make sure their votes count. So, all you out there in thinker-land, any plans to help on Tuesday?

Updated Predictions

On October 20, I posted some predictions for the upcoming election. Nothing dramatic has changed since then, but there has been some movement.

In the Senate, there are 9 seats in play:

New Jersey (D incumbent)
Minnesota (R)
Rhode Island (R)
Montana (R)
Ohio (R)
Tennessee (R)
Missouri (R)
Pennsylvania (R)
Virginia (R)

I'm now predicting that the Democrats will pick up PA, MN, MT, OH, RI, and VA. George Allen has shot himself in the foot one too many times, and there are enough pissed off Democrats in northern VA who will overcome the racist hicks in the south. They'll hold on to NJ. They'll lose CT after Lieberman wins on the backs of GOP votes and switches parties. That gives them 50 seats (which is really a GOP victory, since Uncle Dick will come by to shoot everyone in the face break ties. TN and MO are still possible pickups, but I just don't see the south giving up their hate. Even if they do make the smarter decision, someone like Ford is as conservative as a Democrat will get, and keeping him in the fold will be tough.

I'm still seeing a tidal wave in the House. Too many House members are doing stupid things (there's new stories every day - check out TPM Muckraker for details). The Dems need 15 seats to get a 1 seat majority. As much as Karl Rove is confident about "the" math, the only polls that support his optimism are internal GOP polls, which I trust about as much as internal Dem polls. 30-40 seats.

Katie, we're going to miss you

Enjoy it while it lasts, we have only a little while left to enjoy bat-crazy Katherine Harris, endorsed by 0 out of 22 daily Florida papers! Check this one:

More on war, winning, and losing--and screw you!

Note the ol' universal symbol above. I post that not because I am a pacifist opposed to war. I use it as a reminder that WE ARE NOT AT WAR. We have a botched occupation (and venal, lethal stupidity that is killing innocents daily) on one hand and a law enforcement issue on the other, hardly "wars."

With that in mind, I give you the words of our Fearless Leader:
"However they put it, the Democrat approach in Iraq comes down to this: The terrorists win and America loses."
Buh bye, thanks for playing.

Guess the quote...

You and I are told increasingly that we have to choose between a left or right, but I would like to suggest that there is no such thing as a left or right. There is only an up or down--up to a man's age-old dream, the ultimate in individual freedom consistent with law and order--or down to the ant heap totalitarianism, and regardless of their sincerity, their humanitarian motives, those who would trade our freedom for security have embarked on this downward course.

Two more to the slaughter

Happy Halloween, Mr. President.

Making sure Countdown pulls it out in the Fourth Quarter

Monday, October 30, 2006

Coincidence, I'm sure

I didn't get the names, but the weekend Today show had two political pundits on. The one from the right was freshly picked from the GOP Blonde Pundit Orchard, while the Democratic strategist was, shall we say politely, neither a petite nor a handsome woman. The message, absolutely coincidental I'm sure, was--"Look! Vote Republican and be young and pretty!"

Go! Fight! Win..?

Over the weekend, the re-animated corpse of Elizabeth Dole surfaced (Alex, may I have `bad plastic surgery' for $1000?) She reminded us how the GOP is committed to "winning" in Iraq while we want to "lose." I was screaming at the (as she said) tee-vee for the talking head to ask her what "winning" meant, but no such luck.

We have often ruminated on this notion of "victory." The "victory" options:

1) The Project for the New American Century wet dream, a U.S. and Israel-friendly stooge government. Not a chance. Don't even bothering wondering if the horse left the barn, that barn never existed.

2) A secular parliamentary government with all factions willingly and peacefully participating. No. The parliamentary structure is an illegitimate joke and the Sunnis will NEVER participate.

3) An authoritarian yet stable Shia regime. Note how George seemed to move those old goalposts, suggesting that you could fill in the blank with "stability" rather than "democracy." So George would have won a "victory" by establishing a strong-armed Shia regime allied with Iran. "George Bush" must be the English rendering of "Pyrrhus."

Those charming White House speechwriters

This one is almost unbelievable.

From Paul Burgess, director of foreign-policy speechwriting at the White House from October 2003 to July 2005:

Friends, neighbors, and countrymen of the Left: I hate your lying guts

WHEN I WAS speechwriting at the White House, one rule was enforced without exception. The president would not be given drafts that lowered him or The Office by responding to the articulations of hatred that drove so many of his critics.

This rule was especially relevant to remarks that concerned the central topic of our times, Iraq.

Having left the White House more than a year ago, I conclude that the immunizing effect of that rule must have expired, because I now find that I am infected with a hatred for the very quarter that inspired the rule--the deranged, lying left.

I never used to feel hatred for people such as Cindy Sheehan, Harry Belafonte, Danny Glover, or other pop-culture notables who, for example, sing the praises of Central American dictators while calling President Bush the greatest terrorist on earth. I do now.

And though these figures might be dismissed as inconsequential, their views seem mild compared with those of some of our university professors charged with the "higher" education of our youth.

Thus have I come to hate Ward Churchill, the University of Colorado professor who called the Sept. 11 victims of the World Trade Center "little Eichmanns"; Nicholas De Genova, the Columbia professor who loudly wished "a million Mogadishus" on American troops in Iraq; and Kevin Barrett, the University of Wisconsin professor who teaches his students that President Bush was the actual mastermind behind the Sept. 11 attacks.

I used to laugh these people off. Now I detest them as among the most loathsome people America has ever vomited up.

I have also grown to hate certain people of genuine accomplishment like Ted Turner, who, by his own contention, cannot make up his mind which side of the terror war he is on; I hate the executives at CNN, Turner's intellectual progeny, who recently carried water for our enemies by broadcasting their propaganda film portraying their attempts to kill American soldiers in Iraq.

I now hate Howard Dean, the elected leader of the Democrats, who, by repeatedly stating his conviction that we won't win in Iraq, bets his party's future on our nation's defeat.

I hate the Democrats who, in support of this strategy, spout lie after lie: that the president knew in advance there were no WMD in Iraq; that he lied to Congress to gain its support for military action; that he pushed for the democratization of Iraq only after the failure to find WMD; that he was a unilateralist and that the coalition was a fraud; that he shunned diplomacy in favor of war. These lies, contradicted by reports, commissions, speeches, and public records, are too preposterous to mock, but too pervasive to rebut, especially when ignored by abetting media.

Most detestable are the lies these rogues craft to turn grief into votes by convincing the families of our war dead that their loved ones died in vain. First, knowing what every intelligence agency was sure it knew by early 2003, it would have been criminal negligence had the president not enforced the U.N.'s resolutions and led the coalition into Iraq. Firemen sometimes die in burning buildings looking for victims who are not there. Their deaths are not in vain, either.

Second, no soldier dies in vain who goes to war by virtue of the Constitution he swears to defend. This willingness is called "duty," and it is a price of admission into the highest calling of any free nation--the profession of arms. We have suffered more than 2,300 combat deaths in Iraq so far. Not one was in vain. Not one.

These are the people I now hate--these people who seek to control our national security. The best of them are misinformed. The rest of them are liars.

So I intend to vote on Nov. 7. If I have to, I'll crawl over broken glass to do it. And this year I'm voting a straight Republican ticket right down to dog catcher, because I've had it. I'm fed up with the deranged, lying left. They've infected me. I'm now a hater, too.

100 101 103

The Republican Party does not want you to think about this next Tuesday, but here at the Thinker, we believe in full disclosure. One hundred and three Americans have died in Iraq this month (with one day to go).

Support the troops. Bring them home.