Gleaning Facebook: Lies

---------

From Chris Ozment's Facebook:

Today, or maybe tomorrow, Michael Cohen will testify behind closed doors before congress. Within minutes following adjournment, specifics of what he disclosed will be leaked to the media. It will be sensational, and the various media outlets will go crazy.

At some point afterwards, #45 and the various disciples who still follow him (Hannity, Alex Jones, Toby, etc) will call Cohen a liar, rat, sleezeball. unethical, poor dresser (plaid suits), a looser, a person with no morals, greasy, ugly, fat, slimy, etc. Memes will be made, and "news" stories from nut job websites will be shared. It will not be difficult to portray Cohen (accurately) as reprehensible. This will be a rare situation where much of what is stated will have a high degree of truth.

When those various derogatory statements are being made about Cohen, it's hugely important to keep in mind that this was THE guy that Trump choose to be his personal attorney for 12+ years. Trump also felt that he was the best person at the time to make a VP for the Trump Organization, too.

The negative characteristics of Cohen that will be attacked this week by the ALT RIGHT (Hannity, etc) were an actual asset to Cohen during the time that he was seeking employment and later working for Trump.

He is not being attacked because of what he is now and historically has been (i.e. a sleazy rat). He is being attacked because he is telling a version of what is quite possibly to a certain extent more or less the truth. Probably more than less.

Trump didn't hire Cohen way back in 2006 and keep him close for 12+ years because he wanted or needed a stand up honest lawyer. (Yes, there is such a thing as that). He needed an unethical sleazeball.

Which Presidents Increased our National Debt?

The National Debt
by Percentage of Decrease or Increase

Here's an interesting table taken from Wikipedia. It uses CBO figures. The pink cells are Republican presidential terms. You will see that ALL percentage increases in the national debt came in Republican administrations.

I am no economist. Far from it. But I cannot help but believe that there is significance to the fact that the combined increase in the national debt compared to the gross national product of last five Republican administrations has been more than 60% compared to a decrease under the last five Democratic administrations of a combined total of 30%

Like President Roosevelt in the 1940s, President Obama is having to again increase the debt to get us out of a mess. But for Republicans to holler about it would be humorous if it weren't such a serious topic.

Trickle-down does not work.

Reagan tried it and doubled the debt.

Bush Jr tried it and nearly destroyed our economy.

Now we have the Republican leaders declaring they will fight to lower the national debt WHILE cutting more taxes, raising defense spending, rescinding the debt-reducing health care reforms, etc., etc., etc.

Didn't work for Reagan 1, Reagan 2, Bush 1, Bush 2 or Bush 3. Won't work now.

Reagan and Bush I administrations raised the debt from 33% of GDP to 66% of GDP. Bush Jr took the debt from 56% of GDP to 83% of GDP.

Democrats? Every Democratic administration since 1945 has reduced the percentage of debt compared to gross domestic product (GDP). When Bill Clinton took office the debt was 66% of GDP. When he left office the debt had been trimmed to 56% of GDP.

Economically, Republican administrations have been great for rich folks and the current GOP leaders are standing tall - stout hearts - to protect the interests of those mistreated folks who "earn" a quarter of a million a year or more.

The Case for the President

The link above (click on the picture) is to a pretty good rundown of the accomplishments of the last two years. They are impressive. Our President inherited a terrible situation on January 20, 2009. The economy was hemorrhaging jobs. According to almost every economist there was real danger of us slipping into depression. At the time virtually everyone admitted that it would be a long slog out of the recession. Well, it has been. But things turned in the right direction almost immediately under the pragmatic, calm, open-minded leadership of our President. We still have a terrible jobless rate, but we have gone from losing hundreds of thousands of jobs to gaining thousands of jobs each month. That's not enough, and would be better without the stonewalling of the GOP, but it is a huge improvement.

Yes we have terrible deficits. We have them because of the excesses of many, but a big part is the mess created by folks who want to conduct two wars and cut taxes at the same time. Letting the ridiculous tax breaks for the wealthy expire as originally planned will help the situation. The wealthy paid much higher taxes than they do now during the boom years of the fifties! (& even the roaring nineties under Clinton.)

Now is the time for level-headed folk to come forward and head off the silliness of the Sharron Angles, Christine O'Donnells, and Rand Pauls, (and Nathan Deals, and Barry Loudermilks here in Georgia) who want to blame this ongoing crisis on the very folks who are digging us, slowly but surely, out of it. The Teabaggers like Angle, et al, would remove any safety nets left for common folk, like Social Security and minimum wage.

Vote for reason. Vote for reality. Vote for hope. Vote Democratic!

Congressman Phil Gingrey

It is very disappointing that our Congressman, Phil Gingrey of Cobb County, has taken such a narrowly partisan approach to the current health care reform effort.

Yesterday I received a campaign -style “robocall” from the Congressman asking me to stay on the line to participate in a “live town hall” discussion of health care issues. “OK!” I thought, I’ll listen, maybe he is serious about hearing from the people". I put the phone on speaker and my wife and I listened, waiting our turn to speak or participate in the feedback promised. I listened as a couple of poorly informed local folk ranted about “government takeover” and such eliciting pompous agreement by our Congressman. Rep. Gingrey then interrupted the “town hall” to offer an opportunity for his constituents to let him know where they stand on the issue!

“Great!” I may be outvoted, I thought, but at least I can let the Congressman know that some Northwest Georgians want reform.

No. Instead the Congressman, again in a tone that can only be described as condescending, offered his constituents four choices: “What concerns you MOST about this legislation?” The first three “concerns” were blatant push-polling questions that could have been written by Rush Limbaugh or Glenn Beck. And the fourth choice? “All of the above”. To paraphrase: “Are you most concerned about this bill because of this scary issue (press one), that terrible expense (press two), or the other disastrous possible outcome (press three), or all three abominable things this awful measure would force on our nation? (press four)”

Classic propaganda.

One must grant him the assumption of reasonable intelligence. He managed to obtain a medical degree from the Medical College of Georgia. He knew exactly what he was doing last night.

There was no opportunity to express approval of the reform. If you disagree with Congressman Gingrey he has no interest in hearing from you.

To treat the voters in this way has become standard operating procedure during campaigns. I have received push-poll calls from politicians from State Representative candidates to Presidential candidates during election campaigns. That is insulting to voters. It shows an incredible disrespect of democracy. For a Congressman to do this under the guise of a “town hall” -- that great tradition of American political life where, supposedly, all viewpoints can be aired -- takes crass partisanship to another level. I do not know to what extent my taxes helped pay for this travesty.

Shame on you, Congressman Gingrey.

The Real Tea Party

The Fox News viewers around the country are all het up to tea-bag our waterways in protest of the fact that their taxes just went down! Well, I doubt you'll find many rich folks besides Sean Hannity tea-bagging today. He and his ilk are the guys who are not getting tax breaks under the Obama administration.

My friend Mike Bock has posted a good article from Vic Harris contrasting these modern "tea baggers" with the Boston tea partiers:

The modern day “Tea-baggers” are not protesting their lack of representation. They are protesting taxes in general. Tax protest is always “red-meat” for conservatives, but, the fact is, President Obama and the Democrats have just passed the largest middle-class tax-cut in history. Let me write that again: the largest middle-class tax-cut in history. Most Tea-Baggers, I imagine, have incomes of less than $250,000 a year, so most Tea-baggers, therefore, are protesting high taxes even though President Obama and the Democrats just cut their taxes. For the rich conservatives who will watch the protests at home on the “Fair and Balanced” Fox “News,” a network that has been shamelessly promoting the events, their taxes will go up in 2010, but will still be 10 percentage points lower than they were under their Patron Saint Ronald Reagan.

Read more here.

Palling Around with Palin

Whatever honor John McCain showed in the Hanoi Hilton evidently got used up there. His campaign announced over the weekend that they plan to "turn the page" on the campaign by running attacks against Barack Obama for his acquaintances. (See our previous post) Never mind Sarah's "keep up the good work!" to Alaskan separatists. Never mind McCain's visits to the Bahamas as the guest of Charles Keating. Never mind McCain's praise of Gordon Liddy. For that matter never mind Phil Gramm.

McCain, understandibly wants to "turn the page" on the economic implosion. Especially since his misdeeds with Keating in the eighties led to problems very similar to those we confront now.

Here's McCain's vicious running mate probably winking as she heaves the slime. (Click the pic.)

Barack Obama's campaign has stayed almost exclusively positive, only attacking on matters of voting record or in response to McCain's mud-slinging. McCain's campaign is now 100% slime. Here comes another desperation Hail Mary pass from erratic John McCain. This one looks very wobbly and weak to me and just might get picked off. It looks like McCain has set the precedent that allows his opponents to bring up his part in the Keating Five affair, a scandal that actually took place while McCain was senator, with McCain's direct involvement, for which he was reprimanded by the Senate, and that relates very directly to the current economic scandal.

And the market just dipped below 10,000.

John McCain's Gimmick of the Day

Plummeting in the polls, John McCain is desperately trying to find a way to avoid his own history. After a career of fighting economic regulation, he embraces regulation. Days after declaring the "fundamentals" of the economy fine and dandy he admits thing aren't quite so peachy. After declaring Barack Obama unprepared for the Presidency, he names the least prepared VP candidate anyone remembers. With the economic emergency reminding folks of his self-described lack of knowledge in economic matters, he decides that the candidates should suspend the campaign so he can rush to the nearest phone booth, don the appropriate tights, then fly off to Washington to to save the world.

It is indeed the Zig Zag Express.

McCain would "suspend" the (official) campaign. Is there a candidate who would benefit from the NRA's (and other "third party") lying ads running without competition for a few days?

He would postpone the first debate. Is there a candidate who prefers the "foreign policy" debate not be overshadowed by an economic emergency?

He might be perceived as actually doing something about an economic issue. Is there a candidate who is currently perceived as having little interest, ability, or experience in economic affairs?

He would postpne the first VP debate. Is there a candidate with no national debate experience who might need a little more practice time?

If there is anyone in the nation who believes that John McCain's motives are as he claims, I have some oceanfront property in Arizona I'd like to sell you.

What a transparent, ridiculous gimmick.

Credit Card Patriots

Part of the reason I have been furious with the Republicans for the last eight years is that they have wanted to put the financial burden of the War in Iraq on our children while decreasing taxes on the wealthy folks. It has been the history of our country that when our sons have been at war, we the people, in a great outpouring of patriotism, have sacrificed, saved, conducted scrap metal drives, put up with rationing, and paid more taxes. George Bush and John McCain have wanted to conduct a Credit Card war. Just put it on the tab. They have tried to hide the sacrifice of our sons and daughters -- even discouraging pictures of their flag-draped coffins -- and postpone the financial burden. It is obscene that the tax bite on the rich has been reduced while our soldiers die and we pay billions and billions for a mistaken war.

And when Joe Biden suggests that those who have been most blessed by our free enterprise system would be showing patriotism to help pay the costs of protecting our country, the McCain camp ridicules the idea.

It is my opinion that, until the war in Iraq ends, all Americans should pay additional taxes. That ain't gonna happen. 95% of Americans will see NO increase in taxes at all under an Obama administration. Only those who make $250,000 or more annually would see their taxes raised in an Obama administration. And those folks would still be paying smaller tax rates than they did during the boom years of the Clinton administration.

Look at this chart again.


The McCain-Bush plan of encouraging the rich to get richer in wartime means that deficits explode. Trickle-down does not work. Sensible, Democratic, moderate, regulated, free enterprise does.

The moderate, Democratic, progressive tax system -- that has been the norm in America since my birth in 1947 -- has never hampered my wonderful blessings. I live comfortably. My children have had a good education. Between the four of us we have a nice house and FOUR vehicles. Our mail is delivered to our door. Police officers patrol our street (and even the levee on bike). I worship in freedom every Sunday. I speak my mind. I enjoy an outdoors that includes cleaner air and water because of tax funded environmental programs. One of my favorite memories is a national month-long tour Sheila and I made on the partially tax-funded Amtrak system. I listen to Garrison Kiellor, non-partisan news, beautiful music, and fascinating, thought-provoking journalism on public radio. I drink safe water from a spigot in my kitchen. I drive on an outstanding highway system (though the last eight years have seen the infrastructure age.) I have hiked in national forests that the Republicans tried to sell off in the 1980s.

I pay more taxes than average. I ought to.

I do not resent the taxes I pay every April 15.

The Credit Card Patriots are just as happy to spend, but they don't want to pay.

Some Great Graphs

I was looking for a graphic on Google images. I didn't find the one I was looking for but I did run across these. I suspect they are accurate, but cannot verify them. Click on an image or link to see the original website and check them out for yourselves.

Want economic growth? Vote Democratic.

Here's an interesting graph from The Liscio Report I stumbled upon. If this graph is accurate, it looks like, at least in terms of GDP, the country has done better under Democratic presidents. Not only do the rich grow richer and the poor grow poorer under Republicans, but we also produce less under the Republicans overall.





Oh what Big Spending Democrats we are!!
As is plain from the chart below, the Republicans are the real big spenders.



Drill, Drill, Drill?




Earmarks? So what!!
I share the enthusiasm to end ridiculous earmarks like the Bridge to Nowhere that McCain's VP pick tried so hard to build. But come on Mr. McCain, if you want to cut the federal budget, you gotta come up with more than that.

John McCain's Poor Choices

First there was the VP.

• One perfunctory meeting with McCain before the Offer.
• Less than two years as Governor of a state significantly smaller than Gwinnett County GA.
• Mayor of a town significantly smaller than Cedartown GA and only slightly larger than Summerville GA. But government leaders in Cedartown and Summerville may have greater duties than the Wasilla AK mayor had. According to a report by the Washington Post:

The universe of the mayor of Wasilla is sharply circumscribed even by the standards of small towns...

The loud aerial wolf-shooter has been a boon to McCain's campaign by revving up the crazies on the right. They love the fact that she would prefer to outlaw abortion even in the case of rape or incest. They are not bothered by the fact that Palin, though a very nice-looking woman, has been a figurative pig at the earmark trough: hiring a lobbyist to bring home the Federal bacon, pressing for the Bridge to Nowhere (until it was killed by others), fundraising for the King of Earmarks (Sen. Stevens).

Here is what Frank Rich thinks of the Republican ticket:

With all due deference to lipstick, let’s advance the story. A week ago the question was: Is Sarah Palin qualified to be a heartbeat away from the presidency? The question today: What kind of president would Sarah Palin be?
It’s an urgent matter, because if we’ve learned anything from the G.O.P. convention and its aftermath, it’s that the 2008 edition of John McCain is too weak to serve as America’s chief executive.

I was distressed by the body language I witnessed in her Gibson interview. She had obviously been given talking points for every posible question. She delivered them. But the eyes and body language gave away her discomfort. This Washington Post editorial has it about right:

Ms. Palin's interview with Mr. Gibson was not disqualifying, but it was also far from comforting... Asked about the prospect of an Israeli attack on Iranian nuclear facilities, Ms. Palin said three times that the United States should not "second-guess" Israeli decisions on self-defense. But of course the United States should, and does, engage in that sort of second-guessing, from the location of settlements to sales of military equipment. If Israel wanted to attack Iran, would a President Palin permit Israeli forces to fly through U.S.-controlled airspace?

Even on the domestic issues about which she could have been expected to have more familiarity, Ms. Palin's responses were disappointingly shallow. Defending her state's -- and her own -- record on earmarks, Ms. Palin suggested that the problem was not shoveling money toward pet projects but the failure to make this shoveling transparent -- seemingly not recognizing that this is far different from the more fundamental complaint of her running mate, John McCain. The "Bridge to Nowhere," after all, was no secret...

Her efforts to explain some previous statements were lacking in candor..... How does Ms. Palin reconcile her understanding of abortion as a "personal issue" with her view that the choice should be taken away from the pregnant woman?

I believe the appointment of someone so clearly unprepared to be President and someone who continues (as late as yesterday) to blatantly lie in her speeches about the Bridge to Nowhere, was a serious mistake by McCain. It was not Presidential. It reinforces his lifelong reputation for impulsivity -- in the Senate, in his extra-marital affairs, in his career as a Navy pilot, and as an irresponsible cadet (fourth from the bottom in GPA) at the Naval Academy. It also reinforces his record as a tool of the lobbyists. From his part in the "Keating Five" scandal to the lobbyists running his campaign this year (including a paid lobbyist for the nation of Georgia), he has shown his true colors. He is no reformer. He gave it a bit of a try in 2000. Now he is just another Bush-Rove disciple.


Now the lying ads.

McCain is avoiding the issues like the plague. His issues are Bush's. McCain knows he loses on the issues. Instead he is running a virtully uninterrupted negative campaign of faux outrage and outright lies. The "sex-ed" ad is one of the sleaziest, most dastardly ads in the history of dirty TV ads.

A pox upon John McCain and all who follow his low-down dirty, special interest-funded, lobbyist-run, swiftboating, Bush-Rove ways.

Later note: Hold on to you seats folks! Even Karl Rove -- Karl Rove!!! -- admits that McCain's campaign ads are dishonest!!!

McCain has gone in some of his ads similarly gone one step too far in sort of attributing to Obama things that are, you know…beyond, beyond, beyond the, the 100% truth test.

-Karl Rove

To paint the McCain campaign as "change" is to put lipstick on a pig.

It is time for real change. Click the link for specifics.
Real change. Click the link for more good reasons.
Real change. Click the link for excellent arguments for change from someone who KNOWS.
Real change. Click the link to understand change from the viewpoint of a real feminist.

McCain's political team was smart to announce their pick the morning after Obama's wonderful speech. But the RNC bounce is flattening out. The lies are starting to backfire on the Bush-McCain team. It's a very close race right now. We can win back our wonderful nation.

Let's get to work.

Lipstick and Other Bush-McCain Smears

To see a brief but brilliant reprise of the Republican National Convention click the pic above.

The true use of lipstick? Click the pic.

She may not know the Bush Doctrine, but she has certainly given us the Palin Doctrine.

Tiny?

The shameful dishonesty of the John McCain campaign is breathtaking. You've seen the ad. McCain declares his approval of the message. Then an ominous voice talks of the "dangerously" unprepared candidate who considers Iran a "tiny" nation!!

Here is the clip of Barack Obama talking about "tiny" Iran.

For heaven sakes, John, "compared to the Soviet Union" most countries are "tiny". To pick out that one word and take it so wildly out of context speaks of desperation on your part.

Shame on you, John McCain.

What silliness.

Enriching Liberty

Almost a year ago Senator Joseph Biden wrote a very brief article for the Atlantic that I had not seen till this morning. Anyone who has visited The Limb knows that his words are in perfect harmony with mine. My greatest disappointment in the Bush/McCain Republicans has been their readiness to do for the Islamic extremists what the bad guys could not do for themselves. Reading this little piece reassured me that Barack Obama has made an excellent decision in tapping Biden as his prospective Vice President.

We don’t have to diminish the American idea in order to save it. Indeed, the only way to prevail in the struggle between freedom and fundamentalism is to enrich that idea in the face of threats.

--

Like the choice of Gore in 1992, Biden's VP choice does not add specific electoral vote possibilities, but does give a prospective new President better foreign policy credentials and a congressional tie that will help him accomplish his legislative goals.

The Republican response has been typical Rovian childishness: playing gotcha with Obama's word slip -- immediately corrected -- in introducing his running mate. Then, of course, all the standard ads noting the words of Biden and Clinton during the primaries. There is no traction in any of those arguments. The fact is Barack Obama made a very mature, even "Presidential", choice in the most important decision he has made as a candidate. Virtually everyone agrees that Joseph Biden is ready to be President if, God forbid, he has to fulfill the ultimate Vice Presidential duty. Obama and Biden will make a great team. No one who has watched Obama can believe there is any question about who will be the President if the team is elected. Good job, Barack!

A Civil & Reasonable Debate

It is such a shame that some are not satisfied to discuss the very real differences in the two major candidates for President. We already see in this young general election race the beginnings of the old Atwater-Rove politics of stirring up hatred and fear of the opponent.

As reasonable people know and as each has verified about the other, John McCain and Barack Obama love their country, want the best for it, and are articulate and reasonable advocates for their points of view.

Some differences are obvious to me and reasonably debatable. McCain at 72 has a longer resume. Obama has a keener intellect and a more visionary leadership style. McCain favors the war that he once predicted would be "easy". Obama opposed it from the beginning and predicted the difficult time we have had. McCain supporters can point to his opposition to the incompetent procecution of the war under Bush, Cheney, and Rumsfeld. They can also reasonably claim a somewhat improved position of our troops since Rumsfeld was sacked and the "surge" was instituted. Obama opposed the "surge" and favors a careful redeployment of American forces out of Iraq. Both have opposed the use of torture, though I believe Barack Obama has been more consistent and definite on that issue. McCain now opposes all abortions, Obama supports a woman's right to choose an abortion if she and her doctors deem it necessary. McCain, by and large, supports the economic policies of the current administration, though he has shown some independence from those policies in the past. Obama believes, as I do that it is unethical to saddle our children with the expenses of a war while we cut taxes on the present generation.

We could go on. I strongly support the positions of Obama, but recognise that honorable people can support McCain, as do several in my family.

Like Abraham Lincoln (two years as a Congressman) and Jimmy Carter (four years as a governor), not to mention Dwight Eisenhower, Zachary Taylor, and others who had no electoral experience, if Obama is elected he will have a thinner elected office resume than average. Some will consider that an important negative. Fine. Argue that.

Some will find his position on abortion a deal-breaker. Fine. Argue that.

Some will find his progressive economic policies anathema. Fine. Argue that.

And I will argue my side. But let's keep it civil.

To those who are so blinded by their own fear, and by distrust of the utility of basic American freedoms, that they cannot tell the difference in disagreement and disloyalty: your views are not credible to me nor worthy, in my opinion, of consideration. John McCain and Barack Obama have each been endorsed by well-known military and governmental leaders, by heroes of our country, by former Presidents, by Democrats and Republicans, by foreign policy leaders respected on both sides of the aisle, etc., etc., etc. If you choose to accuse McCain or Obama of treason, racism, or terrorism, don't try to sell your wares here. I will have no truck with you.

A Man of Character

Many Republicans are still livid in 2008 because President Bill Clinton misbehaved sexually while he was President. They even "despise" his wife -- I suppose for reconciling with him. These folks who could never vote for such a "sleazeball" are now proclaiming their never-dying love for a "man of character" named John McCain.

Well, fact is, the "sleazeball" managed to repair the damage he did to his family enough to save his marriage. The "man of character" ran around on his disabled wife, surprised with divorce papers this woman who had waited at home loyally during his years of captivity, and married his multi-millionaire, young trophy mistress a month after dumping wife number one.

Later he bragged about his "courage" in leaving a failing marriage.

"Today, in our excessively psychoanalyzed society, sharing one's secret fears with others takes courage. So does escaping a failing marriage."
Source: John McCain and Marshall Salter, Why Courage Matters: The Way to a Braver Life, page 14.

Such character! Of course he voted to impeach Bill Clinton for lying about his sexual misbehavior.

I actually don't believe McCain's loathesome personal behavior disqualifies him for President - his policies do that. But it is just fun to remind my Republican friends of their words about Clinton when they beatifically promote their "man of character" for President.

The London Daily Mail has the story of McCain's personal character here.

Thanks to SW at Oh!Pinion for pointing the way to this article.

"You have to decide..."

Several times since the Republican misadventure in Iraq turned sour, I have been told by a few defenders of the decision to invade that "even Bill Clinton believed Saddam had WMD". These folks seem to think that means he also supported the invasion.

I have known that was not true. I am glad, now, to be able to give chapter and verse. A transcript of President Clinton's remarks of March 14, 2003 -- less than a week before the invasion -- has been posted at the Hillary Clinton website. Here are some excerpts:

"... you have to decide if it matters whether we bend over backwards to try to disarm him in a way that strengthens rather than divides the world community. If you don’t think it matters, then you’re with a lot of the people in the current administration...

[Saddam]'s finally destroying his missiles, so let’s give him a certain date in which, in this time, he has to destroy the missiles, reconcile the discrepancies in what we believe is the truth on chemical weapons, reconcile the discrepancies on biological weapons, reconcile the issue of the Drones, and offer up 150 scientists who can travel outside of Iraq with their families for interviews. ... I’m for regime change too, but there’s more than one way to do it. We don’t invade everybody whose regime we want to change..."

I, like President Clinton, believed President Bush was acting foolishly in the months leading up to March of 2003. I was quite vociferous about that, despite the ridicule of a whole gaggle of my Republican friends. I saw an administration hyping the case for preemptive war. They may have believed some of what they said about WMD, but they blatently hyped it. They knew Saddam was not an immediate threat to the US and they knew Saddam was unconnected to the terrorist attacks of 2001 (and never SAID he was, as they are quick to point out) but blatently lied about the first and actively promoted the second impression, and those misconceptions became majority assumptions in the US. The Machiavellian neo-cons viewed war as an exercise of the unique power of the world's only remaining superpower. It was an opportunity, the neo-cons seemed to think, that the US should not pass up. From slimy politics, to slippery slope, to free fall.

What a different and better world this would be today if the election of 2000 had not been compromised.

What a difference it will make for our country if in 2008 we can elect a statesman (or woman) to repair the tragic mistakes of the Republicans. I will be thrilled to support Edwards, Biden, Clinton, Obama, or Dodd.

Assurances

Well, once again the presidency - even when the current one is the lamest of ducks - has demostrated its inherant power in our system. At least with a Democratic majority, tiny though it is, the rubber stamp responses are delayed slightly.

Perhaps it is better to have Mukasey at the Justice Department than to have Bush's recess appointment, whoever that might be. Schumer, Fienstein, McCain, Snowe and others seem to think they have assurances that the torture has stopped or will stop when Mukasey is in place. I am not assured, but I am hopeful. And as Sen. Fienstein says, at least he's not Alberto.

Still, my Republican friends, your Mr. Bush continues to drag our nation's reputation through the muck. There is no legitimate reason for our President and his appointees to refuse to call torture torture. By seeming to countenance torture as legitimate "interrogation technique" he defames our country, supplies our enemies with gasoline to pour on the flames of anti-Americanism, and endangers our soldiers. It seems obvious to me that the reason must be that this President is quilty of okaying torture and wants cover through redefinition of the term. This is nothing new, of course, tyrants have used such ruses throughout history.

Oh, well, in 443 days, perhaps, the recovery can begin.


Later Note: S.W. Anderson at Oh!Pinion has some good posts on this topic.

Psst, Judge! Waterboarding is torture.

Illustration taken from Wikipedia. A drawing of torture in Cambodia.

Get a clue, Judge. Waterboarding is torture.

The Geneva Conventions say waterboarding is torture.

Our immoral vice president may not care, but waterboarding is torture.

If you cannot admit that pouring water over a captive's gagged mouth and covered face until he is convinced his death is imminent is torture, you are either too stupid or too evil to be Attorney General of the United States. Waterboarding is torture.

Olympia Snowe knows. John McCain knows. John Warner Knows. Lindsey Graham knows. I know. You, Judge Michael Mukasey, know. Waterboarding is torture.

Say it or do not become Attorney General. Waterboarding is torture.

This was America. We will make it America again. We will not allow the hoodlums in this administration any more leeway to tear down America. Waterboarding is torture, you incredible jerk. Waterboarding is torture.

America does not approve torture. Waterboarding is torture.

It is not about who they are. It is about who we are. Waterboarding is torture.

Beware the Stone Zone

Roger with fellow tricksters

Roger Stone surfaces from the sludge again. Roger proudly quotes Nixon on his website:

Roger Stone "is one of the very few excellent political professionals."

-Richard Nixon

You remember Roger? He's the guy who is reported to have ...

• vounteered to infiltrate the McGovern campaign for Nixon ( He was part of Chuck Colson's CREEP group.)
• helped Ollie North raise money for the Contras
• been ordered to disrupt the Florida recount by James Baker
  
• organized the "spontaneous" mob that disrupted the recount of Dade County Florida ballots in 2000
• raised a mysterious $150,000 to unseat Florida judges who ordered the 2000 statewide recount
• been rewarded for his undercover work in Florida by "serving" on the transition team for Bush.
• helped staff Bush's Bureau of Indian Affairs, after which he negotiated Indian gambling contracts that could make him a very wealthy man - we're talking millions -- while also working for anti-gambling interests ala Ralph Reed & Co.... "double agent man, double aaaagent mannnnn."
  
• advertised for sex partners through a magazine and online
• been involved, double agent style, with circulating later-discredited evidence of George Bush's military record
• promoted the presidential campaign of Al Sharpton in 2004 -- double agent style again
  
• called the 83 year-old father of NY Gov. Spitzer and left this recorded message:

“There is not a g**d*** thing your phony, psycho, piece-of-s*** son can do about it. Bernie, your phony loans are about to catch up with you. You will be forced to tell the truth and the fact that your son’s a pathological liar will be known to all.”

I have been aware of this guy since the obscene Republican behavior in Florida in 2000.
You can check out this info at a number of spots on the web. Here are a few sources for lots of links and more info on this sleasebag buddy of our President: Oh!Pinion, Daily Kos, Washington Post, Village Voice, Albany Times-Union, or just google "Roger Stone"

If you want the other side, read the guy's defense here. Methinks if the recording should turn out to be fooled around with, the likeliest fooler-around is Mister Stone himself.

"The Most Insidious of Traitors"

I happened across* this quote from the first President Bush. I looked it up. Sure enough, it's right there on the CIA website:

Even though I'm a tranquil guy now at this stage of my life, I have nothing but contempt and anger for those who betray the trust by exposing the name of our sources. They are, in my view, the most insidious, of traitors.

-President George Bush, Sr.

And now Shrub has given a "get out of jail free card" to a man who tried to cover up the administration exposing of, not just a source, but an actual CIA agent. That must be galling to the old CIA director, Bush, Sr.

(l-r) Bush, Libby, Cheney

I continue to believe that George, Sr., in his heart of hearts, must ache for the damage his son has done to the country and to his name.

BTW: It's also interesting to see him thanking Senator Kerry in this speech from 1999.

* Here is where I found the Bush, Sr. quote. This post and the comments to it are an interesting discussion of the Libby commutation scandal.

Check out this old pressed leaf from the Limb:
April 2006 - A Disastrous Presidency