17 Days and Counting

What time is the Sleeping Giant alarm set to go off?

If you can sleep through the last 5 years, you can sleep through anything.

Cookoo

monkey,

There actually IS a Sleeping Giant, at Hain's Point in DC, which is just south of the Jefferson Memorial. (You probably know this).

Click here to see a photo:

http://www.runningplaces.com/route/image_detail.php?photo_id=412&route_id=187&type=photos

Actually, he is NOT sleeping; he is waking up, and he looks kinda pissed. We can only hope Patrick Fitzgerald notices the expression on his face--he certainly represents how I feel these days! I am sure I am not alone...

(Karen, Hain's Point was always a favorite.)

Judgment Call
Did Christian conservatives receive assurances that Miers would oppose Roe v. Wade?

Monday, October 17, 2005
Opinion Journal, From the Editorial Page of
The Wall Street Journal

Two days after President Bush announced Harriet Miers's Supreme Court nomination, James Dobson of Focus on the Family raised some eyebrows by declaring on his radio program: "When you know some of the things that I know--that I probably shouldn't know--you will understand why I have said, with fear and trepidation, that I believe Harriet Miers will be a good justice."

Mr. Dobson quelled the controversy by saying that Karl Rove, the White House's deputy chief of staff, had not given him assurances about how a Justice Miers would vote. "I would have loved to have known how Harriet Miers views Roe v. Wade," Mr. Dobson said last week. "But even if Karl had known the answer to that--and I'm certain that he didn't because the president himself said he didn't know--Karl would not have told me that. That's the most incendiary information that's out there, and it was never part of our discussion."

It might, however, have been part of another discussion. On Oct. 3, the day the Miers nomination was announced, Mr. Dobson and other religious conservatives held a conference call to discuss the nomination. One of the people on the call took extensive notes, which I have obtained. According to the notes, two of Ms. Miers's close friends--both sitting judges--said during the call that she would vote to overturn Roe.

The call was moderated by the Rev. Donald Wildmon of the American Family Association. Participating were 13 members of the executive committee of the Arlington Group, an umbrella alliance of 60 religious conservative groups, including Gary Bauer of American Values, Richard Land of the Southern Baptist Convention, Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council, Paul Weyrich of the Free Congress Foundation and the Rev. Bill Owens, a black minister. Also on the call were Justice Nathan Hecht of the Texas Supreme Court and Judge Ed Kinkeade, a Dallas-based federal trial judge.
Mr. Dobson says he spoke with Mr. Rove on Sunday, Oct. 2, the day before President Bush publicly announced the nomination. Mr. Rove assured Mr. Dobson that Ms. Miers was an evangelical Christian and a strict constructionist, and said that Justice Hecht, a longtime friend of Ms. Miers who had helped her join an evangelical church in 1979, could provide background on her. Later that day, a personal friend of Mr. Dobson's in Texas called him and suggested he speak with Judge Kinkeade, who has been a friend of Ms. Miers's for decades.

Mr. Dobson says he was surprised the next day to learn that Justice Hecht and Judge Kinkeade were joining the Arlington Group call. He was asked to introduce the two of them, which he considered awkward given that he had never spoken with Justice Hecht and only once to Judge Kinkeade. According to the notes of the call, Mr. Dobson introduced them by saying, "Karl Rove suggested that we talk with these gentlemen because they can confirm specific reasons why Harriet Miers might be a better candidate than some of us think."

What followed, according to the notes, was a free-wheeling discussion about many topics, including same-sex marriage. Justice Hecht said he had never discussed that issue with Ms. Miers. Then an unidentified voice asked the two men, "Based on your personal knowledge of her, if she had the opportunity, do you believe she would vote to overturn Roe v. Wade?"

"Absolutely," said Judge Kinkeade.

"I agree with that," said Justice Hecht. "I concur."

Shortly thereafter, according to the notes, Mr. Dobson apologized and said he had to leave the discussion: "That's all I need to know and I will get off and make some calls." (When asked about his comments in the notes I have, Mr. Dobson confirmed some of them and said it was "very possible" he made the others. He said he did not specifically recall the comments of the two judges on Roe v. Wade.)

more... http://www.opinionjournal.com/diary/?id=110007415

monkey,

I often think about the deep silence that fell over my right-wing Fundie friends just before last year's election. At the time, I was sure it was because they knew Bush was in trouble and was going to lose the election; in fact, we heard from people who knew people that there was a belief within that he could, might, and possibly WOULD lose the election.

The last few weeks of the campaign were a frenzy of spin, a frantic pushing of message, meme, and innuendo, as well as, we now know, the shifting of voting machines in Ohio from urban districts to rural districts, an unloading of the voting rolls so people in urban areas would have to vote provisionally, and countless other means in the swing states. But the rightwing fundies became vewy vewy quiet...

I have no idea what happened in the mega-churches those last few weeks (and not only those--the little white churches in Oklahoma and Wyoming as well), but I suspect there was prayer (for a theocracy) and watchful waiting.

Straying lambs had to be brought back to the flock, through subtle pressure and warm rewards for returning.

As for the voting fraud; well, that would have been God's interventions, wouldn't it?

Now I think about my friends and wonder what they make of fairly irrefutable evidence that what happened last November was not the result of their prayers or God's interventions, but the lies of man.

I think we ought to--lovingly, of course, and with some small pity, occasionally remind them of that.

thoughts while doing yoga:
Historically, the Democratic Party hasn’t been much of an organization. That is because we have always had room for differences among folks concerned about the same issues we were concerned about. We did not organize around a set of answers but a set of concerns. In the past 10 years, the political party has been reshaped in this country by a top down-we control everything- paradigm and so we must change also.

We do not want to create Democrat mcpoliticans-same flavor every state because every state is different-and we will support states to be different in every area the Constitution gives the sovereignty..

We represent diverse folks because that’s who the "people" of we the people are. It is not just male white landowners anymore.

And so we have met and agreed to a list of principles (because they do matter), a list of results and a path to get there.

We the People are the path.

Lets put checks and balances back into the system.

Lets clean up the Corporate cronyism-you know from a market point of view

It just raises costs- instead of lobbyist, donate that money to the natl. treasurer to help pay the debt you ran up.

So here is our vision and promise for America.

.....

sortof an outline of what I'd like Dean to be saying one day...

I think we ought to--lovingly, of course, and with some small pity, occasionally remind them of that.

Posted by: Karen at October 17, 2005 08:41 AM

When I see a car with a shrub sticker and that little annoying fish symbol, I skip the formalities and go straight to hockin' a loogie.

Great Expectorantations.

I sincerely wish that passing this Iraqi constitution will do everything george claims it will. I would love nothing more than to be proved completely wrong on every assumption that has led me for the past two years to look at my newspaper and tv every day and think to myself, "I told you so." I'm willing to give up my pride and my frustration with this administration just to see something that resembles peace happen over there.

I'd also like to win the lottery.

So, what's with the fish symbol. I once bought a motorcycle and helmet from a guy- it had the fish thing on it- He told me the Lord said not to drive a motorcycle anymore- Fish mean I should get a boat????

Hawkeye,

right there with ya' buddy.

eel,

Fish mean you probably got a good deal on a motorcycle. But the problem with fish is--driving that cycle responsibly and taking ownership of one's own choices and behavior is what God REALLY wants from us.

When fish means "I no longer have to think for myself", it's kind of a problem. See Hawkeye and monkey, above.

Talks like fish, acts like chicken.

sortof an outline of what I'd like Dean to be saying one day...

Posted by: mkh at October 17, 2005 08:42 AM

I saw Howard Dean Friday night at a fundraising event in Chicago, and he really did address most of your points. Here's a quick summary of his speech...

- Dems need to make people see that we are the "Family Friendly" party. We can't be afraid to talk about morals. He claims that people voted for bush because they're worried about moral values for their children, and bush effectively convinced them that he represented the party of morals...(quite ironic, isn't it...). As a party, we need to acknowledge how hard it is to raise children in this cultural climate. But when we speak of this, we need to do so more from the heart rather than the head, as Dems are prone to do; otherwise we end up speaking past them. That's why bush won -- his message was simple and easy to understand and to them, it sounded like he was speaking from the heart...

- DNC has a long-term business plan and a 50 state strategy (as opposed to only the blue states). They've got hired staff already in 40 states. They're developing a national message with a positive focus. They're building a list of committed activists & office holders across the country. They want people to help spread the message via LTEs, call-ins to talk radio (conservative stations especially), blogs. Since we can't control the media, we need to help spread the message.

- They're working on a DNC version of the Contract with America that focusses on removing corruption in our government (from both parties!), enforcing ethics changes, election and campaign financing reforms. Make it a law that you can't use voting machines that can't be recounted by hand. (BTW, I gave him a copy of our Progressive Pledge; perhaps some -- or all -- of our pledge will end up in that contract!)

- Health insurance for every American!

- Jobs/better economy: should focus on building jobs around renewable energy.

- Iraq: now that the elections are over, we need to define exit strategy. Dems need to prove how tough they can be on defense. Strong defense depends on renewable energy and elimination of our dependence on ME oil.

- Education: US is falling behind, thanks to NCLB. Intelligent Design education does not belong in public schools. We need to put $$$ in public school systems to provide real educational changes, not bureaucratic changes.

- Patriot Act & Immigration: enforce border laws, but if you're in the country, earn legalization. We should not stop immigrants from coming here to help make our country stronger. Dean claims the RNC will make immigration an issue in 2006, just like they made blacks an issue in 2002 & gays an issue in 2004.

Quotes:

"We'll define who we are...don't let the Republicans define us..."

"You can't build a better America by tearing us apart at the seams..."

"America doesn't work unless everyone is included..."
"Democracy doesn't work unless everyone is included..."
"Capitalism doesn't work unless everyone is included."

"The real change comes from us...Stand up for what you believe!"

Bush to Blair: First Iraq, then Saudi Arabia...

http://www.truthout.org/docs_2005/101705Z.shtml

George Bush told the Prime Minister two months before the invasion of Iraq that Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Iran and North Korea may also be dealt with over weapons of mass destruction, a top secret Downing Street memo shows. The US President told Tony Blair, in a secret telephone conversation in January 2003 that he "wanted to go beyond Iraq".

Conservative Wall Street Journal even has an op-ed about the creepy conference call Rove initiated with Dobson

http://www.opinionjournal.com/diary/?id=110007415

Business conservatives and social conservatives are splintering and it should come as no surprise, as the Bush administration "used" the religious right to consolidate their own power. They are not known for keeping promises and this is how their party normally works anyway. Hypercapitalism comes first.

Ripple effects from the two past hurricanes in the Gulf: Shortage of coffee on the store shelves up here!

I was grocery shopping yesterday, went to get coffee.... sections of bare shelves!!! Eeeek!!! I asked one of the managers... Warehouses full of coffee in the Gulf destroyed....

I ended up buying a jar of instant coffee... Bleah!!! Awful stuff!

Since I don't have my caffeine fix, I'm going back to bed... and hope the tropical storm Wilma stays a tropical storm and does not become a hurricane.... I think there have been enough hurricanes already.

Nonny.. wake up and smell the mountain dew.

Cheney May Be Entangled in CIA Leak Investigation, People Say

Oct. 17 (Bloomberg) -- A special counsel is focusing on whether Vice President Dick Cheney played a role in leaking a covert CIA agent's name, according to people familiar with the probe that already threatens top White House aides Karl Rove and Lewis Libby.

The special counsel, Patrick Fitzgerald, has questioned current and former officials of President George W. Bush's administration about whether Cheney was involved in an effort to discredit the agent's husband, Iraq war critic and former U.S. diplomat Joseph Wilson, according to the people.

Fitzgerald has questioned Cheney's communications adviser Catherine Martin and former spokeswoman Jennifer Millerwise and ex-White House aide Jim Wilkinson about the vice president's knowledge of the anti-Wilson campaign and his dealings on it with Libby, his chief of staff, the people said. The information came from multiple sources, who requested anonymity because of the secrecy and political sensitivity of the investigation.

more... http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=10000087&sid=aSuj1d8CcYAk&refer=top_world_news

I really don't like commentary when facts are so hard to find, but here the BBC cites Juan Cole & it's pretty good - talks about how people expect quick, easy answers to complicated situations (such as the Iraq war) and that isn't going to happen. This does make the Iraqi referendum a bit clearer, and I don't predict a groundswell of increased support for Bush and his administration's programs, either in Iraq or domestically.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4349248.stm

Russert Watch (Arianna Huffington)

http://news.yahoo.com/s/huffpost/20051017/cm_huffpost/008983

Yall will not believe this...

Cars stolen in US used in suicide attacks
By Bryan Bender in Washington
October 4, 2005

Page Tools
Email to a friend Printer format
The FBI's counterterrorism unit has launched a broad investigation of US-based theft rings after discovering some vehicles used in deadly car bombings in Iraq, including attacks that killed US troops and Iraqi civilians, were probably stolen in the United States, according to senior US Government officials.

The FBI's deputy assistant director for counterterrorism, Inspector John Lewis, said the investigation did not prove the vehicles were stolen specifically for car bombings in the Middle East, but there was evidence they were smuggled out of the US by organised criminal networks that included terrorists and insurgents.

http://www.smh.com.au/news/world/cars-stolen-in-us-used-in-suicide-attacks/2005/10/03/1128191658703.html

So...

Now car thieves are TERRORISTS....???

Damn bin laden using our innocent junkie gang members to boost cars.

Ok add in cars stolen INSIDE the USA to the questions of ARE WE setting off umm...car bombs.. in Iraq....

Where did that just get me?

WHAT IN THE **** (Please keep it clean. Thanks) IS THIS???

I just talked this through with my man who is exmilitary. Ummm, Bubba

Anyway, check this out, I was telling him that me and Rossi can distinquish the body dumps now, we can usually tell wether it is insurgent victims or those falling prey to the Scorpion and Wolf brigades of Iraqi police.

The insurgents almost always leave a beheaded body among the pile just to mark it. The police body dumps though there is no beheadings and most times they don't even bother removing the flexiciffs.

The insurgents NEVER use flexicuffs.Oh and the torture wounds are more.. industrialized where the insurgents are just quick and nasty.

Perhaps to seperate the insurgent car bombs, from the...good guy car bombs..egahd.. those stolen AMERICAN cars would be one hell of a start.

Am I talking to myself again...???

Cause yall know that won't stop me.

Dianne,

As to your point yesterday, if those brits and our soldiers are doing what they are apparently doing, they CAN NOT break rank in anyway because even those with knowledge of it are responsible for it.

And i just had a major click in my brain.

I bet I know why Rummy denied even knowing the EXISTANCE of the Scorpion brigade.

It is not thier crimes hes scared of, its the ones who trained them.

Those would be AMERICANS and BRITS and OMFG they are the ones that trained for the EL SALVADORE OPTION

Holy shittokki batman

Hi,

please click the recommend button for this kos entry...

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2005/10/17/122656/24

Thanks

Maybe he picked the wrong week to give up drinking/sniffing glue... Oh wait, he didn't give those up yet, did he...

Bush braces for a stormy week
Indictments possible in CIA leak probe; Miers faces more tough questions

WASHINGTON - It could be a rough week for President Bush, with two key White House aides facing the possibility of being indicted in the investigation into the leak of a CIA operative’s name and Supreme Court nominee Harriet Miers bracing for more tough questions from senators.

Even Vice President Dick Cheney has come under scrutiny, sources familiar with the investigation told the Bloomberg News Service.

The special counsel, Patrick Fitzgerald, has questioned current and former Bush administration officials about whether Cheney was involved in an effort to discredit the CIA agent’s husband, Iraq war critic and former U.S. diplomat Joseph Wilson, according to the Bloomberg report.

...

Legal sources said Rove could be vulnerable to a perjury charge for not initially telling the grand jury he talked to Time magazine reporter Matt Cooper about Plame.

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/9727260
(at least MSM is reporting it...)

Military reverses plan to add Ed Schultz show to Armed Forces Radio

The United States' military's Armed Forces Radio has reversed a decision to add The Ed Schultz show to their lineup abroad, RAW STORY has learned.

Schultz was told Sept. 29 he would be added to the military's programming today. That decision was reversed this morning. His producers are currently seeking answers from the military.

On his program Friday, Schultz attacked Alison Barber, an Armed Forces official, over President Bush's staged conversation with U.S. troops in Iraq. Barber is an Assistant Secretary of Defense.

Armed Forces Radio provides programming to American troops wherever they are stationed abroad. The network carries newscasts from a variety of outlets, including NPR and the Associated Press, along with commentary from Rush Limbaugh, Dr. Laura, among others.

DEVELOPING...

Great article at Mother Jones about Paul Hackett when he was running for rep. seat in Ohio and who is now running against DeWine for the senate seat in '06...

The Ohio Insurgency

Paul Hackett is out for one last day of pressing the flesh.

It’s August 2, Election Day, and the lanky, blond, 43-year-old Marine has taken up position outside the polling place in Loveland, a burg on the outskirts of Cincinnati, flashing his toothy smile for the early risers. Hackett is dressed smartly in a blue shirt and striped pastel tie. His khaki pants hang loosely from his wiry, 180-pound frame.

“That’s low politics, punk!” a heavy-set man sneers as he marches toward the poll.
Hackett wheels around. “Pardon me?”
“You know, that radio ad that says, ‘You don’t know Schmidt.’” He’s talking about one of Hackett’s attack ads against Republican Jean Schmidt. The man spews a stream of epithets, and Hackett lets out a crybaby whimper: “Waaaaaaa!”
“What’s that, punk?” the big man growls.

A TV crew is setting up nearby, but Hackett doesn’t seem to care. “What’s your f**kin’ problem?” the candidate snaps. “You got something to say to me? Bring it on!” Hackett, all 6 feet 2 inches of him, is nose to nose with the heckler. “Problem?” he taunts. The man turns around and storms away.

“These guys in the Republican Party adopted this tough-guy language,” Hackett tells me, still steamed, an hour later. “They’re bullies. They’re offended when somebody takes a swing back at them.”

--snip--
Onstage, Hackett never actually conceded the loss. Instead, he declared, “We can take this to other regions of the country and other regions of the state. I don’t want to see any teary eyes—this was a success!” Echoing his rallying cry as a Marine, he bellowed, “Let’s rock on!”

At the party, an Indian Hill neighbor of Hackett’s, attorney Michele Young, charged over to tell me what she thought had gone wrong. “When the DNC came in here two weeks ago, they brought in money and volunteers, but they were thinking the old way”—aiming their get-out-the-vote effort at likely Democrats. But Hackett’s strongest showing was in areas where he drew large numbers of Republican and independent voters. The DNC “were traditional thinkers with an outside-the-box candidate,” she insisted. “That’s why they lost.”

--snip--

As Hackett moves forward, he will take fire from all sides. If the fate of Howard Dean’s antiwar candidacy is any indication, Democrats as well as Republicans will slam his anti-Bush rhetoric. Hackett’s own flaws—his hotheadedness, his political inexperience—will offer his opponents plenty of ammunition. A statewide race could quickly become a national barometer, with both parties pouring millions of dollars into Ohio as a down payment on 2008.

Hackett can taste the coming battle, and he likes it. Talking about what lies down the road, he sounds exactly the way he did during the August campaign, when he’d don his Ray-Bans and leap out of the car to change a few more minds: “You gotta get out there and fight the fight.”
http://www.motherjones.com/news/feature/2005/11/paul_hackett.html

What Democrat is running for governor in Ohio? Because there's this other guy, Brown, who is also running against DeWine for senate. And I love Paul Hackett, but Brown seems like a great guy, too. So could one of them run for governor, and the other for senate? And who IS running for governor? Would Hackett be better off trying for the same congressional seat that the just narrowly lost? What do you guys think?

Posted by: madame defarge at October 17, 2005 09:42 AM

Madame... If the RNC tries to define immigration as the issue of 2006, we can slam them on two fronts:

- The difficulties faced by highly skilled workers that America needs - and can't produce on its own due to our failed education system. This wins support from pro-business fiscal conservatives AND pro-education forces within our own ranks.

- Special-interest pro-Republican immigrants being the exception to the rule (especially the Cubans). Most Republicans (who are anti-immigration, PERIOD) don't realize how their own party is just as sleazy as (if not sleazier than) the Dems when it comes to immigration.

Sure, we will offend the Cuban community, but they were never ours to begin with.

Andrew Sullivan in the Daily Dish has a great summary / excerpt here: http://www.andrewsullivan.com/index.php?dish_inc=archives/2005_10_16_dish_archive.html#112956134589970660

RENDITION, TORTURE AND INTELLIGENCE: There's an important new piece in the Scottish Sunday Herald ( http://www.sundayherald.com/52305 ). It's important because it has two on-the-record sources: the CIA's Michael Scheuer, who set up the rendition program for alleged terrorists under Clinton and saw its evolution under Bush; and Craig Murray, the former British ambassador to Uzbekistan who saw the rendition program first-hand in one of its more notorious locations. Two points are absolutely clear. The United States under president Bush has a pro-torture policy. The U.S. now uses torture - both by its own officials and out-sourced to grotesque dictatorships like that in Uzbekistan. Money quote from Scheuer:

"You'd think I'm an ass if I said nobody was tortured. There was more of a willingness in the White House to turn a blind eye to the legal niceties than within the CIA. The Agency always knew it would be left holding the baby for this one."

The reason for the original White House memos, redefining torture into meaninglessness, was precisely CIA resistance to White House pressure to torture captives. The CIA torturers wanted legal and political cover. They got it. The second point is that torture was invariably useless as an intelligence extracter. As Scheuer confides, "[W]e never expected to get anything from interrogations. Al-Qaeda are trained to fight the jihad from their jail cells, they are masters of counter-interrogation. They'll give you old information or false information. The CIA never felt it would help to torture these people." The decision to allow torture was not a rational one; it was irrational. The British ambassador to Uzbekistan outlines what went on:

"In Uzbekistan, it works like this. Person X is tortured and signs a statement saying he’s going to crash planes into buildings, or that he’s linked to Osama bin Laden. He's also asked if he knows persons X, Y and Z in the UK who are involved in terrorism. He’ll be tortured until he agrees, though he's never met them."

The confession is sent to the CIA where, according to Murray, it is 'sanitised'. Before sanitisation the report "will have the guy's name on it, the date of the interrogation, where it took place – and might still be bloodstained. The CIA then issues a debriefing document, which does not name the individual. It does not say he was tortured. It only says that it is a detainee debriefing from a friendly overseas security service. This will set out the brief facts, such as 'we now know person X in London is in Islamic Jihad and plans to blow up Canary Wharf'. This goes to MI6 – the British and Americans share everything – and then it goes to MI6's customers: the Prime Minister, the defence secretary, the home secretary, the foreign secretary, and other key ministers and officials. I was one of these customers too because I was the ambassador to Tashkent. I'd look at these reports and, to be frank, I realised they were bollocks. One talked about terror camps in the hills near Samarkand. I knew the precise location being talked about and it wasn't true."

We sold our soul for nothing. Nat Hentoff has more to say here. http://www.villagevoice.com/news/0542,hentoff,68920,6.html

Up for a little satire?

Check out the "memo" at The Note...

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/TheNote/story?id=156238

Posted by: dwahzon at October 17, 2005 02:45 PM

It's a coin toss as to what embarrasses and offends me more as a US citizen: the illegal, unjustified, immoral, and unethical war based on lies which has resulted in thousands of deaths... or the ugliness of hearing about our military people (and/or mercenaries hired by American companies) torturing others.

Either way, I hang my head in shame for being an American since 2000..... and I'm angry with our senators and representatives who are not howling loudly on every infotainment news show two or three times a day to stop the atrocities.... Shame on our Congress for being silent!!!

"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing." Edmund Burke....

from David Broder at WaPo today:

~snip~
[Melvin Laird], former defense secretary [in the Nixon administration], himself a veteran of World War II, has harsh words to say about abuse of prisoners in American hands.

"To stop abuses and mistakes by the rank and file, whether in the prisons or on the streets, heads must roll at much higher levels than they have thus far," he says.

"To me, the alleged prison scandals reported to have occurred in Iraq, in Afghanistan and at Guantanamo Bay have been a disturbing reminder of the mistreatment of our own POWs by North Vietnam. The conditions in our current prison camps are nowhere near as horrific as they were at the 'Hanoi Hilton,' but that is no reason to pat ourselves on the back. The minute we begin to deport prisoners to other nations where they can be legally tortured, when we hold people without charges or trial, when we move prisoners around to avoid the prying inspections of the Red Cross, when prisoners die inexplicably on our watch, we are on a slippery slope toward the inhumanity that we deplore."

Those are powerful words from a powerful source. One can only hope they are heeded.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/10/14/AR2005101401789.html

I am going to post this over at Kos too, but wanted to get it up here first. There are some good questions on the Kos thread that dwahzon posted over there, (http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2005/10/17/122656/24) so I just called Travis at the White House and asked him some of those questions. Here is what he said:

We are not talking about a one-day protest at all; but we do need a big day on Nov. 2. We are talking about launchng a movement that will not stop until the Bush Regime is driven from power.

This is not about one day and then we all go home. We are serious when we say that Nov 2 will be the begininning of te end of the Bush Regime.

Part of the point of Nov 2 is that, as the call says that people look at this admiinistration and they are anguished by what is happening--if people participate, millions more will see that there is something that CAN be done.

Not fighting outrages one by one and losing ground, but actually launching a movement to create a political situation in which he is driven from office and the whole direction of this regime is repudiated and stopped. If they can do it in Argentina and other countries, we can do it here.

The fact is there are tens of millions out there--Newt Gingrich was correct when he said our country has not been as divided as it is today since the 1840s and 50s.

People have the need for a vehicle to express this outrage, yet they cannot find it. Politics as usual cannot meet the challenge and we all sense this.

People poured their hearts into stopping the war before it even began--Bush's response was "I don't listen to focus groups." Millions of us worked hard on the election, only to feel equally defeated.

It's not that people don't care-- people care DEEPLY--but what will work?

A Page from the Playbook:

The objective is to pull off a powerful day--to get people out of classrooms, boardrooms, offices and to gather together publicly, in town and city centers, to repudiate the Bush regime. We need to make a large statement.

Having done that and reaching out to millions of fed-up people, we will be better able to organize.

The posters above make good points. A one day protest IS spitting in the wind, but we need to get to a level where we CAN ratchet up and build the movement that will topple this administration.

We remember when the universities were shut down after the Cambodian invasion, when MLK's assassination created an uproar. We need something less self-destructive but bigger than that.

It is becoming clearer that we have to do this ourselves. We the people must act. We must act together, and we must act in public.

Posted by: monkey at October 17, 2005 01:16 PM

http://www.wegoted.com/EdInTheNews/more.asp?ID=59

Who's fighting for WHAT now?

Posted by: NativeTexan4Kerry at October 17, 2005 02:31 PM

Yes...One should run for Governor and the other Senate.

Tell them to flip a coin...but do it quickly before they both lose support!

Can't resist this chuckle.

Hurry and do this before google fixes it! LOL
Go to Google (http://www.google.com )
2- Type in the word "Failure"
3- Instead of clicking "Google Search," click "I'm Feeling Lucky."
4- Laugh
5- Spread the word before the people at Google "fix" it

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x5084359

Posted by: Karen at October 17, 2005 03:51 PM

Thanks for your call to action. I was having a similar line of thinking when I was over at DU having some discussions.

I told them I grew up in Seoul under a Reagan-supported fascist dictatorship, and that I fully know how their use of fear/militarism/nationalism/moralism/corporatism went to crush the best interests of the average man/woman. I even added that W is playing straight out of the Korean fascist playbook.

(I also added that the Korean-American community is nostalgic for those "good old days," but that's besides the point.)

I further went on to say that things have changed for the better thanks to the progressives organizing together for a more democratic society. I added that the democratization of Korea did not happen without a fight, not only against the fascist military dictators but also their Republican backers here in the US. I finally made my point: if W will play out of the Korean fascist playbook, we must counter by playing out of the Korean democratization playbook.

I must admit though that I only know the vague outline of the playbook. This is something I must look into a bit (okay, a lot) more, which will be tough because, again, the Korean-American community is pro-fascist and will not help me. What I do find out from the playbook, I will be more than happy to share in our forum. (I am expecting a business trip to Seoul in the near future, which may help my cause.)

NT4K,

Congressman Ted Strickland, Oh-06 district, and Michael Coleman, mayor of Columbus, are running for Ohio governor. Either would be a great governor. Sherrod Brown and Ted Strickland are as close as brothers so Sherrod would not run against him.
There is great controversy about who should run for senate . Sherrod is an experienced congressman and a former Ohio secretary of state. Hackett, of course, is the newcomer who has held no public office except city councilman in a Cincinnati suburb. I feel that either man
could do a fine job. I'm sorry that one of them will have to lose in the primary if they both continue to seek the office.
It would be harder for Hackett to win the seat he ran for this summer because he ran in a special election to replace Rob Portman who was appointed to another position in the Bush administration. Ohio 2 is the most (or 2nd most Republican district in the state) thanks to redistricting by the Republicans a few years ago. A statewide run for office would probably be more successful for him.

Conyers is following up on Judy Miller's admission in yesterday's NYT that she had/has a security clearance...He has written a letter to the (dis)honorable Mr. Rumsfeld...

http://www.conyersblog.us/default.htm

Posted by: madame defarge at October 17, 2005 05:49 PM

This is especially important when one also considers that this pResident took away the security clearance for all the members of Congress even before the IWR. (Except for the few leadership ones.)

Although, I did not realize that fact until I discovered it on the kerry blog.

YA THINK?!?!?!?!? I want every last one of 'em to APOLOGIZE, and get down on their knees and beg for forgiveness from their constituents for voting in favor of that stupid war!!!

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20051017/ap_on_go_co/democrats_iraq_politics

Pro-War Votes May Haunt Democrats

By LIZ SIDOTI, Associated Press Writer

Potential Democratic presidential candidates who voted to give President Bush the authority to use force in Iraq could face a political problem — they supported a war that their party's rank-and-file now strongly view as a mistake.

Their pro-war votes — cast three years ago — could haunt them as they seek early support among die-hard Democrats and gauge whether to launch formal candidacies for the party's 2008 presidential nomination.

"For a lot of activists, this could be a threshold issue. They may be looking for somebody without any taint for prior support for the war," said John J. Pitney, a political science professor at Claremont McKenna College in California.

Sens. Evan Bayh of Indiana, Joseph Biden of Delaware, Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York, John Kerry of Massachusetts and former Sen. John Edwards of North Carolina are mulling over running for the Democratic nomination. All voted in October 2002 for a resolution authorizing the president to use force in Iraq.

They no doubt will be forced to explain their positions — both then and now — and in doing so could open themselves to attack from candidates who didn't support the resolution or didn't have to cast the politically tricky vote.

The only other oft-mentioned potential Democratic presidential candidate in the Senate — Russell Feingold, D-Wis. — voted against the resolution. Other possible hopefuls, such as Govs. Mark Warner of Virginia, Bill Richardson of New Mexico and Tom Vilsack of Iowa, weren't in Congress.

Primary races are all about which candidate gets the largest share of support from the party faithful. Public opinion polls show that Democratic loyalists overwhelmingly disapprove of Bush's handling of the war and believe the United States should never have gone into Iraq in the first place.

That staunch opposition raises questions of whether Democratic primary voters will be comfortable supporting a candidate who at least initially backed the war they oppose.

The situation facing Democrats who voted for the Iraq war resolution has been likened to Sen. Eugene McCarthy's 1964 vote in favor of the Gulf of Tonkin resolution, perceived as the vehicle that gave President Johnson carte blanche to escalate the Vietnam War.

McCarthy, D-Minn., had become a war critic by the time he announced his intention to challenge Johnson for the Democratic nomination in 1968. But McCarthy didn't pay a political price for his Gulf of Tonkin vote.

In fact, McCarthy was such a vehement foe of the war that he was on the razor's edge of the opposition. That contributed to Johnson's decision not to seek another term.

The race for the 2004 Democratic nomination produced conflicting lessons about how support for the Iraq war could affect a candidacy.

Two months before the Iowa caucuses, polls showed Rep. Dick Gephardt, D-Mo., vying for the lead in a crowded Democratic field.

Then, former Vermont Gov. Howard Dean launched a TV ad in Iowa criticizing Gephardt's work with the Bush administration in drafting the Iraq resolution. It showed Gephardt, then the House minority leader, standing alongside Bush in the White House Rose Garden.

The ad has been credited with helping to sink his candidacy.

Even so, Dean's anti-war candidacy flamed out after being the early favorite. And Democratic voters ended up looking past Kerry's support of the resolution when they chose him as the party's nominee.

Democratic strategists point to that as they play down the possible impact of the Iraq resolution vote on the 2008 Democratic race.

They note that the primary season is more than two years away. Voters likely will focus on the candidate's current positions on Iraq, a plan for withdrawing U.S. troops, and a future vision for the military and its veterans, they say.

Democrats, strategists say, likely will mull questions such as: Did candidates who voted initially for the war continue voting to give the president billions of dollars to continue operations? Did they press for a withdrawal strategy? What was their position as the war dragged on with no end in sight, casualties climbed and the price tag soared?

"It's going to be about what did you do since you voted for the war," said Celinda Lake, a Democratic pollster.

Still, Donna Brazile, Al Gore's 2000 campaign manager, said discussions of how candidates voted on the Iraq war resolution vote will occur as potential candidates rally supporters and try to raise money early on.

"This could be an issue — but one of many issues," Brazile said.

Copyright © 2005 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. The information contained in the AP News report may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed without the prior written authority of The Associated Press.

Posted by: NonnyO at October 17, 2005 06:47 PM

Nonny,
It's a catch 22. If they voted for the IWR then it means they can not turn and NOT vote to fund the troops.

Nonny,

Then there is THIS quote to remind people of:

Bush said "This is a chance for Congress to show that they want to keep the peace".
Even the dj on an AZ show said, "THIS IS WHAT KERRY VOTED FOR! And when people say he voted for the Iraq war - It's a lie"

That extends to everyone who voted for the IWR upon the specific reassurance of the pResident that a vote for IWR was also a vote for Peace.

I checked out the November 2nd web site from the link. Under "November 2 Convergences", I wondered what we might be learning about the Valerie Plame investigation by then.

Well, I'll make a point to do something on Nov. 2nd, but there isn't anything planned here. Our peace group is planning on having a peace vigil soon, because another sad thing we're expecting is the 2,000th US troop killed in Iraq soon. Not that Iraqi deaths don't count, it's just that the 2,000 mark, when (how I wish it were if, but really, it seems to be when) it comes, will strike a cord with many.

Nonny O, I understand your feelings about those dems who supported the war. I can think of so many ways for them to acknowledge what we were saying all along.

Hawkeye--I'm actually optimistic for Iraq with the consitution. I'm hoping that they can pull it together, for the sake of kids if nothing else. I would love to see Iraq get it's act together and unceremoneously kick the US out.

The latest bombing campaign

(http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-101705bombing_lat,0,6877036.story?coll=la-home-headlines)

just shows that we don't have the right tools to help this country. I hope we get our weapons of mass destruction out of that country very soon.

Sparrow, when even AP gets the content of the IWR wrong, it's hard to believe that average Americans will understand it. I don't hold out any hope at all.

I saw John Edwards on Maher Friday night and he was super. I like to imagine him as our next president these days. He is really "of the people" in a way that many are not. And he's smart, and a good speaker on TV! Max Cleland was on too, and he was hilarious. Stole the show, actually.

OMG...EVERYONE

Rawstory:

Someone in the W.H. has flipped.

http://www.rawstory.com/

and I don't mean that as in gone crazy either.

Something else we might not hear about in the LSM:

From October 17-28th, Senator John Edwards will launch Project Opportunity on a two-week tour to ten colleges and universities. Project Opportunity is a project of the Center for Promise and Opportunity, of which Senator Edwards is the honorary chair.

The goal of Project Opportunity is to get more young people involved in their communities and to encourage them to advocate and promote policies that expand opportunity.

http://www.promiseandopportunity.com/

"In the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, we have a historic opportunity. The country is hungry for change and we do not have to live in an America that accepts poverty as a fact of life or chooses to ignore it. At so many critical moments in our nation's history, it has been our young people who have made a difference, and that's why I am asking them to join me and their peers in making the eradication of poverty the cause of this generation."

Senator John Edwards

Of course voting for the war resolution is going to haunt our candidates the next election. If John Kerry hadn't stood on the edge of the Grand Canyon and said that, knowing what he now knew, he'd still vote for the resolution, he'd be in the Oval Office today. All the swiftboat vets in the world couldn't have kept him out- it took the accusations of waffling to do that. It's going to be difficult for any democrat who voted for the war to win in 2008, because the major argument I heard from non-voters last election was that the two candidates really weren't any different. They really didn't know what the candidates would do differently in Iraq, so why should they bother to go to the polls. I was very happy to see at least one Democrat, Max Cleland, say on Bill Maher's show last Friday that it's time to get out of Iraq. And that it's time to get out now, not when the Iraqis tell us they're ready for us to get out. Unless we have a candidate who is willing to say that, and to admit that he made a mistake in voting for the IWR (and I don't mean one who will just try and explain the nuances of why he voted the way he did, but who will APOLOGIZE and say he was wrong), we won't win in 2008 either. Because Americans understand votes, not nuances.And by the way, why are we supporting a so called democracy that allowed Kurds and Shiites to vote multiple times to the Sunni's one vote anyway? I don't know if anyone saw ABC news tonight, but a camera filmed a voter voting on 7 separate ballots in favor of the constitution. Of course it passed. Their elections are rigged by the same bunch of people who rigged ours.
And these people are in office because the average American voter at LEAST wasn't confused about what Bush believed. That's really sad for our party. Our message is cluttered- there's too much of it- and we can't talk directly to Americans unless we admit we made a mistake by trusting Bush on the IWR. And I'm saying "we" in respect to the Democratic party- I literally screamed "Don't trust that liar" at my TV screen the day of the IWR. The Democrats should have been smarter that day, and they may pay for it for years to come. I hope not, but I'm not so sure that article isn't on target.

A friend sent me this. It is something everyone should act on and spread to everyone.

The Organic Consumers Association (OCA) needs your immediate help to stop Congress and the Bush administration from seriously degrading organic standards. After 35 years of hard work, the U.S. organic community has built up a multi-billion dollar alternative to industrial agriculture, based upon strict organic standards and organic community control over modification to these standards.

Now, large corporations such as Kraft & Dean Foods--aided and abetted by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), are moving to lower organic standards by allowing a Bush appointee to create a list of synthetic ingredients that would be allowed organic production. Even worse these proposed regulatory changes will reduce future public discussion and input and take away the National Organic Standards Board's (NOSB) traditional lead jurisdiction in setting standards. What this means, in blunt terms. is that USDA bureaucrats and industry lobbyists, not consumers, will now have more control over what can go into organic foods and products.

This week, acting in haste and near-total secrecy, the U.S. Senate will vote on a "rider" to the 2006 Agriculture Appropriations Bill that will reduce control over organic standards from the National Standards Board and put this control in the hands of federal bureaucrats in the USDA (remember the USDA proposal in 1997-98 that said that genetic engineering, toxic sludge, and food irradiation would be OK on organic farms, or USDA suggestions in 2004 that heretofore banned pesticides, hormones, tainted feeds, and animal drugs would be OK?).

For the past week in Washington, OCA has been urging members of the Senate not to reopen and subvert the federal statute that governs U.S. Organic standards (the Organic Food Production Act - OFPA), but rather to let the organic community and the National Organic Standards resolve our differences over issues like synthetics and animal feed internally, and then proceed to a open public comment period. Unfortunately most Senators seem to be listening to industry lobbyists more closely than to us. We need to raise our voices.

In the past, grassroots mobilization and mass pressure by organic consumers have been able to stop the USDA and Congress from degrading organic standards. This time Washington insiders tell us that the "fix is is already in." So we must take decisive action now. We need you to call your U.S. Senators today. We need you to sign the following petition and send it to everyone you know. We also desperately need funds to head off this attack in the weeks and months to come. Thank you for your support. Together we will take back citizen control over organic standards and preserve organic integrity.

Take action here:
http://www.demaction.org/dia/organizations/oca/campaign.jsp?campaign_KEY=1242

Maybe they have "democracy" just like we do!

Iraq Vote under Investigation
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2005/101705Q.shtml

Iraqi election officials said today that they were investigating what they described as "unusually high" vote totals in 12 Shiite and Kurdish provinces, where as many as 99 percent of the voters were reported to have cast ballots in favor of Iraq's new constitution, raising the possibility that the results of Saturday's referendum could be called into question.

Linda
I think the cheating in Florida & Ohio (& other states) is what kept Kerry out, not that I ever agreed with everything he (or any of the others) said. When canvassing, I met voters who knew who they would vote for but didn't follow the candidate speeches very closely, so I doubt one speech at one location floated or sunk any specific candidate. I'm much more suspicious of Mr. Diebold, Mr. Sequoia.

Posted by: sparrow at October 17, 2005 07:25 PM

Exactly....

BUT they can be reminded that had they NOT given that megalomaniacal psychopathic pResNitwit war powers (which technically only belongs to Congress under the Constitution), they wouldn't be caught between a rock and a hard place about funding the troops either. They could have voted against Nitwit's war and still then vote against the extra funding with a clear conscience (most of which seems to be going to/for Halliburton and their equipment and mercenaries anyway!). If Congress had kept their war powers and not given them away, we might not have been in this mess. Congress could have also demanded a limited amount of time in Iraq, as what happened with Nitwit's father's war there. As is, voting against more money for the military (read Halliburton, mostly) gets them charged with being unpatriotic, be they Dems or NeoCons.... They can't win for losing, but shame on all of them for giving Nitwit war powers!!! We desperately need the checks and balances to go back to what they were!!! (And, IMHO, our military people need to be brought home - in the same amount of time it took them to get there in the first place.)

Posted by: sparrow at October 17, 2005 08:09 PM

There's also the story about election fraud in Iraq.... Story on Yahoo about Iraqi election fraud, too.

Gee, I'm so surprised...! NOT!!!

Posted by: DiAnne at October 17, 2005 08:30 PM

I was just going to post the same story. Seems that the Iraqis are learning the wrong lessons from their American masters...

Hmmm....

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20051017/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/cia_leak_investigation

WASHINGTON - Information attributed to Vice President Dick Cheney's chief of staff in New York Times reporter Judith Miller's interview notes is incorrect, offering prosecutors a potential lead to tracking the bad information to its original source.

Miller disclosed this weekend that her notes of a conversation she had with I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby on July 8, 2003 stated Cheney's top aide told her that the wife of Bush administration critic Joseph Wilson worked for the CIA's Weapons Intelligence, Non-Proliferation, and Arms Control (WINPAC) unit.

Wilson's wife, Valerie Plame, never worked for WINPAC, an analysis unit in the overt side of the CIA, and instead worked in a position in the CIA's secret side, known as the directorate of operations, according to three people familiar with her work for the spy agency.

snip

Danny Coulson, a former top FBI official who conducted several investigations of leaks, said the possibility that Libby passed on wrong information to a reporter may indicate he didn't get his information from a credible, official source.

"What it tells me is he probably got his information from dinner talk," Coulson said. Presidential aides "had access to the official information and if they had used that, you would think they would have had the right stuff."

not my president: I was just using the speech at the Grand Canyon because that was the one instance that I heard Kerry just flat out refuse to say the war was a mistake. The reporter was giving him every chance to say it, but he wouldn't . The truth is, he wouldn't say it during the debates either, or in any of his speeches. And it did affect the results of the election. I don't know about the cheating in the election- there was nothing we could do about that anyway- we aren't in charge of this government. But we can control where we stand on the issues, and we gave no real alternative to the Republicans on the war issue. In fact, Max Cleland is the FIRST Democrat I've heard yet to say we have to just get out. There are hundreds of thousands of young voters- in their late teens and twenties- who would have come out and voted the last election if someone would have just said that. But we couldn't say it, because we didn't want to admit to a mistake. This war was a mistake- that's all there is to it, and unless we leave, the Iraqis will NEVER be able to run their own country. They're living off our money right now- why would they want to actually train their own military to any point of efficiency when the gravy train will leave if they do? The South Vietnamese, amazingly, were never able to do it alone either. It's the same war, just in different times. When we leave there'll be a civil war. If we leave tomorrow, or if we leave 10 years from now. And whoever wins will rule the country. It's that simple. And if it's the majority, the Shiites , they'll lead the country back into the middle ages. That's all we will have accomplished. It's just a matter of how many American kids we want to die while waiting for it to happen. And I don't want even one more to die, so we have to stand up and say "Get out NOW." I hope our candidates for congress next year will be saying just that. If they don't , I may just stay home on voting day myself, for the first time in my adult life. Because I really don't know what the point in going to the polls would be.

Linda
I see what you're saying then. I think what I'll probably do it get less involved in the punching matches in both parties during the primaries and then decide what to do by election day. With no incumbant, the usual cat herding of the Dems & the splintering of the Repubs into business & social conservative (& other) factions, it's going to be crazy. I too am watching the 2006 Congressional candidates.

For those that haven't heard, Karl Rove on Oct. 2, the day before Bush announced the Miers nomination, arranged a conference call through James Dawson, with various right wing religious personages. The call was arranged for the next day, Oct. 3.

During that call two people, both close friends of Miers, assured the group of religious leaders that Miers would vote to overturn Roe v Wade.

STrangely, the supposedly Christian Dobson said recently on his radio program that he didn't have that information.

Several issues arise here. First, the president is vetting his nominee through a group of religious leaders for approval, before he announces the nomination. Is that standard procedure? Second, what does it say about the separation of church and state if Karly Rove, sr. aide to the president, is arranging conference calls between certain religious leaders and friends of the nominee? Third, did Dobson lie when he said recently that he didn't know how Miers would vote? The president is saying the same thing.

And lastly, why is the nominee's view on RvW the deciding factor in a supreme court nomination?

http://www.opinionjournal.com/diary/?id=110007415

Here's the story, from someone who has notes from the conference call....

DiAnne- it's the cat-herding that bothers me. Democrats over the last few years have worried far too much about their own factions- they've worried so much about keeping every single special interest group in the party happy that the public has finally noticed, and that's why they think we have no "core values."
It's called pandering, and quite frankly, our candidates are geniuses at it. Georgy's appeal is that he doesn't care what anyone else thinks about what he does- no matter how evil his motives are, and I do believe they're evil- he's the same person he was last year and every one of the four years before it. I have to give him credit for saying what he thinks- and if the fiscal conservatives and the small government conservatives don't like it, he doesn't give a damn.
Democrats try to be all things to all people, and the American public just doesn't like that. It's confusing, and they're an easy group to confuse- because they aren't really paying that close of attention anyway.
I'm gonna get involved in the primaries again, because it's essential that we nominate straight talkers who have core values, and who can communicate with Americans in their own language.
If we don't do that in 2006, we're doomed as a party. And I don't know but what we will deserve it. I think that, if we don't take the government back next year, a new third party will pop up in 2008 and will succeed where none has done before. I can see John McCain running, losing the nomination again (because of the Christian right), and deciding to branch out on his own this time. And if he does, he will win.
And it'll be because despite the fact that he's let Georgy use him as a doormat the last four years, his reputation as a straight talker will turn American's heads.
Americans want another Harry Truman. We've got to find one and give it to them.

WASHINGTON, Oct. 17 (UPI) -- A talk radio host says his program, slated to debut on a Pentagon radio station Monday, was pulled to punish him for airing audio embarrassing President Bush.

Ed Shultz played an audio tape of Pentagon communications official Allison Barber helping troops in Iraq rehearse for their broadcast video teleconference with the president last week. Barber walked them through questions and their answers and warned them the president might ask questions not from the script.

The incident was widely considered an embarrassment to the White House, which appeared to be coaching soldiers for its own political purposes.

According to People for the American Way, Barber personally called Schultz -- regarded as a liberal in the world of talk radio -- on Monday to tell him his show would not be airing Oct. 17 after all.

Pentagon spokesman Bryan Whitman denied any connection between the Barber tape and the decision to cancel Schultz's radio show. He confirmed the Armed Forces Radio Network is looking to diversify its offerings - it currently carries conservatives Rush Limbaugh and James Dobson's Focus on the Family -- but said no offers have yet been made, including to Schultz.

However, the Fargo, North Dakota radio host received a letter from AFRN confirming the Oct. 17 debut, which was posted on the People for the American Way web site Monday.

The letter was written by Manny Levy, chief of the Radio Division for AFRN. Levy refused to comment to United Press International.

"AFN Radio has squared away everything on our end to begin carrying the first hour of 'The Ed Schultz Show' each day, beginning Monday, Oct. 17, 2005," states the Sept. 29 letter.
Levy added: "An awful lot of people in the government had (or tried to have) a hand in the program selection process that ended with the decision to add 'The Ed Schultz Show.'"

"I'm afraid the staff member got ahead of the decision," said Whitman.

http://edschultz.invisionzone.com/index.php?showtopic=4138&st=20

Posted by: Amy at October 17, 2005 09:10 PM

It may be a matter of semantics. Dobson was exuberant at hearing that the President had nominated someone along the lines of what the religious right wanted.

I don't think he would lie in either case, but
may be doing a little tap dancing to smooth over the harm his exuberance and honesty caused.

You'll have to excuse Mr. Dobson. While he is being played like a fiddle, I don't think he is aware of the entire orchestra. Sadly.

Just when I thought the MSM was close to calling Shrub unpopular…. As if polling under 40 percent in every major national media poll wasn’t enough, apparently the new threshold is the support of his base slipping under 80 percent. So NOW we have to wait for the heaviest koolaid drinkers turn? Okay, that’ll never happen even if they had footage of him enjoying BBQing a baby alive. They’d still make an excuse for him. Pathetic. Apparently his biggest loss of support is among Indies.

Here’s the poll: http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/10/17/poll.bush/index.html
Bush’s job rating continues to drop
Poll shows president’s performance approval at low point

Monday, October 17, 2005; Posted: 7:44 p.m. EDT (23:44 GMT)

President Bush’s poll numbers have slipped after an uptick from his response to Hurricane Rita.
Up to four free mortgage, refinance or home equity offers - one easy form.
www.nextag.com
(CNN) — President Bush’s job approval rating continues to plummet, with 39 percent of Americans surveyed in the latest CNN/USA Today/Gallup poll supporting his performance, compared to 58 percent expressing disapproval.

Posted by: Amy at October 17, 2005 07:59 PM

Amy,

They INTENTIONALLY got it wrong. It was not complicated. All they had to do is pull out Bush's speach.

Voila!

They made a choice. And as I've seen over the months as I've followed the unreported news, places like Time, CNN, Fox, etc...intentionally hid facts from us that would have made Bush less likable in 04 and Kerry look like a Prince from Heaven sent to save us!

Way off topic (sorry) but promised and overdue (tried to keep it clean for posting):

Favorite Signs and Buttons
By Kerry Hall

This was certainly the biggest demonstration since the war began, 2 ½ years ago. The crowds were huge, energized, positive, and clearly dedicated to their cause. There were 5 buses just from Chicago for the 13-hour one-way overnight trip. Other Illinois buses came from Aurora, as well as Wisconsin, Michigan, and even Minnesota.

At least in Vietnam, Bush had an exit strategy

Iraq is Arabic for Vietnam (popular t-shirt)

How many dead children will it take to fulfill the mission?

War is not the answer

There’s never a good war or a bad peace

Peace is a family value

I’m pissed

Stop bitching and start a revolution (a popular t-shirt)

The W stands for Wrong
G.W. stands for Global Warming

Join the MOB: Mothers Opposing Bush

College not combat Make poverty history

Draft Beer, Not Soldiers Republican chicks hate me

Stop Mad Cowboy Disease

Remove the terrorists—from the White House

Bush lied; 1000s died

Is it 2008 yet?

“Yee Hah” is not a foreign policy

Asses of Evil

The National Guard is in the wrong gulf

Category 5 catastrophe

If you can read this, you’re not President

If you’re not outraged, you’re not paying attention

Hey, George, my bible says lying is a sin

When Jesus said, “love your enemies” I think he probably meant don’t kill them.

GOP does not spell GOD

Especially Harsh:
Dick Cheney eats kittens

Bush + Dick = Screwed

Buck Fush (popular button)

(Under a picture of Bush and Cheney) Meet The F***kers

And from the 75 or so pro-war counter-demonstrators: Anti-war is pro-terrorist

my husband just saw the following bumper sticker:

We're creating enemies faster than we can kill them.

TSP - I have trouble excusing Dobson - he's the guy that convinced one of my neighbors to beat her kids. They both turned out badly....

Linda
I'll take straight talking if it's truth.
Bush just lies with a straight face.
I'll get involved in the primaries but am not going to get so emotionally invested until it looks like we don't have rigged elections.

Posted by: sparrow at October 17, 2005 10:17 PM

Don't I know it....

One thing for the neocons - they've got some crackerjack media people working for them. They have their news outlets - the MSM - doing all the subtle things in their favor.

oh my gosh, I missed Monkey's post way upthread and reposted the Journal link.

And Monkey is one of my favorite posters!

Stephen Colbert premiers tonight after the Daily Show. Should be fun! A whole hour of fresh humor.

Posted by: Linda Enterkin at October 17, 2005 09:28 PM

Thank you!

If there IS one thing worth learning from W, he does not give a damn what others think.

We need a Dem who will not waver from core values.

Posted by: Amy at October 17, 2005 10:40 PM

Monkey will forgive you.

Before bed mail:

Are British troops at the breaking point? This article should be read by antiwar activists - well done.

http://news.independent.co.uk/world/middle_east/article320343.ece

Bush & Blair bashing at UN conference in Rome - those bashing have a few skeletons themselves, but the point is that heads of state are calling each other terrorists and insane - this does not bode well for world peace

http://news.independent.co.uk/world/africa/article320404.ece

VA Seeks to Punish Iraq War Veterans - this one just went out to Vets for Peace & also to a bunch of VA & Salvation Army people who work with the homeless

http://www.truthout.org/docs_2005/101705R.shtml

The ability of what we could do then and now are worlds apart. We needed a win, and playing the margins is not Kerry's style, but I believe he had to do it. He was also more critical and vibrant than most here want to credit. I don't know why. A campaign is grueling, and moreso with a public in fear and misinformed. He learned, and for the record, the Grand Canyon was a gotcha moment either way at a very tired moment after the Convention. Why won't our supposed big-picture Dems get over it?

John Kerry has been doing great lately, and I hope you are aware of the bold speeches and attempts to make change. Isn't easy in this environment. Many others are trying too, but if I hear one more litmus test on the IWR, and misunderstood, by people who want change and a win, I'll lose what sanity I have remaining.

I'll add to the signs above:
Make levees not war
The empty warheads are in the White House

I just read this in the NYT and laughed out loud:

Somebody knows the value of understatement...
snip
snip

October 18, 2005
In Sign of Conservative Split, a Commentator Is Dismissed
By RICHARD W. STEVENSON
WASHINGTON, Oct. 17 - In the latest sign of the deepening split among conservatives over how far to go in challenging President Bush, Bruce Bartlett, a Republican commentator who has been increasingly critical of the White House, was dismissed on Monday as a senior fellow at the National Center for Policy Analysis, a conservative research group based in Dallas.

In a statement, the organization said the decision was made after Mr. Bartlett supplied its president, John C. Goodman, with the manuscript of his forthcoming book, "The Impostor: How George W. Bush Bankrupted America and Betrayed the Reagan Legacy."

snip
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/10/18/politics/18bartlett.html?ex=1130299200&en=4d4c37a6753e3379&ei=5070

Cheney may be target of probe

BY JAMES GORDON MEEK, THOMAS M. DeFRANK and KENNETH R. BAZINET
DAILY NEWS WASHINGTON BUREAU

WASHINGTON - A special prosecutor's intensifying focus into who outed a CIA spy has raised questions whether Vice President Cheney himself is involved, knowledgeable sources confirmed yesterday.

At least one source and one reporter who have testified in the probe said U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald is pursuing Cheney's role in the Valerie Plame affair.

In addition, at least six current and former Cheney staffers - most members of the White House Iraq Group - have testified before the grand jury, including the vice president's top honcho, Lewis (Scooter) Libby, and two top Cheney national security lieutenants.

Cheney's name has come up amid indications Fitzgerald may be edging closer to a blockbuster conspiracy charge - with help from a secret snitch.

"They have got a senior cooperating witness - someone who is giving them all of that," a source who has been questioned in the leak probe told the Daily News yesterday.

Cheney was questioned last year byprosecutors and has hired a private attorney, former colleague Terrence O'Donnell, who declined to comment when contacted by The News.

Cheney spokeswoman Lea Anne McBride only offered the standard canned response that her boss is cooperating.

Libby and President Bush's political mastermind Karl Rove remain the focus of the probe into whether Plame's cover was blown in a scheme to embarrass her husband, ex-Ambassador Joseph Wilson, who debunked claims that Iraq tried to buy nuclear materials in Niger.

Libby is often described as "Cheney's Cheney," a loyal and discreet lieutenant who shares his boss's hard-line philosophy and bareknuckle attitude toward political enemies of the Bush administration.

Cheney and Libby spend hours together in the course of a day, which causes sources who know both men very well to assert that any attempts to discredit Wilson would almost certainly have been known to the vice president.

"Scooter wouldn't be freelancing on this without Cheney's knowledge," a source told the Daily News. "It was probably some off-the-cuff thing: 'This guy [Wilson] could be a problem.'"

The News reported in July that Libby was "totally obsessed with Wilson."

Whether that obsession amounts to criminal misconduct will be decided by Fitzgerald - but if Libby is indicted or implicated in wrongdoing, Cheney's reputation will suffer as well.

Originally published on October 18, 2005

http://www.nydailynews.com/front/story/356858p-304125c.html

Posted by: mkh at October 18, 2005 06:25 AM

Bartlett, if I remember correctly, was the Republican who went on record in Ron Suskind's disturbing October NY Times Magazine piece - saying that there would likely be a civil war within the GOP if Bush were reelected.

And just to demonstrate that we have religious nuts on our side of the fence, here's a juicy tidbit about Madonna.

New York Daily News - http://www.nydailynews.com
Denouncing sin? Who is that girl?

Monday, October 17th, 2005

Once, she told papa not to preach. But now, at 47, Madonna has come down from the mount with a message for you sinners.

People "are going to go to hell, if they don't turn from their wicked behavior," the singer proclaims in her new film, "I'm Going to Tell You a Secret."

Despite her many homes, the former Material Girl says she has renounced "the material world. The physical world. The world of illusion, that we think is real. We live for it, we're enslaved by it. And it will ultimately be our undoing."

Reading from Scripture at one point in the film, the mother of two — who won't let her children watch TV or eat ice cream — says, "I refer to an entity called 'The Beast.' I feel I am describing the world that we live in right now."

All this seems to have come from her embracing the mystical Jewish teachings of the Kaballah. But it might seem strange to those who remember that the Catholic girl, confirmed as Madonna Louise Ciccone, used to go out of her way to shred the envelope with nose-cone bras and three-way "Sex" shots.

Catholic League President William Donohue likes Madonna's new morality: "For her to have this sudden wakeup call — that the kind of behavior for which she is infamous is not salutary for young people — is refreshing."

But he doesn't like her proclamation, also made in the documentary about her 2004 Re-Invention tour, that "most priests are gay." Donohue adds, "We're glad to see she is no longer with us. Jews will have to make up their own mind about whether they're going to welcome her. Lots of them don't want to."

But Madonna is clearly beloved at the Kaballah Center in L.A.

On Saturday, she dropped by a birthday party here for Karen Berg, wife of Kaballah Center honcho Phillip Berg. The woman who returns to the disco on her new CD, "Confessions From the Dance Floor," tried "to join in the dancing but immediately sat back down," says a spy.

Apparently, she's still feeling the pain of the birthday riding accident on her English estate.

thanks MAtt-I was not aware of that article.

For me, its a sign that there is some THOUGHT still happening within the GOP....maybe not much, but some

Posted by: mkh at October 18, 2005 08:15 AM

October 17, 2004
IN THE MAGAZINE
Without a Doubt
By RON SUSKIND

Bruce Bartlett, a domestic policy adviser to Ronald Reagan and a treasury official for the first President Bush, told me recently that ''if Bush wins, there will be a civil war in the Republican Party starting on Nov. 3.'' The nature of that conflict, as Bartlett sees it? Essentially, the same as the one raging across much of the world: a battle between modernists and fundamentalists, pragmatists and true believers, reason and religion.

"Just in the past few months," Bartlett said, ''I think a light has gone off for people who've spent time up close to Bush: that this instinct he's always talking about is this sort of weird, Messianic idea of what he thinks God has told him to do.'' Bartlett, a 53-year-old columnist and self-described libertarian Republican who has lately been a champion for traditional Republicans concerned about Bush's governance, went on to say: ''This is why George W. Bush is so clear-eyed about Al Qaeda and the Islamic fundamentalist enemy. He believes you have to kill them all. They can't be persuaded, that they're extremists, driven by a dark vision. He understands them, because he's just like them. . . .

''This is why he dispenses with people who confront him with inconvenient facts,'' Bartlett went on to say. ''He truly believes he's on a mission from God. Absolute faith like that overwhelms a need for analysis. The whole thing about faith is to believe things for which there is no empirical evidence.'' Bartlett paused, then said, ''But you can't run the world on faith.''

http://brandon.multics.org/stuff/suskind2004without.html

Linda great to hear you plan on getting back into the campaign. Thought you were a Clark supporter Linda? Hopefully others won't give up on JK.

I agree with your theory about wanting a straight talker, but when I saw McCain with his arm around Bush last year and now out in Ca embracing Arnold the straight talker label took a politican's tac.McCain can now kiss Ca goodby.

We see the ugly tactics being used currently in the Va Governor's race against Tim Kaine, I just hope our political operatives learn how to play hardball in their campaigns against the RNC. Repubs tend to exaggerate statements and even use bald face lies and make up stuff in their commercials and campaigns so I just don't see that one statement/ speech as being that damaging. If JK didn't say that at the Grand Canyon the RNC would have just made up something else.

I know most here are outraged over the war, but I still think that Bush plans on withdrawing troops next summer before the '06 election and I am doubtful it will be that big and issue in 3 years. Heck voters have already forgotten Katrina a few months ago how can we keep their attention about Iraq for 3 more years. There will be tons of unknown issues occur b/w now and '08.

Nonny,

Then there is THIS quote to remind people of:

Bush said "This is a chance for Congress to show that they want to keep the peace".
Even the dj on an AZ show said, "THIS IS WHAT KERRY VOTED FOR! And when people say he voted for the Iraq war - It's a lie"

That extends to everyone who voted for the IWR upon the specific reassurance of the pResident that a vote for IWR was also a vote for Peace.

Posted by: sparrow at October 17, 2005 07:28 PM

Sparrow and Nonny,

We should hammer that home as much as possible.