« Remembrance | Main | For Whom Did Your Voting Machine Vote? »
My Experience with FEAR UP
When I started to even THINK about writing letters to the editor, Gore had lost the recount and Bush was installed. I thought, but I didn't do anything.
Eight months later I had a baby, and six weeks after that I was nursing my baby at about nine in the morning and watching the Today Show. The date was September 11, 2001.
A week later, as I watched the manipulation of fear turn into a grab for what would eventually look an awful lot like a fascist government in our midst, I knew I needed to DO something.
I was a political and media professional. I had skills and experience. How could I stand by and do nothing?
I began to feel real terror, but not from the terrorists who attacked us in New York. I felt terror at watching the freedoms and liberties I was raised to fight for, be traded off like the cheap items and a silent auction. A very silent auction.
But I had a big problem. I had a new baby.
What if Mommy says a word that the government doesn't like and they drag Mommy off to jail? Shortly after 9-11 the Congress gave the President the power to determine who is an enemy, and then pick them up, never to be seen again.
Of course, we come to find out five years later that both Congress and the Courts are just an irritating formality to the Executive. The President did not need Congress to pass legislation approving that. He would have done it anyway. And that is what I suspected in the first place.
If I had been single and childless, it would have been much easier, but now I had a baby to consider.
I called my sister (not the Bush supporter, the one who believes in the Constitution), to complain about the government. I call her everyday with a "Daily Disgrace" political report. She had been already getting these calls for sometime, when finally one day in October she asked me pointedly, "Look, when are you going to do what you know you should be doing about this? When are you going to get involved and start writing and going public with all of this stuff?"
I said, "I can't. I'm afraid. What if they don't like what I am saying? These are some seriously scary people."
I still remember the tone of her voice when she said to me, "That's why you have to do it. Because these are very scary people."
I looked at her hard. "Hey, I'm not kidding. These are scary people and they are NOT going to like what I am saying."
She put her coffee cup down, and as she stood and turned to put on her coat to leave she looked down at the baby and said, "Well then, you better be sure that whatever you have to say, you shout from the rooftops so as many people hear as possible. The more people that know what's going on, the safer we'll all be. Really, it's our only hope."
And she was right. She still is.
One foot in front of the other. Keep moving, keep going. Each thing builds on the next.
Hope conquers despair, and action vanquishes fear.
IF YOU ARE NOT WATCHING BUSH ON LIVE TV RIGHT NOW...
You are missing a meltdown.
All hands on deck.
Holy good God.
"They've told me what to say?"
Kerry supported a line item veto in person?
huh?
I am at school-what is going on???
This is like watching a box of those refrigerator word magnets, the politics edition.
Just random political words strung together.
I can't wait to see how the transcripts clean up the stammering.
"If I didn't believe we could succeed, I wouldn't be there. I wouldn't put those kids there," Bush said at a White House news conference.
I... I... I...
My government, my government, my government.
What happened to WE and OUR?
What a dope fiend.
Is it a Nixonian melt-down????
Helen Thomas is a goddess.
QUESTION: I'd like to ask you, Mr. President -- your decision to invade Iraq has caused the deaths of thousands of Americans and Iraqis, wounds of Americans and Iraqis for a lifetime.
Every reason given, publicly at least, has turned out not to be true. My question is: Why did you really want to go to war? From the moment you stepped into the White House, your Cabinet officers, former Cabinet officers, intelligence people and so forth -- but what's your real reason? You have said it wasn't oil, the quest for oil. It hasn't been Israel or anything else. What was it?
BUSH: I think your premise, in all due respect to your question and to you as a lifelong journalist -- that I didn't want war. To assume I wanted war is just flat wrong, Helen, in all due respect.
QUESTION: And...
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060321/ap_on_go_pr_wh/bush...
I just tried to call the White House comment line - 202-456-1111 direct and it was busy. So I called the White House operator 202-456-1414 and had the call transfered. The call was answered and I said that I was insulted to be lectured about war from a draft-dodger and liar like Bu$h.
When asked if he could envision a time when US troops are out of Iraq, Dubya said "That's for future presidents to decide."
Clearly, he's not planning any troop withdrawal during his time in office. Typical of this idiot; make a mess of things and leave it for someone else to clean up. 2008 can't come soon enough...
Helen Thomas is a goddess.
QUESTION: I'd like to ask you, Mr. President -- your decision to invade Iraq has caused the deaths of thousands of Americans and Iraqis, wounds of Americans and Iraqis for a lifetime.
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
Thomas deserves an award - for courage and persistence... maybe the medal of freedom???
Helen Thomas is a goddess.
QUESTION: I'd like to ask you, Mr. President -- your decision to invade Iraq has caused the deaths of thousands of Americans and Iraqis, wounds of Americans and Iraqis for a lifetime.
@@@@@@@@@@@
Thomas deserves an award for courage and persistence - how about a medal of freedom award???
He also stood by embattled Secretary of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld.
“I don’t believe he should resign. He’s done a fine job. Every war plan looks good on paper until you meet the enemy,” he said.
(Ummmm, NO IT DOESN'T! Everyone said there were not enough troops, and the enemy you are fighting today were not even there when you invaded, numbnuts! Was Iraq the "hotbed of terrorism" you claim it to be BEFORE you DECIDED to INVADE?)
My head hurts.
The Democrat response to the President's claim of progress in Iraq:
http://www.c-span.org
Latest Video
Democratic Report on Progress in Iraq (3/20/2006)
“I can understand how Americans are worried about whether or not we can win,” Bush said, adding that most Americans want victory “but they’re concerned about whether or not we can win.”
Clear as mud?
He also defiantly defended his warrantless eavesdropping program, and baited Democrats who suggest that he broke the law.
Calling a censure resolution “needless partisanship,” Bush challenged Democrats to go into the November midterm elections in opposition to eavesdropping on suspected terrorists. “They ought to stand up and say, ‘The tools we’re using to protect the American people should not be used,”’ Bush said.
Ok, I"m going to throw this out here, without a lot of research for you guys to pick apart....
Quote from todays press confrence via Yahoo News:
He said he agreed to U.S. talks with
Iran to underscore his point that Tehran's attempts to spread sectarian violence or provide support to Iraqi insurgents was unacceptable to the United States.
Here my thought..
A. Saddam waged a 10 year war with Iran. Suupported in large part I'll add by the U.S.
B. A large part of the insurgency continues to support Saddam.. or at least his policies, which supported a hostile attitude towards Iran. To way oversimplify, part of this was based on Iran's distaste for Saddams secular, rather than Theocratic government.
Conclusion: It would be illogical for Iran to support the insugency and Bush's attempt to link them is in the same catagory as linking Saddam and 9/11.
and if I"m right.. justo how dumb does Bush think we are, I figured this out before my second cup of coffee this morning!
I think the press is smelling blood:
BUSH DOES NOT GIVE PRESS CONFERENCES - unless he is very desperate. Perhaps Rove said to Bush "we have no other choice - we have to give a press conference to stop the bleeding" (declining polls).
I suspect the press has all of this pent-up resentment about being continuously snubbed by this administration and daily by Press Secretary McClellan.
Jury Finds Abu Ghraib Dog Handler Guilty
FORT MEADE, Md. -- A jury found an Army dog handler guilty Tuesday of abusing detainees at Iraq's Abu Ghraib prison by terrifying them with a military dog, allegedly for his own amusement.
More: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/03/21/AR2006032100581.html
Remember these guys?
http://msnbc.msn.com/id/11942973/
N. Korea: Pre-emptive strike not U.S. monopoly
Spokesman says nation has weapons to counter American nuclear threat
[snip]
SEOUL, South Korea - North Korea suggested Tuesday it had the ability to launch a pre-emptive attack on the United States, according to the North’s official news agency.
...
The spokesman also disputed last week’s U.S. national security report that, among other things, said North Korea posed a serious nuclear proliferation challenge.
“In a word, it is a robbery-like declaration of war,” the spokesman said. “Through this document, the Bush administration declared to the world that it is a group of war fanatics.”
I am still confused.
On the Taos of Politics thread..March 19, I posted a scenario:
Posted by: battlebob at March 20, 2006 09:43 AM
It discusses the problems with surveillance in a wireless society. All wireless conversations can be listened to just like all voice conversations can be listened to in a public square. In wireless, most people want to hide their true identities. So words are heard without knowing who said them.
So if a terrorist plot is hatched over the air and detected, the detection will happen before any warrant can be obtained. The ID and IP Address are fairly easy to obtain. This is where a warrant would be necessary? Or when the ID and IP Addresses are known, is a warrant needed to view the provider logs? Is the warrant only needed to raid the house and grab the PCs and people?
The point is, we can’t treat voice and wireless the same initially. They become the same when a person is attached to the wireless message just as when a voice is attached to the voice message; not before. There is a lot of noise from both sides because the intent is to keep the discussion non-focused on specifics. I would like to know the specifics and remove the noise.
One exstension from my post...
If a policeman were in the mall and overheard two people discussing planting a bomb, would probable cause allow the policeman to make an arrest?
If the NSA overhears two people two people discussing planting a bomb, would probable cause allow the NSA to make an arrest?
I think my last post is what the Repubs are saying to the public.
The question is..are they correct?
sorry about the last post..I flunked copying and pasting.
My complaint to the Public Editor of the NY Times:
Incomplete/Misreporting of the President's speech in Cleveland -
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/21/politics/21prexy.html
You, in your article, for the most part, completely ignored that fact that most of the speech - almost ONE HOUR (as opposed to the half hour monologue of prepared remarks) - was devoted to questions from the audience. You could have pointed out that this IS EXCEEDINGLY RARE for this president and that the president usually does not take questions from ANYONE - be (it) in the press or just non-press Americans. Furthermore, you could have pointed out that the questions weren't screened, rehearsed or canned as in most of Bush's Q and A's (like the Social Security townhalls that were packed with Republicans and questions were screened. Third, you failed to mention some very interesting questions coming from the audience. The most interesting I thought, the question about the three reasons that administration gave for going to war in Iraq turned out to be false, incorrect or baseless: WMD; Al Qaeda in Iraq and nuclear bomb program. The question was, given this horrible track record how could anyone, or any American believe what the administration is saying now (certainly with regard to Iran)(?)
@@@@@@@@@@
the offending, inaccurate, incomplete part:
After Mr. Bush concluded his remarks, he took numerous questions from the City Club, a nonpartisan group that calls itself the oldest free-speech forum in America and prides itself on asking sharp questions. Members of the audience queried him about the administration's secret eavesdropping program and the failure to find unconventional weapons in Iraq, among other topics.
Mr. Bush appeared relaxed throughout, and in a question about Iraq segued to Iran. "The threat from Iran is, of course, their stated objective to destroy our strong ally Israel," he said, adding, "I made it clear, I'll make it clear again, that we will use military might to protect our ally, Israel."
One question, directly challenged Mr. Bush's honesty, credibility and his trustworthiness. Bumiller seemed to miss this extremely brave and bold question (it was not just about the "minutiae" of WMD) which the press seems to routinely ignore (and did again in Bumiller's article). Also Bush DID NOT appear relaxed, he appeared awkward and ill-at-ease during the Q and A, clutching the lectern as if for support, sighing, stuttering, looking down several times at the lectern as if he were either ducking or shielding himself from the onslaught of embarrassing questions.
Here is Finegold's resolution...
http://www.c-span.org/pdf/FeingoldResolution.pdf
The NSA Resolution never mentions wireless and the Bush response mentions all communications.
In my mind, there is a lot of unanswered questions.
Sorry for the short posts...
So does a resolution designed for wiretaps mean land-lines only?
Or does it cover wireless and/or internet communications?
The explanation is never given.
Jury Finds Abu Ghraib Dog Handler Guilty
FORT MEADE, Md. -- A jury found an Army dog handler guilty Tuesday of abusing detainees at Iraq's Abu Ghraib prison by terrifying them with a military dog, allegedly for his own amusement.
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
I believe this is the first officer/intelligence person that has been convicted from Abu Ghraib. All of the others were MP's/national guard.
Look at the jury deliberations: 18 hours over three days.... a toughy.....
@@@@@@@@@@@@
He had faced the stiffest potential sentence of any soldier charged so far in the Abu Ghraib scandal _ up to 24 1/2 years in prison if convicted on all counts. With the six counts, he could face more than 8 years in prison, forfeiture of all pay and allowances and a dishonorable discharge. His sentencing was scheduled later Tuesday.
The military jury deliberated for about 18 hours over three days before announcing its verdict.
@@@@@@@@@@
He will probably get a very light sentence - that is what they usually do for officers...
Sorry for the short posts...
So does a resolution designed for wiretaps mean land-lines only?
Or does it cover wireless and/or internet communications?
The explanation is never given.
Posted by: battlebob at March 21, 2006 01:40 PM
@@@@@@@@@@@
Wiretaps, I believe, apply to land-line only, where there is an assumption of privacy. Cell phone/radio communications are not considered (legally anyway) "private" communication.
Posted by: battlebob at March 21, 2006 12:42 PM
Well bb, you have officially left me flat out of breath on that one, because that is EXACTLY what I feared all along with the Moron King's unbridled bravado. You get people hurt with talk like that, on a broad scale... or hasn't that dawned on this nation yet?
PSST! This PNAC thing ain't working out so well.
Weh-hell-hell, buckle up kids, the Captain has ordered turbulence ahead... THAT'S power.
I mean, why wouldn't any nation adapt immediately to a pre-emptive strike way of thinking in return?
After all, the leaders of the most powerful nation on earth, with their self declared and blindly self aggrandized divine hotline to the moral and forthright answer to all the greatest challenges of the world today, yes the very leaders who talk to the Almighty on a regular basis, THEY said this is the way to behave in times such as these...
Weed it and reap ... sow what you ask?
We'll see I guess, and that totally sucks to the Nth degree times infinity... so there.
Harv S. Tyme
So confusing .. North Korea sabre rattling about pre-emptive nuclear strike, on the heels of US' revised (but similar to before) military policy that we can make pre-emptive strikes. Russia and China heads meeting for 5th time in a year, Russia making pipelines to China, selling them military equipment, doing joint military drills, agreeing on policy toward Iran. American Progress Report outlines how Belarus' head is the "last dictator" in Europe and Russia is tending anti-democratic. Does this mean we have alot of enemies?
Also, I am nominating Helen Thomas for a Backbone Award. If you want to join me, email Bill Moyer at http://www.backbonecampaign.org
nmp -- I'll join you on the backbone award for Helen Thomas. She's been a hero of mine for a very long time.
------
There's a diary on kos from a teacher posting about a student of hers who was killed in Iraq last week and her thoughts about it.
What's most interesting is a particular set of comments in which she shares why she voted for Bush and how she has come to view that vote differently and all the reactions of the other commenters. It highlights what we all know to be true -- one on one consistent sharing of accurate news and information sources is critical.
read the thread of comments here...
http://www.dailykos.com/comments/2006/3/21/85850/9747/3#c3
read the diary here...
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/3/21/85850/9747
Something that we have discussed here but this post adds a whole new level of insight. It's by an American expatriate who's lived in France for a long time.
S/he points out what was inaccurate in the CNN coverage of the riots about the employment law changes.
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/3/20/15241/6790
Posted by: ralpheh at March 21, 2006 01:53 PM
Yep...There is no privacy over the internet or airways.
So Dumbo can listen to cell or internet or monitor emails all day without a problem.
Feingold's resolution only deals with wire taps.
Dumbo is listening to all.
Unless Dumbo is doing illegal wiretaps, ther is no problem.
Since there is more wireless communication done, why bother with illegal taps in the first place.
Repeat from earlier...
Calling a censure resolution “needless partisanship,” Bush challenged Democrats to go into the November midterm elections in opposition to eavesdropping on suspected terrorists. “They ought to stand up and say, ‘The tools we’re using to protect the American people should not be used,”’ Bush said.
Yep, Kudos to Helen Thomas! I woke up to Dumbya's "news" (propaganda) conference this morning. Dumbya was so condescending to her I wanted to bitch-slap his chimperor face. He never did answer her question, I noticed. And for the short time I was paying attention, he didn't directly answer anyone else's questions satisfactorily either.
After what sounded like the 500th time Dumbya mentioned (undefined) 'enemies' and 'war on terra' I gave up, knew this was a pep rally for his illegal war, and went to make myself breakfast. I sat down to watch TV again, only to immediately be faced with Bob Schieffer (CBS) cheerfully yakking about 'this is the Bu$h reporters see behind the scenes' - and he proceeded on with complimentary remarks about The Cretin; I lost my appetite.
After doing a few things around my place, I walked in the room to put stuff back where the TV was on just in time to see that a soap opera was starting and the words were "brought to you by the US Army"!!! The US Army was sponsoring a soap opera?!?!? Anyone besides me see the futility of advertising for military careers just now? How about slashing the advertising budget for the US military? I don't see where advertising for recruits is necessary in a country where military service is entirely voluntary; it's a waste of money.
I turned the TV off. I can't deal with such outright displays of propaganda twice in one day - first The Cretin with his pep rally for his war, then advertising for the US Army on a soap opera. It's just too much.
Reality TV, eh Nonny?
http://msnbc.msn.com/id/11942973/
“We have built nuclear weapons for no other purpose than to counter U.S. nuclear threats,” the Foreign Ministry spokesman said.
~~~~~
“In a word, it is a robbery-like declaration of war,” the spokesman said. “Through this document, the Bush administration declared to the world that it is a group of war fanatics.”
Posted by: battlebob at March 21, 2006 12:42 PM
~~~~~
I mean, why wouldn't any nation adapt immediately to a pre-emptive strike way of thinking in return?
Posted by: monkey at March 21, 2006 01:56 PM
~~~~~
Yes. I hardly dare think about it, let alone write that particular fear. While i do not fear a 'terrorist attack' from any criminal or group of criminals (since they are so few in number), I do fear a pre-emptive attack from another country who has had just too much of The Cretin's illegal invasions, too much of him telling other leaders of countries what to do and how to run their countries, and have some fear they will say 'enough is enough' and will attack this country because of the threat The Cretin's administration poses to a country that would not do us harm otherwise.
Bu$hCo created enemies where none existed prior to when he was installed as president. That makes him the most dangerous man on the planet since he became the #1 poster boy to recruit criminals to commit terrorist attacks, and he became the world's #1 bully....
Posted by: monkey at March 21, 2006 03:54 PM
:-) Yes...!
Actually, I can deal with reality - life and death crises situations better than anyone I know. It was part of my job to do so years ago, and I can keep my head when everyone around me is going off on hysterical tangents. Genuine crises situations don't last all that long, and writing reports about those few minutes takes much longer.
I just can't deal with the disassociated illogical reality of the egomaniacal psychopathic brain, or the protective bubble of faux reality in which the Criminal Cabal keeps The Cretin....
Dwahzon
Interesting post on Kos from the expat in France.
I would like to recommend 2 books - "American Vertigo," by the French philosopher Bernhard Henri-Levi, and "European Dream," by the American writer Jeremy Rifkin. They're both very very interesting. The Rifkin book is full of history and statistics which are pertinent to similarities and differences in problems faced by US and EU, and potential solutions. It's an enormous amount of context. The BHL book was panned by Garrison Keillor, who seemed to think the places visited in America were not typical and that the responses were those of an outsider. My husband and I both read the book though, & felt an affinity for what he wrot & had a quite different reaction. The US is a large & diverse country, & we lived where Garrison Keillor lives for a long time.
Yeah, NonnyO, no wonder we retreat to fiction once in a while.
ANY news program these days, whether it's Anderson Cooper's 360 Degrees, or others on CNN, MSNBC, or something on the major networks, are just a little more reality than I even care to digest full time some days.
I come here, get the facts, turn on the tube for current events coverage and some "news", and it is ALL just TOO MUCH. Sometimes I flip on the tube and they are going over all this Iraq war talk and debating Dems with Republicans and I just go "blah blah blah" and turn it off.
I don't know about you, NonnyO, but I look forward to some fiction with James Spader on Boston Legal and Terri Hatcher and the girls on Desperate Housewives. Those are the two fictional treats I indulge in weekly. I figure I deserve it for staying sane in the midst of all this reality.
Truth- I highly recomment "24". Right now, terrorists are rushing off to attack Los Angeles with poisonous gas, the president has declared martial law in LA, the counter terrorist unit has been attacked and rendered so weak that the totally inept Dept of Homeland Security has taken over, and our hero has just found out that his girlfriend might be a double agent. To top it all off, the president looks just like Richard Nixon. Now, as a true political junkie, that's the kind of escapist TV I love :-)
It makes even the world under Georgy seem ALMOST sane. But I still know better.
Oh, and I forgot to mention- the VP is the one who is REALLY in control of the government in the midst of all the "24" mayhem.
Sounds like reality TV, doesn't it?
Hello All,
Dick and I are on vacation and I cannot tell you how good it feels to be NOT in DC...Ok, I'm telling you.
We are in Vermont. And it feels GOOD.
Reading back over the posts of the past three days (getting online is tricky here in the woods!), I see some dicussion on the loss of passion for marches and vigils, and that has been my experience too. I am concerned that we are not nearly worried enough yet. And yet, resting deeply, reading, walking in the woods as we have these past few days, has been meaningful and rejuvenating and I think we are ready to focus in more.
I recommend walks in the woods, and some hot soaks, and then coming back here ready to push on.
We have been talking a lot about next steps and whether or not people are ready to get active in a more concerted and more global way. Hopefully, we can all talk about it when we return--Thursday.
I will say one thing--Vermont does not like GWB very much! It's like being in DC, only with mountains...
Love to all.
Karen- sounds very relaxing. I suspect that one of the reasons the war protests are losing passion is that there has been no real "face" put on the horror of this war. The news reports are all sanitized- the only place to get the real pictures are online. But events that were reported in our local papers this morning may begin to change all that.
The horror of what the Vietnam war was doing to our troops and what they were doing to civilians never became real to Americans until Lt. William Calley's story . The My Lai incident convinced Americans that we weren't the "good guys" in that war anymore, and it brought to light the effect that war was having on our troops- that American soldiers would commit the atrocities in My Lai was almost unbelievable to the average American. It was the direct effect of a long, unwinnable war, and Americans began to realize that it wasn't just the enemy that was being damaged by that war- it was also the psyches of every soldier who had served there. Lt Calley was not a monster until he went in to Vietnam, but he became one while he was there.
Unfortunately, the story this morning of the alleged massacre committed in Haditha some 4 months ago may have the same effect that My Lai had on Vietnam. Up until now, Lyndde England has been the face of the "evil American" in Iraq, but she committed no real murders- only torture and harassment that some of Americans actually believe is "ok" in a war theatre. If it is found true that the 12 Marines who are now under investigation murdered these two families while they were still in their bedclothes, and even murdered a 3 year old girl in the process, Americans may just wake up on the effect that Iraq is having on their sons and daughters who are serving there.
It's a shame that it sometimes takes events like this to wake America up to her conscience, but that's just the way it is. I hope this report is investigated thoroughly and all the Marines responsible brought to justice, in front of TV cameras, just as Lt Calley was. It might mark the beginning of the end of that war.
It's just a shame that it takes something like this to wake our country up to the horror.
I figure I deserve it for staying sane in the midst of all this reality.
Posted by: Truth Shall Prevail at March 21, 2006 05:34 PM
Yes, one MUST take a break from reality to rejuvenate one's psyche long enough to stay sane nowadays. A good book, contemplative silence, soft or cheerful music, a walk in the woods (as Karen suggested)..., or, if one is in the mood for something more noisy, indulge in the pleasures of escapism in those very few TV shows worth watching. Thanks for the reminder about Boston Legal (I'll tape it so I can fast forward through those idiotic commercials which only annoy me by shouting at me or playing background noise while someone is shouting - can't abide them).... I faithfully watch CSI - they always find evidence to convict the bad guys beyond a reasonable doubt.
Following up from last thread's end. I was at the Board of Elections all day.
Ralph, I don't like running away from home, or being run from a home here, by bringing up facts that differ from yours. Do you want your opinion to be the majority of one? No way live in a neighborhood.
You promote a horrible polarization in how you see events, responsibility of the electeds, election strategy, often confusing passion with noise. Pragmatism, sometimes, means more to success than shooting off one's mouth. November elections are critical, and working on election reform essential.
I just questioned the timeline of the Downing Street memo, who did what when, and you allied me with Hillary. A bit drastic.
Posted by: Marjorie G at March 21, 2006 06:32 PM
Marjorie,
Are you making any progress with the board of elections? I hope so.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060321/ap_on_re_us/moussaoui
I guess it really didn't matter if we had an FBI prior to 911, since the FBI supervisors didn't read memos placed on their desks back then anyway.
Huh. Maybe 911 was unavoidable after all.
SINCE THEY WERE ALL SO DAMNED INCOMPETENT.
But Bush stressed that the war is necessary. "My attitude about the defense of this country changed on September the 11th when we got attacked," he said. "I vowed then and there to use every asset at my disposal to protect the American people." (Including breaking the law ???)
The world gave Saddam Hussein a choice, he said. "When he chose to deny inspectors, when he chose not to disclose, then I made the difficult decision to remove him," he said, "and the world is better for it." (yeah, things are going much better in the world since Saddam is out of power... oh, and I have some beachfront property in Nevada to sell you)
Bush said al Qaeda had made it clear that Iraq would be the central front in its plots against America and to overthrow modern governments. "I think it is very important to have a president who listens to what the enemy says," he said.
(So listening to the enemy is ok, but listening to dissenting opinions in this country is not ok?)
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/IraqCoverage/story?id=1750163&page=1
Unbelievable... literally.
I am not surprised about Bush - I heard awhile back that they were building permanent bases in Iraq, & it's either that or aircraft carriers constantly in the Gulf.
I just donated money toward trying to get balance back to Congress and I'll tell you why. A volunteer (under auspices of John Kerry, btw) called me from North Carolina and talked with me for a long time - about why we needed a big change in Congress. He told me alot about Hurricane Katrina and he favored impeachment. I think he was definitely departing from his script but I appreciated a call from a friendly Southerner who figured out how to reach me away from home & who obviously was very committed. Something about it gave me hope for 2006. The money figures I read earlier today also look good, except the RNC is too well-heeled. Rove & friends haven't been knocked out. We must stand together.
Following up from last thread's end. I was at the Board of Elections all day.
Ralph, I don't like running away from home, or being run from a home here, by bringing up facts that differ from yours. Do you want your opinion to be the majority of one? No way live in a neighborhood.
@@@@@@@@@@@@@
Whatever.... You can ignore the DSM, PNAC, Scott Ritter articles, Joe Wilson's articles and the presence of the war-mongering NeoCon cabal in the Bush administration. These are my facts. You, apparently, have a completely different set of facts, sounding very similar to the DLC talking points. we disagree profoundly.
One of the unwritten rules here is that we can all agree to disagree respectfully and with courtesy. There is no place for name-calling or disrupting the flow of discussion.
We know that the people who post and simply read the DCP blog and participate in the community come from a broad range of viewpoints -- a very broad range of viewpoints from very left liberal to greens to libertarians to independents to republicans who just can't bring themselves to buy into the neo-con / theocratic vision that currently dominates the Republican party leadership.
That's one of the things that allows us to educate ourselves and expand our understanding. If a particular person is not comfortable with that approach, they are welcome to find another community that more suits their approach. This one will remain one that accepts disagreements on specifics with graciousness and courtesy.
One of the unwritten rules here is that we can all agree to disagree respectfully and with courtesy. There is no place for name-calling or disrupting the flow of discussion.
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
I disagree with Marge profoundly. I also disagree with Hillary Clinton and Joe Lieberman profoundly as well... We disagree on the facts I guess..
Will Farrell: Bush on Global Warming
http://www.transbuddha.com/mediaHolder.php?id=1147
Ralpheh
Ambassador Joe Wilson was one of the first to endorse Kerry. Just sayin' ..
Pragmatism, sometimes, means more to success than shooting off one's mouth.
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
The good folks at the D.L.C. are extremely pragmatic!!! And they never shoot off their mouths!!! Every D.L.C. talking point is carefully weighed, gamed out, analyzed politically and demographically, and then over analyzed or misanalyzed..... just look at the successes of the past 4 years
More Helen Thomas, Woman of Backbone
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/3/21/173627/737
She takes on Blitzer.
Ralpheh
Ambassador Joe Wilson was one of the first to endorse Kerry. Just sayin' ..
Posted by: DiAnne at March 21, 2006 10:15 PM
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
It is too bad that Kerry didn't have much, if any, position on Iraq the war or the run up to the war. And worse, the clever, clever Kerry people told us Dean, Kucinich and anti-war people to shut-up about the war because Kerry was electable and knew exactly what he was doing.
And you know what happened....
Hey Raleph..quit being a turd...
There are very few defenders of the DLC around here...as you probably saw. They have this annoying attitude of staying in their beltway bunkers and deciding the strategy for the next election.
The problem is...they are thinking it is still 1992 and their guy Bill is running. Clinton was a masterfull politician and they were able to focus on seperating themselves from Bush1 and Dole.
But they are not doing that now. They seem to favor another Clinton and want to run by being like the Repubs.
Everyone has the facts...some intrepret the results differently...some are still asking questions.
BTW..how come you never asked for the election data from Nick? I would think someone who has such a grasp of all the details would want it!
One of the best places to post a rant is in the Soapbox forum...
http://www.democracycellproject.net/forum/index.php?s=824356b48faf6b5a27217cac4d155b44&showforum=87
---------------
And as for the DLC, though one may not like their approach to politics, the reality is that in many states, dems of any stripe are a minority. Any Democratic candidate who wishes to put together a majority to win office must win the votes of dems, independents and even moderate republicans.
--------------
Last but not least, name-calling does nothing but dissuade people who are beginning to explore blogs -- perhaps beginning to explore why they were wrong to vote for Bush -- from exploring any further. Why should they take such abuse?
Not to mention the name-calling simply reflects on the name-caller as I was reminded today when I shared Christy's story of the luncheon with the 13 women. Christy used the term "repells" to refer to the Republicans in the group. My correspondent who is actually more liberal than I though not at all hooked into the blogosphere responded with the following comment:
"Repell" is a new one to me, and I have to say I find a label like that just as bad as the way some people say Liberal. Although, I'm sure some people deserve that cognomen. Both sides have their similar counterparts, who are not helping their causes with their fanatical attitudes."
I think she made a good point that people not likely to vote for someone who calls them or people that they know and identify with, names. It is not how to "win friends and influence people". It is most definitely not how to successfully present new viewpoints and win new supporters to one's cause.
ralpeh- I dunno if you think Kerry was the DLC's choice out of the primary candidates, but, for what it's worth, Wes Clark was their anointed. Wes flew into Pensacola for his speech here in December of '03 in Bill Clinton's private jet. Enough said. The DLC didn't pick John Kerry, the people of Iowa did. Not that I think he was the best candidate either. I favored Clark.
But know your facts before you talk too much.
Good night.
Posted by: ralpheh at March 21, 2006 10:21 PM
One thing I have learned here at the DCP is that I can disagree with someone without disliking that person, being rude or offensive to that person, or ever expecting them to agree with me. That's what democracy and freedom at their best have to offer.
I must say I learned this the hard way. I got defensive, and even perhaps a bit obnoxious from time to time when I felt my view point was threatened.
Finally I got to know the folks here well enough to know that each and every person's main values are the same as mine. No two people are ever going to see everything alike.
Ask twelve people for their opinion, and you'll get twelve differing opinions. If each person INSISTS on his or her way being the only opinion that is any good, or worth while, or worth listening to, we would never get anywhere.
Every one is entitled to his or her own opinion. He or she is entitled to voice that opinion to others as long as they don't make personal attacks and put other people or their opinions down. Try to disagree with the subject material, but not necessarily with the personalities and persons of those offering differing opinions.
I know for certain that we all know that you don't care for Kerry, Ralph, and that you don't care for a good many other people or organizations. I find it a great waste of time to repeatedly read from you how much you dislike Kerry, for instance. Sometimes we need to ask ourselves why we continue to hammer on one point we have already made clear over and over again. Is it because we are afraid we aren't being heard? You have been heard, Ralph, and people are content with letting you have and voice your opinion. After hearing it numerous times over and over again, though, I begin wondering why you are continuing to say something you have already made clear. Could it be because you want to force people to agree with you? Please simply state your preference, and let it go at that. We have pretty good memories around here and won't forget it. I personally find the continuous bashing of a previous candidate redundant and a waste of time. Just my .02.
The NY Times Bumiller changes tone and tune:
"Bush Concedes Iraq War Erodes Political Status"
WASHINGTON, March 21 — President Bush said Tuesday that the war in Iraq was eroding his political capital, his starkest admission yet about the costs of the conflict to his presidency, and suggested that American forces would remain in the country until at least 2009.
snip:
The (Bush's) speech tactic worked in late 2005 when another series of Iraq addresses helped to stabilize the president's poll numbers temporarily. But analysts said that with his message now familiar to the nation, it was not clear whether people were listening.
"The problem with the speeches is they get gradually more realistic, but they are still exercises in spin," said Anthony Cordesman, a military specialist at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington. "They don't outline the risks. They don't create a climate where people trust what's being said."
Ralpheh
I'm not going to argue about the 2004 election. Some of what I could say I do not want to put on the internet for the opposition to read.
Zbigniew Brzezinski had a good 4-point plan for Democrats to follow that he was talking about during an NPR interview tonight - should be archived on their website. He pointed out that terrorism is a technique of fighting, not an enemy or country, so it's impossible to declare war on it (I mean, seriously).
I did read some just now on the DLC site and their foreign policy ideas suck, imo. There is alot of good stuff on Kos right now, in fact the top article is written by a 23 year old who makes more sense than most politicians.
Your last post is way out of line. I was on the Dean side and immaturity sunk Dean....not Kerry or his ilk.
Dean could not handle the big stage. He front loaded for Iowa and blew 40 mil in nothing flat.
Even if Dean won Iowa, he was broke and had nothing elsewhere. His groups were loud, small and poorly organized. Some have survived and gotten better. Most are gone.
Now if you really want to bang a drum that makes sense, how about noise for public financing. Then the Deans, the Dennises (I have a lot of family in Cleveland and they still like him) and the others could run on equal footing.
And if you'd like to know how I know whose plane he was on- I picked him up at the airport.
Clark was the DLC's darling, not Kerry.
The DLC just accepted Kerry when Iowa and New Hampshire voted for him.
So don't blame the DLC
Good commentary, guys. I am impressed.
did. Not that I think he was the best candidate either. I favored Clark.
But know your facts before you talk too much.
Good night.
Posted by: Linda Enterkin at March 21, 2006 10:38 PM
Linda and Marge:
Kerry certainly walks on water... this much is plainly obvious to almost all Democrats. But Kerry didn't get elected in 2004, a nagging fact which the Kerryites might try to explain/analyze.
Good Night
The other thing about Dean - he intended to run as a symbolic candidate, on health care, as Kucinich did, on the antiwar issue. Trippi convinced him to try the internet route and go for it. I am not making it up. It's documented, as is Trippi and Dean's inability to communicate toward the last, as well as how the orange-hatted outsiders could not connect well with Iowans. Kerry campaign made mistakes and it has been admitted, but everybody made mistakes. Bush continues to make mistakes. Voting machines purposely made mistakes.
Linda,
I thought Shrum came from the DLC...old mister 8 times looser...
Gore didn't get elected in 2000 either.
Somehow people who are bitter about the outcome (of the primary AND the general) conveniently forget that these weren't clean elections.
Posted by: ralpheh at March 21, 2006 10:47 PM
If you want to have a pretty good reason why, just ask...
bob-I'm not defending the DLC, though I don't dislike them either. They gave us the only two term Democratic president of the second half of the 20th century , for what it's worth. I was simply pointing out that Ralpeh continuing to cut Kerry down by associating him with the DLC makes no sense. He was NOT the DLC's pick of the litter for the nomination.
Wes Clark's entire staff was just about made up of former Clinton campaign workers- his advance man had helped manage Clinton's campaigns from way back when Clinton ran for governor of Arkansas. That's just a fact. Everybody that worked for Clark's campaign knew it, and it wasn't exactly a national secret to the news media either.
Just trying to clear up a misconception that Ralpeh had made in associating the Kerry campaign too heavily with the DLC. Anyhow- since I've just said, once more, that I'm not anti DLC- I'll head off to bed now and let the chips fall where they may. I reserve the right to be personally against the Iraqi war and to still be pragmatic enough to want to get Democrats elected in any way possible. People who aren't elected get nothing done. Nighty night again.
Could it be because you want to force people to agree with you? Please simply state your preference, and let it go at that. We have pretty good memories around here and won't forget it. I personally find the continuous bashing of a previous candidate redundant and a waste of time. Just my .02.
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
Why do I repeat this??? Kerry is running for 2008 - Horrors.... if I only had the great comfort that Kerry wouldn't run again, I wouldn't be so on-edge and defensive. But I have the sense of the "Kerry Club" is already to go for 2008...
Should Kerry get the 2008 nomination - I LEAVE THE PARTY... you go pragmatic and vague and spineless, I'll go elsewhere.
An interestin site is military.com
Here are today's topics...
http://www.military.com/earlybrief/0,,,00.html
Since I am in the Defense business, this article really bothers me...
U.S. Tech Advantage 'Under Threat'
InsideDefense.com NewsStand | March 21, 2006
The technological edge the United States and United Kingdom enjoy in high-performance computing and other critical military technologies is "under threat," and attempts by the two nations to address the problem by turning to commercial-off-the-shelf capabilities will prove futile, according to a joint report unveiled by the Defense Science Board and the U.K. Defence Scientific Advisory Council. More
-----------------------------------------------
Five years ago I wrote a paper to my company and DOD leaders about how COTS products hurt us because they offer no technology advantage. Too many compromises are made between what is necessary and what is available.
These compromises get people killed.
The other thing about Dean - he intended to run as a symbolic candidate, on health care, as Kucinich did, on the antiwar issue. Trippi convinced him to try the internet route and go for it. I am not making it up. It's documented, as is Trippi and Dean's inability to communicate toward the last,
@@@@@@@@@@
Yeah, Dean can't communicate - and now he is DNC Chair.... bummer
Posted by: ralpheh at March 21, 2006 10:59 PM
Gee..I thought you said good night earlier...
I guess you refuse to beleive that Kerry did as well as any Dem could; not counting vote fraud..of course...
too bad...no candidate ever ran a perfect campaign....
too bad...no candidate has run a campagn without angering his supporters...
I like Dean..I like Dennis...I like Sharpton...I like Clarke...In fact..I liked them all....
all had strengths..all had weaknessess...all tried to hide their weakness and amplify their strengths...
I liked Kerry from the '70's for stuff he did that I forgot about...
If you want to find out election stuff, email me...
It might get rid of some of your misconceptions...
But..sometimes the truth hurts..
March 21, 2006 10:14 PM
Ralph, I have no idea why you lump me in with Hillary or Joe Lieberman, why you call me pro-war, of all things, just because I disagree with the timing of war documents, and cut some slack on the response because of the timing.
Guess my vigil friends would be surprised also.
I happen to think we need to be two-track in our thinking. Pushing for change, protecting our vote, but also understand election strategy, not just politics as therapy. That's not selling out if I want to be generous with Dems that are trying their best in this worst of minority positions.
Tom Mazzie, of Move-On, your key organization worthy of support, claims in the Boston Globe that Kerry's Iraq exit strategy is the most progressive plan. It's the same as PDA. That throws all your simplistic judgments of who are good and bad out the window.
Let me repeat Kerry's recent 10 point plan, delivered at an event. Others have good ones also, even if they happen to be in government.
(1) Obey the law, and Protect civil rights in this country.
(2) Tell the truth, and tell it to Americans all the time.
(3) Fire the incompetents, and Restore competence and integrity to Washington.
(4) Chase the money changers from the temples of democracy, and
reclaim it for the grassroots of this nation.
5) Bring our troops home from Iraq.
(6) Find Osama bin Laden, and Secure our ports and homeland.
(7) Stop subsidizing “Big Oil,†and start investing in energy alternatives.
(8) Make access to affordable healthcare a right and not a privilege.
(9) Reduce the deficit, and Respect work over wealth.
(10) Invest in education, and Fight for American jobs that restore the American dream.
“We know who we are, and we know what’s worth fighting for. We want to lead this nation to the greatness it deserves. We know what to do, we will do what we need to do, and I cannot wait for the elections of 2006.â€
Ralph, we have to work with what we have, and not look back until we succeed. All aboard.
Truth:
Well, there you go again. I have to completely disagree with you. When you get twelve people, you get THIRTEEN opinions, not TWELVE! Or is it fourteen? Oh heck, I never do expect the Spanish Inquisition.
Chuck in Houston
Hey..pretty soon we'll start hurling insults from "The Holy Grail" around...
My favorite insult..."Wiper of Other People's Bottoms"
Great description for dumbo.
good night all.
Marjorie:
Actually, I also really liked Kerry on port security and medical insurance as well.
Chuck in Houston
Marjorie:
Also, I know I asked you this before, but I keep forgeting the answer, and now I am back in the states (NY Dolls tune by the way) and near a Block-Buster and want to rent that documentary on the Motown back-up band -- was the name of the film "Funky Town"?
Chuck in Houston
Chuck, yes, welcome back. Standing in the Shadows of Motown, with the Funk Bros. Great anecdotes, playing, sense of place and history, iffy and luckily few dramatized bits.
BTW- before tucking in- Kerry wasn't even the DLC's SECOND choice for the nomination. John Edwards was. The money trail of the big donors went from Wes Clark to John Edwards and then only to Kerry after he was sure of the nomination. Kerry was too liberal for the DLC- something Ralpeh should like about him.
Thanks Marjorie -- keep the powder dry and we'll get them next time!
Keep the Faith and GOTV 2006!
Chuck in Houston
Antiwar from London
http://www.pbase.com/dave1/image/57527475
http://www.pbase.com/dave1/image/57527761
http://www.pbase.com/dave1/image/57569106
http://www.pbase.com/dave1/image/57421021
http://www.pbase.com/dave1/image/57419873
Ralpheh
I like Dean. I think he's a good communicator.
I didn't write the expose about Dean & Trippi - it may not even be true but neither is some of the stuff that's said about Kerry.
I shook Dean's hand.
I shook Denns's hand.
Didn't get close enough to Wes.
They were all good.
Do you not believe there was voter fraud as a factor?
By the way:
California Sued Over Diebold Voting Systems
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/032106R.shtml
Some California voters and activist groups sued the state's top election official on Tuesday in an effort to reverse the certification of certain electronic voting machines made by Diebold Inc. Diebold came under fire in California after the state's March 2004 primary election for glitches at polling places attributed to its voting systems.
& I just got a photo of a smashed Diebold ATM machine (from France) - I wonder why ..
5{LAD Dean is DNC chair. I think he's good.
Edwards sends out good emails. I like him too.
What do you think about the other candidates besides Hillary Clinton (if she is) and Kerry (if he is) - like Biden, Daeschle?
2006 comes before 2008.
It's the Illinois primary today and the candidate I've been working for won by 70% of the votes.
And now the real work begins...
Madame:
Congradulations and a big "Roger" to that. Now is the time to start focusing and marshalling resources for a big and serious push. We know the issues, we know the facts, we know the stakes. Now, we have to learn all over again how to organize and win.
God Bless and GOTV 2006! Let's go TEAM USA! We can do this! We are the "Good Guys"!
Chuck in Houston
There's a cabin in the pines
In the hills of Caroline
And a blue-eyed girl is waiting there for me
I'll be going back some day
And from her I'll never stray
In a cabin in the hills of Caroline
Oh the cabin in the shadow of a pine
And the blue-eyed girl way down in Caroline
Some day she'll be my wife
And we will have the life
In a cabin in the hills of Caroline
Cegalis? Or Duckworth? All the news I can find on the internet(S) says they are in a virtual tie as of an hour ago.
Hey Truth:
Good to see somebody up. Guess it's a virtual tie.
Chuck in Houston
Also, TSP, I hope you took my post above in the spirit in which it was intended. We primitives aren't so good with communications sometimes.
Chuck in Houston
Chuck,
I can't find anything else on it. Nothing. Using Dogpile right now too.
Nighty Nite!!! :-)
Truth:
It will all be clear by morning.
Chuck in Houston
Number of Precincts 399
Precincts Reporting 393 98.5 %
Times Counted 26549/268458 9.9 %
Total Votes 25214
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Christine Cegelis DEM 10455 41.47%
Lindy Scott DEM 4128 16.37%
L. Tammy Duckworth DEM 10609 42.08%
Write-in Votes 22 0.09%
http://www.dupageresults1.com/results/2006_03_results/dem-1.htm
Is that close enough for an automatic recount?
On this old rock pile
With a ball a chain
They call me by a number not a name, Lord, Lord
Gotta do my time, Gotta do my time,
With an aching heart
And a worried mind
When that old judge
Looked down and smiled....
Oh, and Chuck ~
Yes, I took that the way it was intended. You, by the way, and the other gentlement here are not primatives.
Primatives are the people I was speaking about a few threads back who were raised by parents from the "old country" and believe a woman belongs in the kitchen barefoot and pregnant. They make up the population of this small town in rural red America. As far as the honey drawing more bees than vinegar, I don't want these bees!!! I don't give them vinegar though, I just smile in public and laugh in private. Not at them, but just because it is kind of humorous.
l% difference between Cegelis and Duckworth. 6 precincts still left to report results.
gentlemen not gentlement (even)
Truth -- thanks for that -- and we will keep working on this from both ends I hope! We're all in this together after all. We cannot lose.
Chuck in Houston
United we stand
DEM CON 06 DIST REP DEM
Total
Number of Precincts 399
Precincts Reporting 399 100.0 %
Times Counted 26856/268458 10.0 %
Total Votes 25507
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Christine Cegelis DEM 10536 41.31%
Lindy Scott DEM 4206 16.49%
L. Tammy Duckworth DEM 10743 42.12%
Write-in Votes
OMG...the difference is only 207 votes!!!
That has got to be within the margin of recount.
Oncall,
If this is indeed the final vote count, I hope Christine will consider running as independent, unless she does not want to split up the progressives (democrats).
This was for the house right?
Duckworth wins the Primary
Duckworth wins the Primary
Holy Cow, Duckworth wins the Primary
http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/03/22/illinois.primary.ap/index.html
Is this good or bad for Dems?
I don't know battlebob because she may have one the skirmish, but the behavior of the DCCC left a very bitter taste in Cegalis supporters mouths. Therefore, these people may be so bitter that they may refuse to vote for her at all.
It seems much more than your typical primary when everyone is treated equally by the party. But maybe we just never knew they did this before.
Sparrow,
I don't remember this much noise over a primary.
Maybe the two candidates can meet and patch a coalition together. Either one can take Hyde's seat if all Dems support only one. Neither will win if the vote is split.
Posted by: sparrow at March 22, 2006 03:22 AM
Yes for the 6th district in IL. Duckworth got it by a little over 1000 votes, per the Chicago Tribune, with 81% of the precincts counted so far. I don't know if Cegalis will demand a recount; she's a great lady and I'm sure she'll do what's best for the cause.
Other news for those who have been watching this: in the 8th district, Melissa Bean will be facing David McSweeney, a wealthy investment banker who "believes in the Reagan principles of lower taxes, less government spending, and a strong national defense" (probably all because he has a photo of him at 14 yrs old shaking Reagan's hand...Barf...)
Imus says this morning after playing the tape of Helen Thomas questioning Bush at his news conference yesterday, when are they just going to put her to sleep?
And when are they going to drive that dirtbag off the air? And there is some humor there?
A bunch of us have nominated Helen Thomas for a Backbone Award, by emailing http://www.backbonecampaign.org
Please help - it's not an official campaign - we're just doing it
Posted by: Ira at March 22, 2006 09:11 AM
By dirtbag, you are, of course, referring to Bush? Would love to see him go off the air.
We know that oncall and others here preferred Cegelis in yesterday's Illinois primary, but I hope that now that that battle is over that all our Illinois bloggers will now move on and support Ms.Duckworth help us take back Congress this November. It is only with unity that we can end our national nightmare. Battlebob, this is bad if our Illinois breathern want it to be.
Posted by: karen at March 21, 2006 05:59 PM
Karen, I too am concerned that there aren't enough people yet to really take a stand.
I know what I hear in my community, but the polls by state don't show that we are in the CLEAR majority yet. Bush has lost alot of confidence, and people are upset, worried and angry, but enough to stand in the streets or sit in the streets for hours?
Even though I consider myself an independent, we need to stop referring to Dems that are speaking out as "spineless" and other male privacy terms. It's not very helpful for us if we want to win this fall.
It would be helpful if we stop attacking Dems and refighting the 2003-2004 primaries. The ABK attitude only plays right into the hands of Bush and the GOP.
Hear, hear -- Indie Liberal, you are so right.