What Would Maria Do? -- Mom-ing the Government

Please recommend Kos version:

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/6/12/7625/60422

Thank you!

All social issues are womens issues. Mommy issues.

I never understood why male dominated governments don't understand that.

Until they do, every society they make will fail.

The suicidal evolution of mankind can only be stopped by ...other men.

The suicidal evolution of mankind can only be stopped by ...other men.
Posted by: Christy at June 12, 2007 08:55 AM

Do you really think so, Christy? That is so depressing. I see women making a difference every day here. There just aren't enough of us doing it.

Yes, I do think so. And yes, it is a horribly depressing thought.

Every woman makes a differece, we are the bearers of life.

But very few women have a good man willing to protect her and her children from other men.

In the end it is not even really about guns, it is about who will always be stronger, even without guns.

Nature made it unfair. Only men can change how men flex such unfair power over those that will always be at their mercy.

Ever seen what happens to young bull elephants raised without older bulls keeping them in line?

They become homicidal. They kill things for fun. Even their own.

Suicidal rage and homicidal rage are the same thing.

Until good men can control other men... as a race, we are doomed.

Ape Man
by The Kinks

I think I'm sophisticated
'Cos I'm living my life like a good homosapien
But all around me everybody's multiplying
Till they're walking round like flies man
So I'm no better than the animals sitting in their cages
In the zoo man
'Cos compared to the flowers and the birds and the trees
I am an ape man

I think I'm so educated and I'm so civilized
'Cos I'm a strict vegetarian
But with the over-population and inflation and starvation
And the crazy politicians
I don't feel safe in this world no more
I don't want to die in a nuclear war
I want to sail away to a distant shore and make like an ape man

I'm an ape man, I'm an ape ape man
I'm an ape man I'm a King Kong man I'm ape ape man
I'm an ape man
'Cos compared to the sun that sits in the sky
Compared to the clouds as they roll by
Compared to the bugs and the spiders and flies
I am an ape man

In man's evolution he has created the cities and
The motor traffic rumble, but give me half a chance
And I'd be taking off my clothes and living in the jungle
'Cos the only time that I feel at ease
Is swinging up and down in a coconut tree
Oh what a life of luxury to be like an ape man

I'm an ape, I'm an ape ape man, I'm an ape man
I'm a King Kong man, I'm a voo-doo man
I'm an ape man
I look out my window, but I can't see the sky
'Cos the air pollution is fogging up my eyes
I want to get out of this city alive
And make like an ape man

Come and love me, be my ape man girl
And we will be so happy in my ape man world
I'm an ape man, I'm an ape ape man, I'm an ape man
I'm a King Kong man, I'm a voo-doo man
I'm an ape man
I'll be your Tarzan, you'll be my Jane
I'll keep you warm and you'll keep me sane
And we'll sit in the trees and eat bananas all day
Just like an ape man

I'm an ape man, I'm an ape ape man, I'm an ape man
I'm a King Kong man, I'm a voo-doo man
I'm an ape man.
I don't feel safe in this world no more
I don't want to die in a nuclear war
I want to sail away to a distant shore
And make like an ape man.

Monkey
In some ways many of the apes are less primitive than we are. The native Americans kind of had it right about man and animals.

I'm all for goin' native...

Come to DC, y'all. We can go native here...

Tune Inn.

Do you know why it is depressing...?

Because suddenly a wonderful monkey comes swinging by singing "I'm An Ape Man!"

And all of us females giggle and swoon, and deep down we know some men have evolved into something better. We know if those men could attain power, there would be such hope and life for us all.

All women understand that, and so do those few good men.

We know there is hope, but instead we are watching the world die.

The heartbreak of it is unbearable.

Me, too, I wish we could just go back to swinging from the trees singing 'I'm An Ape Man!'

How fun.

monkey for President!!

I just answered myself a question I have had ever since I first heard the name Darwin.

How to mass evolve the human race, in less than a thousand years. Less with the nifty internets tubing info around.

We need a new religion.

One founded on two simple principles....

Belief in one God, The One who made the trees.

And dedicated to understanding the evolution of mankind.

You do not even need a church, just trees.

"Is your God the one who made the trees? Then we believe in the same God."

The trees are His alter. We should go back to praying amonst the trees. Finally a church we can all be comfortable in.

A religion like that could make even me a church goer again. And think of how many trees would be planted as soon as the money changers realize forrests are the future.

Ummm...

Amen.

Christy,
brilliant. I'm in.

The Trees
by Rush

There is unrest in the forest
There is trouble with the trees
For the maples want more sunlight
And the oaks ignore their pleas

The trouble with the maples
(and theyre quite convinced they're right)
They say the oaks are just too lofty
And they grab up all the light
But the oaks cant help their feelings
If they like the way theyre made
And they wonder why the maples
Cant be happy in their shade?

There is trouble in the forest
And the creatures all have fled
As the maples scream `oppression!`
And the oaks, just shake their heads

So the maples formed a union
And demanded equal rights
the oaks are just too greedy
We will make them give us light
Now theres no more oak oppression
For they passed a noble law
And the trees are all kept equal
By hatchet,
Axe,
And saw ...

Just in, I posted at Kos thread:

from Tina Richards:

Immediate Action is required: Join the Swarm from home.
We are currently occupying Rahm Emanuel's office in DC and we need calls and faxs sent ASAP to demand the end of the occupation.

Washington D.C. office call 202-225-4061 or fax to 202-225-5603.

Something you can do...
****

And then, this:

So i just called Rahm's office to support the swarm. The woman, very nice, asked me if I wanted to receive an e-newsletter, since I am so interested.

I replied that I already get a great amount of news and information from the Rep.'s office and that I was calling to give some information TO him.

The American people want this war to END. NOW.

The folks in his office are also sending information TO him.

We all get a lot of information FROM the offices. They really should not be surprised at information coming back in. That is called participatory democracy~!

This is the message I left on Karen's (brilliant) post at dKos:

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/6/12/7625/60422
Would you argue with a bitch?
[Quote from Karen's diary]
And yet, women are so often criticized for getting in the faces of lawmakers and asking questions, speaking out, and letting folks know how most of the people in this country feel. "Strident", we are called. "Let the process work", we are told. "They have their reasons", we are reminded.
[End of Karen's quote.]

And women are also called 'aggressive bitches' when they point out right from wrong, but if men say or do the same thing, they are praised for being just plainly assertive. That's always amazed me, even though I've worked in positions where women were a novelty years ago. To adapt and do my job well, I had to learn to act like a man, say and do the same things men did. (Well, okay. To be fair, it was law enforcement, and male or female, the officer had to be right or it might mean the end of someone's life.)

Personally, I wouldn't argue with a snarling bitch defending her puppies, protecting them from harm. She's only protecting the next generation of her own kind, trying to ensure a future for them. Isn't that precisely what homo sapien women are trying to do nowadays? Make sure our offspring (by birth or just because they're one of our own kind) have a future...? (No one in their right mind would interfere with a female of any kind except in rare circumstances where a rabid bitch was devouring or harming her own or others, and then it would be only a rescue mission.)

"Seems to me" that every four years or so male politicians wake up and realize women make up 51% of the world's population and just before election day they do something women approve of so they can get our votes. That's condescending, and it treats women like teenage girls with a nanosecond attention span (and some fit the stereotype, I know that - so do some men, for that matter).

Women politicians are now following suit, and like their male counterparts they're still kow-towing to the Bu$histas and their corporations and the religious reich and that mysterious thing called 'the middle' (who are the so-called 'people in the middle,' and didn't their parents teach them right from wrong, and why can't they make up their minds?), which doesn't bode well for women, children, men, or any other living thing on the planet. It's utterly shameful that women have to become political whores to try to accomplish anything, and then become corrupted by the system they were elected to try to balance or even fix.

"Let the process work" - we've tried the existing process and given it years to try to work. Georgie and Dickie and their evil minions who have lied to us weekly, if not daily, are still in power because the men (majority in Congress, along with their women counterparts who have become political whores for corporations and the administration) have seen fit to leave them in power "for their own reasons" (and those reasons have never been explained, and I'm tired of senile old men symbolically patting us on the head like we're mentally challenged little children who don't understand how the world of politics works).

War is wrong. That's a given. The war in Iraq is more wrong than most because the premises for the invasion were lies. The only people who benefit are oil corporations and Halliburton and their ilk. Under the Geneva Conventions the invasion of Iraq was an act of aggression against an innocent country, and therefore it is a war crime. Torture and imprisoning innocent people at Gitmo (and wherever else rendition flights took prisoners) are also war crimes. There are no middle shades of gray when it comes to these issues, this particular 'war of choice' based on lies to steal oil from the Iraqis, nor the torture and false imprisonment.

What I do not understand is why our politicians (of both political parties) don't seem to get that, why they have not been howling for impeachment of people who are so obviously lying war criminals. Georgie and Dickie give politicians of all stripes a bad name, but yet they are still in power. Why?!?

What is the benefit to both neoCons and Dems to leave Georgie and Dickie in power, especially since questionable legislation in the last seven years has now laid the groundwork for a "legal" fascist dictatorship...?

It's up to the politicians of both sexes and both political parties to give us 'poor dumb animals' a logical explanation for why these war criminals are still in power and taking us over the edge into madness.

Come to DC, y'all. We can go native here...

Tune Inn.

Posted by: karen at June 12, 2007 09:51 AM

Thank you!

I *may* be in the DC area, if I can talk my company into paying for a seminar in Reston...

Posted by: Christy at June 12, 2007 10:22 AM

Personally, I'm all for everyone dealing with the existential angst of knowing that there is NO supreme being and facing the fact that this is it. We are born, we live, we die. What we do with our lives while we live determines whether or not we affect our fellow beings on this planet for good or for ill. It's called 'personal responsibility.'

Funny thing is, last night I was going through old papers and found an article from 1993 that talked about the rise of the "religious right." The phenomenon isn't new, but thanks to the endless loop of Lamestream Media, we hear about it more often now.

Logic - a beautiful word from the Greek 'logos' - 'reason.' I'm looking for reason, for wisdom, for people to strive for knowledge, rather than accepting the status quo (which currently means many people quietly and meekly accept the fact that we have war criminals who lie to us every day running this country). Because of "men" like Georgie and Dickie and their minions, it's become acceptable to keep one's self uneducated (and willful ignorance is stupidity in my personal lexicon). That's shameful.

But, in lieu of "christianity" that has so badly skewed and screwed women and our reputation as life-givers, I'll take trees. Preferably the mighty and sturdy oaks so hallowed by my Celtic ancestors.... :-) "A mighty oak was once a little nut that stood it's ground...."

We may have Gonzo and Paris but at least we don't have the breastfeeding and urine fatwa scandals

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/national/319433_egypt12.html

Ah, The Tune Inn...

Nonny,

A tree offers its shelter to everyone equally, no matter what they actually believe.

Could you imagine an entire forrest of trees sculpted for our presence among them...? Could you imagine how beautiful that would be?

I think that is what Heaven will look like. A forrest.

Posted by: NonnyO at June 12, 2007 11:21 AM

Notice that it's not just Christianity, but all monotheistic religions in the West, that have painted women as the originators of sin, and therefore inferior to men by default.

A big about-face from the earlier religions that considered women's birthing and nurturing qualities mysterious and divine.

If anyone needs an "Honor Your Mother" bumper sticker with a picture of the Earth next to it, it's me. :)

(Alas, this is one of those ritual writings that don't seem to be attributable to any one specific source...)

------

The Prayer of the Tree

You who would pass by and raise your hand against me
Hearken... ere you harm me
I am the heat on your hearth on a cold winters night.
The friendly shade screening you from the hot summer sun,
My fruits are refreshing draughts, quenching your
thirst as you travel on
I am the beam that holds your house
The board of your table,
The bed on which you lie
and the timber that builds your boat,
I am the handle of your hoe
The door of your homestead
The wood of your cradle
and the shell of your coffin
I am the bread of kindness and the flower of beauty
You... who pass by... listen to my prayer
Harm me not...

And to think of it, I need another bumper sticker - the purple one that says "Sorry I missed church, I was busy practicing witchcraft and becoming a lesbian."

George, George
George of the Jungle,
Strong as he can be.
(Ahhhhhhhh)
Watch out for that tree.

George, George,
George of the Jungle,
Lives a life that's free.
(Ahhhhhhhh)
Watch out for that tree.

When he gets in a scrape,
he makes his escape
with the help of his friend,
an ape named Ape.
Then away he'll schlep
on his elephant Shep
While Fella and Ursula
Stay in step.

Well....George, George
George of the Jungle,
Friend to you and me?

Watch out for that tree.

*What*? He is?? Why I am shocked, *shocked* I tell you to hear that there is Gonzalizing going on in this establishment!

Posted by: Otter at June 12, 2007 06:18 AM

@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@

Otter!!!!!,

Do you want me to post that Cindy Sheehan quote about John Kerry!!!!

Or should I wait a little longer???

Otter just provided our Official Prayer.

TY Otter.

"You... who pass by... listen to my prayer
Harm me not..."

EXACTLY.

This right here is the repeatable condensed version

'I am the beam that holds your house
The board of your table,
The bed on which you lie
and the timber that builds your boat,
I am the handle of your hoe
The door of your homestead
The wood of your cradle
and the shell of your coffin
I am the bread of kindness and the flower of beauty
You... who pass by... listen to my prayer
Harm me not..."

Amen.

I'm a believer.

Ralpheh
Why is Negroponte pretending to be Secretary of State and putting pressure on Al-Maliki? I thought Condi was Secretary of State. What does Cheney do when he goes over there? What the hell is going on?!

Posted by: not my president at June 12, 2007 09:47 AM

@@@@@@@@

Negropointe is a long-time Bushie/flunky/loyalist. The Bushies hate the State Department and don't trust it, so they use people like Negroponte and Bremer instead. The Bushies would rather use bombs and bullets to do the talking.

Ralpheh
Oh yeah - the State Department are supposed to be diplomats. In the Bushie mind, I suppose diplomats are wimps and elitist wine sippers who hang out with foreign people. That would be a definite no-no (unless they are dictators with plantations or sheiks with oil etc.)

I supported my last two presidential candidates because I thought they'd be stronger on diplomacy - never mind that one chose that neocon Lieberman for VP and the other voted for the IWR. Just explaining ..

Ralpheh
It would not be surprising Cindy Sheehan would have a negative quote about Kerry or the Democrats. I would too if I were thinking in total world terms. I had to vote for the US of A head - no choice as that's where I live, work and vote. In my heart, for the planet as a whole, I don't mind that Cindy went and hung out with Chavez. It's hard being an antiglobalizationist and simultaneously having to deal with national party politics. So the threat of posting what Cindy said about John can easily be put in context. I live in Seattle and was spit on by Deaniacs for supporting Kerry, called a Zombie, yelled at by Vets for Peace even though my best friend is a member, and I did support the message of Kucinich but no one was being pragmatic at that point. That's why I'm sitting this one out and not supporting a candidate til the bitter end - I did that in 1996 and 2000 and wanted to be as committed for 2008 as I was for 2004 but it is just not happening. Your threat is fairly toothless, for me. I like Sheehan and I like Kerry and I'm not schizophrenic (my sister is though).

"Funny thing is, last night I was going through old papers and found an article from 1993 that talked about the rise of the "religious right." The phenomenon isn't new, but thanks to the endless loop of Lamestream Media, we hear about it more often now."

1993 isn't really that long ago and movements take time to grow.

The religious right probably first became a factor during the Nixon years as Nixon played on the so-called Moral Majority. Prior to that they weren't much of a factor in the Republican Party, especially as Barry Goldwater, whatever his faults, was a strong opponent of the religious right.

There was also a brief break in their growth as many evangelicals voted for Jimmy Carter. Subsequently the Republicans have sucked them in, uisually taking advantage of them but doing minimal for their agenda.

This all changed with Bush who actually buys their agenda and has pushed it far more than any other Republican.

I've always thought that George W. Bush is nothing more than a repackaged version of Pat Robertson from the 1988 campaign with a more electable pedigree/message.

His run made me physically ill.... and I still feel like crap.

Swear to Gop.

Read the following article:

Economists attack Iran policies
By Frances Harrison
BBC News, Tehran

Tehran market (file picture)
Food is getting more expensive by the week in Iran
Fifty-seven Iranian economists have launched a scathing attack on President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

They have accused his government of ignoring the basics of economics.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6744841.stm

(Honestly, Ahmadinejad's economic policies are right along the lines of our own W's.)

Posted by: monkey at June 12, 2007 02:13 PM

They both look alike too.

Posted by: not my president at June 12, 2007 01:55 PM

And the dictators/sheiks better be right wing too. Leftist dictators, like Chavez, are considered regional/world menaces.

Posted by: Ally McRepuke at June 12, 2007 02:18 PM

Meant that too! ;-)

Meanwhile, back at the bRanch...

(CNN) — The mystery of President Bush’s missing watch has been solved.

After days of internet rumors and international reports that the president’s watch was stolen as he was mobbed by a crowd in Albania this weekend, the White House is setting the record straight.

Asked at Tuesday’s briefing if the presidents watched was lifted, spokesman Tony Snow answered, “No, it was not. It was placed in his pocket…the president put it in his pocket and it returned safely home.”

Snow says a careful review of video of the scene confirms no pilfering.

Snow also said there was no concern over the president’s safety as enthusiastic well wishers grabbed his hands and arms.

“What you had was an example of when captive nations come free,” he said.

Using the moment to allude to recent White House foreign policy decisions, he added, “They understand the role the United States has played through the decades, taking unpopular moves.”

Snow also said the crowd was “euphoric because we helped make them free….if there was a problem, the Secret Service would have dealt with it. Trust me.”

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2007/06/12/mystery-surrounding-bushs-watch-solved/

*coughing* dick!
*coughing* dick!
*coughing* dick!

See? Another "diplomat" is saying Iran is arming Iraq AND Afghanistan. Well maybe they are. They would not have been had we not gone there. Saddam was the best deterrent against Iran that anyone had going, including the Saudis. Boy did we mess that up. 9/11 and we went after a COUNTRY that has nothing to do with it. Even going into Afghanistan, we did so fairly blindly, with Russian generals who had been mired in that particular quagmire for a decade warning us. Whoa .. now we'll go into Iran from the air and the sea and maybe the ground and it'll be Apocalypse Now. Iran has a million man army that moves in human "waves" - not so different from invading crazy N Korea. & look out Israel (although they will probably be the trigger point, with the cluster bombs and bunker busters and daisy cutters they bought from us, plus their hidden nuclear arsenal).

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/national/1107AP_Iran_Taliban.html

Posted by: monkey at June 12, 2007 02:20 PM

Albania Land of the Free is where the Chinese illegally detained Gitmo residents were sent (with no jobs or prospects, following their release from yet a different prison). I read about it in Sunday's paper.

Lieberman is licking his chops.

http://www.medpagetoday.com/Psychiatry/Depression/tb/5913

Male vets twice as likely to commit suicide as male civilians.

“What you had was an example of when captive nations come free,” he said.

Posted by: monkey at June 12, 2007 02:20 PM

Total f'ing baloney.

That captive nation NEVER knew what freedom was, still doesn't understand it.

Otherwise, George W. "There Ought To Be Limits To Freedom" Bush wouldn't have been their hero.

Posted by: not my president at June 12, 2007 02:25 PM

We should invade *South* Korea for its role in f'ing up American politics beyond repair.

A partisan ally is NOT an ally.

“What you had was an example of when captive nations come free,” he said.

What kinda mindless drone propaganda spewing nationalistic nonsense IS that?

Tense much?

Bush as usual is full of crap. Albania is an "emerging democracy" as of Clinton's presidency, not his. Anti-communist protests took place ten years before he even came into his first term. Even when they allowed multiple parties, it took awhile before there was a coalition government. Then people rioted against the IMF and people put their life savings in pyramid schemes, til 80% of their gross national project was thus invested. The police and military were looted of millions of Kalishnikovs and anarchy prevailed. Armed citizens took over the cities and any Americans there had to leave. Then socialists took over, and riots continued. Refugees flooded in from Kosovo in the late '90s. The Socialists fragmented again and corruption continued. They're trying to get into the EU and NATO. Their workforce keeps migrating out of the country. The only reason they cheered for Bush is because it's the first time they were visited by a US President and he badmouthed Russia.

Posted by: not my president at June 12, 2007 04:24 PM

Again, the Dems do hard work, the Republicans claim all the credit.

Korea 1953. Cuba 1961. Vietnam 1960s. Deja vu.

Again, the Dems do hard work, the Republicans claim all the credit.

Posted by: Ally McRepuke at June 12, 2007 04:32 PM

Easy work if yer daddy can get it for ya.

Posted by: Ralpheh at June 12, 2007 11:54 AM

------------

I don't know what you're talking about in this comment, but frankly, I don't don't give a damn. For some reason you seem to determined to act like a jerk when it comes to this stuff. I see no reason to waste time playing sophomoric little games with you, sorry.

Women in Art... very cool...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nUDIoN-_Hxs

http://rawstory.com/news/2007/Fitzgerald_wants_Libby_jailed_now_while_0612.html

Fitzgerald wants Libby jailed now, while Secretary Rice hints at pardon

Special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald sought the immediate imprisonment of former top White House Adviser I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby in papers filed Tuesday with a federal district court. At the same time, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice hinted at the possibility of a pardon from President George W. Bush for the former chief of staff to Vice President Dick Cheney.

"Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald urged a federal judge Tuesday not to delay former White House aide I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby's 2 1/2-year prison sentence in the CIA leak case," wrote AP's Matt Apuzzo on Tuesday morning. "Fitzgerald, in court documents filed Tuesday, said an appeals court is unlikely to overturn Libby's conviction because the evidence against him was so overwhelming."

{More on link.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nUDIoN-_Hxs
Posted by: monkey at June 12, 2007 06:15 PM

Absolutely, positively one of the BEST videos I've ever seen! It incorporates many of the famous faces from great works of art throughout many centuries, done by old masters that I recognize from my years in Art History studies.

Thanks, monkey! :-)

God I would love to knock at least one of those buck teeth out of her stupid lying head.

Yes, the tree religion allows that.

We can't have a tree religion without the law of the jungle.

I saw a magnetic ribbon on a truck up north in Rednecksville - it said "Support Road Head"

Also, someone wrote "No War" in the prayer book and someone else crossed it out. Then someone wrote a peace sign and "Why would God want war?"

Strange

Glad to be back in "War is Terrorism" country

Watch the Albanian footage and tell me W didn't get his watch stolen. That's the only reason he was mobbed. They expected a Rolex. I'll bet he hasn't seen a crowd like this since one of those staged events in 2004.

http://english.hotnews.ro/George-Bush%5C%27s-watch-%5C%27%5C%27vanishes%5C%27%5C%27-in-Albania-articol_45211.htm

I also watched Karen's fine video, which was blocked to me at work but I had sent it to friends who recommended it - pretty amazing to see myself about half way through and to realize that I knew or knew of so many of the fine women shown. Bravo, Karen! It is really nice to be pulling so much together.

What you had is an example of what happens when cheap watches come free.

Wesley Clark lets Joe Lieberman have it:

After wrongly supporting George W. Bush's strategic blunder of attacking Iraq, and continuing to support Bush's failed policies after the invasion, Senator Joe Lieberman made irresponsible comments this weekend regarding military action against Iran.

(re L's appearance on Face the Nation):

This kind of rhetoric is irresponsible and only plays into the hands of President Ahmadinejad, and those who seek an excuse for military action...The Iranians are very much aware of US military capabilities. They don't need Joe Lieberman to remind them that we are the militarily dominant power in the world today.

Only someone who never wore the uniform or thought seriously about national security would make threats at this point. What our soldiers need is responsible strategy, not a further escalation of tensions in the region. Senator Lieberman must act more responsibly and tone down his threat machine.

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2007/6/12/151042/484

Dear All:

Well, we do need to evolve past this "Guys/gals" thing. Sure there are differences. Viva la difference as they say (vive le difference? never could figure that out....What ever happened to Andree anyway?). And probably more overlap.

Also, since no matter what the Venus and Mars theme seems inevitable, way to go Clark. If we have to go down that war hero route, my guides will be people like General Clark and Senator Kerry and Senator Webb who have walked the walk and can still talk the talk. Not to mention Senator Inouye and President Kennedy. And I am sure many others.

Peace.

Chuck in Houston

PS: Good to see Ron on here!

Posted by: Chuck at June 12, 2007 11:41 PM

It's "vive la difference" in feminine, Chuck.

And I do think I am qualified to say that men and women have different strengths that are best used combined together.

And it's good to see Ron and YOU here!

Thanks, Ally -- that's just it -- different strengths combined together (with a lot of overlap). That's exactly what I wanted to say.

Chuck in Houston.

PS: Plus the Korean War congressman from the Bronx -- Charlie Rangel (Wrangel?) I think. Don't get me wrong -- being a war hero isn't instant karma. Hitler was a war hero. But to go through that and emerge with an intact soul does count for something, ceteris paribus.

Code Purple I guess.

Chuck in Houston

Came home and finally saw the video.

Wonderful piece of work. Thanks Karen!

(And thanks for including me with all these great activists... I am truly honored.)

Chuck, I dig any conversation that starts out with 'We must evolve...'

But on the guy/gal thing, the law of the jungle will never allow us to evolve past it.

The only thing we can do is accept and even revel in the differences of our natural roles.

I am not saying men should be in control, I am saying men should allow far more women power than they give other men. Women can not take that power from you, you must give it.

It will save our species.

PS... I like the differences.

My toys are much prettier than yours.

Christy:

Revelling in the differences instead of bogging down in them is exactly evolving past it!

And are you saying Corvettes aren't pretty? Not that I have one (I drive a 1992 Honda Civic 5-speed manual that often gets over 40 mpg), but if I was to buy a toy car, it would probably be a 1956 Corvette.

You are right that power tools aren't too pretty, although an Azure (?) Blue Makita cordless drill....

Neither are fishing rods, tackle boxes, and (I suppose) deer/elk rifles or duck/goose shot-guns (I don't hunt so I don't have those).

So you are probably right on that one. And I probably wouldn't want it any other way.

Chuck in Houston

My toys are much prettier than yours.

Posted by: Christy at June 13, 2007 12:23 AM

No dispute there!

Posted by: Chuck at June 13, 2007 12:36 AM

Silly boys. Cars (trucks/SUVs/whatever) are for girls!

At least that's what some bumper stickers say... :)

Ally/Christy:

And what about those pretty red/chrome Snap-On tool boxes??!! Or the chrome tool boxes for pick-up trucks with all those little raised "X's" to prevent skidding? Life ain't fair. I've learned to face that ugly fact.

Chuck in Houston

Hey Chuck
thought of you when I transferred about 5000 songs from one computer to another!

Guys:

OK, you win. We're not pretty. But, NMP, on the other side, my old Fender Jazz bass, beat to heck and polyglot (non-stock) as it is, is beautiful!

Chuck in Houston

That is, it's OK provided the drummer isn't a jerk and the guitarists and vocalists aren't incompetent prima donnas.

That sounded weirder when I read it than it did when I wrote it, but I hope that anyone that played in a band will take it in the right spirit.

Chuck in Houston

Sacred Shiite shrine devastated
June 13, 2007

BAGHDAD, Iraq (CNN) -- Insurgents blew up the remaining two minarets of the Askariya Mosque, a holy Shiite Muslim shrine in Samarra that was badly damaged in a similar attack in early 2006, a Samarra Police official told CNN. There was no immediate word on casualties.

Within hours of the attacks, Iraqi state television announced that Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki had imposed a curfew for Baghdad until further notice.

The blast followed early Wednesday morning clashes between gunmen and Iraqi National Police, who were guarding the site. During the firefight, the insurgents entered the mosque, also known as the Golden Dome, planted explosives around the minarets and detonated them.

According to the police official, residents of Samarra are furious over the latest attack on the mosque.

In response, radical Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr called for three days of mourning to mark the destruction of the minarets, according to a statement. The anti-American cleric also said no rival Sunni Arab could have been responsible for the bombing, adding he was holding U.S.-led coalition forces responsible.

more...
http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/meast/06/13/iraq.main/index.html

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Senate Democrats will once again try to impose timetables for the withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq, Majority Leader Harry Reid announced Tuesday.

Reid said Democrats will use a defense authorization bill for fiscal year 2008 as a vehicle to revive two Iraq timetable amendments that they pushed unsuccessfully during a fight over Iraq funding in May.

The first, sponsored by Reid and Sen. Carl Levin of Michigan, chairman of the Armed Services Committee, would set a goal of beginning the withdrawal of U.S. troops by April 2008, unless the Iraqi government demonstrated political and security progress. However, President Bush would have the power to waive that requirement.

The second, sponsored by Reid and Sen. Russ Feingold of Wisconsin, would go further and cut off funding for the Iraq war by next April, without giving the president any flexibility to extend the mission.

"On Iraq, we're going to hold the president's feet to the fire," Reid said at a news conference Tuesday afternoon.

more...
http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/06/12/war.deadline/index.html

Note to Reid: You call THAT a fire?
Replace Bic disposable lighter with flamethrower.

Big boost in Iraqi forces is urged
A top general sees years before U.S. ends security role

By Walter Pincus and Ann Scott Tyson
washingtonpost.com
Updated: 38 minutes ago

WASHINGTON - A senior U.S. military commander said yesterday that Iraq's army must expand its rolls by at least 20,000 more soldiers than Washington had anticipated, to help free U.S. troops from conducting daily patrols, checkpoints and other critical yet dangerous missions.

Even then, Iraq will remain incapable of taking full responsibility for its security for many years -- five years in the case of protecting its airspace -- and will require a long-term military relationship with the United States, said Lt. Gen. Martin Dempsey, who until recently led the U.S. military's training effort in Iraq.

Appearing before a House panel, Dempsey outlined his assessment of Iraq's 348,000-strong security forces looking into 2008 and the prospects that they can take over from U.S. troops. He said the Iraqi forces are improving but are still riddled with sectarianism and corruption and are suffering from a lack of leaders and the attrition of tens of thousands of members -- including 32,000 police between mid-2005 and January.

His projection of the size of the police force required to help bring stability -- 195,000 -- is more than 40 percent higher than Washington estimated in 2003. The remarks follow other blunt comments by U.S. military commanders that civilian deaths and attacks on U.S. troops have recently risen and that particularly tough fighting is expected in the coming months.

Building a competent Iraqi security force is at the center of the U.S. effort to turn over military operations, but serious gaps in the capability of Iraqi forces are limiting their role in pacifying Baghdad and safeguarding civilians under the counterinsurgency plan being implemented by the top U.S. commander, Gen. David H. Petraeus, Dempsey said.

Describing the U.S. effort in Iraq as a labor of Sisyphus, he said the metaphoric stone is "probably rolling back a bit right now in Baghdad. But I don't think it's going to roll over us."

more...
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19197080/

Posted by: Chuck at June 13, 2007 01:06 AM

You're not saying that girls can only be the pop-tart singers in bands right?!

Give me a girl drummer or bass player any day. Let the guy prima donnas be the lead singers or guitar players. They're usually more full of ego than talent anyway.

V
Right on!

Sacred Shiite shrine devastated
June 13, 2007

ruh roh

Holy Shite
Holy Shiite

Nice assessment of the Republican field (at DailyKos Cheers and Jeers)

Mitt Romney: That jaw! Those FAA-approved shoulders! So tall! So presidential-looking! And thank goodness someone's willing to stand up to the arrogant, know-it-all truth and insist that Saddam rejected IAEA inspectors. Can we double Guantanamo now, daddy?

Rudy Giuliani: Tough! Steely! Take-charge hero of 9/11! He'd be a great hunter if he hunted! Messy divorces? Bernie Kerik? Megalomania? Water under the bridge. And if you make Lieberman your veep we may crap our pants with musketballs of joy. Now, tell us more about Iran nuke plans, daddy!

John McCain: Maverick's hittin' his stride? Straight Talk Express back on the tracks? Answer to immigration question at last debate puts him in driver's seat? Even nuke-ier on Iran than the cross-dresser? New slogan---"Iraq 4evuh, my friends"---has edgy, youthful ring to it. Can we sit on your lap and do pony rides, Granddad?

Sam Brownback: A sweet man who's simply getting overshadowed by his wealthier rivals. But he's a shoe-in to head the new Department of Womb Management. ("Ya keeps the baby or ya gets the lash!")

Mike Huckabee: Started off strong by scaring the fur off the Great Orange Satan's hindquarters, and had us in stitches by attributing 110lb weight loss to a stay at "a concentration camp held by the Democrat Party of Arkansas." Then, to nation's horror, turned heretic by forgetting Ronald Reagan's birthday. No more funds, governor, 'til you make Simi Valley pilgrimage and atone.

Tommy Thompson: Hate to break it to ya, son, but if you can’t control your bowels, you can't control the country.

Fred Thompson: Christ is risen.

As you know, I limit most of my bashing to wingnuts and fundies.

Fred Thompson: Christ is risen.

Posted by: not my president at June 13, 2007 09:35 AM

Twice Dead Fred

PARIS, France (CNN) -- The United States has "irrefutable evidence" that Tehran is transferring arms to Taliban fighters in Afghanistan, a top U.S. diplomat told CNN Wednesday, noting that NATO forces have intercepted some of the arms shipments.

"There's irrefutable evidence the Iranians are now doing this and it's a pattern of activity," U.S. Undersecretary of State Nicholas Burns told CNN.

"If you see the Iranians arming Hezbollah in Lebanon and Hamas in Gaza and the West Bank and, of course, arming Shia militants inside Iraq itself. It's very violent and very unproductive activity by the Iranian government."

And one that puts Tehran contrary to the U.N. Security Council, Burns said.

"Iran is operating against the last Security Council Resolution 1747, passed on March 24, which said that Iran must not transfer arms outside of Iran, and here it is doing it in Lebanon, in Gaza, in Afghanistan, and in Iraq, so Iran is in outright violation of its Security Council commitments," according to Burns.

In late May, U.S. and British officials simply said that weapons crossing the border from Iran to Afghanistan may be winding up in the hands of the Taliban, the hard-line Islamic militia that is battling U.S.- and NATO-led forces in Afghanistan.

Wednesday's accusations took the case against Tehran to the next level.

"It's certainly coming from the government of Iran. It's coming from the Iranian Revolutionary Guard corps command, which is a basic unit of the Iranian government," Burns said.

more...
http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/asiapcf/06/13/iran.taliban/index.html

Nurse Wratchet

OMG, I just realized something.

If I believe in my own tree religion, does that make me Jerry Falwell?

OMG!!! I almost just threw up a little.

I REALLY DO LOVE TREES!!!

Posted by: Christy at June 13, 2007 11:14 AM

Yes, but if you Falwell in a forest and nobody is there to hear it, then nobody has to know who you are in the pecking order...

Life & Limb, Inc.

That "arming the Taleban" (as well as Iraqis, Hamas, Hezbollah and the NRA) is the latest disinfo, designed to gain public support for the invasion, devastation and occupation of Iran prior to securing the oilfields for Halliburton.
It's been debunked but the media has been instructed to propagate and perpetuate it. It's very interesting when there is a schism between the Administration/neocons and the military itself.

Cheney's Iran-Arms-to-Taliban Gambit Rebuffed
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/061307J.shtml

A media campaign portraying Iran as supplying arms to the Taliban guerrillas fighting US and NATO forces in Afghanistan, orchestrated by Cheney and his allies who advocate for a more confrontational stance toward Iran in the Bush administration, appears to have backfired last
week when Defense Secretary Robert Gates and the commander of NATO forces in Afghanistan, General Dan McNeil, issued unusually strong denials.

"Yes, but if you Falwell in a forest and nobody is there to hear it,...."

HAHAHAHAHA!!! HAHAHAHAHA!!

Monkey, I am convinced you may just have the devil in ya.

I recommend 4 Hail Marys and 20 tree huggings.

(I do not know what the Hail Marys are for, but if you want to feel close to God, hug a tree.)

Ummmm....

Amen.

Posted by: Christy at June 13, 2007 11:26 AM

Can I trade ya for 4 Bloody Mary's and a sprig of celery to be named later?

Keep laughin Twiggy, it's good fer ya.

Ok you got me with the as yet unnamed celery.

4 Bloody Marys can be a suitable alternative libation, the tree hugging however, is not optional.

This is a church, not a democracy dammit.

Tree hugging is helpful in times of extreme overindulgence in religion (I didn't say what religion) - very grounding.

Back to serious for a moment ..

Secret UN Report Condemns US for Middle East Failures
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/061307K.shtml
The highest-ranking UN official in Israel has warned that American pressure has "pummeled into submission" the UN's role as an impartial Middle East negotiator in a damning confidential report. The 53-page "End of Mission Report" by Alvaro de Soto, the UN's Middle East envoy, presents a devastating account of failed
diplomacy and condemns the sweeping boycott of the Palestinian government.

--hooboy even Israel thinks we have gone too far; somebody better listen and fast

Officials Rebuked for Disclosing Rove's Connection to Firing of US Attorney
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/061307L.shtml
46 pages of documents turned over by the Justice Department to Congress as part of the investigation into the firings of at least nine US attorneys provide further evidence that White House officials were deeply involved in the mass firings of well-performing prosecutors.

--two more subpoenas - I know one is Harriet Miers. The WH totally knew what fishy biz was going on in the Justice Dept. Let's hear it from the detail people who like to follow court cases.

Yes, Motherhuggard.

Cheney sez, go hug yourself.

How would Christians react if this happened to St. Peter's Basilica?

Source: Reuters

BAGHDAD, June 13 (Reuters) - Gunmen blew up a major Sunni mosque in the Iraqi town of Iskandariya on Wednesday, police said, following an attack on a revered Shi'ite shrine that has stirred fears of a surge in sectarian bloodshed.

Police said Iskandariya's Grand Mosque had been totally destroyed. Witnesses said the town, which lies south of Baghdad, was tense in the wake of the bombing.

Read more: http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/L13888326.htm

How would Christians react if this happened to St. Peter's Basilica?

Posted by: not my president at June 13, 2007 01:00 PM

They'd be greeted as liberators and showered with flowers... no, wait... they'd forgive their transgressions and speak the truth in love... no, wait...

KEEPING THE PRESSURE ON RE: GONZALES,

CALL WHITE HOUSE - 202-456-1111 OR 202-456-1414

CALL CONGRESS - 202-224-3121

Today I called the White House comment line three times and it was busy each time. Then I called the White House switchboard and asked them what was wrong with the comment line. They just told me that it was very busy... (immigration???)

Then I called Sen Lieberman's office who voted against cloture on the No Confidence vote on Gonzales. I asked why did Lieberman do this - did he have confidence in Alberto Gonzales. The guy answering the phone said that if you asked the Senator "on the street" he would say that he does not support Gonzales. I responded "Well, Gonzales is still there. How does Senator Lieberman propose to remove Gonzales?" The guy says " We will have more hearings." I said "We have already had plenty of hearings, what more do you need to know?" (I can't remember quite what the guy to this.)

Then I asked "What does Congress and Senator Lieberman do after more hearings on Gonzales, and Gonzales is still there?" The guy says " That is a very good question but if people keep calling and expressing their displeasure things might change...."

Thats an easy question.

The Catholics would invade a nation of brown people on the pretext St Peters Plotters are there, they would then spend a few centuries thouroughly looting the place and then pretending for the next 1000 years it was all done in the name of God.

BTW, in case you missed it, I have up clean and close up pics of the memorials.

Click on any pic to enlarge.

http://christyscranium.blogspot.com/2007/06/look-ma-i-remembered-my-password.html

That's why I'm sitting this one out and not supporting a candidate til the bitter end - I did that in 1996 and 2000 and wanted to be as committed for 2008 as I was for 2004 but it is just not happening. Your threat is fairly toothless, for me. I like Sheehan and I like Kerry and I'm not schizophrenic (my sister is though).

Posted by: not my president at June 12, 2007 01:59 PM

@@@@@@@@@@

If you're and we're not careful, I think Hillary will be shoved down our throats by the mainstream media and the money people....

Queen Hillary

http://tinyurl.com/2sg25t

If you're and we're not careful, I think Hillary will be shoved down our throats by the mainstream media and the money people....

Queen Hillary

Posted by: Ralpheh at June 13, 2007 04:09 PM

The problem after 2000 and 2004 is that I don't know what we can do about it without electoral and campaign finance reform. We would have to overhaul our entire system and it ain't happening - the military industrial complex has too much power.

I will vote Democrat because they will have better health plans and environmental foresignt. It will not be a dramatic difference. I am not impressed by any of the other candidates besides Hillary either. At least Gore and Kerry were environmentalists and had some experience. I'd take Bill Richardson or Chris Dodd or even Joe Biden over the lot but they won't make it. Obama and Edwards may make it through. Fine then, if they can, I'll support them. I am not joining the primary fray until end of summer.

Posted by: Christy at June 13, 2007 04:06 PM

You painted those? What beautiful tributes they are!

Amazing - US and Britain both having Justice Department scandals

http://www.guardian.co.uk/baefiles/story/0,,2102237,00.html

This is SO incredible .. payoffs to Bandar, totally criminal.

It will not be a dramatic difference. I am not impressed by any of the other candidates besides Hillary either. At least Gore and Kerry were environmentalists and had some experience. I'd take Bill Richardson or Chris Dodd or even Joe Biden over the lot but they won't make it. Obama and

@@@@@@@@@

I would like to see Anybody But Hillary. There is very good arguement to be made that our governmental system is turning into a monarchy for the very rich and powerful. That's how a disaster like George the Second came to power. I don't think Hillary Clinton would have a chance without her big name recognition and her big money.

And frankly, 8 years of Bill Clinton was just enough for me. I don't think 16 years of the Clinton family would be very good for the nation. It is surprising how little the media mentions this dangerous pattern and precedent...

clueless...

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Democratic lawmakers set up a possible court showdown with President George W. Bush on Wednesday by summoning two of his former aides to testify about the controversial firing of federal prosecutors last year.

Bush could challenge the subpoenas issued to former White House counsel Harriet Miers and political director Sara Taylor although the White House said no decision had been made.

Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy (news, bio, voting record) of Vermont said in a letter to Taylor that she had until June 28 to turn over documents related to the inquiry and must appear before his committee on July 11.

House Judiciary Committee

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070613/pl_nm/usa_prosecutors_dc_2;_ylt=AhKdTiWgfRvf9fsEYgagugtkM3wV
_________________

ABOVE ^^^^^ MORE ON GONZALES SCANDAL

sitting at the Code Pink house; they have an actual face-to-face meeting with none other than:

JOE LIEBERMAN

tomorrow afternoon. Your DCP correspondent plans to be there...

Posted by: karen at June 13, 2007 08:16 PM

Great! Let's press him... Go CodePink!

Thanks for all your hard work Karen.

Republicans are abandoning Bush, mostly over immigration. They want no amnesties - not even the special-interest ones that W believes in, and which have been a boon to the Republicans.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19209733/

Democratic Congress gets even lower approval ratings, however, thanks to its inability to live up to the voters' mandate.

Posted by: V at June 13, 2007 08:53 AM

V:

My post was gender neutral! In fact, a "guy prima donna" is, I think, a contradiction in the literal sense.

Chuck in Houston

Band members of any gender are a challenge, no?

Yes Sparrow, they are my works, but they are the only ones I ever left unsigned.

It just didn't seem right once they were painted to put my name on them.

... and then there are bands that can play together for 30 years or more...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Radiators_(US)#_note-7

hey, monkey officially makes wikipedia!

Monkey:

I always thought we were just plain-old challenged. Anyway, kudos on the Wikipedia project! You are a primate of considerable breadth. How do you manage it without opposable thumbs? Must be hard to drum that way....

Chuck in Houston.

Posted by: karen at June 13, 2007 08:16 PM

Great! Let's press him... Go CodePink!

Thanks for all your hard work Karen.

Posted by: Ally McRepuke at June 13, 2007 08:37 PM

@@@@@@@@

Joe LIEBERMAN wants to BOMB IRAN......

Right, Ralpeh. And Leslie, one of the women, has been on a hunger strike until he meets with them. Leslie just got back from Iran.

The meeting is at 4:30 today. Five of the women will meet with him, including Leslie and a woman who is Iranian. The meeting as planned will be civilized and honest.

We will see what we can all learn.

Hunger strike? I say starve Lieberman.

Posted by: karen at June 14, 2007 08:56 AM

I trust 'you' will learn something, yet I'm not convinced Joe is open to learning anything beyond his narrow ideologically driven scope.

I never met a Joe I didn't like...

Posted by: not my president at June 14, 2007 09:13 AM

Hunger strike?

I say since Joe thinks he's the 'cat's meow', let's let him eat the cat food that's in the grocery stores. Maybe it's safe. Maybe it's not. But it's his 'homeland security' dept that is suppose to protect us from imported food and such...

(Oh..and yes, we can just give him some of that gluten that has been fed to animals that in turn we eat...maybe it's safe and maybe it's not.)

Well, maybe we will learn that Joe does NOT learn!

8 day ago:

Obama and Clinton Tied in New Hampshire polls:

By Susan Page, USA TODAY
WASHINGTON — Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama are essentially tied for the Democratic presidential nomination, according to a USA TODAY/Gallup Poll, the first time that the New York senator hasn't clearly led the field.
The Illinois senator bests Clinton by a single percentage point, 30%-29%, if the contest includes former vice president Al Gore.

Clinton bests Obama by a single point, 37%-36%, if it doesn't include Gore.

Steven Spielberg has just endorsed HIllary for president, heard it on NPR this morning..

Oh man, and we were fighting so hard to win over that infamous Spielberg block of voters, too.

Yer McFly is open...

Oh man, and we were fighting so hard to win over that infamous Spielberg block of voters, too.

Yer McFly is open...

Posted by: monkey at June 14, 2007 10:17 AM

@@@@@@

It made the NPR hourly newscast. I think we are talking about BIG MONEY from Hollywood to Clinton.

Actually I would like to know who Spielberg endorsed in 2000 and 2004 in the Democratic primary (to see what his track record is.. etc.)

Ralpheh
Spielberg is a close personal friend of Bill Clinton.

NMP...

Um...didn't he stay in the "Lincoln bedroom"?

WASHINGTON (Reuters) -- China is seeking to unseat the United States as the dominant power in cyberspace, a U.S. Air Force general leading a new push in this area said Wednesday.

"They're the only nation that has been quite that blatant about saying, 'We're looking to do that,"' 8th Air Force Commander Lt. Gen. Robert Elder told reporters.

Elder is to head a new three-star cyber command being set up at Barksdale Air Force Base in Louisiana, already home to about 25,000 military personnel involved in everything from electronic warfare to network defense.

The command's focus is to control the cyber domain, critical to everything from communications to surveillance to infrastructure security.

"We have peer competitors right now in terms of doing computer network attack ... and I believe we're going to be able to ratchet up our capability," Elder said. "We're going to go way ahead."

The Defense Department said in its annual report on China's military power last month that China regarded computer network operations -- attacks, defense and exploitation -- as critical to achieving "electromagnetic dominance" early in a conflict.

China's People's Liberation Army has established information warfare units to develop viruses to attack enemy computer systems and networks, the Pentagon said.

China also was investing in electronic countermeasures and defenses against electronic attack, including infrared decoys, angle reflectors and false-target generators, it said.

The Chinese Foreign Ministry rejected the U.S. report as "brutal interference" in China's internal affairs and insisted Beijing's military preparations were purely defensive.

Elder described the bulk of current alleged Chinese cyber-operations as industrial espionage aimed at stealing trade secrets to save years of high-tech development.

He attributed the espionage to a mix of criminals, hackers and "nation-state" forces. Virtually all potential U.S. foes also were scanning U.S. networks for trade and defense secrets, he added.

"Everyone but North Korea," he said. "We've concluded that there must be only one laptop in all of North Korea -- and that guy's not allowed to scan" overseas networks, Elder said.

In October, the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff defined cyberspace as "characterized by the use of electronics and the electromagnetic spectrum to store, modify, and exchange data via networked systems and associated physical infrastructures."

The definition is broad enough to cover far more than merely defending or attacking computer networks. Other concerns include remotely detonated roadside bombs in Iraq, interference with Global Positioning Satellites and satellite communications, Internet financial transactions by adversaries, and radar and navigational jamming.

http://www.cnn.com/2007/TECH/internet/06/13/china.cyberspace.reut/index.html

Karen, tell him that one of his constituents in CT thinks he's completely wrong about Iran (and a lot of other things) but that he's not listening to what his constituents are saying.

Bush hires the media attorney who went after Clinton's impeachment. (How's that for irony!?)

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070613/ap_on_go_pr_wh/white_house_counselor

Are we absolutely sure that Condi or Harriet hasn't given Bush a....? Would it be cheaper to fund an investigation into that or to pay for the war?

Decisions...decisions....

Republicans abandoning Bush
NBC/WSJ poll: President’s, Congress’ ratings drop to lowest levels ever

WASHINGTON - As President Bush attempts to revive the controversial immigration reform bill he supports, the latest NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll finds that Republicans are abandoning the president, which has dropped his job-approval rating below 30 percent -- his lowest mark ever in the survey.

more...
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19209733/

CALLED THE WHITE HOUSE COMMENT LINE (202-456-1111)

First time - busy (immigration?? or Gonzales??)

Second time - got through; I said that Gonzales, the chief law enforcement officer in the country, lied in testimony before Congress. The operator, surprisingly, offered the comment to me " and it was all so unnecessaary.." (comment line operators are told not to discuss things with callers - just take notes on comments.) I told her that Gonzales did not tell the truth (i.e. the attorneys were fired for purely person or purely political reasons and/or may, in fact, be inappropriate or illegal) because it was inconvenient.

I also used the quote from Jon Stewart that Gonzales was "Bush's pinhead".

Can someone fill me in on Rep. Daryl Issa of California??? He is on the HOuse Oversight Committee. I looked up in Wikipedia about Issa and it said that Issa had twice been accused of car-theft along with his brother (as a young man). Later Issa made a fortune by founding a car alarm company.

When I see Issa on C-Span, I think "former car-thief".....

When I see Issa on C-Span, I think "former car-thief".....

Posted by: Ralpheh at June 14, 2007 12:29 PM

If you were watchin FOX and he was a dem, the caption under his name might actually say that...

What's in inane, anyway.

Rep. Issa was charged in San Jose auto theft

by Lance Williams, Carla Marinucci, Chronicle staff writers

Wednesday, June 25, 2003

Republican Rep. Darrell Issa, the driving force behind the effort to recall Gov. Gray Davis, was prosecuted with his brother in San Jose in 1980 for allegedly faking the theft of Issa's Mercedes Benz sedan and selling it to a car dealer for $16,000, according to court records.

Issa, in a phone interview with The Chronicle Tuesday, blamed his brother for the car theft, which was detailed in documents on file in Santa Clara County Superior Court and which has never been made public.

"I do not steal," Issa said.

The second-term San Diego area congressman has pumped $1 million into the campaign to recall Davis and has declared he will run for governor should the recall qualify for the ballot this year. Issa's previous political campaigns have been roiled by allegations that twice -- once while a student in his hometown of Cleveland and once while a soldier in Pennsylvania -- he also was involved in car thefts.

In the San Jose case, Issa, who at the time was a 27-year-old U.S. Army officer, and William Issa, 29, were arrested by San Jose police on a felony auto-theft charge in February 1980.

They were accused of a scheme in which Issa's brother allegedly sold Issa's cherry-red Mercedes 240 to Smythe European Motors in San Jose for $13,000 cash and three $1,000 traveler's checks. Within hours, Issa reported the car stolen from a lot at the Monterey airport, near his Army post at Fort Ord.

more...
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2003/06/25/MN2908.DTL

duck, incoming random firing neuron d'jour (thouroughly disgusted thursday edition)....

America: Where The Squeaky Wheel Gets The Grease
aka We Deliverance Justice, uh huh, uh huh

An aide to Mahmoud Abbas said today that the Palestinian president plans to declare a state of emergency and dismantle the Hamas-Fatah coalition government, The Associated Press reports.

Judge orders Libby jailed during appeal
http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/06/14/libby.hearing/index.html

Here in Mexico City and just got to see the strong and beautiful family video. All the sisters, some I like to consider friends.

I'd suggest a better snapshot, but I've never taken a good one. I posted the link to my list many hours before it went up, I think.

The election integrity community is at odds with each other over the current House and Senate legislation. Many have worked very hard for so long to prevent another presidential theft, with safeties that have to be built in before we go the polls, that some want anything that's better than nothing. Others are disappointed and venting frustration as the usual firing squad.

Many are willing to hype and mislead on advantages, knowing a lot of the language in place is just hopeful posturing and not solution. Electronic voting would become more permanent with fresh money and new invention requirements.

I went to Congress with position papers from Voters Unite, and pertinent statements from NYC, to try to get HR811 amended. Some improvements were made, but not the essential ones.

Unfortunately, we weren't able to get measures in place that make sense, that do more good than harm. With so much consideration given to the GOP to pass the bills, the vendors, and the states, we are more vulnerable with ever.

The Feinstein bill in the senate was supposed to correct many of our problems with the Holt bill, but are really worse, creating almost treason, and not my style to use hyperbole.

The Holt bill was changed from open source to non-disclosure, because Microsoft, the basis for all the machines, won't allow open source even in escrow. For the first time, a secret ballot without citizen observance, would be law. Until now, secrecy was by vendor contracts.

A billion giveaway to the states in the Holt bill, while there is no voting system certified for use, effective 1-1-08. Nothing to prevent states from buying more direct recording touchscreen machines (producing an electronic ballot) with paper trail printers that don't fix the problem, a trail that voters don't check or find the errors. No real mandate to audit or count, and mixes terminology on what is a ballot.

The secret first vote is still in place, with states unwilling to audit trails or ballots, which frankly, are very time consuming to verify as much as necessary with paper trails. A trail which is never is an indicator of what the legal, secret ballot is, or what the voter intended if she doesn't look at it. A recent paper concluded only 30ish% saw the vote shifts, caught errors, or looked at the trail.

States shouldn't have to deal with such error prone and hackable machines, but many want to keep them for good, bad and lazy reasons. They won't audit them, want to close the election and run the machine tally twice, without hand comparison.

There are never post election remedies or audits that work. Contested elections are getting thrown out of Congressional review (if they make it there), and the winner in question is seated anyway, before an audit. A dangerous precedent.

Sufficient to say, the problems are huge, with equipment that is problematic and poorly designed, with more attempts to defraud than there was imagination for a couple of decades ago. We are in this fight for our Democracy for a long while yet.

I urge everyone to get involved with your state. Congress does not know what to do, or is unable to make good change at the federal level.

To learn about the issue and where we are, please go to Brad Blog, and look for Ellen Thiesen's articles on both Hot and Feinstein bills. She has made many efforts to explain and correct, work with the Congress on amending the errors and conflicts they don't understand. It is significant that she has considered both bills unworthy and unworkable. She is co-founder of Votersunite.org.

The House defers to Rush Holt to understand it, and does not want to diss him. Kucinich has proposed paper ballots for the presidency in 2008, and has withdrawn support for HR811.

While my husband is at a conference and writing when he gets back to the room, I'm using the computer to finish a merge for a resolution we just got for paper ballots/optical scanners, the only other than DRE system allowed in NYS. The Coalition of Black Trade Unionists just passed it locally in NY, and just when we think these are unimportant, the national group wanted the trails, because one CBTU member is one of the four partisan EAC appointed by the administration.

No correcting the mistakes while we have the Election Assistance Commission. They consider counting the paper ballot the most urgent problem. The Chair, Donetta Davidson, was repprted as getting up first thing in a regulation meeting due this summer, as saying just that!!

Please get involved. As with many issues that require constant involvement, passionate commitment, that may never be solved, we are the necessary voices to push back before getting rolled over. Again.

Sorry for the rambling, but I don't have time to really edit or say it better. I will edit later if I have time. I don't want to do the tedious task of generating eight different versions of the cover letter, but I must.

Wow, that's long. I will try to do a compact thread header when I get back of where we are, with links to learn the issue.

Amazing speech - no link because it's a press release. It's probably on his own website http://www.johnkerry.com - reading it over lunch

Kerry Calls for New Approach to Fighting Terrorism

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, Senator John Kerry delivered remarks at John Hopkins University National Security Symposium with the American Security Project, on fighting terrorism and how we can make our country safer. Kerry addressed the current debate of “are we safer now than after 9/11” and laid out his argument for new framework for defeating terrorists, addressing head-on the ways in which the policy in Iraq has hurt us in this effort.

Below are his remarks, as prepared:

The American Security Project has a simple goal—to restore bipartisan, real thinking about America’s security interests and to communicate those interests directly to the American people.

And what we’ve all witnessed just over the last two weeks has been a case study in exactly why we need the American Security Project. The debate over America’s security has focused on a single question: “Are we safer now, today than we were on 9-11?”

This is a classic campaign over-simplification. It’s the wrong question to ask because 1) it’s subject to different interpretations and 2) it tells you nothing about the future.

Some can answer “yes of course we’re safer” because of increased airport security, a revamped FBI, and improved intelligence coordination. Others will say “no” and point to an increase in nuclear weapons, failing states, jihadists, and violent anti-Americanism.

And you know what? They’re all right.

Are we individually safer? In certain situations, yes. But are we collectively, as a country, more secure? Profoundly not. But the question that we ought to be debating, the question that America needs us to wrestle with, is not “are we safer than we were the day the Twin Towers fell?” The real question is: nearly six years after 9-11, are we as safe as we should be? And what must the next president do to get us there?

This much is clear: We are not yet doing all that we should be. We are clearly losing ground in the fight against terrorists worldwide. We have created more terrorists than we have killed. We are more isolated internationally. We are more divided domestically. And more than at any time in modern history, our forces are stretched to the breaking point.

The question of our present state of security is not simply an academic one, designed for think tank analysis. It’s the essential challenge before our country today. Americans deserve -- and policy-makers must demand -- a better debate—and that’s precisely why the American Security Project was founded.

In recent years, Washington’s preferred currency for discussing national security has too often been cleverly sculpted sound bites, full of simplistic sloganeering, and calculated to scare people—not inform them. Often light on strategic thinking, sometimes light on truth, these sound bites – or slogans – are geared to polarize and obscure rather than galvanize and inform. It is no surprise that six months after the invasion of Iraq, 7 in 10 Americans believed that Saddam Hussein was personally involved in 9-11. That didn’t happen by accident – and it provides a window into the poverty of our political discourse and our failure to communicate reality to the American people. We have to do a better job. We cannot accept a dialogue that—willingly or otherwise—obscures the reality of the threats we face and drowns out the real choices for making America safer.

The truth is that at a time of historic challenge, our struggle remains strikingly ill-defined. We are long overdue for a strategy that offers better answers to such basic questions as who, precisely, are we fighting? What is the nature of the battle? What is our strategy for victory? What role can our military effectively play? How important is America’s moral authority in this struggle? How will we isolate radical Muslim extremists from the world instead of having them isolate us from our own allies?

The truth is also that far too much of what has been said and written in recent years about the fight against terrorists has been based on several dangerous misconceptions. Building a winning strategy requires us to expose and discard some of the faulty thinking that has undermined our efforts.

What are these myths and misconceptions? There are four principal fallacies that led us into this disastrous war in Iraq—and one that is still being used to justify our presence there today.

The most obvious is the notion that defeating terrorists is primarily a military effort focused on nation-states. The phrase “war on terror” purposefully brings to mind troops deployed to fight armies in battle. And this very mindset tempted the Administration to choose traditional targets like Iraq instead of hunting down non-state actors in Afghanistan. In fact, we now know that some in Don Rumsfeld’s Pentagon initially considered bombing Iraq first instead of Afghanistan because military planners couldn’t find enough Taliban targets to bomb—a vivid illustration of the flaws of an exclusively military-driven, state-centered approach divorced from the actual threats we faced then and still face today.

Make no mistake, the military clearly has a role to play -- sometimes even against another government. Exhibit A is Afghanistan -- where we were right – and we were unified – in overthrowing a regime that harbored the terrorists who attacked our homeland. But this is the exception. Don’t take my word for it. There’s a reason why the Army’s own counterinsurgency manual written by General Petraeus makes clear that using massive military force risks playing into our enemies’ hands. And Osama Bin Laden himself has declared that his strategy is to “provoke and bait” the United States into protracted “bleeding wars” that drain our resources and our national will while painting us as the aggressor in the eyes of the Muslim world. He’s gotten exactly what he wanted in Iraq.

And we know that conventional military force is not the most effective way to destroy terrorists hiding out in sovereign nations. Getting that job done largely falls to our intelligence agencies and special operations forces, and it will always hinge on coordination with countries where terrorists hide – exactly the areas in which we are the least equipped to work effectively. Why does that matter? Because make no mistake, if an attack on America is ever hatched in a Pakistani neighborhood in London, we won’t be bombing Buckingham Palace—we’ll be working with MI5 to hunt down the perpetrators.

Fortunately, the American Security Project’s own survey shows that the American people are way ahead of the narrow Washington political debate: most Americans now believe that “the war on terror will be won primarily through the aggressive use of intelligence and law enforcement.” They believe that “Military force should be used in a limited and precise way.” They’re just looking for an honest dialogue about how to get there.

The second misconception – driven largely by political expediency—is that top Al Qaeda leaders like Bin Laden don’t really matter. Eliminating them won’t end the terrorist threat. But Osama Bin Laden, alive and well, stands as a monument to the world that extremists can escape and defy the most powerful nation on earth. And this madman continues to inspire – if not plan – more attacks. So we must redouble our efforts to deny al Qaeda leaders sanctuary in the lawless tribal areas — starting by asking more from Pakistan in return for the billions of dollars of counterterrorism aid. We cannot allow failure to simply be explained away-- not in Islamabad, and certainly not in Washington.

The third fallacy is the simplistic notion that all those extremists who hate us are fundamentally similar. Sun Tzu said, “if you know yourself but not the enemy, for every victory gained you will also suffer a setback.” Our failure to appreciate the difference between a secular dictator and a religious terrorist led us into an invasion of Iraq that diverted our attention from those that attacked us. Even today, many politicians lump together dozens of competing factions into an undifferentiated “they” that includes Sunni and Shia, religious and secular, friends and sworn enemies alike. We’ve got to know our enemy in order to defeat them.

Fourth--it is a misconception that torturing prisoners, as we saw at Abu Ghraib, and detaining them indefinitely, as we are now at Guantanamo Bay, are effective ways of fighting terrorism. In fact they define the word “counterproductive.” Just this week, a federal appeals court struck down part of the President’s detainee policy as having —and I’m quoting judges here—“disastrous consequences for the Constitution and the country." It should disturb all of us that a proposal to double Guantanamo is considered red meat for Republican primary voters. Our military leaders tell us that torture does not yield better intelligence. And as Colin Powell has said, the world is beginning to doubt the moral authority of our fight against terrorism—our most precious asset in winning the war of ideas.

The final and currently most pressing misconception is that by fighting the enemy in Iraq, we will not have to fight them here. This is a dangerous illusion, and a false choice of epic proportions. The National Intelligence Estimate warned that Iraq has become a primary recruiting tool for terrorists worldwide. The CIA recently put it simply: “our presence in Iraq is creating more members of Al Qaeda than we are killing in Iraq.” In fact, our current strategy in Iraq today rests on circular logic: we’re staying there to prevent the very chaos and failed state that we uncorked by going there. We’re staying to prevent what they are succeeding in doing because we are there. We have to break this cycle.

Taken together, what do these misconceptions tell us? For one thing, that Iraq is a case study for how not to defeat the terrorists. We diverted resources from the hunt for Bin Laden to invade Iraq, which had no operational ties to Al Qaeda. We diverted our attention from North Korea, which had nuclear weapons, and Iran, which is closer to acquiring them, to be consumed by Iraq, which had no weapons of mass destruction. Once we were there, we underestimated the insurgency, and lost the trust of the Iraqi people by failing to grasp the moral and non-military dimensions of our mission. Now we find ourselves stuck, refereeing a bloody Iraqi civil war that no American army, no matter how brave and skillful, cannot resolve.

Every day that we continue on this same path is a day that we play into the terrorists’ hands. Bin Laden has stated that he wants to subject America to what the Soviets experienced in Afghanistan. Only it turns out that our “bleeding war” isn’t in Afghanistan—it’s in Iraq. To begin fighting terrorism more effectively, we need a change course in Iraq. And we ought to start by listening to General Petraeus, to every other military commander, to the Secretary of State and even to the President himself. They have all told us that there is no military solution to the violence in Iraq. There is only a political solution.

Despite the President’s escalation of the war ostensibly to provide “breathing room” for Iraqi politicians, it’s now clear that we’re unlikely to see any substantive political progress before the end of this year. Kurds are blocking the oil law, Shiites are blocking plans to reintegrate Baathists into the government, Sunnis are demanding broad revisions to the Constitution. If Iraqi politicians fail to deliver, then those Republicans in Congress who are giving the Iraqis until September to make real political progress should be prepared to join Democrats in helping to end this war.

The fact is that no American soldier should die for an Iraqi government that cannot—or will not—do its part. Instead of bringing Iraq together, this government has become little more than a fig leaf for Iraqi politicians to pursue sectarian interests.

If we’re serious about a political solution, we need a fresh start. Prime Minister Maliki should immediately fire all ministers not committed to political reconciliation and replace them with those who are. And the governing coalition should be realigned to isolate extremists and empower moderates.

We must also leverage Prime Minister Maliki’s personal political future by making it clear that this truly is his last chance. If shaking up the government does not produce meaningful political progress in short order, if Maliki proves unwilling or unable to deliver results, a new leader should be given a chance.

But obviously a successful strategy for defeating terrorists involves more than just seeking resolution in Iraq. We need a comprehensive new approach to the entire region and the notion of a “war on terror.”

Many of our best thinkers in the private sector and the Pentagon now speak of fighting terrorism as a “global counterinsurgency” The goal of counterinsurgency operations is far more than just killing insurgents. Ultimate success depends on winning over the local population and isolating the extremists. Applied to global terrorism, this leads us to focus on winning a global “information war,” and turning “the street” against Al Qaeda wherever they seek a base of operations.

As we’ve seen in Iraq, this struggle cannot be won by military means alone. Again, it’s the Army’s new counterinsurgency manual that tells us “the more force used, the less effective it is.” Successful counterinsurgency relies on every tool in our national arsenal—economic, political, military - and perhaps most importantly recognizes the power of our ideas.

It’s the Tip O’Neill doctrine applied to a dangerous world – successfully fighting a global counterinsurgency recognizes that, just like politics, all terrorism is local. That means looking beyond catch-all phrases like “Islamo-Fascism” that obscure more than they illuminate. After all, Al Qaeda is, as the theorist David Kilcullen says: “sixty different groups in sixty different countries who all have different objectives.”

We must be prepared to respond each situation differently, to adapt as our opponent adapts, and to tailor our response to the local conditions that give rise to terrorism. In some places, that means local development projects and television broadcasts. In others, it means visits to sheikhs in their tents and—when necessary—it means firing Cruise missiles at high value targets.

Some policymakers like to say we need to stay on the offensive against the terrorists. They tend to equate “offense” with military force. But we must never forget that we are fighting a battle within Islam for the hearts and minds of Muslims everywhere.

Al Qaeda understands that we are fighting an information war: they quadrupled their output of propaganda videos last year and take advantage of some 4,500 different jihadi websites. And we know that Al Qaeda’s #2, Ayman al-Zawahiri, urged Al Qaeda in Iraq to stop mass-murdering Shia civilians because he worried it would hurt Al Qaeda’s reputation among moderate Sunnis. Today the sobering reality is that, in many quarters, we are losing a public relations battle to a gang of cave-dwelling mass-murderers.

Hezbollah understands that we are fighting an information war. After provoking Israel into a war last summer, do you know what Hezbollah did? They marked with their party flags all the houses that had been damaged—claiming them for Hezbollah to fix. As David Kilcullen said, “that’s not a reconstruction operation—it’s an information operation.”

To succeed in this arena, we must regain our moral authority. Our actions matter more than our words: no Madison Avenue PR firm or public diplomacy czar can make the Arab world forget Abu Ghraib. This self-defeating tendency continues today at Guantanamo—which has become a catchphrase in every language for the perceived lawlessness of America’s fight against terrorists. These policies amount to a unilateral disarmament in the war of ideas.

Understanding today’s struggle as a global counterinsurgency makes clear the dangers of attacking Iran. At a debate last week, most of the Republican candidates seemed almost eager to use nuclear weapons preemptively. We can hope that this was political posturing, but just this weekend, Senator Lieberman advocated military strikes into Iran to disrupt insurgent networks. We all understand the threat Iran poses to the United States, and to our ally Israel. None of us accept the prospect of a nuclear-armed Iran. But my guess is Osama Bin Laden would love to see us bomb Iran, because it would stoke anti-Americanism, because it would weaken moderates everywhere, because it would unite the Islamic world against us.

These are the outcomes which smart, thoughtful, careful planning can help us avoid. My hope is that we can expose the misconceptions that have led us astray—and replace them with a better frame for understanding the threat we face. That is a primary mission of the American Security Project: to foster a national security dialogue worthy of our best traditions, and to shape a policy to tackle today’s challenges that is equal to the statecraft that led us through yesterday’s.

Five years into the Cold War, a Democratic President and a Republican Congress had already worked closely together to create a sustainable strategy for winning the Cold War. We had the Truman Doctrine, the Marshall Plan, the UN, and the IMF. George Kennan’s “Sources of Soviet Conduct” and SAIS founder Paul Nitze’s NSC -68 clearly defined the enemy, the battlefield, and the strategy for victory. That generation created a bipartisan foreign policy framework that guided our actions for decades under Democratic and Republican administrations alike.

Today, more than five years after 9-11, an effective strategy for fighting terrorism remains elusive—and there is precious little bipartisan trust on which to reach and sustain a truly national consensus.

That, my friends, is the tough work ahead of us. Just as getting out of Iraq has proved far more difficult than getting in, rebuilding a new bipartisan foreign policy will prove far more difficult than shattering the old one. But that is what this moment requires of us—vision, understanding toward those who hold honest disagreements, clear and critical thinking, and above all honesty with the American people. If we stay true to these principles, then perhaps five years from now, instead of asking “are we safer?” we can share together in the satisfaction of knowing that all of us—Democrats and Republicans alike—have worked together to do all that we could to make America as safe as it can be.

Majorie G
Greetings from Seattle - see you in a few weeks!

Kerry's speech was amazing, leading as always. Wish he were more in the radar of a respectful and knowing media.

I'd say many forces don't want to listen to his policies of holding corporate influence accountable, educating on issues. People have been demagogued to simplistically and wrongly for too long.

I didn't exactly talk economically about voting reform, but no errors. Clarifying that the regulations for 2007, effective January, 2010, are due this summer, and supposed to be comprehensive. Yet, the EAC wants to get rid of paper ballots, counting, any language, all the while optical scan systems are gathering momentum.

The EAC was started by HAVA to oversee the electronic conversion, but have covered for the vendors.