One day's worth

From one day's morning paper:

1) U.S. mercenaries, oh excuse me,  contractors, have been withholding the passports of laborers "hired" at subsistence wages in Iraq, a technique often utilized by human traffickers. Lovely.

2) The military KNEW for nine months that Iraqi "security forces" killed two National Guard members but blamed "insurgents." The father of one of those soldiers, as well as Sen. Barbara Boxer, accused the military of suppressing the truth to shore up public support for the war.

3) Murder charges filed against 8 U.S. service personnel

4) Heavy firefight near the Green Zone: Iraq's government clamped a state of emergency on Baghdad and ordered everyone off the streets Friday after U.S. and Iraqi forces battled insurgents armed with rocket-propelled grenades, hand grenades and rifles near the heavily fortified Green Zone. The military also announced the deaths of five more U.S. troops in a particularly violent week for American forces that included the discovery of the brutalized bodies of two soldiers. Twelve U.S. servicemembers have died or been found dead this week.

But--we're makin' progress. Turning points, you know. 

Dead and Buried

We are gathered here to finally lay to rest the idea of "American Exceptionalism." Christened in 1831 in an Alexis de Tocqueville quote, American Exceptionalism was a belief that the United States and its people were qualitatively different from and of course superior to other nations. AE had been in very ill health throughout much of his life, but finally succumbed to gross international lawlessness, torture, military adventurism, corporate greed, racism and many other causes.

No services are planned.

Word for the Day

Mistrial: A trial that becomes invalid because of basic prejudicial error in procedure; a trial that terminates without a verdict because of error, necessity, prejudicial misconduct, or a hung jury.

Lawyer Khamis al-Obeidi, a Sunni Arab who represented Saddam and his half brother Barzan Ibrahim, was abducted from his home Wednesday morning by men wearing police uniforms, his colleagues said. His body was found riddled with bullets on a street near the Shiite slum of Sadr City. Police provided a photo of al-Obeidi’s face, head and shoulders drenched in blood.

Moron of the Month

The award for June goes to "Al" for this brilliant comment in the online Chicago Tribune:

"So, let me get this straight: our involvement in the middle east is intended to DE-stabilize an unstable part of the world? That is beyond idiotic. Unless democracy spreads in the middle east, the 13th century will continue to flourish, eventually appearing on our very streetcorners and killing with impugnity anything that doesn't bow to Allah. Saying `this war is all about making money for Mr. Bush's corporate cronies' is ridiculous as well, since there's a very large hole in the ground in New York City that proves otherwise."

Amazing.

The Word for the Day

The word for today is:

OCCUPATION: The invasion, conquest, and control of a nation or territory by foreign armed forces.

Boys and girls, THAT is what is happening in Iraq. It isn't a "war," a contest with a foreseeable outcome and, more importantly, a winner and a loser. It is merely an occupation, a bloody, ugly occupation, that will someday come to a bitter and forgettable end.

BTW, thanks to all for the kind words--P

Someone help me here

One thing I've never understood is on what grounds our country (or others, for that matter) say to other countries, like, say, North Korea - "We can have all the ICBM's that we want, but you can't have any." I know Kim Jong Il is nuttier than a bucket of nuts, but as a sovereign nation (which, again, sovereignty means being sovereign), don't they get to decide if they want the same military capabilities that we have? Who are we, their dad?

Kudos

Kudos to I Drew This:

Here we go again

Schmidlap asked recently what he should do to celebrate the 4th of July parade in his neighborhood. Well, I've got a more detailed answer for him.

Burn an American flag. Put one on the front stoop of your house and walk on it. Revel in free speech.

Senate committee approves flag amendment

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Senate Judiciary Committee gave a nod Thursday to a constitutional amendment to protect the American flag from desecration, moving it to the Senate floor where vote-counters on both sides say it could be within one vote of passing.

The 11-7 vote sent the amendment to the floor. Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn., has said the measure will get a Senate vote this month.

To be considered during the patriotic season between this week's Flag Day and the Fourth of July, the amendment's substance and timing is designed to appeal to veterans during this year of midterm elections.

"The Congress shall have power to prohibit the physical desecration of the flag of the United States," the amendment reads. To become the Constitution's 28th amendment, the language must be approved by two-thirds of those present in each chamber, then ratified within seven years by at least 38 state legislatures.

The House a year ago passed the bill 286-130, more than the required two-thirds of those present to pass. Vote-counters on both sides of the issue say the amendment has commitments of support from 66 senators, one fewer than the required 67 votes if all 100 members of the chamber are present.

Sen. Dianne Feinstein of California was the lone committee Democrat to vote for the measure, saying its language was designed to both protect the flag and First Amendment free speech protections.

The committee also rejected an amendment by Sen. Joe Biden, D-Del., to replace "desecration" with specific types of defilement. Using the word desecration, he said, would leave the government too much power to define the term.

So, they're one vote short of sending it to state legislators and forcing this debate to go on all over the country. One more Dianne Feinstein, who somehow thinks that the amendment as proposed somehow protects freedom of speech, and we'll have blood red states all over the country going nuts approving this. And if they get to 38...

I've said it before, and I'll say it again: if this amendment passes, I will go to the store, buy a flag, bring it home, and burn it.

Cost to take a life in Baghdad? $2.40

From the Financial Times (subscription required)

Cheap, high-quality ammunition is becoming widely available on the Baghdad black market, much of it smuggled in from eastern Europe, according to a report published on Thursday by Oxfam.

In a section of a report on the global ammunition market, the charity says the price of bullets for AK-47 assault rifles has fallen to an average of $0.30 (€0.24, £0.16) in Baghdad. This compares with $1.50 a round in Somalia during recent fighting.

Given that victims are killed by between four and 12 bullets, the cost of taking away a life in Baghdad is now $2.40, the report says.

An analysis in the UK of bullets bought in Baghdad by Doctors for Iraq found that ammunition for 9mm semi-automatic pistols and for AK-47s originated from factories in China, Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Hungary, Romania, Russia and Serbia. There were also pre-2003 Iraqi-made bullets.

What an unrestricted present from FEMA will buy you

From CNN:

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- A $200 bottle of champagne from Hooters and $300 worth of "Girls Gone Wild" videos were among items bought with debit cards handed out by FEMA to help hurricane victims, auditors probing $1 billion in potential waste and fraud have found.

The cards -- given to people displaced by Hurricanes Katrina and Rita -- also bought diamond jewelry and a vacation in the Dominican Republic, according to the Government Accountability Office audit.

The GAO uncovered records showing that $1,000 from a FEMA debit card went to a Houston divorce lawyer; $600 was spent in a strip club and $400 was spent on "adult erotica products," all of which auditors concluded were "not necessary to satisfy legitimate disaster needs."

(snip)

I had a friend of mine who diaried and chronicled his escape which was harrowing, expensive and just unbelievable. He's STILL fighting for legitimate money for cleanup for his home and is living in a FEMA trailer in his yard. Obviously there's going to be misuse, but on the scale that is alleged is almost unbelievable.

For some reason it reminds me of the line from comedian Jeff Foxworthy: "You can't give Rednecks money." But that was more geared at garish taste in decor, a la concrete deer in the front yard.

World Cup Befuddlement and Patriotism?

The three-headed Disney monster of ABC, ESPN and ESPN2 are carrying all the games, and they're doing so in high definition. Good for them; high def was designed for sports, as evidenced when I could see blades of grass flying after a corner kick.

Let me preface this by saying that I am not a fan of soccer (translated in every other country on the planet to 'football'). Maybe it's the fact that I work globally for a living and all my partners around the planet are enthralled and lost for the next thirty days. Whatever.

Somebody help me understand this one: England's match on Saturday morning is important enough to bump Lilo & Stitch back a couple of hours to give it to us on ABC. Mexico and Iran were important enough to be on ABC yesterday. Let's face it, anybody of Mexican persuasion was probably watching it on a Spanish-language channel; unless ABC offers an SAP button (which I honestly don't know).

Team USA, our own NATIONAL team, isn't important enough to bump Oprah, The View and whatever soap opera pablum is being pandered at 11:00 CDT on a Monday morning to give our national team the widest distribution? Let me guess: Soccer moms only take their kids to games because they have to but don't want have to watch it on TV? They prefer to live their Desperate Housewives lives while their charges are at summer camp?

While the World Cup and the Olympics share the major trait of being a quadrenial event, there are only sixty four games and thirty two teams. This isn't like having curling shunted to MSNBC at 4:30 in the morning because they've got figure skating to cover in prime time, dammit. There's sixty-four games. They're commiting to show them all in high definition which is an investment.

I don't want to be mistaken for a flag waving, sycophantic idjut, but isn't this just one of those things that you do because you're supposed to?

New category of Republicans for Schmidlap

It's not just Evil, Greedy, or Stupid anymore - how about Suicidal?

In response to, among other things, Al Gore's movie "An Inconvenient Truth," the College Republican National Committee has suggested that students host "Global Warming Beach Parties" and "Global Cooling Day" events, where you too can ignore the effects mankind has on the world and assist the environment in killing you:

Run a “Global Cooling” Snow Cone Stand

Freeze out cataclysmic environmental scare tactics with a little humor. The Oklahoma University College Republicans gave out free snow cones to students for an event they called "Global Cooling Day."

Stage an event like this one to grab the attention of your campus and raise awareness on the real facts of the global warming phenomenon. Engage with students and debunk some of the myths and cool the hyperbole surrounding the issue.

OU CRs simultaneously used the event to promote their first meeting, sign-up members, and sell CR shirts. A tent and tables were set up at the busiest spot on campus, and OU CRs gave away nearly 1,000 snow cones each day.

Prior to your "Global Cooling Day" event, arm your College Republican chapter with solid talking points on the issue, and then kick-back and enjoy the sun. The facts are on your side.

The page has a link to another page, entitled "Global Warming Myths Debunked", where they attempt to "debunk" exactly three things:

1) Not all scientists agree on what kind of threat global warming poses. They tell us that "Many reputable" scientists think that any rise will be "well within the range of human adaptability". Names? References? How will we adapt? If half the population died, but the other half adapted, would that qualify as being within the range of human adaptability? They, of course, answer none of these.

2) The Kyoto Protocol would not help. They go on to say that it's a bad idea, because other countries' businesses might benefit. There's lots of "facts", and little or no data.

3) They make fun of people's concerns that polar bears are losing their habitats. This has happened before, due to natural causes, they say. Well, sure, but just because I know people who die from natural causes doesn't mean I can kill others, does it? And nice to know that "compassionate conservatism" is going strong.

That's it. That's all they got. Hundreds and hundreds of articles, in peer-reviewed journals, reams and reams of data, and scientists around the world say otherwise, and that's their counter-argument. And in some places, it wins.

For a much more informative response to the movie, read Salon's piece on the issue. (Day pass required.)

It's all true, I swear

The story of the real George W.

Props to Wil Wheaton for the link.

NSFW, BTW.

Now, this is what a real Democrat sounds like

These are some excerpts from a speech Barack Obama made to an EMILY's List luncheon earlier this year. There are a couple of quotes from it that got some notoriety at the time, because of their sharp-witted attacks on the President, but to me the more compelling parts are where he makes it clear what being a Democrat means, and shows why he should be one of the people leading the party, not Hillary Clinton or John Kerry.

We meet here today at a time where we find ourselves at a crossroads in America's history.

It's a time where you can go to any town hall or street corner or coffee shop and hear people express the same anxiety about the future; hear them convey the same uncertainty about the direction we're headed as a country. Whether it's the war or Katrina or their health care or their jobs, you hear people say that we've finally arrived at a moment where something must change.

These are Americans who still believe in an America where anything's possible - they just don't think their leaders do. These are Americans who still dream big dreams -they just sense their leaders have forgotten how.

...

We had held a large rally the night before in the Southside of Chicago. And in the midst of this rally, someone comes up to me and says that there's a woman who'd like to meet you, and she's traveled a long way and she wants to take a picture and shake your hand.

And so I said fine, and I met her, and we talked. And all of this would have been unremarkable except for the fact that this woman, Marguerite Lewis, was born in 1899 and was 105 years old.

...

[S]he saw the passage of the Civil Rights Act and the Voting Rights Act. And she saw people lining up to vote for the first time - and she got in that line - and she never forgot it. She kept on voting in each and every election because she believed. She believed that over a span of three centuries, she had seen enough to know that there is no challenge too great, no injustice too crippling, no destiny too far out of reach for America.

She believed that we don't have to settle for equality for some or opportunity for the lucky or freedom for the few.

And she knew that during those moments in history where it looked like we might give up hope or settle for less, there have always been Americans who refused. Who said we're going to keep on dreaming, and we're going to keep on building, and we're going to keep on marching, and we're going to keep on working because that's who we are. Because we've always fought to bring all of our people under the blanket of the American Dream.

...

It's the timidity - the smallness - of our politics that's holding us back right now. The idea that some problems are just too big to handle, and if you just ignore them, sooner or later, they'll go away. That if you give a speech where you rattle off statistics about the stock market being up and orders for durable goods being on the rise, no one will notice the single mom whose two jobs won't pay the bills or the student who can't afford his college dreams. That if you say the words "plan for victory" and point to the number of schools painted and roads paved and cell phones used in Iraq, no one will notice the more than 2,300 flag-draped coffins that have arrived at Dover Air Force base.

Well it's time we finally said we notice, and we care, and we're not gonna settle anymore.

You know, you probably never thought you'd hear this at an Emily's List luncheon, but Newt Gingrich made a great point a few weeks back. He was talking about what an awful job his own party has done governing this country, and he said that with all the mistakes and misjudgments the Republicans have made over the last six years, the slogan for the Democrats should come down to just two words:

Had enough?

I don't know about you, but I think old Newt is onto something here. Because I think we've all had enough. Enough of the broken promises. Enough of the failed leadership. Enough of the can't-do, won't-do, won't-even-try style of governance.

Four years after 9/11, I've had enough of being told that we can find the money to give Paris Hilton more tax cuts, but we can't find enough to protect our ports or our railroads or our chemical plants or our borders.

I've had enough of the closed-door deals that give billions to the HMOs when we're told that we can't do a thing for the 45 million uninsured or the millions more who can't pay their medical bills.

I've had enough of being told that we can't afford body armor for our troops and health care for our veterans. I've had enough of that.

I've had enough of giving billions away to the oil companies when we're told that we can't invest in the renewable energy that will create jobs and lower gas prices and finally free us from our dependence on the oil wells of Saudi Arabia.

I've had enough of our kids going to schools where the rats outnumber the computers. I've had enough of Katrina survivors living out of their cars and begging FEMA for trailers. And I've had enough of being told that all we can do about this is sit and wait and hope that the good fortune of a few trickles on down to everyone else in this country.

...

Now, let me say this - I don't think that George Bush is a bad man. I think he loves his country. I don't think this administration is full of stupid people - I think there are a lot of smart folks in there. The problem isn't that their philosophy isn't working the way it's supposed to - it's that it is. It's that it's doing exactly what it's supposed to do.

The reason they don't believe government has a role in solving national problems is because they think government is the problem. That we're better off if we dismantle it - if we divvy it up into individual tax breaks, hand 'em out, and encourage everyone to go buy your own health care, your own retirement security, your own child care, their own schools, your own private security force, your own roads, their own levees...

It's called the Ownership Society in Washington. But in our past there has been another term for it - Social Darwinism - every man or women for him or herself. It allows us to say to those whose health care or tuition may rise faster than they can afford - life isn't fair. It allows us to say to the child who didn't have the foresight to choose the right parents or be born in the right suburb - pick yourself up by your bootstraps. It lets us say to the guy who worked twenty or thirty years in the factory and then watched his plant move out to Mexico or China - we're sorry, but you're on your own.

It's a bracing idea. It's a tempting idea. And it's the easiest thing in the world.

But there's just one problem. It doesn't work. It ignores our history. Yes, our greatness as a nation has depended on individual initiative, on a belief in the free market. But it has also depended on our sense of mutual regard for each other, of mutual responsibility. The idea that everybody has a stake in the country, that we're all in it together and everybody's got a shot at opportunity.

Americans know this. We know that government can't solve all our problems - and we don't want it to. But we also know that there are some things we can't do on our own. We know that there are some things we do better together.

We know that we've been called in churches and mosques, synagogues and Sunday schools to love our neighbors as ourselves; to be our brother's keeper; to be our sister's keeper. That we have individual responsibility, but we also have collective responsibility to each other.

That's what America is.

And so I am eager to have this argument not just with the President, but the entire Republican Party over what this country is about.

Because I think that this is our moment to lead.

The time for our party's identity crisis is over. Don't let anyone tell you we don't know what we stand for and don't doubt it yourselves. We know who we are and we know what our legacy is.

We're the party of Jefferson who first believed that every child in America should be educated regardless of wealth and birth and circumstance. That's who we are.

We're the party of Roosevelt who lifted this nation out of its own fear and sent workers to the factories and veterans to college and families to new homes and seniors to a comfortable retirement. That's who we are.

We're the party that stood up to fascism and defended freedom across the globe during World War II.

We're the party of civil rights, and workers' rights, and women's rights who believes that that every member of the American family deserves a shot at the American Dream. That's who we are.

We're the party of new frontiers and bold horizons - the party that put man on the moon and fueled the research that unlocked the secrets of the human genome. That's who we are.

And let me tell you about the party I see in the future.

In a globalized economy with bigger risks and greater rewards - a world where we are at once more connected and more competitive - let it be said that we are the party of opportunity. The party that guarantees every American an affordable, world-class, top-notch, life-long education - from early childhood to high school, from college to on-the-job training.

Let it be said that we are the party that equips every worker with what they need to succeed in a 21st century economy - wage supports and pensions, child care and health care that will stay with them no matter where they work or what they do.

Let it be said that we are the party of innovation and discovery - willing to blaze a trail toward energy independence or invest in the research that could create whole new industries and save thousands of lives.

And in a world where evil lurks and terrorists plot, let it be said that we will conduct a smart foreign policy that matches the might of our military with the power of our diplomacy. And when we do go to war, let us always be honest with the American people about why we are there and how we will win.

If we do all this, if we can be trusted to lead, this will not be a Democratic Agenda, it will be an American agenda. Because in the end, we may be proud Democrats, but we are prouder Americans. We're tired of being divided, tired of running into ideological walls and partisan roadblocks, tired of appeals to our worst instincts and greatest fears.

Americans everywhere are desperate for leadership. They are longing for direction. And they want to believe again.

You know, as I was thinking about today's luncheon and all the progress EMILY's List has made over the years, the first thing that came to mind wasn't all the politics or the campaigns; it wasn't even all the issues debated or the legislation passed.

I thought about my daughters.

I thought about the world that Sasha and Malia will grow up in, about the chances they'll have and the challenges they'll face. And I thought about my hopes for them - that they'll be able to dream without limit, achieve without constraint, and be free to seek their own happiness.

And I wondered - if they are lucky enough to live as long as 105-year-old Marguerite Lewis, if they someday have the chance to look back across the twenty-first century, what will they see? Will they see a country that is freer and kinder, more tolerant and more just than the one they grew up in? Will they see greater opportunities for every citizen of this country? Will all her of my hopes for my girls be fulfilled?

We are here today because we believe that in this country, we have it within our power to say "yes" to those questions - to forge our own destiny - to begin the world anew.

We are here because we believe that this is our time.

Our time to make a mark on history.

Our time to write a new chapter in the American story.

And then someday, someday, if our kids get the chance to stand where we are and look back at the beginning of the 21st century, they can say that this was the time when America renewed its purpose.

They can say that this was the time when America found its way.

They can say that this was the time when America learned to dream again.

Thank you.

Thanks for writing. Luv ya.

From the Answer Man column, by Roger Ebert:

Q. I'm always amazed at the irrational nature of the debate on medical care. In your review of "The Death of Mr. Lazarescu," you state, "At least in Romania he is not asked for his insurance company, and he has a theoretical right to free medical care." In the next sentence you quote a Romanian doctor who discusses the horrible condition of medical care in his country. Isn't it obvious that when something is "free" for everyone, it will be inadequate for everyone? Do people get left behind in a medical system that involves free enterprise? Of course they do. But when you have a system where personal responsibility plays no part, you certainly get the system you deserve. I for one am glad that I get asked for proof of insurance when I show up at a hospital. It annoys me that people who cannot do so get treated at my expense anyway.

Jeff Grant, Centreville, Va.

A. The hospitals are always looking for volunteers. Maybe you could help them turn away sick poor people.

Rest in peace

February 3, 1927-June 7, 2006

Godspeed, Mom.

Olberman KOs O'Reilly

Just watch it

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T3utX-WbrPA&search=O%27Reilly

Ban gay marriage? How about divorce?

In honor of the proposed ammendment to be debated today that bans gay marriage, I offer a twin ammendment. An ammendment banning divorce, but only for those folks who favor the gay marriage ban.

And for those who fall in this category who leave their spouses (because they can't get a divorce anymore), then round 'em up and put them in interment camps, as deserving of "less than human" folks.

Whaddya think?

Gone fishin'

EDITOR'S NOTE: There is ONE new post from me below that I added after the original Gone Fishin' notice.

The man:



The mission:

I will be away from my duties here until Monday as I am off after the mighty chinook salmon, the tasty coho and the elusive brown trout (and a weekend of debauchery!)

Back on Monday with fish stories.

Media shilling for Bush

I have often pointed out the foibles and foolishness of Mark Silva, a shameless apologist for the Bush administration. Silva, a a "reporter" for the Chicago Tribune, gushes like a breathless correspondent for Tiger Beat over his hero's dramatic "overture" to Iran:

The Bush administration, signaling a willingness Wednesday to open direct talks with Iran over its nuclear program, is embracing a sharp change of course that reflects a more pragmatic approach to one of the world's most intractable conflicts and may ease upward pressure on international oil prices.

Wow, a "sharp change," pragmatism and lower gas prices? Hurray for George!

But let's all wait a minute. First of all, this situation is only "one of the world's most intractable conflicts " because of the ineptitude, stupidity and arrogance of the current administration. And how about "pragmatism?" How pragmatic is it when you offer to negotiate if IN ADVANCE the other side AGREES TO ALL YOUR DEMANDS? That is some negotiating tactic.

My favorite point in the piece is Silva's reference to the letter from the Iranian president as "rambling." Apparently he missed this bit of brilliant elocution from his hero:

Tribal sovereignty means that, it's sovereign. You're a -- you're a -- you have been given sovereignty and you're viewed as a sovereign entity. And therefore, the relationship between the federal government and tribes is one between sovereign entities. Now, the federal government has got a responsibility on matters like education and security to help. And health care. And it's a solemn duty. From this perspective, we must continue to uphold that duty. I think that one of the most promising areas of all is to help with economic development, and that means helping people understand what it means to start a business. That's why the Small Business Administration has increased loans. It means, obviously, encouraging capital flows, but none of that will happen unless the education systems flourish and are strong. That's why I told you, we spent $1.1 billion in reconstruction of Native American schools.

THAT was inspiring, concise and to the point, not one ramble there!

Rarely do I agree with the president of Iran, but this "overture" was merely shallow propaganda, and Mark Silva is the perfect shallow propagandist for the job.