How's that surge working?

The U.S. occupation of Iraq has taken a new and deadly turn with the escalation of violence with the Sadrist forces. We have gone from being occupiers to participants in a political purge.

This conflict lays bare the foolish and simplistic rhetoric that we are fighting "terrorists" in Iraq. We project our western impressions onto alien situations and manage to screw things up entirely. The militias are political as well as military entities, that provide security and order within their territories. Muqtada al-Sadr is a powerful and popular political leader as well as the visible head of the Mahdi army.

This mess came about because the Sunnis in majority Sunni regions were demanding new elections, and the band-aid of our bribe deal was collapsing. However, in southern Iraq, if new elections were held, the stooge government would lose badly to the Sadrist supporters (al-Sadr, an Iraqi nationalist, wants us out. Of course the stooge government wants us to stay so their gravy train of corruption and privilege can continue), destroying any claim of legitimacy.

So what does the stooge government do? It decides to take out the Mahdi army, and presumably Sadr's power along with it. This all happens with our full support and cooperation.

And just by chance, did you notice how close Basra is to the main oil channel in the region? And how close it is to Iran, a major supporter of al-Sadr? Stay tuned.

How's that surge working?

Headline

From the AP: "Bush sees Iraq violence as defining"

This, of course, is yet another example of his Orwellian up-is-down, any outcome clearly supports any actions he's chosen to take "logic." On the other hand, as does happen from time to time, it's also a case of him being correct, even though he knows not why. The violence in Iraq does indeed define his disastrous reign as a fascist murdering cokehound monkey. Bully for him.

I don't write about him or the rest of the scheming demons dressed in kingly guise that masquerade as our government very much anymore not because they're not doing horrible things, but because I'm tired of the inarticulate rage that bubbles around behind my eyes when I do.

How many levels of wrong is this?

From that deep thinker, Pat Buchanan, in a piece oh so cleverly titled "A Brief for Whitey":

First, America has been the best country on earth for black folks. It was here that 600,000 black people, brought from Africa in slave ships, grew into a community of 40 million, were introduced to Christian salvation, and reached the greatest levels of freedom and prosperity blacks have ever known. [Pastor Jerimiah]Wright ought to go down on his knees and thank God he is an American....We hear the grievances. Where is the gratitude

Oh my God. Having generations of the best and brightest kidnapped and enslaved? Generations disrupted, families destroyed and entire civilizations ripped apart?

Excuse them for not sending thank you notes.

Go away. Now.

Dear Sen. Clinton:

You have been running on your experience.

The news of the last few days have shown how you lied about your experience, and did so in a stupifyingly lame way. There were reporters on the plane, Madam Senator. Remember? Did you think they wouldn't? It was such a dangerous mission that you were there with SINBAD??

It also appears from your own records, hesitatingly released, that you have your stories on NAFTA exactly reversed. It seems that you were an active advocate for this anti-labor and anti-American job measure.

Withdraw. Now.

Kisses,

Peter

How could you?

How could you? I know you have an important and stressful job, and that you need some levity occasionally. But how could you appear with someone like this? Why did you stand next to a cartoonish buffoon that no one believes in, just a fraud dressed up in a suit?

How could you, Easter Bunny?

Back from Away

Last night, Mrsdrmagoo and I finally made it back from Houston. I say "finally" not because the travel was tough - our flight was on time, and the drive home from O'Hare to Champaign was uneventful. I say it because downtown Houston is the most boring large city in the entire universe. Chicago is the third largest city in the country, and Houston fourth, which is bizarre because nobody's there. I've never crossed against the light so many times during the week in a business district in my life - there's just nobody there. Not only is the area around the convention center (which also houses the baseball and basketball stadia) dead in terms of people, there's nowhere to go to eat or drink. Every other city I've traveled to for conferences, especially in areas with this many large venues has, y'know, restaurants and bars and stuff where people can go, but not Houston. And if you do walk the 10+ blocks to the nearest handful of restaurants, your choices are fast food or $25 entrees. C'mon, folks. The worst is trying to find breakfast - it's either the hotel, where you're paying $8 for a bagel (once you figure in tip, etc), or Starbucks (which isn't really breakfast, at least not 7 days in a row). And all of that conveys an epic level of busy compared to Houston on a Sunday, a day which could best be described by Buzz Aldrin's comment about the moon, "Magnificent desolation."

The last day or so, we shared the convention center with the Foursquare Church, a group founded by Aimee Semple McPherson and which is so very excited about the imminent second coming. If they spend a lot of time in Houston, I can see why.

Pardon my skepticism

Time reports: Afghan and NATO forces killed more than 40 insurgents in an air and ground battle in southern Afghanistan, a security official said Sunday.

Insurgents? I'm sure.

Let's hear it for that foreign policy expertise

According to Sen. McCain, it is "common knowledge and has been reported in the media that al Qaeda is going back into Iran and receiving training and are coming back into Iraq from Iran, that's well known. And it's unfortunate."

Well, it isn't that special. We ALL know that despite being sworn mortal enemies, Iran and al Qaeda are practically sharing a summer home. After Joe Lieberman whispered sweet nothings in his ear, he had to come back to the reporters with an Emily Litella-like "never mind."

Just keep 'em comin' John.

All from this morning's paper

No longer shocking story #1:

Petraeus: Iraqi Leaders Not Making 'Sufficient Progress'

BAGHDAD, March 13 -- Iraqi leaders have failed to take advantage of a reduction in violence to make adequate progress toward resolving their political differences, Gen. David H. Petraeus, the top U.S. commander in Iraq, said Thursday.

Petraeus, who is preparing to testify to Congress next month on the Iraq war, said in an interview that "no one" in the U.S. and Iraqi governments "feels that there has been sufficient progress by any means in the area of national reconciliation," or in the provision of basic public services.

No longer shocking story #2:

NRCC Says Ex-Treasurer Diverted Up to $1 Million
By Paul Kane
Washington Post Staff Writer

The former treasurer for the National Republican Congressional Committee diverted hundreds of thousands of dollars -- and possibly as much as $1 million -- of the organization's funds into his personal accounts,GOP officials said yesterday, describing an alleged scheme that could become one of the largest political frauds in recent history.

For at least four years, Christopher J. Ward, who is under investigation by the FBI, allegedly used wire transfers to funnel money out of NRCC coffers and into other political committee accounts he controlled as treasurer, NRCC leaders and lawyers said in their first public statement since they turned the matter over to the FBI six weeks ago.

"The evidence we have today indicated we have been deceived and betrayed for a number of years by a highly respected and trusted individual," said Rep. Tom Cole R-Okla.), the NRCC chairman.

And no longer shocking story #3:

Ozone Rules Weakened at Bush's Behest
EPA Scrambles To Justify Action

By Juliet Eilperin
Washington Post Staff Writer

The Environmental Protection Agency weakened one part of its new limits on smog-forming ozone after an unusual last-minute intervention by President Bush, according to documents released by the EPA.

EPA officials initially tried to set a lower seasonal limit on ozone to protect wildlife, parks and farmland, as required under the law. While their proposal was less restrictive than what the EPA's scientific advisers had proposed, Bush overruled EPA officials and on Tuesday ordered the agency to increase the limit, according to the documents.

"It is unprecedented and an unlawful act of political interference for the president personally to override a decision that the Clean Air Act leaves exclusively to EPA's expert scientific judgment," said John Walke, clean-air director for the Natural Resources Defense Council.

The president's order prompted a scramble by administration officials to rewrite the regulations to avoid a conflict with past EPA statements on the harm caused by ozone.

Solicitor General Paul D. Clement warned administration officials late Tuesday night that the rules contradicted the EPA's past submissions to the Supreme Court, according to sources familiar with the conversation. As a consequence, administration lawyers hustled to craft new legal justifications for the weakened standard.

And that's just ONE day, folks.

Oh Madam Senator..

For all of the drama of Ohio and Texas, Obama has made up any gains HRC might have gotten out of last Tuesday.

It is almost a statistical impossibility for her to win the available electoral delegates. I know the "superdelegates" have a role to play, and I believe in playing by the rules, but in this year, with record voter turnouts, I think there will be hell to pay if these party operatives thwart the voter's will.

So exactly what is HRC up to? Why is she praising McCain at Obama's expense? What is this endgame?

On Elliot Spitzer

I know, it's all been done. He's an idiot. Why does his wife stand on the podium? Even questioning the nature of the investigation, wiretaps? On prostitution? Even a prostitution "ring?" All that said, it comes back to--he's an idiot.

Maybe I'll stop going to work

This morning, gas spiked again (originally to $3.50/gallon) to $3.40 a gallon - it was $3.15 yesterday. I drive 50 miles each way to work in a car that averages 30 mpg, and my monthly gas costs are roughly 100*the cost per gallon. In the not quite 4 years I've had this job, gas has gone up roughly $1.50/gallon. Somewhere around 40+% of the raises I've received in that time have gone entirely to paying for the increase in gas prices. Whee!

Maybe I'll stop going out to lunch

Last week, when I went out to lunch, gas was $3.05. When I came back, it was $3.25.

While there was a store brand that was cheaper, in my local Jewel, the Dean's milk was $4.01 a gallon.

Groceries, fuel, the necessities of life are becoming too expensive while jobs are evaporating around us. Welcome to Potterville.

I try not to spread email spam

But this joke made me laugh:

The Pope and Hillary Clinton were on the same stage in front of a huge crowd. However, both of them have been in front of crowds before, so, to make this time more interesting, Hillary said to the Pope, 'Did you know that with just one little wave of my hand I can make every Democrat in the crowd go wild?'

He said, 'O. K., show me.' She waved. Sure enough, every Democrat in the crowd cheered wildly. The cheering then subsided as quickly as it started.

The Pope, not to be outdone by such arrogance, thought about what he could do to answer her stunt. 'That was impressive,' the Pope said, 'but did you know that with just one little wave of my hand I can make every person in this crowd go crazy with joy? What's more, this joy will not be a momentary display like that of your people, but will go deep into the hearts of this crowd. They will forever speak of this day, and they will rejoice.'

The senator doubted this, of course, and said with a smirk, 'One little wave of your hand and all people will rejoice forever? Show me.'

So the Pope slapped her.

Now don't you feel silly

The president has set us straight on those God-fearing telecom companies and those pesky lawsuits:

Now the question is, should these lawsuits be allowed to proceed, or should any company that may have helped save American lives be thanked for performing a patriotic service; should those who stepped forward to say we’re going to help defend America have to go to the courthouse to defend themselves, or should the Congress and the President say thank you for doing your patriotic duty? I believe we ought to say thank you.

Damn, I'm really starting to hate her

TORONTO (AP)--Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper's chief of staff said someone in Hillary Rodham Clinton's campaign gave Canada back-channel assurances that her harsh words about the North American Free Trade Agreement were for political show, according to a report by the Canadian Press.

The report comes just days after a Canadian government memo stated Barack Obama's senior economic adviser told Canadian officials that the Illinois senator's own comments about NAFTA were for "political positioning." The release of that memo helped Clinton defeat Obama decisively in Tuesday's Democratic primary in Ohio, where the trade treaty is unpopular.

On Wednesday, the Canadian Press quoted an unidentified source as saying that Ian Brodie, Harper's chief of staff, made the comment last week to a crew for Canada's CTV television network during a press gathering to discuss Canada's budget. According to a person with knowledge of the incident, the source was a CTV journalist.

The Canadian Press story said a CTV reporter asked Brodie about remarks by Clinton and Obama that they would seek to renegotiate NAFTA.

"He said someone from Clinton's campaign is telling the embassy to take it with a grain of salt. ... That someone called us and told us not to worry," the journalist quoted Brodie as saying, according to the report.

The Fascist Ball

Apparently fascists like to dance.

War is the Health of the State

In Chimpy's world, at least...

No Need for Lawmakers' Approval of Iraq Pact, U.S. Reasserts

By Karen DeYoung
Washington Post Staff Writer

The Bush administration yesterday advanced a new argument for why it does not require congressional approval to strike a long-term security agreement with Iraq, stating that Congress had already endorsed such an initiative through its 2002 resolution authorizing the use of force against Saddam Hussein.

The 2002 measure, along with the congressional resolution passed one week after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks authorizing military action "to prevent any future acts of international terrorism against the United States," permits indefinite combat operations in Iraq, according to a statement by the State Department's Bureau of Legislative Affairs.

A so-called "emergency" authorization empowers the Bush administration to pursue endless war and permanent empire. That makes perfect sense, doesn't it?

It's not Karl Rove's math...

So, last night was a good night for the Clinton campaign. They learned that going negative gets them votes, and votes get them the media, and the media gets them the story. Congrats to them, and thanks for all the wonderment and joy.

But...

Did yesterday change anything? If so, how? And what has to happen in the remaining 12 races (WY, MS, PA, IN, WV, KY, ND, MT, NC, OR, Guam, and Puerto Rico) for her to win this thing?

Well, over at Daily Kos, a diarist named PocketNines has done a little bit of math (no, don't run away!) and we learn some interesting things from this diary:

Because of the way that the Democratic party splits delegates proportionally, merely winning a state or a district doesn't necessarily grant the winner a large margin of delegates.

In order to cross all thresholds except the initial break that give you a +2 delegate swing, you need to win by an extra 200/X%, where X = the number of total delegates at stake. Let's see how this works by easy example - West Virginia and its 10 statewide delegates. 200/10 = 20%. To go from 5-5 to 6-4 there you have to win by over 10% (55-45). But to get ANOTHER +2 you need to add 20% to your win and win by 30% (65-35).

What do we see here? In a district/state with 10 delegates, the "winner" gets 5 if they get less than 55% of the vote, 6 if they get between 55 and 65, 7 if they get between 65-75, 8 if they get between 75-85, 9 if they get between 85-95, and 10 if they win more than 95%. So, a 10-point win by either candidate only nets a +2 delegate margin, and to increase that they have to win by 30%. Trivia: In how many states has Hillary gotten more than 65% of the vote? Answer: One - Arkansas (70%)

What's the upshot of this? If Hillary was able to win every race by 10% and every district by 10%, she'd get a net gain of 58 delegates (Obama's lead is somewhere around 140-150 right now in pledged delegates). If we raise that number to 16.5% (58.25-41.75), then she gains 64 delegates on Obama. If she won every district by 24.9% (62.45-37.55), then she gains 110 delegates on him (and still trails by 30-40).

Putting it this way, there is no realistic chance that she'll catch him in pledged delegates, and likely not even get close. If she's still down by 80+ delegates, her means of victory are in SuperD's and/or Florida and Michigan. Of course, if she wins every state from here on out by 10%+, then her case to get the SuperD's is reasonable (not airtight, but it's certainly an argument with value). But if she splits the states reasonably evenly (which is still a good scenario for her), she won't gain any appreciable number of delegates on him, which means that she'll need a huge number of the remaining SuperDelegates to go her way.

Meanwhile, back in Frostbite Falls...

The beat goes on.

BAGHDAD - A pair of car bombings, at least one of them a suicide attack, killed 26 Iraqis and injured dozens in Baghdad yesterday, Iraqi security and hospital officials said.

Hard work, makin' progress...