So--what have we learned? (Hint: Sociopathic and delusional are both correct)

We saw the Dick Cheney 1994 quagmire talk. Largely ignored by the network news, the tape shows Dick Cheney talking about a quagmire and the value of American life balanced against the removal of Saddam Hussein.

Should we be shocked by his hypocrisy? No. We should be frightened by his sociopathy. He was lying then, not giving a damn about "American lives." He was lying because he knew what he wanted to do, but knew he couldn't sell it a dozen years ago. he entertained delusions of the GOP presidential nod in 1996, so he had to hide his malevolent true self. See how effortlessly he lies, an indicator of the sociopath.

And then his stooge drags out Viet Nam. Beyond the laughably obvious fact that no man ever is less qualified than George W. Bush to bring up that tragic conflict, could he have gotten it more wrong?

You have already read how he has been pilloried by historians and military experts. A feeble claim that we can't leave because bad things would happen is pathetic and tragic, as are attempts to glom onto difficult decisions made by previous presidents when faced with real crises. For the love of God, at least Viet Nam was a "war," as misbegotten as it was. There was an objective and an identiafiable enemy, even if that objective ran counter to U.S. interests and the "enemy" was no real threat. At least it was not an ethereal shadow boxing match with no logical objective or endgame.

Note the absurdity of even pundits such as George Will, who defines "victory" as the establishment of "a stable society under a tolerable regime." Hmm, what is that odd smell of eggs? Oh that's right, it is the odious, sulphuric smell of a shattered Humpty Dumpty that no king's men or horses can fix. George, if you will recall, there was a "stable" society living under a "tolerable" if odious regime. You embraced pushing Humpty off that wall.

For the depth and breadth of this delusional absurdity, take a gander at this perverse White House "fact sheet," that gives us

Today, The Violent Islamic Extremists Who Fight Us In Iraq Are As Certain Of Their Cause As The Nazis, Imperial Japanese, And Soviet Communists Were Of Theirs – And They Are Destined For The Same Fate. So long as we remain true to our ideals, we will defeat the extremists in Iraq and help that country's people stand up a functioning democracy in the heart of the Middle East, which will make America safer and more secure.

The Wehmacht, the Imperial Army, the Red Army--and a few thousand guys in caves. God help us.

The Dumbass Hall of Fame

We have two inductees this time.

The first is Mr. Michael Sanderman of Chicago. Mikey, holding his crayon firmly and mouthing the words as he scribbles, gave us this masterpiece:

Here are just a few thoughts concerning all those cigarette taxes that everybody likes except for smokers. Among the many ideals our forefathers fought and died for was the abolishment of unfair taxation. The Boston Tea Party might be the best example of this. Have all those ideals become just pretty words on a pretty piece of paper? Where has everyone’s sense of fair play gone? Where have all the lawyer do-gooders gone? Where have all those tax dollars gone? How could anyone in his or her wildest imagination think that the cigarette tax is a fair tax?

Wow, where to begin.

Mikey, let's start with your patently obvious ignorance of American history. The American Revolution did not spring from any desire to "abolish unfair taxation." While "no taxation without representation" was a common shibboleth, what concern there was about taxation sprung from the issue about WHO should be the taxing body (Parliament or colonial assemblies), not the particular taxes themselves. Beyond that, the taxation issue was really just that, a shibboleth, a pithy slogan designed to appeal to the masses. General warrants, allowing unlimited searches, were far more offensive than taxes. So Mikey, please spare us the history "lesson."

And "unfair?" How? Taxes have been used to shape policy going back even before the days of the tariff. How are cigarette taxes possibly unfair?

But Mikey is a mere piker compared to the incredibly dimwitted Susan J. Venecek of Elkhorn, Wisconsin:

I am a Republican and I am not pro-war. The candidates are not "pro-war." Republicans, however, do realize that there are things worth fighting for. They realize right now that we are in the fight of our lives and it's going to last for a long while. Possibly if this had been realized during the administration of the sex-crazed buffoon, Bill Clinton, we wouldn't be in the position we are right now. Mr. Dugan simply exhibits the usual liberal stupidity and ignorance. Not to mention the general slack-jawed "I don't get it" liberal idiocy.

So many talking points, so little time....

Let's dismiss the "Blame Bill Clinton" nonsense as not even worthy of comment. But "things worth fighting for?" Propping up a Shi'a regime with no popular support or perception of legitimacy? Taking different sides in different locales in the midst of a sectarian civil war? And how is this the "fight of our lives?"

So, Mikey, Little Suzie:

Wow, they're stupid

Ari Fleischer, back from the dead to be an idiot: "That’s like saying we never should have gone into Germany cause after all it’s just the Japanese who attacked at Pearl Harbor."

We've been here before

As per the post below, see this one.

A sign that he, as usual, has exactly zero idea what the hell is going on

Headline: "Bush will invoke Vietnam in support of Iraq plans"

Sure, because if I'm going to say - hey, we need to do X because of Y, I'm going to make sure that Y is the biggest failure I can get my hands on. Of course, he'll just feed on the neocon delusion that the only thing wrong with the Vietnam War was that the damned dirty hippies made the good, red-blooded Americans stop before they were done kicking yellow tail. It's sad, too, the way the entire Asian continent went communist the day the war ended, but those of us who hate America and want the terrorists to win know that was for the best.

On immigration

They deported Elvira. Finally. And I say, nice job.

Elvira Arellano-an illegal immigrant who claimed "sanctuary" in a north side church, and had been there for over a year. The "minister" of this church was an "activist" with somehat of a shady background, "Slim" Coleman.

She lived in the church for a year, claiming "sanctuary" and generally making a scene, exploting and not educating her young son, who was born here. She was arrested and deported after leaving the church to attend an LA rally.

First of all, she was not your typical illegal immigrant. She had committed a crime (forged documents) and actively sought out the press. She used her young son as a prop while failing to be a parent to him. She openly defied law enforcement, and I say good riddance.

On that note, I once again posit the question of what is the purpose of our immigration laws? Assume two young men. Both are skilled contractors and garage door installers. Both are fluent in English and have achieved the same level of education. Anders, from Copenhagen, can be here in six months. Pedro, from Guadalajara, gets in the back of a line that begins in 1994.

Does that make sense?

Cheney Version 1.0

I apologize for my absence. BURIED at work and the home wireless has been a bit fussy....

You all know by now of the 1994 version of Dick Cheney, where he as the ex-Secretary of Defense said all the bad things that would happen from going into Iraq, and said the "quagmire" word.

My response is--"Well duh." Cheney was reciting what any college sophomore who had taken a Middle Eastern history class would spit back as the first grossly obvious paragraph in a blue book exam.

But what changed? Certainly not what Dick Cheney knew about the Middle East--I doubt that had changed since birth. No, what changed, as Der Chimpenfuher inartfully puts it, September the 11th.

Cheney 1994? He still considered himself to be a potential 1996 GOP candidate, so of course he was mouthing the centrist line. centrist why? He WANTED this mid-east adventure, he just knew he couldn't sell it. His 1994 piece wasn't hypocrisy, it was A LIE. Then comes gift-wrapped some hijacked planes (comspiracy theories for another time) and frustrated Mr. Potter gets the presidency he feels he deserves. He can now sell the war he always wanted to a stupid frightened nation. He was able to sell it, and millions bought it.

Sigh.....

In memoriam

I found out today that a good friend of mine was killed in a car accident while traveling in Moscow. She was bright and witty and well-spoken - a professor who specialized in British literature. She also browsed our little blog here from time to time and marched as one of the "Billionaires for Bush," a satirical group which pointed out the gross inequities in Bush's financial plans. She was 34.

Goodbye Lana, you will be missed.

What do you think?

From The Onion:

Congress Approves Surveillance Measures

The Democratic-controlled House passed a bill that will allow wide-ranging domestic and foreign eavesdropping that would be authorized by a secret court. What do you think?

Ed Albaugh, Elevator Repairman
"You won't need to eavesdrop to hear this: I voted for you assholes because you said you were against shit like this."

Hey Steve, did you ever notice that Dennis spelled backwards is "Sinned"?

Taking his rubber stamp and going home - Dennis Hastert, not seeking re-election in 2008.

Hat tip to David Corn--and F. Scott Fitzgerald

In his column today, David Corn of The Nation makes a nice literary reference to W and Rove, conjuring up this one from The Great Gatsby:

It was all very careless and confused. They were careless people, Tom and Daisy -- they smashed up things and then retreated into their money or their vast carelessness, or whatever it was that kept them together, and let other people clean up the mess they had made ....

Congrats, Varmint Hunter!

So Mitt, our favorite varmint hunter who equates his kids crossing Iowa in an RV with military service and then says that he "misspoke," "wins" the Iowa "straw poll," edging people you've never heard of.

Let's see--the Iowa "straw poll" costs $35 to participate in (it is a fundraiser for the Iowa GOP), you have to be there in person in Ames and Eva Braun Laura Ingraham is the moderator, and we have what the Iowa GOP says is "the most important event on the 2007 calendar for the Republican candidates seeking the Republican nomination for President." Seriously.

I am torn on this. I look around and see debacle after debacle, I remember the Family Guy line of the "two symbols of the Republican Party: an elephant, and a fat white guy who is threatened by change," and think we can't lose, and then one word comes to mind--Diebold.

On the Turd, Part Deux

I really have been struggling to get my head around this one.

First of all, with all due respect to my family--NOBODY wants to spend more time with their family! (and read about Rove's family, odd this comes when a kid is leaving for college)

Der Chimpenfuhrer will protect him to his dying breath, trying to promote a narrowly-drawn privilege crafted by the courts for national security purposes into allowing Goodfellas in Washington.

Rove and Bush are already toxic for GOP hopefuls.

My only thought? We all know the media is (are) lazy and stupid. Note how quickly so many reports seized on the New York Times (you know, the LIBERAL NYT, the paper that let Judy Miller cheerlead us into war) piece by Brookings Institute writers Michael O’Hanlon and Ken Pollack (Ken Pollack, who wrote The Threatening Storm: The Case for Invading Iraq--yeah, he's a good source) Note a teeny presidential approval rating bump. Note America's short attention span.

But still-I don't get it.

Taking an early lead

I haven't talked much about the 2008 Presidential election yet, because it's too damned early. I have my opinions, of course, but I'm in no rush to get hip-deep in that race yet.

On the other hand, one sure way to win my support is to insult Karl Rove. John Edwards' statement about Rove's announced resignation:

"Goodbye, good riddance.”

h/t CNN.com's Political Ticker

Turd Blossom to resign

Anyone who believes he'll just fade into that Good Night is welcome to continue living in the land of make-believe, but Karl Rove is resigning at the end of August.

Der Chimpenfuhrer on Accountability

THE PRESIDENT: Lewis Libby was held accountable. He was declared guilty by a jury and he's paid a high price for it.

Al Gonzales -- implicit in your questions is that Al Gonzales did something wrong. I haven't seen Congress say he's done anything wrong. As a matter of fact, I believe, David, we're watching a political exercise. I mean, this is a man who has testified, he's sent thousands of papers up there. There's no proof of wrong. Why would I hold somebody accountable who has done nothing wrong? I mean, frankly, I think that's a typical Washington, D.C. assumption -- not to be accusatory, I know you're a kind, open-minded fellow, but you suggested holding the Attorney General accountable for something he did wrong.

Move along, nothing to see here...

Let's move to Oklahoma

Where we can get this nifty license plate!

Link

On the road

So I'm spending a week or so out in the greater Seattle area, which is why I've been quiet on the latest attacks on our civil liberties. I find vacation to be a useful thing - I get far less worked up about the horrible things that go on than I do when I'm at home (of course, there will be something new next week, so I've got that going for me).

A couple of days ago I took a trip to a cute little town in the San Juan Islands, and since I wasn't feeling well that day, I visited a number of places that regularly have graffiti on the walls. All except one had profoundly anti-Bush graffiti, and the one that didn't had something saying "F___ the GOP". It was enough to make an ill drmagoo feel a little better about the world.

On the comments below

If you read colonial history, you will find that one of the driving forces behind revolution was the concept of the "general warrant." These odious documents authorized the king's agents to search anyone at any time for any reason.

Taxes? Hardly. A popular shibboleth, granted, but colonial leaders knew that 1) the taxes levied were consumption taxes, which individuals could control and avoid, 2) the colonists were taxed far less than inhabitants of the home islands and 3) representation wouldn't have changed a damn thing.

But the searches? Those were VERY real and incredibly offensive to both revolutionary leader and the everyday blacksmith. In the view of the framers, such interferences with privacy justified what we now call "regime change." [Editor's note: another key concern was the tendency of European princes to make war for sport. To deal with that, the framers gave warmaking powers to Congress and required a war expenditure vote AT LEAST every two years, thanks for ignoring that part, folks.]

On this bill, Geoffrey Stone of the University of Chicago Law School [Editor's note: Yours truly was admitted to the U of C Law School, but 1) I couldn't afford it and 2) there is an underground tunnel from the law school to the law dorm. I never would have seen the sun!] said that the

amendment authorizes the government to wiretap or intercept any international communication, even if one of the participants is an American citizen on American soil, as long as the intercept is undertaken for foreign intelligence purposes and is "directed at a person reasonably believed to be located outside of the United States

Think about that. Gone is "probable cause," that must be found by a judge. Now it is the ATTORNEY GENERAL who REASONABLY BELIEVES that the intercept is for "FOREIGN INTELLIGENCE PURPOSES." And those are WHAT?

So, if Mrs. Pete goes to Europe (as she always does) and calls me, our conversation is now fair game. Thanks guys.

I hate Will Rogers

Or at least that "I belong to no organized political party" line because it is so damned accurate.

Question #1 for the Democratic leadership: You have a rogue administration that has shamelessly broken statutory law and flouted constitutional guarantees of privacy and personal security in the name of "terrorism." Why on earth do you give him MORE power?????