Simply Chimpy

The head ghoul in a ghost town

2005-09-16T06:45:00.000-07:00

A bizarre scene last night: Jackson Square cleaned up for His Majesty (obviously a much more important task than cleaning up a residential area, or perhaps picking up dead bodies), empty of even his normal hand-picked and pre-screened audience, illuminated by creepy blue lighting, and a horse over his shoulder that looked ready to either attack him at any moment or take a dump on him. Bush emerged from somewhere in the darkness and strode manfully toward his Hollywoodish lighting, dressed for workin' hard in a blue shirt with the sleeves rolled up (did he just pick up wreckage from Jackson Square? I don't think so). Nice dramatic entrance, right? Well, maybe, except whoever dressed little George buttoned his shirt wrong, as noted in the photo above.

Amazing that they felt the need to blow taxpayer money to have him in this weird setting rather than give his "address" from the White House. I hope everyone enjoyed it, since you paid for it - Air Force One guzzling fuel so expensive it's put two airlines in bankruptcy this week, his large security and staff detail dragged along, the stage lighting - all of it was on your dime.

With a jerking jaw Bush read his speech in the manner of a six year old struggling with a grade school text, but that was to be expected. Given his complete lack of a philosophy to deal with the large underclass in our society it might be surprising at first glance that he shoveled out some Great Society-like programs to address poverty, but as with anything with this puppet you have to look first at a philosophy he does embrace: keeping his wealthy base happy and (more) wealthy.

First, his offer of homesteading was interesting, but where is this federal land that will be part of his exciting lottery? Is it in the 9th ward of New Orleans, where many of those potential homesteaders lived? Of course not. Now that the poor population of New Orleans is scattered in the wind, the wealthy elite who have run the city for years has already decided they won't be welcomed back, as noted last week in the Wall Street Journal:

The power elite of New Orleans -- whether they are still in the city or have moved temporarily to enclaves such as Destin, Fla., and Vail, Colo. -- insist the remade city won't simply restore the old order. New Orleans before the flood was burdened by a teeming underclass, substandard schools and a high crime rate. The city has few corporate headquarters.

The new city must be something very different, Mr. Reiss says, with better services and fewer poor people. "Those who want to see this city rebuilt want to see it done in a completely different way: demographically, geographically and politically," he says. "I'm not just speaking for myself here. The way we've been living is not going to happen again, or we're out."

What better way to give his elitist friends a shiny new city with fewer poor people than planting them in Indian reservation-like settings outside of New Orleans? Of course, they'll keep them close enough so they can still bus in to take those great new minimum wage jobs Bush has created by suspending the Davis-Bacon act in the flood zone or clean the homes of the wealthy New Orleans elite.

He mentioned churches a lot, as though to draw his insanely religious followers back into the fold, and I laughed out loud - something I rarely do at a Bush speech, since I'm generally so nauseated - when he suggested that we give money to churches in Mississippi to help pay for their 'compassion'. Oh, yeah, I'm really going to shovel money at the regressive hateful knuckle draggers who want to outlaw abortion, persecute gays and lesbians, force creationism into the public schools, thump their bibles for a very cruel and un-Christian like war in Iraq, and generally drag our society back into the 16th century. I'm surely chomping at the bit to contribute to that.

As expected, the ninny proposed expanded executive powers for himself in using the military as his personal branch of domestic law enforcement:

"...It is now clear that a challenge on this scale requires greater federal authority and a broader role for the armed forces, the institution of our government most capable of massive logistical operations on a moment’s notice.

Of course, he determines the scale of the "challenge", so expect him to casually dismiss the Posse Comitatus Act with the same breezy cheerfulness with which he destroyed the Davis-Bacon Act in the event of a "challenge", say, from the American people when they take to the streets in anger against this corrupt puppet in the upcoming Civil War v2.0.

Whatever. His Republican base of fiscal conservatives (are there any left?) and racists alike are screaming about his 'liberal' proposals last night - Free Republic crowed that he had been transformed into "Lyndon Baines Bush" - and liberals distrust his homesteading plan and the corrupt process by which the $200B of funding will be disbursed. The only ones happy with last night's performance are the wealthy elite of New Orleans, who will get the ethnic cleansing they so desperately desire, and his corporate pals who'll rake in the chips in no-bid contracts. The public on both sides of the political divide can grouse about the speech all they want, but this wasn't for them. His plan is to benefit the top 2% - the "have mores" - and to turn our country into a police state. In this, it must be said, he succeeded in splendid fashion.

The strings of the puppet exposed

2005-09-15T07:46:00.000-07:00

Wow, the little monkey can't even take a leak without asking Condi's permission (and he's unsure of exactly how badly he needs to whiz: he "thinks" he "may" need to use the bathroom).

A real strong and decisive leader, isn't he?

One wonders if Condi scribbled her approval on his hall pass so he could show the Secret Service that he did, indeed, have permission to leave the room.

Place this note next to his arrogance, his sour nasty expressions, his obnoxious arms-akimbo strutting and you can see exactly what is false and what is real. The little tool can playact all he wants, but when a president has to ask a Secretary of State if he can use the can it's obvious that he's not in charge and never has been - and knows it.

Building a nation of serfs

2005-09-14T08:20:00.000-07:00

Another outrage for working people - the millionaire Bush is about to throw over yet more wage controls in the hurricane zone, so his millionaire friends can drive wages even lower and the millionaires in Congress are just fine with this.

In what may become the next major post-Katrina policy, the White House was working yesterday to suspend wage supports for service workers in the hurricane zone as it did for construction workers on federal contracts last week, administration and congressional officials said.

And as a prelude to the rape that Halliburton is about to visit upon Louisiana, Mississippi and the American taxpayer, the article continues:

At tomorrow's speech, the president is to outline his vision more comprehensively than he has to date. A top aide said he will stress that New Orleans officials will dictate how the city will be rebuilt, but will also make plain the reconstruction should reflect his vision of government -- including reducing regulatory obstacles and emphasizing entrepreneurship over big government, the aide said.

"Entrepreneurship" is, of course, no-bid contracts for his campaign contributers and Cheney's buddies at Halliburton. "Reducing regulatory obstacles" meanings gutting the Clean Air and Water Acts and allowing low-wage workers to toil in a toxic dump without legal recourse should they sicken and die. That's the Bush "vision of government", a serf-and-overlord nation where the rich get richer and the environment gets filthier and the poor work for - let's just say it, shall we? - slave wages until they die.

Who's going to defend us from this corruption, this immoral "vision", this death sentence? The Democrats? The ones who are about to confirm John Roberts, who will gladly hand Bush and his neocons and corporate cronies unlimited power in their quest for greed and war? Wake me up when the Bush administration is over - if, indeed, it ever is. Given who owns the voting machines, we're in for more of the same for our lifetimes.

Another power grab

2005-09-14T07:02:00.000-07:00

If you're wondering, as I am, what Bush could possibly say that's new in his grandiose "Address to the Nation" tomorrow night from Louisiana you're in good company. After all, he's already given us an inventory of the number of blankets sent to a semi-tropical region in one of the hottest months of the year, told us repeatedly how rebuilding the region will be 'hard work', we've already seen him look bored and indifferent during one of his many photo-op briefings, and I think we've seen him hug enough carefully chosen and appropriately screened for political background black children.

It might be time for us to prepare for yet another disaster tomorrow night. If 9/11 taught us anything (and it hasn't, not at all) we know that Bush and his cronies use these events and the ensuing public fear/worry/concern/apathy to attempt to seize more power for the executive branch, as they did with the Patriot Act. Tomorrow might well bring even more disaster down upon our Constitution and our civil liberties.

Why, you say? Weill, check out a trial balloon dropped by the Hearst newspapers yesterday:

Bush says he may need more power in disasters

He wants Congress to look into whether presidential authority should be expanded in times of catastrophes like Katrina

By STEWART M. POWELL

Hearst Newspapers

WASHINGTON — President Bush on Monday urged Congress to examine whether the White House needs stronger powers to deal with catastrophes like Hurricane Katrina.

Bush’s backing for the congressional inquiry raised the possibility that lawmakers might expand presidential authority to:

• Order mandatory civilian evacuations

• Dispatch U.S.-based armed forces for emergency search-and-rescue operations

• Grant wider leeway for active-duty U.S. military personnel to carry out law enforcement operations.

“It’s really important that as we take a step back and learn lessons — that we are in a position to adequately answer the question: ‘Are we prepared for major catastrophes?”’ Bush said during a tour of hurricane damage in New Orleans.

He said if there was a terrorist attack with weapons of mass destruction, such as germ-warfare agents, “we’ve got to make sure we understand the lessons learned to be able to deal with catastrophe.”

Asked whether the federal government needed broader authority to “come in earlier or even in advance of a storm that (is) threatening?” Bush replied: “I think that’s one of the interesting issues that Congress needs to take a look at.”

There's a reason why our Constitution forbids the military from being used as a domestic law enforcement agency, and that is to prevent the president from using the military to establish a police state or overthrow, say, a State government or even the Congress.

For Bush to seize on his own incompetence (or was it deliberate?) to now howl for more power, more power, more power is sick and unacceptable. The question now is will a rubber stamp Republican congressional majority give this president - the worst president possible to trust with such authority, as he proved with the Iraq War Resolution - the power to use military troops as law enforcement within the United States? Will he be able to call out the Marines in the event of, say, civil unrest in San Francisco or Los Angeles or New York or YOUR CITY?

I'm guessing that tomorrow night will be yet another power grab, a "give big daddy a bigger stick and I'll keep you safe" moment. There's really no other reason for him to give a prime-time address regarding a momumental failure in his personal leadership.

Be wary, be on alert, and if he does call for increased executive branch power be sure to give him the answer he must have: NO.

Our New FEMA "Expert"

2005-09-13T07:36:00.000-07:00

Scary Bloggerman entry:

Secaucus - If Michael Brown's resignation this afternoon as the head of FEMA was supposed to end the political controversy over the administration's response to Hurricane Katrina, it probably won't.

In another gesture symbolizing the continued confusion of the federal response, the man President Bush immediately named to succeed "Brownie," proves to have been the same FEMA official who, two-and-a-half years ago, suggested that Americans stock up on duct tape to protect against a biological or chemical terrorist attack.

David Paulison, then the govt's Fire Administrator, joined with the then-head of Homeland Security Tom Ridge, on February 10th, 2003, to say that duct tape and plastic sheeting should be part of any home's "survival kit" in preparation for a terrorist attack. That set off a run on duct tape at stores, and widespread criticism of the administration. It might have been the first time a large number of Americans wondered if the govt really knew what it was talking about when it came to disaster preparedness.

Is there any single person in this administration who isn't totally batshit?

Our big, brave Commander-in-Chief in New Orleans today

2005-09-12T10:07:00.000-07:00

Yes, that's his little tiny head cowering in the center.

President Photo-Op

2005-09-12T07:31:00.000-07:00

Bush is strolling through the French Quarter today - you know, Party Central of his drunken youth. Of course, the Quarter took very little damage and any angry African-Americans have long ago left the area, so it's considered "safe" turf for the little coward.

He can strut and roll up his sleeves and look in control for the cameras, but the lead article in this week's Newsweek strips the clothes from our Chimperor and exposes him for the fraud that he is.

The article begins with a tragedy - not the hurricane, but advising Bush that he has to cut his five-week long vacation short by two days.

Sept. 19, 2005 issue - It's a standing joke among the president's top aides: who gets to deliver the bad news? Warm and hearty in public, Bush can be cold and snappish in private, and aides sometimes cringe before the displeasure of the president of the United States, or, as he is known in West Wing jargon, POTUS. The bad news on this early morning, Tuesday, Aug. 30, some 24 hours after Hurricane Katrina had ripped through New Orleans, was that the president would have to cut short his five-week vacation by a couple of days and return to Washington. The president's chief of staff, Andrew Card; his deputy chief of staff, Joe Hagin; his counselor, Dan Bartlett, and his spokesman, Scott McClellan, held a conference call to discuss the question of the president's early return and the delicate task of telling him. Hagin, it was decided, as senior aide on the ground, would do the deed.

The article goes on to describe how out-of-touch and disconnected from the agony of the Gulf coast Bush was:

The reality, say several aides who did not wish to be quoted because it might displease the president, did not really sink in until Thursday night. Some White House staffers were watching the evening news and thought the president needed to see the horrific reports coming out of New Orleans. Counselor Bartlett made up a DVD of the newscasts so Bush could see them in their entirety as he flew down to the Gulf Coast the next morning on Air Force One.

How this could be—how the president of the United States could have even less "situational awareness," as they say in the military, than the average American about the worst natural disaster in a century—is one of the more perplexing and troubling chapters in a story that, despite moments of heroism and acts of great generosity, ranks as a national disgrace.

Remember when the national media in 2000 thought it was cute that Bush insisted on a 10:00 pm bedtime while on the campaign trail, and cooed over the personal pillow he carried? Maybe they should have considered the possible downside of having a president who considers his bedtime more important than American lives:

There are a number of steps Bush could have taken, short of a full-scale federal takeover, like ordering the military to take over the pitiful and (by now) largely broken emergency communications system throughout the region. But the president, who was in San Diego preparing to give a speech the next day on the war in Iraq, went to bed.

Really a take-charge kind of guy, huh? This makes the White House spin that the blame should be placed on the (Democratic) state and local governments even more putrid. This president is lazy, incompetent, and completely uncaring. Good to see the media finally reporting the truth about this monster.

Now the real looting begins

2005-09-09T06:38:00.000-07:00

While the nation is distracted by the horrific images of death and suffering coming from the Gulf coast, the Bush oligarchy is looking to fatten the wallets of the already wealthy.

Three examples will suffice, but be assured that Dick Cheney's visit to the region yesterday had nothing to do with storm victims and everything to do with laying the groundwork for Halliburton and other Republican donors to obtain huge contacts for the rebuilding - much as he mused over the maps of Iraqi oilfields prior to our "humanitarian" invasion. Look for many further atrocities to the federal treasury as Cheney plots a course of greed in the midst of a tragedy.

The first step to his "Rebuilding for Fun and Profit" plan has already been put in place. Corporate Republicans have for years tried to dismantle the Davis-Bacon Act of 1931, which requires that federal contractors pay the prevailing wages in the area in which federally funded work is conducted. Keep in mind that most construction work is performed by union workers - thus, prevailing wages in this type of work is generally understood to be union scale. Large construction firms really dislike union scale - that's money that could be in their pockets.

Well, yesterday, with the stroke of a pen, Bush destroyed the Davis-Bacon Act for Cheney's Halliburton friends.

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President Bush issued an executive order Thursday allowing federal contractors rebuilding in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina to pay below the prevailing wage.

In a notice to Congress, Bush said the hurricane had caused "a national emergency" that permits him to take such action under the 1931 Davis-Bacon Act in ravaged areas of Alabama, Florida, Louisiana and Mississippi.

Handy, isn't it? Now the only requirement for workers hired by Halliburton and other GOP-connected firms will be to pay the federal minimum wage - five bucks an hour. And these are the jobs that will be offered to the evacuees, many of whom are already poor, who will continue to live under the poverty line even as they do the hard and dangerous work of rebuilding their communities through layers of toxins and disease.

Are we ready for a revolution yet?

Further on this subject is my second example. Yesterday, CNN reported that evacuees had to sign a waiver to receive their $2,000 per family grant that decrees that they won't request further assistance from the government. When that $2,000 runs out - as it will quickly, as most of them only have the clothes on their back - what happens? Why are they being forced to waive the provisions of FEMA's own Individual Assistance Program, which provides cash grants of up to $26,200 per individual or family, forcing them to settle for less than a tenth of that amount?

See the (deadly) minimum wage jobs noted above. If that fails, there's always the deadly duty of being shipped to Iraq. Military recruiters are taking advantage of the large pool of evacuees at the Superdome to sign up new cannon fodder, which may be the only option left for people jobless, homeless, and without funds. See how those waivers come in handy?

Are we ready for a revolution yet?

Next on the hit parade is possibly the most outrageous exploitation of tragedy to push through the Bush agenda since 9/11. Hoping that the country will be distracted by the disaster which the Republicans did so much to contribute to, they're now planning on ramming through Bush's Social Security Privatization plan - the largest looting scheme in history - through a sneaky procedural vote, despite the fact that an overwhelming majority of the public opposes this plan.

Congressional Republicans, persisting in hopes of enacting some form of private Social Security option despite opposition from the public and the Democrats, are considering the same kind of maneuver that enabled them to pass a controversial Medicare drug bill two years ago.

That's the clear signal from key GOP congressional leaders and chief White House strategist Karl Rove, one of the main architects of the Social Security proposal that President Bush made his top 2005 priority.

Mr. Rove, speaking to college students and lobbyists before Congress went on its current recess, said the House would act next month and the Senate soon after, according to the congressional newspaper The Hill .

And Rep. Bill Thomas, R-Calif., chairman of the Ways and Means Committee and one of his party's canniest operatives, said without giving details that his panel would introduce a retirement security bill in September.

...None had as torturous a path to enactment as the bill to create a prescription drug program. It only passed in 2003 after three hours of early morning arm twisting and the help of misleading cost estimates that soon proved to have been understated.

Because the Senate had passed a similar bill, Republicans could take the measure to a Senate-House conference. By excluding most Democrats from any role, they crafted the kind of bill they wanted in the first place.

That would appear to be their hope for private Social Security accounts – pass a bill in the House authorizing private accounts, accept any Social Security vehicle in the Senate that gets the issue to conference and write a final version letting the White House proclaim success.

So, there you have it - wage laws destroyed, Social Security being leeched by Wall Street, lots of profits from hurricane rebuilding efforts going directly into the pockets of the oligarchy - no wonder Bush asked Nancy Pelosi in wonderment, "What went wrong?" He and his wealthy corporate friends hit another "trifecta".

"Oblivious, in denial, dangerous"

2005-09-08T06:01:00.000-07:00

Thank you, Nancy Pelosi, for finally telling the truth about the sociopath in the White House.

During a meeting with Congressional leaders on Tuesday, President Fruit Loops had the following exchange with Pelosi:

At a news conference, Pelosi, D-Calif., said Bush's choice for head of the
Federal Emergency Management Agency had "absolutely no credentials."

She related that she had urged Bush at the White House on Tuesday to fire Michael Brown.

"He said 'Why would I do that?'" Pelosi said.

"'I said because of all that went wrong, of all that didn't go right last week.' And he said 'What didn't go right?'"

"Oblivious, in denial, dangerous," she added.

We're so screwed. If he really is clueless and has no idea what "didn't go right", then he's incompetent. But of course he knows. This is more of his mission accomplished-style bullshit, denying reality to the American people while he follows his deadly agenda. The country can't afford a "What, me worry?" president who, despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary, assures us of victory in Iraq and tells us that the federal response in the Gulf was satisfactory.

I wonder what the thousands of people at the Superdome or the Convention Center in New Orleans last week - people who were degraded, forgotten, and left to die by George Bush - think of his "What didn't go right?" comment. Gee, might they think that his neglect was deliberate? That the deaths were something that went right? It's really an admission of genocide, isn't it?

Pelosi is right. This man is dangerous.

From bizarre to insane

2005-09-07T07:28:00.000-07:00

As evidence mounts of bumbling ineptitude on the part of our Republican government in handling the aftermath of hurricane Katrina, George Bush has proposed a novel idea sure to catch fire with the many Americans outraged by his handling of the disaster.

Yes, the president is going to investigate himself. Yes, he's going to personally head up the investigation into "what went right (!) and what went wrong" with his government's response to the crisis.

I'm reassured - aren't you? I wonder if he'll criticize himself for attending birthday parties and playing with a guitar and golfing and fundraising while residents of the Gulf coast went without emergency supplies and New Orleans drowned. No doubt the "I can't recall a mistake I've ever made" president will really crack down on the fact that his excessive vacation time seems to be a problem, given his lengthy downtime just before 9/11 and during the height of the greatest natural disaster in our country's history.

In bizarre "who are you going to believe, me or your lyin' eyes?" language, Bush said yesterday, "We've got to solve problems. We're problem solvers. There will be ample time for people to figure out what went right, and what went wrong. What I'm interested (in) is helping save lives."

What a sack of shit. Where was this interest in saving lives last week, when there were actually lives to save? Where was this problem solving prowess when FEMA turned away emergency supplies and rescue crews desperately trying to gain access into the affected areas? Why did our "MBA president" pack one of the most crucial federal agencies with political cronies with no experience in disaster management? Why hasn't he fired his top crony at FEMA, Michael Brown, who waited until after the storm hit to request a paltry 1,000 DHS employees to the region (and gave them two days to arrive - crucial days, as it happened) and listed one of the urgent duties of these workers as "conveying a positive image " about the government's response?

This sad document, asking for DHS employees to play a public relations role for George Bush rather than saving the lives the president suddenly claims to care about, exposes the sheer shallowness of this government. Everything is for show, everything is a stunt and a photo-op, everything is about propping up the puppet in the White House, even if thousands of lives are lost in the process.

We know what happens when the crooks in the White House investigate themselves - they give themselves a clean bill of health. It's time for the American people to demand not only a non-partisan investigation into this fuckup but to start demanding impeachment hearings.

Spinning Death

2005-09-06T06:41:00.000-07:00

As evidence mounts of the Bush administration's utter incompetence in dealing with Katrina, the White House is in a frenzy of spin, attempting to blame the mayor of New Orleans, the governor of Louisiana, and even the victims themselves for FEMA's failings.

An interesting confluence of headlines today. From AP comes a story entitled White House: Leave Blame Game for Later.

WASHINGTON (AP) - Criticized for its sluggish response to Hurricane Katrina, the White House said Tuesday that ``we're not going to engage in the blame game'' but instead would keep its focus on rescue and recovery efforts across the heavily battered Gulf Coast.

The "blame game" is used interchageably with the dreaded "pointing fingers" by Bush apologists, including former president Clinton.

Meanwhile, the New York Times reports that - oops! - the White House is indeed very much engaged in the "blame game" in a piece entitled White House Enacts a Plan to Ease Political Damage (a "plan" you see, is different from a "game").

WASHINGTON, Sept. 4 - Under the command of President Bush's two senior political advisers, the White House rolled out a plan this weekend to contain the political damage from the administration's response to Hurricane Katrina.

It orchestrated visits by cabinet members to the region, leading up to an extraordinary return visit by Mr. Bush planned for Monday, directed administration officials not to respond to attacks from Democrats on the relief efforts, and sought to move the blame for the slow response to Louisiana state officials, according to Republicans familiar with the White House plan.

When the Bush apologists aren't blaming state officials, they're blaming the victims of their incompetence by faux outrage that poor, elderly, or infirm African-Americans didn't have cars, or credit cards to finance hotel stays, or ready cash for plane tickets to evacuate New Orleans. This is the low tactic of sheer desperation, repulsive to an extreme, but the immorality of this particular "blame game" doesn't stop Republicans such as Larry King.

If you've flipped over to Larry King Live in the past few days, you were treated to the stomach-churning sight of King speaking in a slow, patronizing voice - the manner in which you'd speak to an idiot, or a small dense child - whenever he spoke to a displaced African-American at the Houston Astrodome. His first words to every single African-American he spoke to were, without exception, "Why did you stay?". These people, already brutalized by the government's lack of response, were further brutalized by King demanding them to put aside all pride, all dignity, and confess to being poor on national television. Never have I seen the Bush apologists sink so low, and you can find similar examples throughout cable television.

The public chiding and ridiculing of the poor continued over the weekend with former First Lady Barbara Bush saying in a radio interview that "it's sort of scary" that many former residents of New Orleans might permanently relocate to Texas, leaving one to wonder if it's "sort of scary" because they're poor and black or because many are Democrats. Pathetic enough, but she went on to say that "And so many of the people in the arena here, you know, were underprivileged anyway (chuckles), so this is working very well for them." Yes, you old pseudo-royal bitch, I'm sure that these poor blacks who have lost homes and the lives of family members and friends, who were left to die on a New Orleans sidewalk by your son, who are left with nothing are just sitting around plotting how to scam the system - which is exactly what she was inferring with her crude comments. To even think that victims of a major disaster and the criminal negligence of our government have things "working very well for them" is perverted, especially given that the only reason Barbara Bush isn't one of those desperate unfortunates she despises is that she married into a wealthy crime family.

Louisiana Burning

2005-09-02T07:10:00.000-07:00

It's Friday morning. Friday morning. And as I type this, people are dying in Louisiana, not from a hurricane that made landfall on Monday but from the criminal negligence of our federal government.

The stories are horrific. Patients at Charity Hospital in New Orleans are dying from lack of electricity and proper facilities and the corpses of the dead are being stacked like cordwood in stairwells. Doctors have been begging since Monday for patients to be evacuated from local hospitals - and they're still there, still dying.

Tens of thousands of citizens are abandoned at the Convention Center. Children, the elderly, families left without food or water since Monday. More corpses, more suffering, more despair.

Bodies are floating in canals and through the streets of New Orleans, a shocking health hazard that can't even begin to be addressed because more and more corpses are joining the floaters every hour. People are still on rooftops, with bodies of dead family members who were unable to survive for five days without food or water surrounding them. Police are tying the floating bodies to stop signs for pick up, whenever FEMA gets around to it.

Cops are looting stores and draining gasoline from abandoned vehicles because no food, no gas, no help has been provided to those expected to keep order. At least 30% of the New Orleans police department have abandoned their posts. Do you blame them?

And in the middle of the chaos, the man responsible is going to chopper over the area in an attempt to save his administration, because the American people have finally woken up to the gross incompetence of this puppet of the rich. Of course, his trip over New Orleans will require the airspace to be cleared, so the food, medical supplies, and above all water desperately needed by the thousands of people at the Convention Center will not be airdropped - but then, FEMA has had all week to do that and failed, so what's another day to these monsters? Bush is, at the moment I type this, at a worthless photo-op in Mobile where he's pretending to listen while Haley Barbour explains to him what a really, really baaaaad storm this was. Good god! If he doesn't know that much, we're in a hell of a lot of trouble, kids.

If the people at the Convention Center had been members of Bush's base - the "have mores" - is there any question that the federal government would have turned out a massive rescue response? Would they have allowed their wealthy white elderly supporters in wheelchairs to go without food and water for five days, pissing where they sit, in the blazing sun and killing temperatures?

Of course not.

What's so shocking in this nightmare is just how disposable poor African-Americans are in the scheme of "compassionate conservatism", how little their lives mean in the Bush food chain, how easily their dignity is destroyed, how their bodies are allowed to float through the streets of a dying city, abandoned and ignored in death as they were in life.

Never - and he's put us through a lot in the last four and a half years - have I hated George Bush with the intensity that I've felt this week. He's poured billions of our tax dollars into rebuilding Iraq and cuts funding to rebuild the levees in New Orleans. He sends floods of troops into Iraq to kill but can't send anyone into New Orleans to save lives. He plays guitar and eats cake while his fellow citizens are dying of his neglect, his lack of Christian caring, and his incompetence. He cuts taxes for the wealthy and asks us to pony up from our wallets for this disaster. And above it all, he does nothing but vacation and fundraise while the poorest, the most vulnerable, the most desperate in our society are simply abandoned to their fate to die.

At least our media isn't trying to hide the shocking incompetence of the buffoons in the government running this show. Even the right-wing lackies on cable news are reacting with outrage over the neglect of this government in dealing with this crisis. The scales have finally fallen from their eyes, and for once they're reacting with a spark of outrage and humanity.

I'm numb with fury over the scenes from New Orleans and the Gulf coast this week. This worthless, dangerous President of Death is allowing people to die of dehydration where they stand on the streets of an American city. How do you accept that? How do you even begin to grasp it?

Bush cut New Orleans flood control project 44% to pay for Iraq

2005-09-01T06:47:00.000-07:00

An infuriating article this morning in Salon.com
(you can get a free one-day pass to read the entire article - follow the link on the site).

Our tax dollars have been pouring into Iraq, leaving crucial work at home undone. Nothing illustrates this better than the butcher's bill Bush has presented to the people of New Orleans, who were left unprotected and vulnerable so he could pay for his pet war in Iraq.

"No one can say they didn't see it coming"
In 2001, FEMA warned that a hurricane striking New Orleans was one of the three most likely disasters in the U.S. But the Bush administration cut New Orleans flood control funding by 44 percent to pay for the Iraq war.

Aug. 31, 2005 | Biblical in its uncontrolled rage and scope, Hurricane Katrina has left millions of Americans to scavenge for food and shelter and hundreds to thousands reportedly dead. With its main levee broken, the evacuated city of New Orleans has become part of the Gulf of Mexico. But the damage wrought by the hurricane may not entirely be the result of an act of nature.

A year ago the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers proposed to study how New Orleans could be protected from a catastrophic hurricane, but the Bush administration ordered that the research not be undertaken. After a flood killed six people in 1995, Congress created the Southeast Louisiana Urban Flood Control Project, in which the Corps of Engineers strengthened and renovated levees and pumping stations. In early 2001, the Federal Emergency Management Agency issued a report stating that a hurricane striking New Orleans was one of the three most likely disasters in the U.S., including a terrorist attack on New York City. But by 2003 the federal funding for the flood control project essentially dried up as it was drained into the Iraq war. In 2004, the Bush administration cut funding requested by the New Orleans district of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers for holding back the waters of Lake Pontchartrain by more than 80 percent. Additional cuts at the beginning of this year (for a total reduction in funding of 44.2 percent since 2001) forced the New Orleans district of the Corps to impose a hiring freeze. The Senate had debated adding funds for fixing New Orleans' levees, but it was too late.

The New Orleans Times-Picayune, which before the hurricane published a series on the federal funding problem, and whose presses are now underwater, reported online: "No one can say they didn't see it coming ... Now in the wake of one of the worst storms ever, serious questions are being asked about the lack of preparation."

The Bush administration's policy of turning over wetlands to developers almost certainly also contributed to the heightened level of the storm surge. In 1990, a federal task force began restoring lost wetlands surrounding New Orleans. Every two miles of wetland between the Crescent City and the Gulf reduces a surge by half a foot. Bush had promised "no net loss" of wetlands, a policy launched by his father's administration and bolstered by President Clinton. But he reversed his approach in 2003, unleashing the developers. The Army Corps of Engineers and the Environmental Protection Agency then announced they could no longer protect wetlands unless they were somehow related to interstate commerce.

The entire article is a must-read. With public opinion already against Bush's war, this might be the straw that breaks the camel's back.

a'pickin' and a'grinnin'

2005-08-31T06:55:00.000-07:00

When Bush wasn't eating cake while the flood waters in New Orleans rose yesterday, he was clowning with a presidential guitar. Yes, the plight of his citizens truly tears at his soul - right?

Meanwhile, a crisis worsens in the city thanks to his policies.

Among emergency specialists, 'mitigation' -- the measures taken in advance to minimize the damage caused by natural disasters -- is a crucial part of the strategy to save lives and cut recovery costs. But since 2001, key federal disaster mitigation programs, developed over many years, have been slashed and tossed aside. FEMA's Project Impact, a model mitigation program created by the Clinton administration, has been canceled outright. Federal funding of post-disaster mitigation efforts designed to protect people and property from the next disaster has been cut in half. Communities across the country must now compete for pre-disaster mitigation dollars.

As a result, some state and local emergency managers say, it's become more difficult to get the equipment and funds they need to most effectively deal with disasters. In Louisiana, requests for flood mitigation funds were rejected by FEMA this summer. (See sidebar.) In North Carolina, a state also regularly threatened by hurricanes and floods, FEMA recently refused the state's request to buy backup generators for emergency support facilities. And the budget cuts have halved the funding for a mitigation program that saved an estimated $8.8 million in recovery costs in three eastern North Carolina communities alone after 1999's Hurricane Floyd.

Consequently, the residents of these and other disaster-prone states will find the government less able to help them when help is needed most, and both states and the federal government will be forced to shoulder more recovery costs after disasters strike.

In addition, the White House has pushed for privatization of essential government services, including disaster management, and merged FEMA into the Department of Homeland Security -- where, critics say, natural disaster programs are often sidelined by counter-terrorism programs. Along the way, morale at FEMA has plummeted, and many of the agency's most experienced personnel have left for work in other government agencies or private corporations..."

......And indeed, some in-need areas have been inexplicably left out of the program. "In a sense, Louisiana is the floodplain of the nation," a 2002 FEMA report noted. "Louisiana waterways drain two thirds of the continental United States. Precipitation in New York, the Dakotas, even Idaho and the Province of Alberta, finds its way to Louisiana's coastline." As a result, flooding is a constant threat, and the state has an estimated 18,000 buildings that have repeatedly been damaged by flood waters – the highest number of any state. And yet, this summer FEMA denied Louisiana communities' pre-disaster mitigation funding requests.

In Jefferson Parish, part of the New Orleans metropolitan area, flood zone manager Tom Rodrigue is baffled by the development. "You would think we would get maximum consideration" for the funds, he says. "This is what the grant program called for. We were more than qualified for it."

And more:

"Before FEMA was condensed into Homeland Security it responded much more quickly," says Walter Maestri, director of Jefferson Parish's Office of Emergency Management. Maestri has worked with FEMA for eight years. "Truthfully, you had access to the individuals who were the decision-makers. The FEMA administrator had Cabinet status. Now, you have another layer of bureaucracy. FEMA is headed by an assistant secretary who now has to compete with other assistant secretaries of Homeland Security for available funds. And elevating houses is not as sexy as providing gas masks."

Maestri is still awaiting word from FEMA officials as to why Louisiana, despite being called the "floodplain of the nation" in a 2002 FEMA report, received no disaster mitigation grant money from FEMA in 2003 ("Homeland Insecurity," Sept. 28). Maestri says the rejection left emergency officials around the state "flabbergasted"

Why did the Bush administration cut funding to Lousiana's flood mitigation program so severely? Walter Maestri, the emergency management chief for Jefferson Parish, told the New Orleans Times-Picayune the following on June 8, 2004:

It appears that the money has been moved in the president's budget to handle homeland security and the war in Iraq, and I suppose that's the price we pay. Nobody locally is happy that the levees can't be finished, and we are doing everything we can to make the case that this is a security issue for us.

Everything for Iraq, and nothing for the citizens at home who are paying taxes and expecting at least a basic level of federal services. Heavy military equipment that could be saving lives today in the Gulf coast - in Iraq (see below). Money earmarked to strengthen the levee system in New Orleans - cancelled, and sent to Iraq. The only thing shared by both Iraq and the Gulf states are dead Americans, thanks to the murderous and incompetent policies of the buffoon with the guitar.

Let Them Eat Cake

2005-08-30T07:44:00.000-07:00

Hurricane? What hurricane? Bush spent last evening at a fat-cat political fundraiser during his breezy five-week vacation while residents of the Gulf coast and New Orleans clung to rooftops, waiting for rescue.

He might have good reason to hide from this disaster. On August 1st - almost a month ago - the following appeared on the site of a New Orleans television station:

LA National Guard Wants Equipment to Come Back From Iraq

Yunji de Nies

August 1, 2005, 9:07 PM CDT

JACKSON BARRACKS -- When members of the Louisiana National Guard left for Iraq in October, they took a lot equipment with them. Dozens of high water vehicles, humvees, refuelers and generators are now abroad, and in the event of a major natural disaster that, could be a problem.

"The National Guard needs that equipment back home to support the homeland security mission," said Lt. Colonel Pete Schneider with the LA National Guard.

Why in the world would the Army need dozens of high water vehicles in Iraq? Wouldn't those have come in rather handy, as well as the generators, in New Orleans this week? In fact, wouldn't having the Louisiana National Guard in Louisiana be sort of helpful - given that a large portion of their mission is to deal with natural disasters in their home states - rather than in a hopeless quagmire in Iraq? Meanwhile, the flooding in New Orleans is reaching a crisis stage, while Guardsmen from Louisiana watch helplessly from their barracks in Iraq.

How bad is the situation in New Orleans, while Bush kicks back on vacation and Louisiana Guardsmen and their heavy equipment are in Iraq? Here are a few excerpts from the mayor's latest statement:

"We have 80 percent of our city underwater. In some parts of the city, the water is as deep as twenty feet.

"We have people still trapped on their roofs.

"We have an incredible amount of water in the city. Both airports are underwater."

"The twin spans in New Orleans East are destroyed. They're gone.

"We have three huge boats that have run aground. We have an oil tanker that is also run aground. And leaking oil.

"We have a serious levee break at 17th Canal. It's causing waters to continue to rise in certain sections of the city.

"I must tell people who are driving around that if you drive on the highrise, we're not sure about the structural soundness of the high-rise, because it appears that a barge has hit one of the main structures of the high-rise.

"All of Slidell is under water.

"We have gas leaks that have sprout out, and even when they are under water, you will see a flame shooting out of the water. It's not a pretty picture."

Having a local Guard unit mobilized near the event can be a handy thing. Last night, Jeanne Meserve from CNN was reporting live from New Orleans and broke down in tears from the horrors all around her. She reported that people were screaming from rooftops and rubble, begging for rescue, dogs howling because they were trapped in electrical wires, still alive - and no rescue available until morning. Perhaps having the Louisiana Guard staged in Baton Rouge yesterday morning might have alleviated some of last night's agony.

CNN is reporting this morning that Mississippi is scrambling to borrow Guardsmen from other states, as so many of their own Guard are deployed in Iraq. I'm sure those awaiting rescue will be glad to wait for other state's Guard units to be cobbled up and transported.

No wonder that Bush's only advice to Americans in the face of this natural disaster is to "pray". He's left the people of the Gulf coast no other option.

Chimpeach!

2005-08-29T09:35:00.000-07:00

Bush has been repeating his robotic lies about Iraq for months, and it's shocking how easily exposed his lies are - and how little they receive critical attention from the mass media.

The New York Times today exposes the murderous Bush lie that when the Iraqi Army builds up, we'll "stand down". Turns out that we're deliberately not building up the Iraqi Army, and are instead telling the Iraqis to rely on the permanent American bases in Iraq.

So much for "standing down".

EVEN though President Bush keeps saying American forces won't leave Iraq until its forces can fight on their own, the United States isn't rushing to give the Iraqi military heavy weapons.

There is an official explanation for that - that such things take time.

But there is also another reason to go slow, one that illustrates how tightly American military success is intertwined with the political prospects of Iraq itself. This reason is little discussed in public by military officers, but it was evident last week on the explosion-scarred streets of Baghdad, in the skirmishes between rival Shiite forces in Najaf, and in the confusion of Iraq's struggle to complete a new constitution.

Simply put, Iraq remains too fragile for any planner to know what shape the country will be in six months or a year from now - whether it will reach compromises and hold together or split apart in a civil war.

And that presents a conundrum for American military planners. With those questions up in the air, they have to fear that any heavy arms distributed now could end up aimed at American forces or feeding a growing civil conflict. And the longer Iraq's army has to wait for sophisticated weapons, the longer American forces are likely to be needed in Iraq as a bulwark against chaos.

Nice. But this major fuck-up gets worse:

In private, some officers acknowledge other concerns, too. "We're worried about civil war or a coup," said a senior American officer in Baghdad charged with outfitting Iraq's new army. He would not agree to be identified because the concerns he was discussing are so sensitive.

Indeed, Iraqi commanders are growing restive, saying their troops are dying at three times the rate of American soldiers because they lack basic equipment.

"Soldiers with Kalashnikovs and pickup trucks is not an army," said Gen. Abdulqader Mohammed Jassim, commander of the Iraqi ground forces, during a recent interview at his office in Baghdad. "To make the Iraqi Army stand on its own without American or coalition forces, we need command and control equipment, transport vehicles and training." He wants helicopters and artillery, more powerful guns and bigger tanks - weapons the Americans say he doesn't need now.

At the same time, the Americans are building at least four semi-permanent military bases that could hold 18,000 troops each. These are usually described as way stations on the eventual route home for the Americans, places where they will stay while ever-more-capable Iraqi troops engage the insurgents on their own. But that will clearly take time. Gen. George W. Casey Jr., the top military commander in Iraq, when asked this month about how the bases would be used, dismissed the question: "You're talking years away." And if Iraq's politics remain unstable, the bases could offer a continuing rationale for not providing heavier weaponry, since the Americans would still be close by for the Iraqis to rely on.

Bush repeated just last week, during his rant where he screeched like a madman at his hand-picked audience, that the U.S. would "stand down" as soon as the Iraqi Army could defend the country. But what Army?

"Just as there isn't one Iraqi people, there isn't one Iraqi army," said Peter Galbraith, a former United States ambassador to Croatia who is now in Iraq and has worked closely with the Kurds. "We won't be arming a national army, but armies that are loyal to three different groups."

Just how long will the American people put up with this major fucked-up mess before demanding that our elected officials in Congress get a fucking grip and start demanding policy changes from the incompetent Bush administration - and an end to the bald-faced lies?

Bring The Troops Home Now tour announced

2005-08-27T07:54:00.000-07:00

As peace activists prepare to leave Crawford this week in order to follow Bush back to Washington, plans are underway for a bus tour to bring the spirit of Camp Casey to cities that are on the route to the White House.

Three separate bus tours will be the focal point of rallies, interfaith services, and political action. To see if the tour will stop in your city visit the Bring The Troops Home Now site. They're also looking for organizers to help with the rallies, housing assistance for tour participants, and financial help - gas is expensive! - so have a look and see how you can participate or donate.

Fortunately, the tour will stop here on Thursday and I'm volunteering to help organize in my city. I'll be sure to get photos of the event and post them Thursday evening - that is, if the American Legion doesn't show up with pitchforks and torches and face paint to take us out.

It's Fuck You Friday

2005-08-26T07:45:00.000-07:00

A resounding fuck you to the fascists at the American Legion, who apparently don't understand the constitutional protections and freedoms that our soldiers are told daily they're fighting and dying for.

At their recent national convention, national commander Thomas Cadmus had the following to say about the uptick in organized war protests:

"The American Legion will stand against anyone and any group that would demoralize our troops, or worse, endanger their lives by encouraging terrorists to continue their cowardly attacks against freedom-loving peoples."

The delegates voted to use whatever means necessary to "ensure the united backing of the American people to support our troops and the global war on terrorism."

Use "whatever means necessary"? Exactly what "means" will force the American people to give "united backing" to Bush's war policies? For that's exactly what they're demanding. When you hear the phrase "support the troops" come from a right-winger - which, of course, everyone does, how ridiculous to imply otherwise - what they're really demanding is that you "support the war". So what kind of violence will the American Legion unleash upon the public to demand "united backing" for this war?

And did anyone else enjoy the crude irony of his considering us a "freedom loving people" while he recommends using "whatever means necessary" to quelch those same freedoms? Orwellian...

And the media calls the anti-war activists crackpots! Yet hardly a word has been said about the open threats of violence made by the American Legion this week, nor have they been taken to task or picked apart or openly attacked as Cindy Sheehan has been all month.

Cadmus didn't stop there. He continued:

"No one respects the right to protest more than one who has fought for it, but we hope that Americans will present their views in correspondence to their elected officials rather than by public media events guaranteed to be picked up and used as tools of encouragement by our enemies."

To this quote, Editor and Publisher added the following dry remark: "This might suggest to some, however, that American freedoms are worth dying for but not exercising."

Gee, I wish that my elected officials would give two shits about what I write them. I continue to do it, but it's like pissing in the wind. Never has there been a greater disconnect between the public mood and the actions of our elected officials, but that's the sole avenue the American Legion gives us before they start cracking heads.

Cadmus, obsessed with the notion that any hint of discord will bolster "the enemy" - you know, the people whose country we attacked without provocation, whose families we've killed with our bombing and casual shooting, whose cities we've destroyed, whose land is now permanently tainted with depleted uranium, whose water, sewage, and electrical systems are in tatters - goes on to again note that the insurgents are more interested in what we're doing here than the destruction we're causing there:

"We had hoped that the lessons learned from the Vietnam War would be clear to our fellow citizens. Public protests against the war here at home while our young men and women are in harm's way on the other side of the globe only provide aid and comfort to our enemies."

I wish to fuck we had learned the lessons of Vietnam!

So, I suppose that the 4,000 members of the American Legion who signed on to this doctrine will now become the brownshirts of the vaterland, wading into war protests and using "any means necessary" to stop them. I hope they understand that should they lay even one filthy paw on this "peace visualizing" war protestor, my foot will aim directly for their nuts.

Bush, the great "uniter", has not only created violent private militias in Iraq, but he's apparently created one here in the United States. By not publicly condemning the fatwa the Legion issued this week, he's encouraging blood in the streets at home courtesy of the "patriots" at the American Legion.

Republican "grassroots" activism

2005-08-25T07:24:00.000-07:00

Well, well, well....the You Don't Speak for Me, Cindy! (note the exclamation point to give the phrase a snappy, Madison Avenue-type oomph) anti-Sheehan bus tour is actually being run by -gasp!- a Republican public relations firm.

The Move America Forward website - the same site that is organizing and promoting the bus tour - is registered to the following:

Registrant:
Russo Marsh & Rogers
770 L Street, #950
Sacramento, CA 95814
US

This "grassroots" activism is actually a creation of Russo Marsh & Rogers, a Republican PR firm that is apparently so desperate for business they once ran an "Orin Hatch for President" campaign. Move America Forward not only shares an office with RM&R but also a receptionist. The bus tour is a paid-for GOP public relations campaign that they've had the audacity to present as some kind of grassroots movement. Keith Olberman on Countdown last night confirmed this swindle, which the media has been presenting as a sincere movement on the part of pro-war military families to mouth loving platitudes to Bush and his warlords.

Everything is faked theater with this crowd, from Armstrong Williams to Jessica Lynch to this phony "activism".

The exposure of this bus tour, of course, won't shut down the hypocritical right-wing media nutters who have been screaming that Sheehan is a "tool of the left". Who, exactly, do they consider "the left"? Those godless commies at MoveOn.org, of course. This is laughable, as is their entire campaign to portray MoveOn as some kind of wild-eyed Marxist outfit. Every MoveOn event I've attended - including one of those subversive bake sales - has been comprised of middle-class 30-somethings, suburban moms and dads with kids and two cars. Hardly crazed leftists screaming for the nationalization of industry, but the RNC and their mouthpieces have been at great pains to portray them as the "hard left". Why? MoveOn actually is an effective grassroots organization, unlike the above fake bus tour, that can mobilize millions of followers and raise huge amounts of cash - something the right-wing lacks, other than the evangelical "Christian" base exemplified by Pat "Call Me Lee Harvey" Robertson. They feel they must discredit MoveOn and other liberal groups because they have the numbers, the money, and the momentum and that threatens the right's death-grip on our government - who in truth fear and despise we, the people.

The question now, of course, is if the corporate media will allow anyone to even hint that the military families riding on this bus tour are now "tools" and "mouthpieces" of the right. They allowed Sheehan to be portrayed in this fashion, and what's sauce for the goose...

And now, a popcorn break

2005-08-24T06:53:00.000-07:00

Interesting all-day bloodletting that went on over at Kos yesterday, when he posted an entry he surely knew would rile up many of his readers (and contributors who fund his site):

I'm not anti-war. As I've said before, I'm a military hawk. I supported the Afghanistan War and I supported the Bosna and Kosovo interventions. I'm not one of these touchy-feely hippy types that thinks war is inherently bad. I laugh at people who think they can "visualize peace".

Unlike most people reading this, I grew up in a country at war. I've seen the effects first-hand. I also served in the Army. To me war isn't a video game or an abstract concept. It's real. Yet sometimes, many times, military force is a force for good. There are evil people in the world, doing evil things. And all the sanctions in the world, all the strongly worded denunciations, will never have the effect of a 1,000 pound bomb.

I oppose the Iraq War.

But I refuse to be labeled "anti-war". I'm not. I'm anti this war. Why? Because I'm a war pragmatist. I understand the costs of war, but I also understand the potential benefits.

...I oppose Iraq not because I'm anti-war. I'll have nothing to do with any of the anti-war rallies planned in the near term (and the crazy cast of characters that seek to inject their unrelated own pet causes into the proceedings).

Kos makes two separate but related points in this entry. First, he follows the DLC/GOP playbook by smearing a large swath of opponents to our occupation of Iraq as "touchy-feely hippy types" notwithstanding the fact that he isn't old enough to have actually experienced a "hippy type" from the 1960's and clearly hasn't grasped the underlying philosophy from that era. Perhaps a review of the 1968 Democratic National Convention - yes, the opposition was led by Yippies but who were the troops? - would modify his "touchy-feely" prose. I would also remind Kos that the '68 convention was a mutiny within the Democratic ranks refusing to accept another "war pragmatist" as our nominee, a lesson we should keep in mind for 2008.

I'm tired to the bone of so-called "war pragmatists" smugly throwing aside the very core of opposition to this war in an attempt to frame this struggle as a messy problem best left to the grownups. The anti-war movement stepped aside for another "war pragmatist" (with a Crackerjack-like salute and "reporting for duty" bray that made me literally want to vomit) who happened to be the Democratic nominee last year and it kept public opposition to our Iraq policies from crystalizing until this summer - far too late for any meaningful change. Our only hope was in 2004, and the "war pragmatists" guaranteed that the bloodbath will continue through the second Bush term.

If Kos truly opposes the continued occupation of Iraq, one would think that he'd accept a broad range of opponents, unwashed as he may consider them to be, or risk the anti-war movement becoming a simple policy debate, shorn of anger over the lies that led us to Baghdad or moral objections to the "Shock and Awe" that destroyed cities and lives for nothing other than a stragetic position in the Middle East to protect our oil supply in the event of destabilization in Saudi Arabia or Iran. The passion of our moral position is our greatest strength, but Kos would rather we step aside so the "war pragmatists" can support the concept of war to a war-weary public who, frankly, are sick of this militaristic bullshit but pick and choose which wars, with their attendant civilian casualties and destruction of entire societal structures, are good. All done, of course, while Kos "laughs at those who visualize peace".

This me=adult and you=unwashed hippy bullshit espoused by Kos, ridiculous as it is, won't harm the peace movement. It will only harm individuals such as Kos, who will find himself increasingly irrelevant because the call for an end to the bloodletting in Iraq is larger than any one individual. People will react according to their own moral beliefs, not because they sit and stew over how they can position themselves as "war pragmatists" so the big bad attack dogs of the GOP won't snap at our ankles. Fuck 'em. We have a war to end, and Kos can either accept all segments of the anti-war movement or be left on the sidelines with his granny-like lectures.

He also takes a me=adult you=crazed cast of characters tone when he addresses what I assume is the demo taking place in Washington in September and the participation of A.N.S.W.E.R. in this event. Yes, I believe that A.N.S.W.E.R. dilutes our message with the free Mumia crap, the Coca-Cola in India speeches and their insistence on addressing Palestine before Iraq. Still, they were the first organization that planned (and financed) many of the early war protests, and while I don't agree with many of their positions far be it from me to dismiss them as a "crazed cast of characters" and petulantly sit at home pecking away at my keyboard while thousands of Americans take to the streets next month to demand an exit strategy from Iraq and accountability for the lies that led us there. I have every intention to be in Washington next month - via the Peace Train from New Orleans - and I hope to blog from both the train and the demo. I can overlook the call to free Mumia and focus on what's important, rather than distance myself from the "crazy cast of characters" who so frighten and repulse Kos. I can do this, you see, because I'm an adult.

IraqNam

2005-08-23T07:35:00.000-07:00

Chuck Hagel was correct in comparing the situation on the ground in Iraq to Vietnam, but there's another parallel that is only going to grow in the months ahead - civil unrest and Kent State-like police tactics.

In Pittsburgh last week, a group of protestors who were attempting to shut down a military recruitment office were tasered, pepper-sprayed, and attacked by police dogs.

Meieran claimed some protesters were pepper sprayed and Tasered; he said a 68-year-old woman who was not resisting was bitten by a police dog.

Police spokeswoman Tammy Ewin initially said no pepper spray was used on protesters, but Sgt. Clint Winkler, a supervisor on duty, told The Associated Press he tried to use pepper spray on one woman who would not leave, but it hit her glasses. She was then subdued with a Taser, Winkler said.

The Taser victim and the dog bite victim were being treated at UPMC Presbyterian Hospital. Winkler confirmed that the older woman was bitten in the leg by a police dog when she refused a police order to disperse.

In Sacramento, a group of protestors confronted the obnoxious "You Don't Speak For Me, Cindy!" neocon bus tour.

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — Supporters of President Bush clashed with anti-war activists as they wound their way through California after rallying in the hometown of Cindy Sheehan, the mother who started a protest camp outside Bush's Texas ranch.

Conservative activists and military families embarked on the tour Monday, calling it "You don't speak for me, Cindy!" A verbal confrontation erupted when the caravan arrived in Sacramento and was met by anti-war protesters chanting for Bush to bring home the troops.

Some caravan members called the anti-war protesters communists and said they were "aiding and abetting the enemy." Those comments enraged Sheehan supporter Dee Ann Heath, who said she has two sons serving in Iraq and another preparing to leave.

Readers might want to check the itinerary for this pro-war, pro-death bus jaunt and let the right-wing organizers know your feelings when it zips through your town en route to Crawford.

Meanwhile, in Salt Lake City, thousands of citizens protested our Chimperor while he was mouthing the same inane platitudes for continuing the occupation.

Bush spoke to more than 6,000 people at the annual convention of the Veterans of Foreign Wars, while three blocks away about 2,000 people gathered to protest Bush administration policies and the war in Iraq.

...Salt Lake resident Hugh Musser, 74, said he was a Korean War veteran who came to the protest because of ``the lies about this war and the reasons we went into it.''

``I'm so opposed to our administration. I'm not politically motivated, I'm an independent. I think we have really lost our democracy,'' Musser said.

...Salt Lake City Mayor Rocky Anderson, who called for a strong showing from Utahns at the protest in an e-mail he sent last week to local activists, addressed both the VFW convention and the protest.

Anderson was booed in his speech to the veterans at the Salt Palace Convention Center about two hours before Bush's speech. After, he said challenging political leaders is being supportive of the troops.

``The message we want to send is that we are behind our troops, we care very much about our troops. That if their lives are going to be put on the line, they are going to be put in harm's way, that we're told the truth and our nation hasn't been told the truth,'' Anderson said.

Chants of ``Rocky!'' followed Anderson as he took the podium at the anti-war rally.

``Those who take a stand ... who stand up to deceit by our government. Those are true patriots. You are true patriots,'' Anderson said.

The quiet unease phase of this war is over. Cindy Sheehan has gotten people involved, in the streets, and active. The right wing nutters can hold all of the silly bus tours they want, but we have the numbers - overwhelmingly so - and we're on the right side of this issue.

Bush has divided this country in many ways apart from the war in Iraq, but it's the war that is providing the final fracture. There is no neutral ground.

Truth Be Told

2005-08-22T09:04:00.000-07:00

If you missed the op-ed by Frank Rich in yesterday's New York Times entitled The Swift Boating of Cindy Sheehan, it's a must read. Here's a snippet:

When these setbacks happen in Iraq itself, the administration punts. But when they happen at home, there's a game plan. Once Ms. Sheehan could no longer be ignored, the Swift Boating began. Character assassination is the Karl Rove tactic of choice, eagerly mimicked by his media surrogates, whenever the White House is confronted by a critic who challenges it on matters of war. The Swift Boating is especially vicious if the critic has more battle scars than a president who connived to serve stateside and a vice president who had "other priorities" during Vietnam.

A Ray of Light

2005-08-22T07:53:00.000-07:00

On July 26th, I posted the following on the blog:

The only leading Democrat who has come out strongly in opposition to this war is Gore, and it's doubtful he'll run in 2008. Perhaps it's time for Edwards to reconsider his position on Iraq and become his own man. I believe that Americans will be so weary of this bloodshed (as the majority now are) in 2008 that a pro-occupation policy will be poison for any Democrat, but a rapid turnaround on the issue will appear insincere and pandering. If Edwards came out now against the occupation, he'd be a lock in 2008. He'd then get the "unity" Clinton preaches for, and not destroy the party (as she will).

The Chicago Tribune this morning is speculating that this might indeed happen:

Edwards signals shift against war

Throughout his campaign for president and then vice president in 2004, former Sen.
John Edwards of North Carolina made it clear that the death of his teenage son in a car accident was off-limits, not for discussion in a political context.

But now his wife, Elizabeth, has sent an e-mail to supporters voicing a connection she shares with Cindy Sheehan, the mother of a soldier killed in Iraq. As Sheehan was camped near President Bush's Texas ranch, protesting the war, Edwards called on her own family's backers to support Sheehan.

And, in a departure from a campaign-trail silence that the Edwardses kept about the death of their 16-year-old son, Wade, Elizabeth Edwards noted that Sheehan's son, Casey, 24, died in Iraq eight years to the day after her own son.

For John Edwards, who voted as a senator to support the invasion of Iraq, his wife's outreach to subscribers of their One America Committee Web site bears a distinct anti-war voice that could augur a new tack for Edwards as he prepares for a potential run for president in 2008.

"The president says he knows enough, doesn't need to hear from Casey's mother, doesn't need to assure her that Casey's is not one small death in a long and seemingly never-ending drip of deaths, that there is a plan here that will bring our sons and daughters home," Elizabeth Edwards wrote in her e-mail last week. "He claims he understands how some people feel about the deaths in Iraq. The president is wrong."

The Edwardses left questions about the e-mail to spokeswoman Kim Rubey, who said, "When Elizabeth read about Cindy Sheehan and her son, she immediately felt a strong personal connection."

Rob Tully, a Des Moines lawyer who campaigned for John Edwards in 2004, suggests that Elizabeth Edwards' battle with cancer since the election has given her an added perspective.

"She has gone through her own life-threatening experience, and that is life-changing," Tully said.

Yes, the Chicago Tribune is a right-wing rag, evidenced by the fact that it's Elizabeth, and not John Edwards who is signaling a 'shift'. Still, I remain hopeful that John Edwards will make a major political address that will indeed signal a shift in his stance on the occupation, and do so sooner rather than later. Elizabeth Edwards is one of the most intelligent and influential political spouses around, and if she's on board that's an extremely hopeful sign.

You can sign Elizabeth Edward's statement of support for Cindy Sheehan at the One America Committee site (please do this), and you can also jump on their blog and encourage John to oppose the occupation. Unlike Bush, he actually listens.

Some Weekend Reading

2005-08-19T14:01:00.000-07:00

If there's no other reason to be interested in politics, the effect our government's policies have on real-life issues is a start. You won't read a better or more gripping tale of George W. Bush's America than in this account. Prepare to be saddened and infuriated.