Wednesday, November 01, 2006

George Bush -- Terrorist?

There's been a flap in the news lately about this remark by the verbally challenged John Kerry:

"You know, education -- if you make the most of it, you study hard and you do your homework and you make an effort to be smart, you can do well.

"If you don't, you get stuck in Iraq."

There was no flap in the news after this statement by the verbally challenged George W. Bush:

"Our enemies are innovative and resourceful, and so are we. They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we."

On the one hand, we have John Kerry saying something ambiguous. He seems to be referring to Bush, who didn't study very hard and is now (as Commander in Chief and as President) stuck in Iraq.

On the other hand, you have George W. Bush admitting what many of us think: that he never stops thinking of ways to harm the American people.

So which is worse?

Thursday, October 05, 2006

Criticize Cheney, Go to Jail

Steven Howards happened to pass by Vice-President Cheney one day, and mentioned as he passed that he disagreed with Cheney's policies. The exact words he used are not known, but are said to be close to “I think your policies in Iraq are reprehensible.” When Mr. Howards came back, he was arrested, handcuffed, and tossed into jail for "assaulting" the vice-president.

Yes, folks, you did wake up in Russia. Land of the free? That was just a dream you had. Home of the brave? Ruled by chickenshits is more like it.

Kill the Messenger

Dennis Hastert (Asshole, Illinois) has looked at these facts:

Mark Foley, Republican congressman from Florida, has resigned from Congress.

ABC revealed the fact that Foley had been having "sexually explicit" IM chats with congressional pages, ages 16 and 17, for some time.

This fact was revealed to ABC by a Republican aide. Once ABC aired the story, former (and perhaps even current) pages contacted ABC with their own lurid tales.

Other Republican congressmen revealed that it had been known since as early as 1995 that Foley had "a page problem." The pages had been warned about Foley since 1995.

Nobody did anything about it until ABC aired its report, even though several other news outlets had the same information.

The country found out about all this when ABC aired its story. Some of the people who found out about this were Democrats.

These are the facts that Hastert looked at. Foley's conclusion? It's the Democrats' fault! Well, the Democrats and the Pages! It's our fault because we found out about all of this

Interestingly, this is the same tack the Bush administration took everytime something unpleasant was revealed. Abu Ghraib? It wasn't bad that we were abusing prisoners; it was bad that someone told us. Secret prisons in Eastern Europe, places where we "rendered" prisoners to be tortured? Yup; it was bad that we found out. Kill the messenger. What you don't know won't hurt you, unless you happen to be one of those innocent people (estimates are that 80% of the prisoners in Guantanamo did nothing wrong) rounded up and tortured.

Yes, indeedy. GOP. Gathering of Pedophiles. Gargantuan Old Perverts. Grumpy Old Perverts. Got nO Principles. You take your pick.

Tuesday, October 03, 2006

GOP Stonewalls... What Else Is New?

So far, it's been a slow news day with respect to the Foley scandal. At this point, major members of the GOP (Gathering of Pedophiles) have resorted to either blaming some other Republican or, shock of all shocks, blaming the pages for Congressman Foley's perverted advances.

At any rate, now you know better than to leave your children alone with either a Catholic clergyman or a Republican. Or Matt Drudge, for that matter.

Monday, October 02, 2006

Fire Them All

Here's an item from today's news that bears repeating:

The Republican Congress spent 100 hours investigating the possible use, by the Clinton administration, of the White House Christmas card list as a source of names of possible donors.

The White House Christmas card list.

100 hours.

Now, bear in mind that in the Bush White House, the White House Christmas card list and the donor list are one and the same.

The Republican Congress spent 12 hours investigating the allegations of prisoner abuse at Abu Ghraib during the Bush administration.

Let's recap, shall we? Christmas card list, Clinton administration, 100 hours of Congressional investigation. Abu Ghraib, torture, murder (or, at the least, "accidental" death), 12 hours of Congressional investigation.

Number of hours spent investigating the Iraq war? We're still waiting.

Number of hours spent invesigating the incredible scandal surrounding contractors in Iraq? We're still waiting.

Folks, those people in Congress work for you! You're supposed to keep an eye on them. You're supposed to see to it that they do their jobs, and if they don't, you're supposed to fire them.

Let me repeat this: Those people in Congress, who work for you and who probably have benefits that you can only dream of -- the best health insurance, an incredible pension plan, free postage, transportation to and from work, a cushy office, an underground train system to whisk them to and fro in the Capitol building -- these people are your subordinates. You are their boss. They're supposed to do your bidding.

Hey, just for fun, call up your local representative and request a meeting. For those of you who are not lobbyists or CEOs, let me know if you happen to get a meeting.

Did I mention that these people are your employees? That you can fire them?

Once again, let's look at the numbers:

100 hours investigating whether Clinton officials looked at a list of names to see if maybe some of those people wanted to become donors.

12 hours investigating atrocities committed in your name and mine, sanctioned by the highest officials in the Bush administration, atrocities that have put our men and women serving in the armed forces at further risk.

Seriously. You should take a little time to think about the job your fine Republican Congress is doing.

Saturday, September 30, 2006

What did Hastert Know and When did he Know It?

Here's a thought: If the Republicans could protect America as well as they protect pedophiles, the attacks on 9/11 would never have been successful.

I'm just sayin'.

Tuesday, September 26, 2006

Heckuva Job, Georgie

Today, the S&P 500 Index closed at a 5-1/2 year high.

Let me rephrase that: Today, the S&P 500 Index finally recovered to where it stood in March of 2001.

That's March of 2001. George W. Bush had been President since January of that year, and has been President ever since. And the stock market, which was tanking already, has taken 5 and one half years to recover. Five and one half years.

Remember all that talk about tax cuts and how those tax cuts were going to spur the economy?

Five and one half years later, we're back where we started. We're at square one. If you had an investment of $100 back in 2001, it's finally worth $100 again.

If you had stuck that $100 under your mattress, you'd be in exactly the same position.

George W. Bush: His Economic Policies are No Worse than Your Mattress. Heckuva slogan, isn't it?

Five and one half years, and we're back where we started. Well, back where we started minus the surplus from the Clinton years, and minus the... what, $1.2 trillion?

At least the wealthy are paying less in taxes. That sure helps take the sting out of all those flat 401k plans.

Heckuva job, Georgie.

Friday, September 22, 2006

It's Only Bad If They Do It

On March 19, 2003, George W. Bush declared war against Iraq and sent in American troops to... well, we're not really sure. And, as it turns out, George W. Bush can't actually declare war. Only Congress can. But George did declare that he had the right to "pre-emptively attack" any country that he perceived to be a threat. And we all know what a perceptive guy George W. Bush is.

OK, so we now have a Bush doctrine, even if Bush himself can't really pronounce all the words in the doctrine. So what I want to know is this: On December 7, 1941, the Japanese Empire saw a threat and acted to contain it. They attacked Pearl Harbor, an American territory, and declared war on the United States.

The consensus opinions of Americans everywhere is (and was) that this was a Bad Thing.

I believe Germany did the same thing when they invaded Poland. They saw what they perceived to be a threat, and they acted. We also held, at the time and probably now, that this was a Bad Thing. When the Germans invaded Russia, Russia loudly proclaimed that this was a Bad Thing.

So as far as I can tell, it has always been a Bad Thing for one nation to say "Hey! You looked at me funny! I'm-a comin' to git ya!" And in general, if the country being invaded ends up winning the conflict, they punish the country that had exercised their "pre-emptive war" option.

So, again I ask: Why was it Bad for Japan to invade us -- aside from the fact that it was us, and we really don't like being invaded -- but OK for us to invade Iraq?

How come it was OK for us to invade Iraq because they "possessed weapons of mass destruction" while we ourselves possess weapons of mass destruction?

How come it was OK for us to invade Iraq because Saddam was a "bad guy" who tortured people when the President of the United States has ordered that people be tortured, and is currently lobbying on behalf of a bill that will make it legal for him to order that lots more people get tortured?

How come it was OK for us to invade Iraq because Saddam was "killing innocent civilians" even though we have killed far more innocent civilians than he did?

How come it was OK for us to invade Iraq because Saddam had "rape rooms" when we seem to have the same thing ourselves?

I'm lost here, really. Saddam inflicted outrages on the Iraqi people -- at least, those Iraqi people who were his enemies -- and we're inflicting outrages on the Iraqi people. The main difference here is that we're much more efficient at inflicting outrages on the Iraqi people, especially those who happen to think that fresh water, gasoline, and electricity are Good Things, and that being able to safely walk the streets is a Good Thing, and that not being shot simply because you're a Sunni living in the Shiite section, or a Shiite living in the Sunni section is a Good Thing.

100 Iraqis a day are being murdered. At this rate, the entire country should be dead before too long, all thanks to the generosity of George W. Bush.

Friday, September 01, 2006

I'm Going To See It There So I Don't Have To See It At Home

I've decided to see all my movies at the movie theater. Why? Simple: I need to see them there so I don't have to see them at home. And that should be all the reason I need, I think, and all the reason any of you need, as well. Do it There so you Don't have to Do It at Home. This is the rationale behind many of the things we do, isn't it? Restaurants, for example. We Eat it There so we Don't have to Eat It at Home.

Although Some of you bring home Doggie Bags, something that appeases the Enemy, no doubt.

We need to expand this philosophy to as many things as we can. Sure, we already have our dogs Crap on Someone Else's Lawn so they Don't have to Do It at Home. That's a great start. But can't we do the same with our trash? Dump it in Someone Else's Yard so we Don't have to Dump It at Home? (Actually, we already do that, but we call the place we dump the trash a "land fill.") Still, there's a universe of unexplored ideas:

  • Date Someone Else's Spouse so you Don't Have to Date your Own
I originally called this idea "Date Someone Else's Wife..." but I realized that this was a sexist approach, one which would limit the full impact. I believe this idea is self-explanatory.

  • Beat Someone Else's Kid so you Don't Have to Beat your Own

How many of you have become so angered by something your children have done that you've been tempted to use force? More than a few of you, I'd bet. But restraint is called for in situations like this. Still, that leaves you with a nasty and unfulfilled urge, one which could be satisfied by a ready supply of other people's children. We wouldn't want to use our fine young American children for this purpose, so I'm thinking we could import children from some other country, some underdeveloped country. And the beatings would no doubt be a liberating experience, so we would be "spreading freedom" at the same time.

Those are all the ideas I have for now, but I'm sure that some of you can come up with a few dandies on your own. Let me know what you come up with !

Tuesday, August 22, 2006

The Rightist Sixth Column

I read an interesting article today that made me wonder this: Some on the right like to have sex with puppies. In fact, some have argued for the right to have sex with goats in public places. But is it fair to smear all those on the right with the same brush? I think not. I think there are those on the right who would argue that such a thing is wrong, against the laws of man and of God. And I would agree with them, fair-minded folk that they are. But I wonder why they aren't all like that? Why oh why do they tolerate those puppy-abusing perverts in their midst?

And speaking of straw men, aren't there some on the right who think we should do away with anyone not exactly like "us," those of us who are defining exactly who "us" is?

One also wonders, seriously this time, why the folks on the right are called "colorful" when they engage in name-calling. (The author of the article to which this post links refers to "Leftist retards") while those on the left who do the same thing are called shrill, or are accused of hateful speech? You'd think there would be a single standard, wouldn't you? Then again, if there were a set of rules for all of this, you'd think everyone would abide by them.

Thursday, August 17, 2006

Judge Rebukes Wiretap Program - Wingnuts Explode!

OK, I admit it. I don't have first-hand experience. I haven't even heard stories. All I've done so far is seen the crawl on one of the televisions at the gym I frequent, and that was enough for me to fill in the blanks. The story? Here's MSNBC's take: Judge rebukes wiretap program. This has been the bread-and-butter issue for all those nice folks on, say, LGF (well, that and just about anything else Shrub has put his moniker on) and now that it's been suspended it is just a matter of time before those same nice folks begin calling for "activist judges" to meet some kind of untimely demise.

Bear in mind that the "activist judge" in this case decided that the Constitution of the United States, that same document that lets all those nice folks who populate RightWingia own firearms, says in two places -- the first and fourth amendments -- that the President can't just go off and order wiretaps, and that the President also has to obey the law of the land, just like mere mortals.

Law and Order are clearly too much for the nice folks of RightWingia to abide, and I can hear the sound of heads exploding even as I type these words. The President, clearly, is entitled to obey only those laws He deems proper. He has already indicated this with His signing statements, appended to those laws He signs. And the President is clearly entitled to do what He deems proper when the nation is at war, especially if it is a war that He initiated for purposes that only He can properly divine.

Meanwhile, I'm going to see if I can't scare up a latte, or whatever it is that those of us on the left, we scary people who believe in the rule of law, are supposed to drink.

Monday, August 14, 2006

Of Mohawks and Morons

Senator George Allen (Idiot, Virginia) is having some trouble identifying a Mohawk haircut. It seems that he referred to a staffer for his opponent, James Webb, as "Macaca," a type of monkey. (Macaque, to be precise.) A spokesman for Allen later clarified Allen's comments, saying that the Senator was referring to the staffer's haircut, and said "Macaca" instead of "Mohawk." Here's a picture of the staffer:

Now, just to be helpful, here's two more images:


Any questions?

Monday, May 15, 2006

Presidential Loophole

So you thought you had good grounds for the impeachment of King George Bush, did you? Lying. Incompetence. And worst of all, violation of his oath of office.

Well, here's the bad news: George W. Bush has not violated his oath of office. I know, I know... you're hoping that I don't know what I'm talking about. Unfortunately, I do, but I want you to know that I feel as badly about this as I'm sure you do. But let's walk through the evidence together, shall we? Here's the oath of office King George swore upon assuming the office of President of the United States:

I do solemnly swear that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States.

There. Do you see the problem? The exact phrase is to the best of my ability. A loophole big enough to drive a truck through. Or even a mobile bioweapons laboratory. The best of his ability. Let's have a show of hands. How many of you think that George W. Bush isn't a moron?

(hmmm.... one... two... no, wait; that person's just stretching... ah, over there! two, three...)

I count three, and it looks like one of those three is Neil Bush. Wait... the other two are Barbara and Jenna!

So there you have it. Dubya really is preserving, protecting, and defending the Constitution to the best of his ability. God help us all.

Friday, May 12, 2006

More to Come

So first we learned that the NSA was listening in on phone calls... to or from overseas, we were assured. "If al Qaeda is calling you, we want to know about it" said King George. And it seemed like there might be more, especially when Attorney General TortureGuy couched his non-answers about the NSA wiretap program to make it clear that he wasn't not answering questions about some other program, that it was the NSA wiretapping of calls to or from overseas that he was not answering questions about.

And now we learn that the NSA is compiling a database of every single phone call (except for those handled by that pesky Telco, Qwest) made in the United States. Every single one.

News flash: That lone ant crawling across your kitchen floor isn't the only one. The cigarette/joint/beer/glass of booze you just caught your kid with isn't the first. That guy trying to get you into bed doesn't really have a week to live, hasn't had a vasectomy, and isn't shipping out for Iraq tomorrow. (We can only hope that last one isn't true...) The check is not in the mail. Those pants really do make your ass look big.

There's more to come. Not everyone in the Bush administration is evil, and more of them will find the courage to speak out in the coming days and weeks and months. More of them will tell us how bad it really is, what's really going on, that no matter how bad we think things have gotten, they're really far, far worse than we thought.

And then, God help us, King George will rain death and destruction on Iran and kill a few thousand people who had the misfortune to have been born in the wrong place, all to distract us.

At least in the darkest days at the end of the Nixon adminstration his closest advisors had the good sense to take the keys away from him. We can only hope the same thing happens to King George.

Thursday, May 11, 2006

A Uniter, At Long Last

Here's the good news, kids: Your phone company owes you a thousand bucks. Owes you a thousand bucks, that is, if their name happens to be AT&T or Verizon or BellSouth. If it's Qwest, you have my sympathy.

ThinkProgress has the goods. You see, the phone companies -- everyone but Qwest -- violated the law when they turned over our phone records to the NSA. The Stored Communcations Act, to be specific. And as it happens, there's a stiff penalty for violating that law: not less than $1,000 per violation. Can you say Class Action Suit? I knew you could.

But wait! It gets better! Sure, the phone companies are going to try to get out of paying you that thousand bucks, and Comrade Bush is going to do his best to help them. But this time, they're in way over their heads. Think about it: do you want to be the person to tell one hundred million Americans that they're not going to get that one G note? One hundred million Americans who, thanks to the Bush administration's woeful economic policy (steal from the poor, give to the rich) have been treading water for the last five years? One hundred million Americans whose gas bills have just doubled, to the tune of... oh, maybe a thousand bucks extra per year?

I'm thinking there just might be a March on Washington of unprecedented scale if word got out that most of America was entitled to a four-figure check and King George was going to stand in their way. And if that happens, ol' W will have turned out to finally be a uniter, not a divider, in the end.

The Final Throes... of Freedom?

It might have been a bad dream from the old cold-war days, that dream where I wake up and find that I’m living in the Soviet Union. But it wasn’t a dream; it was real. The latest item in the unending stream of the inconceivable is the news that the NSA isn’t just spying on some of us, the ones who make or receive long-distance calls. No, they’re spying on almost all of us, everyone except the fortunate few who are served by Qwest.

And all the while those who are sworn to faithfully defend the constitution stutter and stammer and assure us that all is well, that our Big Brother has our best interests at heart and shouldn’t be questioned or investigated or even talked to in anything other than a reverent tone. Be afraid. Freedom isn’t just a slogan. It’s something that has to be defended every moment, protected from friend and foe alike, something that can disappear in the blink of an eye. Or the ring of a phone.

Concerned about NSA Spying?

One of Jack Cafferty's questions of the day today was "Does it concern you that your phone company may be providing your phone records to the government without your knowledge or permission?"

Since I'd like to remember what I said, and I don't have time to ask the NSA for a transcript, here's my contribution to that discussion:

Does it concern me that the NSA is compiling a record of who I've called and who has called me? You bet! I can assure you that bin Laden hasn't been calling my house, nor I his, and we haven't had Zawahiri over for dinner. Is this program helping the Bush administration fight terror? Last time I checked, all the "name guys" -- bin Laden, Zawahiri, Zarqawi -- were still at large. But that's to be expected. This is the kind of program that is far better at letting the administration keep track of their internal enemies. You know, the American people. Want to know who called USA Today to spill the beans on this? I bet it's in the NSA's phone record database. Want to know who's organizing the next pro-Bill of Rights rally? I bet you that's in the NSA's phone record database too.

Serious trouble? Double true, dat.

Thursday, April 06, 2006

Moral Values, Part Seventy-Three

Here's the first in a series of spots I wish the Democratic Party would run.

Moral Values?

I'll have more of these in the days or weeks or months or years to come...

Wednesday, March 15, 2006

Idiot, Liar, or Jerk?

The latest Pew Poll has Bush's approval rating at 33 percent. We're down to raving fundamentalist Republicans here, folks. Moreover, this poll shows that people have a hard time deciding whether Bush is an idiot (21 chose this), a liar (17 chose this), an ass (8 think so) or just a jerk (7 offered this descriptor). Of course, the largest number of respondents (29) used the word "incompetent" to describe him. (This poll asks people to offer a single-word description of the President. See all the glorious here.)

I favor the explanation that he's a lying incompetent idiot of an ass, but that's just me. Well, me and an awful lot of other people who seem to be discovering that the Emporer really does have no clothes. Thank you, America, for coming to your senses, even if it has taken you a bit too long. Now perhaps we can rally some support for the Constitution of the United States, eh?

Wednesday, February 01, 2006

Cindy Sheehan Arrested for Not Breaking the Law

In George Bush's America, you can unleash the blind fury of the world's greatest war machine if you have just the merest of suspicions that someone you don't particularly like just might be up to something. It doesn't matter what the rest of the world thinks. It doesn't matter what the experts on the ground think. It doesn't even matter what your own experts think.

In George Bush's America, you get to pick and choose the portions of the constitution that apply to you. No longer do you have to depend on the judicial branch of government to make the interpretation; you can do it yourself. And, in fact, you don't even have to suffer the indignity of judicial oversight (or legislative oversight, for that matter) for the things you do. You just declare that what you do is done in the name of "The American People" to protect them from "Terror" and that makes everything O.K.

And today we learn that you can be handcuffed and hauled off to jail simply because you express an opinion that George Bush may not agree with. On January 31, 2006, Cindy Sheehan was arrested, handcuffed, and tossed into jail before George Bush's State of the Union Speech because she was wearing a shirt that questioned the war in Iraq. On February 1, the Capitol Police were said to be preparing to ask the U.S. Attorney to drop the charges against Ms. Sheehan because...

wait for it...

...they could find no rule or law that might have been violated.

Thursday, January 26, 2006

When They Came for the Vegans...

When they came for the vegans,
I remained silent;
I was not a vegan.

When they locked up the people with anti-war bumper stickers,
I remained silent;
I did not have an anti-war bumper sticker.

When they came for the people who got calls from overseas,
I did not speak out;
I was not a person who got calls from overseas.

When they came for the people who wore t-shirts that Bush people didn't like,
I did not speak out;
I was not a person who wore t-shirts that Bush people didn't like.

When they came for me,
there was no one left to speak out.

Wednesday, January 04, 2006

Wingnut Souffle

Well, well, well. The right-wing Bush blind loyalists have gotten themselves into a righteous snit and are now loudly bleating the latest talking points: whoever let the New York Times know that the NSA was tapping phones without bothering to check with the courts was leaking crucial information to the enemy. That is to say, this person or persons had committed a treasonous act, was helping our enemies, was Hurting America.

Uh.... right.

Now, let's re-digest the information s l o w l y for those who are a little light in the thinking department:

Everyone knows that the NSA conducts wiretaps. It says so right on their website, although they fail to let you know that they spy on you if you visit their website.

We know the NSA taps phones. They know the NSA taps phones. The Enemy, whoever He or She is, knows that the NSA taps phones.

Are we clear on this? The NSA taps phones. El Phone-o Tap-o. The NSA Aps-tay Ones-phay. Le tapez-vous le phone. IT'S NOT A SECRET!

You see, my brain-cell-unencumbered-right-wingnut-friends, the news here is that the NSA has been tapping phones without anybody's permission. That is to say, they have been breaking the law. And Bush told them to break the law.

Intellectual giants like John Hindraker would have you believe that this one tidbit of knowledge, that the NSA isn't bothering to get the permission of the FISA court before they tap Christiane Amanpour's phone, is going to somehow help Osama plot... whatever.

It's folks like Hindraker who make the rest of us look good, especially in a class that's graded on a curve.