A partial list of violations of the law that no longer are crimes

t sickens me to think that Zoe Baird and Kimba Wood were disqualified as choices for Attorney General because of nanny taxes and yet we get Attorneys General who believed in stomping on the Constitution (Ashcroft), approve of voter suppression and torture as well as lie to Congress and reporters (Gonzales) and who think torture is only torture if it is done to him, won’t prosecute or investigate crimes committed by the Executive Branch and now thinks that not all violations of the law are crimes (Mukasey).

Thanks for that last one, Senators Schumer and Feinstein.

Whether you look at the “regular” definition of the word “crime” or even the legal definition, you will find the most basic “violation of law” as part of the definition.

But this isn’t just to point out that the current Attorney General is willing to say that not every crime is a crime in trying to stretch the boundaries of reality so far as to not prosecute...um....hmmm....what’s the word....oh yeah....crimes by members of his own Justice Department, it is to wonder just what other crimes, I mean “violations of the law” are just peachy keen according to the man who only holds the title and position of the nation’s top law enforcement official.

• We know that violating the fourth amendment (which is of higher authority that “a law”) is not a crime;


• We know that ignoring subpoenas by Congress is not a crime (disclaimer: IOKIYAR);


• We know that politicizing the internship program at the Justice Department is not a crime;


• We know that waterboarding another individual isn’t a crime (unless it is done to him);


• We know that destroying taped evidence of torture, after being ordered not to), is not a crime;


• We know that top Executive Branch officials ordering torture isn’t a crime;


• We know that suppressing people’s right to vote is not a crime;


• We will probably soon find out that violating FEC campaign finance rules is not a crime (again, IOKIYAR);


• We also know that violating the habeas corpus rules is also not a crime;


• We know that lying to Congress is not a crime; and


• For good measure, covering for the President himself over potential crimes, er, “violations of law” that the President may have committed is most certainly not a crime.

I’m sure that I missed more than a few, but I am glad that having a funny sounding name or names that sound similar to names that sound funny are worthy of indefinite detaining or “errors”. And living in a house that wasn’t even the house that SWAT teams were supposed to be looking for is their own fault when they are raided or wrongfully arrested.

Torture. Fabricate evidence to invade another country. Violate laws in hiring and firing practices. Suppress the vote illegally. Violate the fourth amendment. Blow the cover of a covert CIA operative and an entire network of people working on WMD issues. Break campaign finance laws. Ignore subpoenas.

Go ahead - those aren’t crimes and there certainly is a precedent for not being prosecuted.

Just don’t wear a shirt that has a cartoon robot on it while trying to fly or, even worse, wear a t shirt that says “Give Peace A Chance”. Because those are not only most certainly not in any way violations of the law, but are also crimes.

KYM: Unstable McCain should be medicated, not President

On a few occasions over the past couple of weeks, I have mentioned an initiative with respect to going on the attack against John McCain. With that, I have created a Google Group called “Know Your McCain” and we are looking to gather information (old and new), create viral videos, write blog posts and use social networking to spread the message about how dangerous John McCain is.

You can look for diaries with the tag “Know Your McCain”, and some diaries will have the “Know Your McCain” in the title as well. If you are interested in joining the Google Group or helping out with Facebook, please send me an email (address is in my profile).

***************************

I’ll probably take some heat for this, but I am serious here, as the prospect of someone with anger issues, who holds grudges, doesn’t think about the implications of his words before he talks, is confrontational by nature and experience five years of torture (and the effects of it) being the President of the United States – especially now – is downright scary.

As recently as 2000, McCain stated “I hated the gooks. I’ll hate them as long as I live”. While this is disturbing in and of itself, regardless of the horrors that he had to endure, the fact that he was tortured for 5 years should be considered as far as both the dedication to his country that he showed then, and the far reaching impact on him, his psyche and how he views the world.

If this was an isolated incident, then that would be one thing – and even somewhat explainable (even if unacceptable to all Asians). But more recently, McCain did it again when Bud Day, a leading campaign surrogate said that ”the Muslims are going to kill us”, and he refused to disavow the comments that painted only one billion people with the same broad brush – let alone in a most confrontational way.

But it still goes way deeper than that. We know the amount of stress that an individual who is at war endures. We have seen many many soldiers return with various levels of PTSD, and our own CIA declassified documents that were prepared in the 1960s that dealt with brainwashing and torture. Other than the fact that there are “interrogation techniques” referred to as “torture” in these documents that are way less extreme than some that our own administration and much of the republican party thinks is just peachy keen, there are some interesting notes.

For starters, note the passage in bold regarding isolation. John McCain spent approximately 2 years in solitary confinement. That’s a helluva long time. The CIA document referenced in the link above (the link in the diary is broken but if you play around with it, you can get to the entire document) has the following to say about isolation and the impact on a person subjected to it (emphasis mine):

A major aspect of his prison experience is isolation. Man is a social animal; he does not live alone. From birth to death, he lives in the company of his fellow man. His relations with other people and, especially with those closest to him, are almost as important to him as food or drink. When a man is totally isolated, he is removed from all of the interpersonal relations which are so important to him and taken out of the social role which sustains him. His internal as well as his external life is disrupted.

---snip---

After a few days it becomes apparent to the prisoner that his activity avails him nothing and that will he will be punished or reprimanded for even the smallest breaches of the routine. His requests have been listened to but never acted upon. He becomes docility of a trained animal. Indeed, the guards say that prisoners are “reduced to animals”. It is estimated that in the average case it takes from four to six weeks of rigid, total isolation to produce this phenomenon.

Four to six weeks in isolation will produce that. John McCain was in isolation for two entire years. And within those two years, he was also bound into painful positions with rope and beaten every two hours.

As I wrote in a diary a few months ago:

The long term effects of solitary confinement have been well documented, and there is little doubt that the torture that McCain endured had a profound effect on him, both short and long term.

[...]

Is there any doubt that McCain feels some level of anger, bitterness, holds a grudge or wants revenge for what was done to him? Hell, I know I would. I’d be permanently pissed off and looking for a fight - and I’m a pretty mild mannered guy. But, do we want to have a Commander in Chief who is even more hawkish on foreign policy than Bush is? On Iraq? On Russia? On China? Someone who talks openly about more wars, especially at a time when we are hated around the world for our confrontational and reckless foreign policy, not to mention with troops already stretched to the breaking point?

But even with that, it still goes deeper than the torture, the threats, the grudges, the sweeping comments and derogatory statements that offend multiple entire races. In a precarious global situation – one that the United States is already not looked favorably in, we see chest thumping about “100 years in Iraq”, we hear of excluding Russia from the G8 (not to mention his apparent desire to restart the Cold War), we hear talk of there being more wars, we have a Presidential candidate whose view of diplomacy is to physically assault foreign diplomats, just to name a few of the more major alarming issues.

If we want to look at how he treats those on the homefront, he blows off reporters when he isn’t berating them individually (this pattern goes back to 1982) or what he thinks of his wife or rape victims, there are plenty of examples of what is clearly an angry and disturbed man with little tolerance.

These issues are serious ones, and as much as some people want to ignore them or call them “quirks” or “gaffes” or part of his personality, they are scary and are not befitting of someone who aspires to be President or Commander in Chief.

“Shoot first” is what got the United States into the mess it is currently in – both domestically and internationally. Browbeating, chest thumping and insulting entire races or countries is not what is needed.

But when all of these traits, experiences and factors are considered together – if it was someone who wasn’t running for President (I’ll add “as the republican candidate”) – if it was your grandfather, your uncle, your neighbor or someone you worked with – this behavior would not be acceptable or tolerated. This individual’s mental stability would be called into question and would likely be referred for some sort of professional help.

So why is it ok if the person is only running for one of the most important positions in the world?

"Voter fraud" = "we will suppress the vote"

I’ve done a bit of writing over the past couple of years about election integrity issues, election fraud, voter suppression and the “gaming the system from the inside” that has been the republican party’s modus operandi since 2000 when it comes to stealing elections in various forms.

And right on cue - even since the anti-voter voter ID laws that were recently passed in Indiana (and almost passed in Missouri), we are seeing, as my good buddy dday is referring to as the “new battleground” - that big bad boogyman of “voter fraud”.

Never mind the fact that this is (1) a false argument and (2) false in the small issue of fact, as I wrote a few months back:

So, now that this is out of the way, I’ll refer to a 2006 DOJ memo that I discussed over the weekend:

The US Department of Justice put out a release regarding the “massive” voter fraud that they have uncovered and investigated. And there was lots to be “proud” of:

As a result of the Initiative, nationwide enforcement of election crimes has increased dramatically. At present, 195 investigations are pending throughout the country. Moreover, since the start of the Initiative in 2002 over 300 investigations of possible election crime have been opened, and over 125 election crime matters have been closed after investigation; 119 individuals have been charged with ballot fraud offenses and 86 individuals have been convicted of these crimes; and 48 individuals have been charged with campaign financing fraud and 42 individuals have been convicted of these offenses.

In over four years, only 42 individuals have been convicted, and under 50 have been charged with campaign finance fraud - now if we think of those who have been heavily lined to campaign finance fraud, one party comes to mind in a big way - and that isn’t the one who keeps pushing “voter fraud” laws. Only 86 people were convicted of “ballot fraud” (of course, Ann Coulter was cleared after calling in a favor from her well connected boyfriend), out of 300 investigations.

The issue of the voter going to the polling place in order to personally cast a vote that is fraudulent is, based on the DOJ’s own numbers - basically nonexistent. And the one high profile case was that of Ann Coulter, someone who conveniently wasn’t charged.

But the issue of voters without proper ID is one that is potential gold for the party that (1) wouldn’t likely get these votes anyway and (2) can eliminate a possible 10 million plus registered voter (or vote) advantage.

Still don’t believe me? OK, fine. Let’s just look at the tens of thousands of Floridians who were disenfranchised in 2000, or the hundreds of thousands of Ohio voters in 2004 who were disenfranchised for a contrast to the 150 or so individuals who the DOJ is touting.

The first and larger issue here is the way that this issue is being presented and argued - whether it be “voter ID” laws, whether it be voter roll purges, whether it be voter registrations or whatever else. The issue should be to make sure that people that have the right to vote can actually vote, not that people that are not eligible to vote should not be voting.

Yes, both are true, but the 2nd part - about people voting who shouldn’t vote, or people registering to vote illegally is a very minor issue - as noted by the DOJ report linked above. The flip side of these 50 people, or even 150 people who committed so called “voter fraud” or “registration fraud” is that hundreds of thousands of people in Florida were illegally disenfranchised, tens of thousands in Ohio and countless others in states that have enacted voter roll purges or ID laws.

And we are already seeing it again - as dday states in his post linked above:

With an uninspiring candidate, an enthusiasm gap and a host of fundamentals against them, obstruction and suppression is really all the Republicans have left. You can see exactly where they're worried from this story:

As Barack Obama tries to draw hundreds of thousands of new voters to the polls, Republicans are beginning to scrutinize registrants' eligibility as both sides draw a major battle line over voting rights.

Republicans are moving to examine surges in voter registrations in some states. A Republican lawyers group held a national training session on election law over the weekend that included campaign attorneys for Sen. John McCain and other Republican leaders. One session discussed how party operatives can identify and respond to instances of voter fraud.

Republicans said they are particularly worried about prospects for fraud in Virginia and Pennsylvania, and are beginning to comb thousands of new registrations in those states for ineligible applicants. In some cases the huge numbers threaten to swamp their efforts -- and those of state and local governments to verify and process applications.

Read: we're going to lose Virginia and Pennsylvania unless we invalidate hundreds of thousands of legal votes through bogus voter fraud claims. Both of the Secretaries of State in these commonwealths are Democrats, but of course the county boards of elections have more local control, as we've seen. And be prepared for this meme that the stress of all these new voters may break the system.

We have already seen three instances recently where this fear mongering has reared its ugly head.

The WaPo recently shot down the Virginia State republican Party Chair’s baseless allegations of “coordinated and widespread voter fraud....throughout Virginia, since there was no fact to back up these assertions. In Connecticut, the republican state party Chair made unsubstantiated allegations and calls for investigation into non-existent voter registration fraud, based on a video made by Election Journal, which is run by Mike Roman, a man who happens to be McCain’s Director of Election Day Operations and was the RNC’s Director of Election Day Registration in 2006.

Of course, the Connecticut allegations and hysteria has nothing to do with this:

Democratic voter registration is up sharply in southwestern Connecticut's 4th Congressional District, and political analysts said Friday that

In fact, if city Democrats in Bridgeport, Norwalk and Stamford show up on Election Day in a tide of anticipated statewide urban support for Sen. Barack Obama, Shays' narrow 5,747-vote margin of 2006 could evaporate into a forced political retirement.

[...]

Since Jan. 1, 11,329 new Democrats have registered in the 17-town district. Only 3,462 Republicans have signed up so far this year and only 8,299 unaffiliated voters.

And from the hysterical to the ridiculous, there are unsupported allegations (with “a report forthcoming”) in Alabama with respect to votes being sold for crack. This is very similar to the same story that was put out in 2004 in Ohio, and even if true, requires prosecution of the offending individual - not sweeping law changes that will suppress thousands of other voters rights.

It is happening again - actually, it has been happening all along. And as more and more new voters are registered, there will be more challenges and hurdles thrown up by the republican party to make sure that less people can vote, not more people.

If a few hundred thousand likely Democratic voters get caught in the crossfire and don’t get to vote, then the republicans will consider it “Mission Accomplished”.

Ignoring forged war documents is a dangerous precedent

How can impeachment be off the table if there is proof that documents that linked al Qaeda to Saddam or documents that made the case for invading Iraq were forged by the Office of Special Plans/Doug Feith/Dick Cheney/Scooter Libby or whoever else may have forged them?

How can impeachment be off the table if over 4,000 American troops were killed, tens of thousands more injured, not to mention all of the Iraqis who have been killed, displaced or had their lives ruined when intelligence officials spoke on the record about Bush knowing that Iraq had no WMDs, yet repeated this charge over and over and over and over?

Of course there were flat out denials of this by those close to the White House, as well as many rightist bloggers. But they have denied other lies and actions that have been proven to have occurred (or not occurred), or said (or not said) when it comes to this administration and its’ enablers in Congress.

But that isn’t the point. If even The American Conservative says that Dick Cheney is behind the forgery, and there is a tape and transcript that corroborates this assertion, then isn’t it Congress' duty to, at a minimum, initiate investigations and hold hearings to determine whether there was a deliberate attempt to lie this country into an invasion?

Didn’t Pelosi herself say that the most important thing about the Democrats regaining the majority control is the use of subpoena power? And while “drudging up things from the past” may not be what she or others in Congress want to do, if agents are willing to go on the record and indicate that the Office of the Vice President was directly involved in forging documents to make the case for invading Iraq, then Congress really doesn’t have a choice.

It is the duty and responsibility of them to “preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States”, whether they want to or not.

smintheus did an excellent analysis of the claims last week, and I would be hard pressed to think that a good number of the most gung ho republicans and especially military personnel would not be appalled that the use of the United States military was used to further top Executive Branch officials’ political and personal goals – especially if it was based on forged documents.

This may or may not ultimately turn out to be true. It may or may not lead to other evidence being uncovered. Once one or two people talk on record – especially when there was such contempt towards the intelligence community (in their area of expertise, mind you) by the Executive Branch and Defense Department – more people may be inclined to come forward.

Even Joe Conason (a man who certainly has a very solid overall track record) says that, at a minimum, this should be the basis for investigations:

Setting aside the relative credibility of the author and the government, the relevant question is whether the available facts demand a full investigation by a congressional committee, with testimony under oath.

When we look back at the events surrounding the emergence of the faked letter that is at the center of this controversy, a strong circumstantial case certainly can be made in support of Suskind's story.

Now, the fact that Congress has allowed subpoenas to go ignored by so many administration officials with no consequence is already a horrible precedent to have set. That kind of negates the whole “subpoena power” thing that Pelosi was talking about a few years ago. But Congress has to make amends here or deem themselves irrelevant when it comes to that whole “checks and balances” thing. And if the OVP may have already done this once with Iraq (and already tried to levy false charges against Iran to make the case for bombing), then what is to stop them from doing it again - especially if McCain wins the Presidency?

If there is nothing to the charges, so be it. However, there are intelligence officials on tape and on the record that have already said that Cheney and his office were behind forgeries to sell the Iraq invasion as well as Bush knowing that Iraq had no WMDs. Put them under oath and if they are denying their comments now, they can clarify if they were lying before or if they want to lie under oath.

But this is a string that is hanging which needs to be pulled on. If it unravels a bigger picture and criminal acts, then that is only good for the Constitution, the rule of law and the future of this country. If it goes nowhere, then at least there were meaningful investigations.

Congress is out of session now, but this should be one of the first items on the agenda of the Judiciary Committees when it returns.

To pretend that the charges don’t exist and to not investigate by putting these intelligence officials under oath is a tacit approval of forging documents to make the case for invading a sovereign nation.

And both the forgeries themselves as well as the lack of meaningful investigations is nothing short of treason.

A partial list of violations of the law that no longer are crimes

It sickens me to think that Zoe Baird and Kimba Wood were disqualified as choices for Attorney General because of nanny taxes and yet we get Attorneys General who believed in stomping on the Constitution (Ashcroft), approve of voter suppression and torture as well as lie to Congress and reporters (Gonzales) and who think torture is only torture if it is done to him, won’t prosecute or investigate crimes committed by the Executive Branch and now thinks that not all violations of the law are crimes (Mukasey).

Thanks for that last one, Senators Schumer and Feinstein.

Whether you look at the “regular” definition of the word “crime” or even the legal definition, you will find the most basic “violation of law” as part of the definition.

But this isn’t just to point out that the current Attorney General is willing to say that not every crime is a crime in trying to stretch the boundaries of reality so far as to not prosecute...um....hmmm....what’s the word....oh yeah....crimes by members of his own Justice Department, it is to wonder just what other crimes, I mean “violations of the law” are just peachy keen according to the man who only holds the title and position of the nation’s top law enforcement official.

• We know that violating the fourth amendment (which is of higher authority that “a law”) is not a crime;


• We know that ignoring subpoenas by Congress is not a crime (disclaimer: IOKIYAR);


• We know that politicizing the internship program at the Justice Department is not a crime;


• We know that waterboarding another individual isn’t a crime (unless it is done to him);


• We know that destroying taped evidence of torture, after being ordered not to), is not a crime;


• We know that top Executive Branch officials ordering torture isn’t a crime;


• We know that suppressing people’s right to vote is not a crime;


• We will probably soon find out that violating FEC campaign finance rules is not a crime (again, IOKIYAR);


• We also know that violating the habeas corpus rules is also not a crime;


• We know that lying to Congress is not a crime; and


• For good measure, covering for the President himself over potential crimes, er, “violations of law” that the President may have committed is most certainly not a crime.

I’m sure that I missed more than a few, but I am glad that having a funny sounding name or names that sound similar to names that sound funny are worthy of indefinite detaining or “errors”. And living in a house that wasn’t even the house that SWAT teams were supposed to be looking for is their own fault when they are raided or wrongfully arrested.

Torture. Fabricate evidence to invade another country. Violate laws in hiring and firing practices. Suppress the vote illegally. Violate the fourth amendment. Blow the cover of a covert CIA operative and an entire network of people working on WMD issues. Break campaign finance laws. Ignore subpoenas.

Go ahead - those aren’t crimes and there certainly is a precedent for not being prosecuted.

Just don’t wear a shirt that has a cartoon robot on it while trying to fly or, even worse, wear a t shirt that says “Give Peace A Chance”. Because those are not only most certainly not in any way violations of the law, but are also crimes.

...and herein lies the problem

As John Edwards has become the issue du jour and too many people are salivating over whether his political career is over, we now have yet another hypocritical and needless diversion from what is really important. Just like the recent overexposure of Paris Hilton and McCain’s passing the buck on his increasingly nasty and spiteful campaign, none of this means a damn thing to, oh, 300 million or so Americans.

But since it is a Democrat and since it has to do with sex and since the real horrors of what has been impacting many people on a day to day basis is getting buried and ignored just to create yet another diversion for people to either say “HA” or to get on their moral high horse (all while probably keeping their own skeletons in their closet), that doesn’t mean that it shouldn’t be called for the complete and utter crap that is really is.

Of course, if you want to talk about sex and politicians and the impact on their career, why not look at Larry Craig, David Vitter, Mark Foley and the years of covering up his actions, Newt Gingrich serving his wife divorce papers while she was in the hospital with cancer and of course McCain’s tossing his first wife to the curb and having an affair with Cindy the heiress?

But moving past the issue of sex, which is really only important to people who have so little in their own lives to be proud of that they have to obsess and point fingers at others to feel better about themselves, there are so many other reasons to be absolutely frustrated with the hypocritical moralists and smarmy narcissists that are once again rearing their ugly heads. Over the past week, we found out that the White House not only passed off forged documents to sell the Iraq invasion, but they forged their own documents to sell the Iraq invasion, and there is not a peep about it?

We found out that the US attorney scandal is now focusing on the White House inner circle, yet there is a collective yawn. The much ballyhooed military tribunal of Hamdan resulted in a 5 month sentence even after a kangaroo court trial - basically a repudiation of the entire administration view on military tribunals.

We just passed 500 military deaths in Afghanistan, and the Iraqi Congress adjourned without meeting one benchmark that was supposed to be the main result of the so-called “surge”, yet all we hear is the foregone conclusion that the surge worked.

Torture is still on the table. One Attorney General approved of torture memos, while also being part of voter suppression lawsuits while the latest Attorney General approves of waterboarding as long as it isn’t being done to him, and also is a chief obstructor of justice when it comes to the Executive Branch. Iraqi prisoners are being put in small wooden boxes, which of course is most certainly not torture.

Spying on Americans has been given the thumbs up by Congress, criminal defiance of subpoenas by Rove, Miers, Bolton are being allowed to set a dangerous precedent, there is more saber rattling about attacking Iran - with similar lies being trotted out by this administration, and the current republican nominee.

And speaking of that republican nominee, he has lied about just about everything, he can’t even get the difference between the Sunnis, the Shiites, Iran and al Qaeda right. He lies about his pork projects, he lies about his opponent, he lies about comments he made days earlier, weeks earlier, months earlier and years earlier. He breaks his own campaign finance rules and lies about it. He lies to the press about his top advisor/lobbyist connections and meetings he had on behalf of lobbyists.

And he gets a pass on all of it.

Private entities that made huge profits by taking tremendous risks are being bailed out by our tax dollars (in a unilateral move by the Executive Branch), but nothing substantial is being done for homeowners that are struggling and are facing foreclosure on their homes. So much for that “ownership society”. A smoke and mirrors “stimulus package” that basically used American taxpayers as conduit to send billions to the credit card, oil and gas companies and retail industries has proven to be the farce that I called it for a few months ago as the economy didn’t come close to growing in the way that we were told it would.

Gas prices are still near all time highs as the oil companies reported the highest profits in the history of the universe, and while offshore drilling won’t do squat in the short, medium or long term, McCain is pocketing handsomely from oil company contributions, yet none of this is being reported either.

But let’s focus on a two year old affair by someone who isn’t part of the Presidential campaign anymore, isn’t in Congress and is far from the first person in politics to have an affair. Because THAT is what is important to the people of this country.

Jeez.....

The temptation is too much for me to fight.

How can I NOT spread the word about how great John McCain's ass backward policies will be for ruining this country for years, nay, DECADES to come?

I mean, all I have to do is sell out my soul, er, astroturf because there are no real McCain supporters out there, er, troll progressive blog sites, er, (swallows hard) proudly support a man who has done nothing really of note since coming back from Vietman, I mean, is hawking cheap crap on his campaign website if I promise to copy and paste talking points into blogs in the hope that even brainless people won't notice that I am a new user with no diary or commenting history.

Talk about an opportunity that can't be passed up....

Maybe this can get me a PROSPERITY sign, a PEACE sign, a REFORM sign (because nothing spells reform like an old angry washed up insider who has sold out to everything that is status quo), or maybe I can hit the trifecta - the REFORM/PROSPERITY/PEACE sign!!!

Actually - come to think of it, the unintentional comedy factor in these signs is off the charts.

Even better, if I can troll enough sites, can I get enough points to get me one of the John McCain Filtered Water Bottles? It would be perfect to deliver hot bottled water to dehydrated babies.

But maybe I would have to sink a bit lower, and really REALLY sell myself out (or more accurately, be like McCain himself and pimp out Mrs. clammyc) in order to get her one of the spaghetti strap tank tops so I can enter her in the Miss North Jersey um..."pageant". Yeah, that would make me feel like a real part of the campaign.

Or....I can really go for the gold and try to accumulate enough troll points and get me one of the big and bad ass McCain Nation Party Packs - which I would only assume is complete with an ape suit (because nothing spells party like a good ape raping) and other assorted goodies that can be used to humiliate and denigrate excite the ladies on the block.

Well, all this excitement is getting to be too much. Let me see what today's talking points are so I can go regurgitate them and pretend that I actually care about an old phony who blows his top at the slightest challenge or questioning and has no clue about, well, anything that happened after 1985.

Oooooooooh.... "rising above partisanship" and jobs for all of the other rich white republicans and their children, er, America.

Gotta go get busy with some trolling. Otherwise, I may miss out on the McCain Courageous Service CD, which I would only assume is limited edition.

Know Your McCain: his electability problem

On a few occasions over the past couple of weeks, I have mentioned an initiative with respect to going on the attack against John McCain. With that, I have created a Google Group called “Know Your McCain” and we are looking to gather information (old and new), create viral videos, write blog posts and use social networking to spread the message about how dangerous John McCain is.

You can look for diaries with the tag “Know Your McCain”, and some diaries will have the “Know Your McCain” in the title as well. If you are interested in joining the Google Group or helping out with Facebook or MySpace, please send me an email (address is in my profile).

***************************

So much seems to always be made about Obama or Clinton or whoever else’s so-called “electability issues” – most of which turns out to be nothing more than a hunk of nonsense strung together from bits of polls, magnifying tiny segments of the population into a much larger group or whatever other themes that the Village wants to conjure up.

All the while, there has been no mention of the tremendous electability issue and problem that faces one John Sidney McCain.

Seriously.

Here is a man who is disliked by his own party. A man who, even though he clinched the republican primary on March 4, had an incredibly low amount of votes in the primaries, both before and (here is the kicker) AFTER he already clinched. For example, he only won one of the twelve caucuses, topped 55% of the primary vote only once (DC) before clinching the nomination and even after clinching the nomination only broke 80% of the vote two times in 10 primary contests.

Hardly a vote of confidence from his own party – a party that is as unpopular as any political party has been in my lifetime. But wait, there is more. Much more.

Here is a man who pissed off an entire hugely motivated section of the republican party – the fundies, only to finally flirt with an extremist pastor (Hagee) and then be forced to denounce him after pressure to do so, therefore alienating this portion of the base further.

Here is a man who has broken his own campaign finance laws - benefiting from them in the primaries when he had no support and no money yet denying that he ever “really” opted into the public financing. Some “straight talk: there.

Here is a man who is supposedly running on “foreign policy experience”, yet has made mistake after mistake after mistake when it comes to basic foreign policy matters.

Here is a man whose supposed “straight talk” has lied out of his ass so many times that even the WaPo, Joe Klein and Andrea Mitchell have called bullshit on his lies.

Here is a man who touts his military experience (which basically consisted of screwing around, losing 5 planes and being a POW close to 40 years ago), yet his voting record when it comes to the troops and veterans is nothing short of abysmal and thinks it isn’t too important when the troops will come home from Iraq. A man whose wife stole painkillers from a veteran’s charity that she headed up.

A man who is not only against a woman’s right to make personal private medical decisions, but would appoint SCOTUS Justices that would eliminate right to privacy, has made jokes about being raped and joked about Chelsea Clinton being ugly because Janet Reno was her father when Chelsea was just 18 years old , and left his first wife when she was disfigured in a horrific accident (after she waited for him for years to return from Vietnam).

And say what you will about his age being off limits, but over 40% of people polled last year would be hesitant to vote for a 72 year old for President. And that was before he bumbled and stumbled his way through a few weeks of campaigning - clearly looking like he is in way over his head.

Here is a man who is running one of the dirtiest and desperate campaigns – and still has the corporate media as his lapdog despite totally blowing off members of the press or asking the ever diplomatic question “what do you want, you little jerks? to other members of the press.

Here is a man whose idea of diplomacy is to sing about bomb bomb bomb bomb bomb Iran, to stay in Iraq for 100 years and to physically assault a foreign official in 1987.

Not only does he threaten to bomb bomb Iran (all while confusing Iran and al Qaeda), but one of his top aides lobbied for an Iran-linked firm, and McCain himself has deep ties to Ahmed Chalabi, who we know was a double agent for Iran (and continues to be linked to Iran), despite having McCain’s full support – either this is dangerously incompetent and naïve of McCain, or it is way more sinister than just being naive.

And finally (for now), here is a man whose running mate short list includes a former primary opponent who, on numerous occasions, was about to bait McCain into hitting him – in what was a very nasty and personal fight.

I think it is long past time where people start to look at the many major overriding issues with McCain and his campaign. Many of these should be fatal. And these should be spread far and wide.

John McCain is unelectable. The American public just doesn’t fully know it yet.

John McCain, fucking liar

It’s long past time for people to not only give McCain a total pass on his outright lies, smears, “McCain moments” and other absolute nonsense that comes from his mouth but also to actively call him on it. And if he isn’t lying, then he is goddamn near senile and shouldn’t be President for that reason alone, notwithstanding all of the other very valid reasons that he shouldn’t be President.

Over the past few weeks, he has really stooped to a new low – and just when you think that there can’t be a new low. But yes, every day comes another outright fabrication, nay, lie – about his positions, about Obama’s positions, hell – think back to the primary season when he lied about Romney or Huckabee or whoever else.

It’s too bad that only republicans know how to use the word “liar” when it comes to their opponents, even though they generally are using it for opponents that didn’t actually lie (and usually, they are the ones lying). But the fact remains that McCain is so power mad, so unhinged at the fact that he isn’t getting quite the fluffing that he feels he is due, his campaign has continued it’s collision course with the title of “most sleazy, dishonest and scummy campaign ever”.

The problem is that in an era where things can easily be verified, “I don’t remember” is sometimes passable and “I never said that” or “I never did that” is unacceptable and easily verifiable.

• We know that he lied about not writing letters to the FCC to benefit one of his campaign contributors;


• We know that he lied when he said that he never asked for nor received a single earmark;


• We know that he lied about privatizing Social Security;


• During the primaries, he lied about his potential running mate, Romney on more than one occasion;


• Over the past week, he lied about Obama and visiting the troops. In fact, his new ad on this is also a lie.


• He lied this week (again) about not using the word “timetable”;


• He lied about his admission that he is the damn fool when it comes to the economy;


• His campaign lied about oil spills after Hurricane Katrina;


• He lied about his voting record when questioned by a veteran about it;


• He recently lied to either a child or to conservative bloggers about immigration;


• He lied about his POW experience (i.e., Pittsburgh Steelers vs. Green Bay Packers), and while this isn’t as big a deal to me, it should be raised if stupid petty nonsense about Obama gets raised.


• Of course his wife Cindy lied about her recipes for cookies when she stole them from Family Circle magazine. Of course, stealing is something that she knows well, as she also stole painkillers from a veteran’s charity that she was in charge of.


• He lied recently to FoxNews about a Town Hall event they were working together on;


• He lied about decreasing oil prices being because Bush lifted the offshore drilling ban;


• He has lied about Obama’s and Clinton’s health care proposals;


• He lied about his position on Bosnia and Kosovo in trying to prove his credentials;


• He lied about Clinton and Obama’s comments regarding renegotiating NAFTA;


• He lied about his opting into public financing when it was convenient for him to opt back out;


• He lied a few months back about Iran-Contra.


• He lied about his involvement (not sexual but political) with Iseman and her firm.

And that is just off the top of my head and a quick search.

So let’s start calling him what he is. A full on liar. Not only “forgetful”, not only “misinterpreted”, not only “misquoted”, not only mean-spirited and stretching the truth.

A liar. As in “pants on fire”. If he is going to get a pass from the media, it makes it that much harder for the rest of us to get past the smokescreen. Here are around 20 instances, not even counting the 3 straight days of “Iran helps al Qaeda” or “the surge resulted in the Anbar awakening” or whatever other crap he tries to throw at the wall.

We just had 8 years of outright dangerous lies on many major issues. Not only are many of the same people involved with McCain campaign, but they are lying about just as many major important issues.

And lying isn’t so “mavericky”, is it?

****************

Update [2008-7-28 19:15:7 by clammyc]:: I did create the google group "Know Your McCain" and we are just getting it off the ground. We need writers, researchers, video people and anyone else who is interested. Email is in my profile if you want to join.

We can't let America elect another unhinged raving lunatic

I’ll start by saying that this is a call to action continuation and follow up to my diary last week about starting to attack McCain. And I’ll also say that the events of this past week were nothing short of stunning in the contrast between what can be accomplished by Obama and the potential for repairing our image around the world - and what would happen in terms of 4 more years of the same tired failed McCain/Bush/Cheney/neoconservative ideas and policies.

It floored me so much that I donated my first $50 to Obama’s campaign earlier today - more than I donated to Dodd’s campaign during his too short candidacy.

To see stories like this about Obama and then things like this about McCain, it shows just how much more can be done when you don’t piss off everyone just because you feel like being an asshole.

Back in 2004, the entire world was rooting for Americans to do the right thing. And yet, we end up with this:

I said that I would start a series of diaries that would go on the attack against McCain. And based on the response I got from my diary last weekend, I started a GoogleGroup called “Know Your McCain”. Anyone that wants to contribute research, videos, diaries or help out otherwise is welcome to join and should send me an email (see my profile). Some have already been in touch, and have provided some very good links, information or videos. You can also get to any of the links from any of the many diaries in my signature, or go to McCain Source as well.

We are starting to see McCain completely lose his shit. He is blowing off reporters. He is becoming unhinged in a big time manner - lashing out at Obama on the most crazy of attacks, all while continuing to make mistake after mistake about basic foreign policy issues and trying to run a campaign based on two things:

• Something that happened close to 40 years ago (his Vietnam service and POW status); and


• Something that he credits himself with (the so called “surge”) which, at best, has only resulted in some decrease in violence - which is related to more than just “more troops” and has no bearing on what needs to be done now in Iraq, Afghanistan or Pakistan.

The problem here is that nothing that happened in Vietnam has any real bearing on what is going on now in Iraq, Pakistan and Afghanistan and we only know that McCain has no plan for anything other than “I told you the surge worked” when it comes to Iraq, forgot (or even worse, doesn’t think) that Afghanistan was the first major conflict since 9/11, and thinks that Pakistan shares a border with Iraq.

But it isn’t just that, even though “that” is more than enough to warrant an Obama win at all costs. It is the instant rise in credibility that the United States will get with an Obama Presidency - one that will enable us to be strong where we need to be and smart about diplomacy.

Too many Americans rejected Kerry in 2004 because he wasn’t enough of an asshole to the rest of the world, and we all know how great it was for our standing in the world with Captain Asshole in charge of pissing off everyone else just because he could. With McCain it is even worse - just like Bush but angrier, older, more unstable and with more of a temper and grudge against more people.

Which is a scary thought.

As I wrote the other day, your kids and grandchildren will fight McCain’s “more wars”. Our foreign policy will be unpopular, aggressive, conducted with haste and arrogance. And we will lose more ground both overseas and on the homefront.

Big time.

With Obama, things will be far from perfect. And they will be far from easy. And too many things that will get accomplished will likely be out of necessity, reaction and crisis, not out of foresight or planning. But that is the hand we have been dealt, and not even a President Obama and a very progressive Congress can do what needs to be done.

However, with an unhinged raving lunatic with a grudge against the world, many members of his own party and horrible domestic policies (because the issue of economics is too big for him to understand and he has trusted advisors like Phil Gramm) - the hole that this country has been dug into by Bush and the republican Congress will need to be around 6 feet deep.

Because we might as well be dead to the rest of the world at that point.

If McCain wins, your kids and grandkids will fight his wars

You have a friend or a colleague who has kids? Or one that has grandkids? Or is thinking about having kids?

Are they thinking that McCain is “moving to the center” (as I was told by a colleague earlier today)? Are they considering voting for McCain because Obama “doesn’t necessarily have the right experience” or for some other nonsensical reason? Do they believe the lies that McCain was “very against the war from the beginning”? Are they unfamiliar with McCain’s “there will be more wars” comment? Do they not know about his 100 years in Iraq comment?

If there is no other distinction that people can understand (or care enough about) – even though there are more distinctions than I can easily count to (and I am an accountant), it is this one: if McCain wins, he and his neoconservative buddies will ensure that there are more wars. Enough of the “more wars” that not only many of us, but our children and grandchildren will be shipped off to fight..

So, I plan on telling one of my closest friends, who is a self described “moderate libertarian” who happens to vote republican because of his wallet (he owns 2 dental practices) that his 7 year old son, 4 year old daughter and 1 year old son (who I am the godfather of) could likely be shipped overseas to fight in one of the many wars that McCain will start or inflame.

And I will tell my parents, who think McCain is not conservative enough that if he wins, they will be setting things up so that my 4 year old niece has a shot at being drafted into the decades long war that he plans on continuing (I will personally flee the country with the little mollusk if need be). Ditto for my work colleague down the hall who has 2 sons under the age of 6, and all of the people in my neighborhood who have young children, including my next door neighbors who have twin grandchildren who are around 2 years old.

It is that simple to me. It is that clear. SCOTUS is of utmost importance, however the damaging impact from McCain SCOTUS picks are not as easy to describe in tangible terms as “McCain would gladly have your kids kill and possibly die halfway across the world – or come back with PTSD or permanent injuries”.

Or the reverse – “Do you want your kids or grandkids to become fodder for McCain’s continuation of failed aggression?”>

Either way, it is a very powerful question, and paints a picture in very stark terms of what we can expect under a McCain presidency. And with there being absolutely no coverage of Iraq on the major news outlets and therefore no talk of the human cost in lost and damaged lives, I can think of no stronger more powerful way to pointedly show what is at stake here.

Will the Democrats ensure that justice is served for Siegelman

I’m sitting here in Austin listening to Sam Seder interview Don Siegelman about the horrific actions that Karl Rove orchestrated in order to wrongfully imprison him for 9 months, and even though I knew some of the background, I am frankly shocked as I hear it straight from his mouth.

Once again, as Don said, “all roads lead to Rove”, and here is yet another example of a gross overstepping of any legal or moral lines by Karl Rove - carried out by fellow republicans and more importantly, yet again against a prominent Democrat.

And just as Rove (yet again) has skipped out on testifying before Congress, and just as we see more “sternly worded letters” or “stern comments” by top level Democrats and “significant interest” in investigating Rove and his illegal acts - such letters will be ignored, such subpoenas will be mocked, such comments will be dismissed by republicans, and the story will not be covered nearly enough by the corporate media.

Siegelman has just said that now Congress wants to investigate Rove’s involvement in this - yet another example where Karl Rove is involved in illegal acts against Democrats. Just like the White House emails, just like the prior refusal to testify, just like ignoring other subpoenas, just like the Plame leak, just like the US attorney firings, just like the smear campaigns and every other illegal thing that Rove has done.

There is a website set up called ContemptForRove.com that calls on Congress to make Rove testify or to hold him in contempt of Congress. Besides the obvious call for everyone to visit this site and send a note to Congress, it raises a question that I have been asking for quite some time, as well as a major concern about how the Democratic Party Congressional leadership treats its own.

Why is the Democratic Congressional leadership so unwilling to take all steps to not just investigate abuses of power and crimes by republican members of this administration but ALSO to protect members of its own party who have been wrongfully charged, imprisoned or targeted by Rove and the republican party?

The republican party, for all of its faults, take care of its own. Now granted, usually it is in the form of cover ups and stalling and obstructing justice and commuting of sentences for criminal charges. But they DO take go to great lengths to take care of their own.

The ONLY remedy here for the Democratic Party is to take care of one of their own - a GOVERNOR who was wrongfully charged, convicted and imprisoned for partisan political purposes. It would show that they are not only serious about “having each other’s backs” but also to hold one of the biggest criminals in this country - a criminal who is hated by such a large number of Americans accountable for his illegal acts.

This is a no-brainer. It would be a travesty of justice to not fully investigate and hold Rove in inherent contempt if he refuses to testify, just as it has been a travesty of justice for there to not be full investigations of all of the other crimes committed by this administration (or republican party members) over the past 7 years. These actions, as Sam Seder just said, are corrupting the chief law enforcement department in this country.

To have Rove be the one at the center of this and to hold him accountable would be a bonus. But the bigger picture is how this reflects on Democratic Party leadership. Will they make sure that one of their own is vindicated and that justice is served? A pardon by President Obama of Siegelman would be great. But even if Obama wins and even if he pardons Siegelman, this would not be nearly enough.

Will criminals be held accountable when their actions result in the wrongful imprisonment of a high level Democratic Party member? Or will this be brushed aside with no accountability?

The result of this investigation will go a long way to show whether top Congressional Democrats are more concerned with protecting their own from wrongful and illegal acts, or if they are afraid of “rocking the boat in the name of partisanship”. There is a BIG difference between the two.

Election theft disguised as the "Bradley effect"

There have already been a few articles and discussions over the past few months about the “Bradley effect”, which attempts to “explain” discrepancies between what white voters tell pollsters and how they actually vote when it comes to “non-white” candidates.

And even though a lot of these discussions end up with evidence that dismisses the theory, as the election season heats up, there will no doubt be more of a racial undertone (whether it is blatant or not), and as long as poll samples are intentionally skewed to help McCain, or likely Obama voters are being excluded from the polling samples - there will be more focus on the so-called “closeness” of this race.

A few months back, I wrote a diary titled “They just have to make it close enough to steal”, and this point bears repeating over and over and over.....and over until the election.

The ways that the elections have been stolen since 2000 have been in a number of ways - whether it be caging, gaming the system from the inside, questionable software security “patches”, illegal voter roll purges, voting machine “issues”, voter ID laws, illegal redistricting, phone jamming or other shenanigans by people like Ken Blackwell or Katherine Harris - there have been different and creative ways for different states, different races and on different levels.

Many Americans have been led to believe that exit polls were suddenly inaccurate and unreliable, even though they have historically been the most accurate methodology in numerous countries for many years. We were convinced by the lying corporate media and the republican party that, while our exit polls were so far off in the 2004 Presidential race - and all in the favor of one candidate while at the same time, exit polls were being cited in the Ukraine as irrefutable evidence of a stolen election which was ultimately overturned there.

In many states, the voting machine problems have not been satisfactorily fixed - hell, in New Jersey, the voting machines are known as some of the least reliable in the country. And with new anti-voter voter ID laws being introduced, a renewed effort at voter suppression with each cycle, more states in play for Obama to potentially capture and the skewed polls that I mention above, this election is another one that is ripe for an attempt to steal.

While we can argue whether there is a “Bradley effect” - on that election, on ones involving Jesse Jackson, David Dinkins or others, the narrative of such a “phenomenon” is out there. And just as there were “theories” (no matter if they were based on fact or evidence, or if they were just explanations and cover ups so that a neat and tidy media narrative could exist) of why the 2000, 2002, 2004 and certain 2006 elections defied all sense of reason, statistics, evidence of suppression or disenfranchisement, it will be all too easy for a “new” (but recycled and largely false) narrative to come into play if there is a race that is close enough to steal comes into play.

And just as we have already seen skewed and biased reporting on Obama vs. McCain, just as we have seen biased polling sample sizes in order to give the impression that the polls are close than they are, and just as we have seen prior elections stolen with impunity, it will be all too easy for another “explanation” with no proof to be advanced if there are swings outside of the margin of error in certain states, or even if Obama loses states that historically voted republican but he is winning (or will be projected to win) this November.

Which makes it all the more imperative for this election to be a blowout, and for this narrative to be killed before it starts to rear its ugly head again - as it has from time to time over the past few months.

Scott Garrett's new low - hating on Americans with disabilities

As noted by Howie Klein, the Americans With Disabilities Act Amendments (HR 3195) was overwhelmingly passed yesterday by a vote of 402-17.

And once again, Scott Garrett was one of the 17 - the only republican from New Jersey (again) to vote against these Amendments. Is this because Garrett hates all Americans with disabilities? Is this because he thinks they don?t need protection against discrimination? Or is this a stick in the eye of opponent for NJ-5?s House seat Dennis Shulman, who has overcome many obstacles, including his own disability?

Here are some of the things that Garrett voted against yesterday:

• Specifically rejects the erroneous Supreme Court decisions that have reduced the protections for people with disabilities under the ADA, restoring original Congressional intent.


• Makes it absolutely clear that the ADA is intended to provide broad coverage to protect anyone who faces discrimination on the basis of disability.


• Clarifies the definition of disability, including what it means to be ?substantially limited in a major life activity.?


• Prohibits the consideration of mitigating measures such as medication, prosthetics, and assistive technology, in determining whether an individual has a disability.


• Provides coverage to people who experience discrimination based on a perception of impairment regardless of whether the individual experiences disability.


• Is supported by a broad coalition of civil rights groups, disability advocates, and employer trade organizations.

When asked by the folks at Blue America for his thoughts on Garrett?s vote, Shulman offered this sober and rational response:

"I'm not outraged as someone with a disability, I am outraged as someone who fights for the fundamental American value of equal opportunity."

"The Americans with Disabilities Act is a landmark piece of legislation that has provided millions of Americans with equal access in virtually all areas of life, including education, the workforce, and technology. Perhaps without it, I wouldn't be here to offer a sensible alternative to an out of touch career politician like Scott Garrett."

As an American, I am outraged at the latest extremist vote by Garrett. And as a resident of this District, I am ashamed to be represented by someone so out of touch with reality. Any support for Dennis and his campaign will go a long way towards bringing sanity back to NJ?s fifth district.

The contrast between the candidates couldn?t be clearer.

Offshore drilling - Garrett proves that he just doesn't get it.

It isn?t exactly news anymore when Scott Garrett is the only NJ republican House member to vote a certain way. While it shows his stunning ability to be out of step with his own party (and not in a good way, since he is more to the right than most party members at a time when the republican party is more and more at odds with what Americans want), there are certain times when his lone vote shows an even more stunning lack of ability to grasp the big picture.

Offshore drilling is yet another one of those times.

Just recently, Garrett voted in favor of not one but two bills that would ?solve? America?s oil dependency by?.drilling for more oil, just here in the United States. Not only is this a bad idea from a short to mid term standpoint, but it is also a bad idea from a long term standpoint, as it (1) won?t lower gas prices in any material way and (2) won?t address the big picture need of becoming energy independent over the long term.

As far as the overall timeframe and impact, one of the more common timeframes that has been thrown around is that it would take 10 years before we hit a high level of production and there would be a potential 3% drop in prices on a per-barrel basis:

According to the NYT, the Energy Information Agency estimates that the total amount of oil in the offshore zone in question is about 16 billion barrels. If we assume that it would take about ten years from the day of authorization to get to peak production and that most of the oil is pumped out over 30 years, this would translate into a bit over 1 million barrels of oil a day.

That would be equal to about 1 percent of world production in a decade. If we assume a long-run demand elasticity of 0.3, this would imply a drop in world prices of approximately 3 percent. In today's prices, we would be looking at a drop in the price of a barrel of oil from around $135 to $131. If this were passed on one to one in gas prices (this is long-run story), we might expect to see a drop in the price of a gallon of gas from around $4.00 to around $3.92 a gallon.

But this isn?t really even the point, even though it demonstrates that (1) we can?t drill our way out of the current crisis, and (2) even if we can, we won?t see a big benefit even if everything runs as smoothly as one can hope. Put another way, the offshore drilling won?t reduce prices in the short term and won?t likely even materially reduce prices in the long term.

The larger issue here, of course, is energy independence in general, as well as the environmental impact of our choice in energy policy. And here is where Garrett is either clueless or doesn?t really care about the needs of his constituents when it comes to solving the short term and long term energy crisis.

Not that this lets other republicans who oppose drilling off their particular state coast but are all for drilling elsewhere off the hook ? as the ?NIMBY? argument is only a selfish one. Either you are in favor of more drilling or you are not. Either you are in favor of solving America?s oil addiction with more oil or you are not. Either you are for new initiatives in order to achieve energy independence and lower overall energy costs as well as help the environment or you are not. Either you are for more environmental pollution from oil and ?clean coal? (and by the way, coal is coal and is dirty no matter how ?clean? you want to try and call it) or you are not.

Either you get it, or you don?t (or you do but choose not to care).

By focusing on more oil and more refineries and more drilling, it is clear what Scott Garrett?s priorities are. And they are not with the short, mid range or long term interests of the people of New Jersey?s fifth district.

It is only with investment and focus on alternative energy sources and renewable energy initiatives that can save people money in the short term and help families transition to the use of hybrid cars, energy saving appliances, wind or solar energy sources and other similar ?out of the box? thinking that will help people save money in the short term as well as make changes that will be beneficial in the long run.

If Garrett can not or will not see this major pressing need, even when the other NJ republicans see it, then it makes you wonder whether he is fit to serve his constituents.

The long road back to respectability

This is something that has been on my mind for some time, yet I still haven’t quite figured out where I am going with it. Over the past decade, this country has fallen from grace in a big way. Granted, “grace” is overstated, since there were many stains on the integrity and hypocritical nature of what we say as opposed to what we do long before Mister Bush took office in 2001.

But even taking that all into consideration, the way that this country’s promise and opportunity was hijacked - not by “republicans” or “Democrats” or even “neoconservatives” per se - since 2001 makes one (or at least makes me) look at what has gone on and how much respectability has been lost and wasted by a combination of greed, money, arrogance and wanton disregard for the rule of law.

In 2004, I thought that things would get better once Kerry was elected. Or, at least, it wouldn’t continue to get worse. Sadly, even if Kerry did win, much would still be the same - sure, there wouldn’t be such a mess of the Justice Department, and there would be two people other than John Roberts and Samuel Alito on the Supreme Court, and we wouldn’t be dumping hundreds of billions into Iraq and a good number of other horrific things that are a direct result of the abomination that is the current Executive Branch.

But most of the problems facing Americans would still be big, regardless of who is in the White House - just a degree of how big.

That being said, it isn’t really worth playing the “what might have been” game, because Bush is in office, not Kerry. And with the way that Bush and many in Congress have been acting, the “just wait until Democrats are in the majority” line of thinking has been an even bigger disappointment when it comes to just how far we have to go in order to regain any respectability or advance any real progressive causes.

There is no credible explanation other than “they don’t represent us” that would explain the capitulation on Iraq funding or on FISA and the failure to have any meaningful consequences from the investigations that have been launched, nor the interest in stopping torture (or at least bringing this to light when it was first learned), the selling out of the middle class for oil and gas companies on the energy bill, the reckless disregard for the budget deficit on the AMT legislation or the challenges by Democratic party “elite” to progressive candidates by the DLC.

It’s even worse on the “other side” as the number of republicans who aren’t absolutely repulsive has dwindled to, at best, a single digit number. Stopping legislation that would help the middle class, that would be fair on wiretapping, would eliminate unnecessary and unaffordable tax cuts for special interests, stonewalling and lying and withholding documents and looking the other way about crime, corruption or the favored few are just a few of the many anti-American things that are done.

All just to show that they can obstruct everything because if they can’t get exactly what they want every time then nobody will get anything.

The same tools that wouldn’t be used by Democrats when they were in the minority (specifically by Reid and a few other Senators) are being used at every turn. Even Presidential candidates who are standing up for the Constitution are being railroaded by their own party “leadership”, while a number of impeachable offenses have occurred and been uncovered since last November with no consequences.

The same special interests are being rewarded and sheltered from accountability while not being prosecuted or seriously investigated for their complicity in violating federal law or international treaty. The election in November 2006 was supposed to take care of this. The election of 2006 was supposed to change the status quo and bring us in a new direction. Yet, impeachment was taken off the table immediately, and there has been little in the way of accountability.

Almost two years later, things have most certainly not changed - in fact, you can say that they have gotten worse. We have learned that many more of those Democrats that would make it all better were either liars or inept. We saw a party that turned its back on the winner of the Connecticut Democratic Primary for Senate for one of “its own” - a man who has only proven to be a power hungry egomaniacal liar and is actively supporting a republican (McCain) and will hopefully be kicked out of the Democratic caucus, and stripped of his seniority - yet that isn’t even a definite and it has gotten to this point without any semblance of major pushback. This is not nearly the first time that Lieberman has done this, yet he was welcomed with open arms by Senate Democrats over a progressive candidate that their own party’s voters wanted to represent their state.

We have been told that 2008 is the year that will change everything. Yet, there has been disappointment after disappoinment - on Iraq, on FISA, on things as silly as condemning MoveOn.org to more recent comments by Harold Ford that were as tepid of a defense of Obama as I have ever seen when it comes to smears, lies and distortions by republicans, the media and the McCain campaign. Similarly, there has been little push against all of the egregious things that McCain has said or done - now it can’t really be done by Obama, but it CAN be done by other prominent Democrats.

when one of the strongest remarks from House Democratic leadership was Rahm manuel saying that he won’t be buying the New Yorker anymore, how does that demonstrate leadership, and what message does that send to the American people?

The amount of “House” cleaning that needs to be done is massive. The balance of whose interests are being served is highly skewed. The current two parties have their differences but on the big picture and issues that are vital to the American people, there is more common ground with each other than with We the People. Not wanting to make moderate changes to the status quo or not wanting to tackle the big issues isn’t much different from willfully obstructing the passage of legislation that would make moderate changes to the status quo. Both result in nothing. We talk about more and better Democrats. And in some cases, the more part gives us a Jim Webb or a Jon Tester - not the ideal progressive by any stretch but certainly 100 times better than George Allen or Conrad Burns. But we also run the risk of electing the next Steny Hoyer or Jay Rockefeller, who are certainly not necessarily “better” Democrats, and can actively hinder progressives, Democrats and America as they become more entrenched.

How different will 2008 be? Or 2010 and 2012, for that matter. Will there be enough progress on global warming or healthcare or our education system or energy independence or our deteriorating infrastructure? Will we be any closer to withdrawing from Iraq? Will we be bogged down elsewhere, or still debating which Middle Eastern country we need to attack rightfuckingnow? Will the US dollar continue to be as weak, will the job market be any better and will the economy be any better? Will the US Justice Department be cleansed of its partisan ideology? Will our election system still be the laughingstock of the civilized world?

So much has happened that has done so much damage in so many ways. And it will take more than elections or incremental change to bring back any semblance of respectability for this country.

I shouldn’t say “this country”, as it isn’t the country itself - there is still opportunity and a lot that is right and good about it. I should say our “system” and our leadership with respect to their priorities and reputation. But we have seen very little change of direction as compared to what was promised in 2006. And our reputation is damaged beyond levels that would never even be considered a few years ago.

I do have faith that things can change - that things can get better again and at least there will be some accountability or change of direction. Certainly, and despite what some people think, Barack Obama is a HUGE step in the right direction - not my first choice as a candidate, but light years better than McCain. There is no other option than to do whatever we can to get him elected - and no, that is not mutually exclusive from holding him accountable in the blogosphere or even on MyBO (again, despite what some think).

But with Democratic leadership being as pitiful as it has been (I don’t think I ever saw a republican say that they needed a veto proof majority or a filibuster proof majority), more and more however, I am realizing just how far we have to go to get there.

Whiners, eh? Funny thing about that...

With all of the talk about Phil Gramm's and by extension, McCain's campaign's comments about Americans being a bunch of whiners, most are focusing on the outrage as far as a reaction goes. But the truth is, there is a large segment of Americans that ARE whiners.

That segment would be, ironically enough, republicans.

Think of an issue - think of the incessant whining on right wing talk radio, think of the direction of the debate and discussion over the past decade (or even more), and we can see just how much Gramm's comments ring true.

Who can forget some of the classic whining moments that prove Gramm's point?

George W. Bush - Debate with John Kerry, 2004: It's hard work. But, again, I want to tell the American people, we're doing everything we can at home, but you better have a president who chases these terrorists down and bring them to justice before they hurt us again.

This was just one of 10 comments that whine about the "hard work" something is.

Trent Lott, 2005 - describing the "need" for the nuclear option: "I'm for the nuclear option, absolutely," Lott has said. "The filibuster of federal district and circuit judges cannot stand. ... It's bad for the institution. It's wrong. It's not supportable under the Constitution. And if they insist on persisting with these filibusters, I'm perfectly prepared to blow the place up. No problem."

Republican activists complain of "voter fraud", which there have been very few cases, in pushing widespread voter disenfranchisement initiatives. John McCain complaining about Congress going on July 4 recess despite missing close to 400 votes in this Congressional session. John McCain complains about his treatment by the press despite having them ignore his gaffes, his misstatements, his blowups, his "McCain moments" and his flip flops.

Oklahoma State Representative Sally Kern on "the gay agenda": The "homosexual agenda is destroying this nation....This stuff—it's deadly," Kern says, "and it's spreading, and it will destroy our young people. It will destroy this nation."

Bill O'Reilly's "War on Christmas": "it's all part of the secular progressive agenda ... to get Christianity and spirituality and Judaism out of the public square." He then added: "[B]ecause if you look at what happened in Western Europe and Canada, if you can get religion out, then you can pass secular progressive programs, like legalization of narcotics, euthanasia, abortion at will, gay marriage, because the objection to those things is religious-based, usually."

Rick Santorum - whining about "activist judges": "Should we look at situations where judges have decided to go off on their own tangent and disobey the statutes of the United States of America?" Santorum said. "I think that's a legitimate area for oversight, sure."

Of course, 7 of the 9 Supreme Court justices were appointed by a republican, as were more than half of the federal bench.

Scott McClellan whines about people playing the "blame game" about Katrina, while "Brownie" whines about Louisiana being to blame, and Brit Hume blames Gov. Blanco, despite thousands of pages of documents proving otherwise.

Thinking nothing of Swift Boating, lying and smearing opponents with whisper campaigns or outright leaking of classified information, Matthew Walter, spokesman for the New York Republican State Committee, whined about a privately financed exhibit that had mug shots of Bush, Cheney and others:

“It is simply inappropriate to have political attack in the form of egregious doctored photographs of the president and other high-ranking officials who have dedicated their lives to public service in a taxpayer-funded building frequented by schoolchildren and the general public.”

Republicans whine about how Democrats will raise taxes. Larry Craig complained about a "witch hunt", despite pleading guilty. Tom DeLay complained about "unfair partisan attacks" despite being knee deep in illegal activities. Republicans complained and tried to blame the Democrats for Mark Foley's sexual harassment of Congressional pages.

And of course, there is this "ace in the hole":

George W. Bush - 2006:"Five years after 9-11, Democrats offer nothing but criticism, and obstruction and endless second guessing," Bush said. He said the Democratic Party - the party of Franklin Delano Roosevelt and Harry Truman - has become the "party of cut-and-run."

This, despite overwhelming support for withdrawal from Iraq, the Bush administration's own "cut and run" from Afghanistan and a record of republican obstruction in the 110th Congress that is unrivaled by any Congress ever.

I could go on for days, but will leave it at these fine examples. So maybe Gramm does have a point - there are a lot of whiners in America. Thankfully, due to millions of Americans realizing how destructive the republican policies have been, the number of republican whiners has decreased over the past few years.

All that is left are a bunch of dead enders.

Screw you, Iraq, we're not leaving

Iraq’s National Security Advisor is the latest official to insist on a timetable for withdrawing from Iraq, following such dead enders such as the Iraqis themselves, not to mention al Maliki and the Iraqi Parliament (in fact, this is one of the only things that they do agree on).

But these silly Iraqis just don’t get it. It really doesn’t matter that 70% of Iraqis want us out. Or that top official after top official call for a timetable for our troops to leave. Or that the point of McCain’s ill-fated surge was to allow for political progress, which there has been none of. Or that most Americans want our troops out, and that keeping our troops in Iraq is hurting the cause in Afghanistan as well as Pakistan – the places where the Taliban and al Qaeda are. Or that more troops are now dying in Afghanistan than Iraq.

No, what matters is that John McCain says that the Iraqi government can’t make us leave (not to mention that he wants to keep our troops there for 100 years), that General Petraeus isn’t about to come up with any plan for withdrawal, and that even though members of Congress are asking for that, Congress is still providing hundreds of billions of dollars to ongoing operations in Iraq with no strings attached.

So, while these Iraqis whine and some members of Congress continue to act in the best interests of America, none of them realize that it isn’t their place to say what happens in their own country. After all, we liberated them, so they owe us. The timetable will be our timetable, not anyone else’s. And if you look at other “strategic acquisitions” made over this country’s history – this is not unlike the Louisiana Purchase, the purchase of Manhattan, or even the “liberation” of Texas.

This is for the Iraqi’s own good. It is for the good of the region. It is our “manifest destiny”. It is the “Pottery Barn rule”, and since it ain’t “fixed” yet, then we have an obligation to stay there as long as it takes to fix it – Iraqi officials or citizens be damned.

We are there, and we are not leaving. There can be hand wringing, there can be demands, there can be calls from the Iraqis, the Americans, the Iraqi officials and the US Congress for withdrawal. But none of this matters.

Congress is funding this ongoing occupation with no withdrawal dates attached (and even if they did, it wouldn’t be listened to), nobody thought of what to do after “shock and awe” and the Iraqis don’t know that we are really there to hear them say “God, I love freedom", even if we have to force it down their throats at gunpoint. Don’t they realize that they just aren’t grateful enough of what we are doing for them?

What are they going to do anyway, attack our troops? Don’t they realize that one of the Presidential candidates doesn’t care about the troops, nor do far too many people in Congress?

So go ahead and call for a withdrawal – it won’t happen. There is a better chance of Iraq becoming the 51st state than anything else. After all, how long as it been since Iraqis paid their taxes to the US – a country that has laid out all of this cash and to what benefit?