Cowards and "Ass Kissing Chickenshits".

I know I haven't written in awhile, but let's start off with the biggest issue out there.

The Petraeus lie session is over.

I warned everyone for months exactly what was coming. It was Petraeus, doing his best acting work ever in playing Gen. William Westmoreland during Vietnam and reading exactly what the White House wrote for him.

Bravo! It takes a lot of balls to be a Yes Man in the military. Well I suppose it's all you are allowed to be thanks to the pesky rules against free speech they have.

Those of us who were wise to the con (apparently everybody minus the morons in Congress) knew what was coming, saw through it and wanted a rebuke of Bush for putting a uniformed man out there to make his pitch for him.

Obviously Bush knew that everybody at this point is aware that he is a compulsive liar. So he threw the pristine image of a good, honest soldier in front of Congress. Hiding like a coward behind Petraeus' medals.

The thing is Petraeus' military service was only good enough to talk up as a point of thwarting attacks on the credibility of a scam artist report.

Who really thinks Bush gives a fuck about the US Military or any of the soldiers anyway?

He had a respected General in Colin Powell debase himself in front of the United Nations (supposedly after he tried to talk the Neo-Cons out of war) and tell Bush's blatant lies about Iraq WMDs to get us into this war.

He had the gall to send our troops into battle in two different countries without any real plans and worse without the Humvee and body armor they deserved (or prohibiting them from wearing the best armor available thanks to alliances to certain corporations!).

He keeps them there on stop loss measures and doesn't allow them to leave the military when their time is up.

He uses them as political hostages when he throws a tantrum about time lines and says he will hang the troops out to dry and veto their funding if he doesn't get his wish for perpetual Iraq War.

He employs mercenaries through his right wing financial connections (Blackwater) and allows them to freely kill however many civilians they want. They operate under no laws, are paid ten times as much as the military soldiers and oh yeah their reckless actions are helping to get our soldiers shot and killed by angry Iraqis who can't tell one from another. So much for the goodwill our soldiers are trying to create. And here's the kicker... they've actually killed our own troops themselves!

He opposes military pay raises and veteran health care increases.

But hey, hey can fly out under the cloak of darkness and have a photo shoot with them!

What a great fucking guy!

Petraeus, in his role as the General in charge of the Iraq War is supposed to be fighting in the best interests of America and the citizens here that the military is suppose to serve. The President is Commander in Chief but the General's main responsibility is not to him but to us and his soldiers.

That's why many Americans who see this was for what it is, felt betrayed by him deciding to be Bush's puppet. Make no mistake about it, that's what he was. From the RW talk shows to the RW blogs, they sent him out on a propaganda campaign to speak to Bush's base.

So MoveOn.org ran an ad calling a spade a spade. "General Petraeus or General Betray Us?"

Wow did the Right blow up.

It was hilarious. Fox News was leading the charge and just like election night in 2000 when they pulled bullshit and called the election for Bush despite proof to the contrary, the rest of the Mainstream Media fell right in line. Hell even half of the Democrats in the Senate fell in line when they voted to condemn the ad.

Of course this vote came right after another one that got less press. See Senator Jim Webb, a former military man himself (and Reagan appointee) is no liberal. He even voted to condemn the MoveOn ad. But being a former military man with a son serving in Iraq he can see the forest through the trees so to speak.

He tried to push a bill in which he constantly gave the Republicans what they wanted to try to pass it, that would allow soldiers time home after their tour in Iraq, equal to the tour they just served. Figuring these soldiers who have been stretched thin already could use the mental, emotional and physical break as well as the time home they deserved.

Strangely though after the whole Petraeus farce, Bush gave a speech in which he tried to connect 30,000 troops coming home mid to late next year as a troop reduction based on the success of the surge.

The funniest part was everyone knew that was a red herring (I called the whole thing right here on this blog). We've mentioned it here that the surge could not be maintained. That troop rotations dictated that some troops had to come home regardless of the success of the surge next year. It was Bush pulling more lies out of his ass.

But where you find a lie, you find a gullible stupid Senator not far behind. Enter outgoing Virgina Coward, John Warner.

Warner, like Voinovich, like Dominieci are willing to talk the talk but walking the walk is a totally different beast on Iraq. He had said he would vote for the bill but once he heard the artificial "30,000" withdrawal number he fell for it hook, line and sinker, apparently believing Bush wanted to actually withdraw troops on his own or something. So as usual the cowardly Republicans voted against the bill and Bush wins again.

Republicans and Bush rule the day once more and punish our troops for not being rich enough or well connected enough to never have to serve in a military where they may be trapped forever in perpetual war.

So the MSM goes after MoveOn.org about an ad that rightfully questions the integrity of a man who uses his uniform to spread propaganda but doesn't attack the Right Wing Cowards who never send their sons and daughters, let alone hardly ever served in the military themselves off to their wars of choice?

The priorities of this country's media are wrongheaded and very Pravda like. Except the Russians knew Pravda was propaganda and Americans foolishly believe that we have a choice in media and that even though a mass majority of the talking heads on radio and TV are spouting the same White House-approved talking points, that somehow the media is liberally biased and they are getting a real selection of views.

The problem with this whole deal is this:

Attacking MoveOn.org's calling BULLSHIT on what was without question, bullshit, is saying they don't have a right to free speech.

The Right Wing smear machine, whom whined like babies over this, have been behind more attacks on military men than anyone.

They had no problem taking an honorable soldier like Max Cleland and trying to push him as friendly to Osama Bin Laden.

They had no problem taking an honorable soldier like John Kerry and swiftboating him with lies and trying to dishonor his service (all while their Commander was AWOL from Guard Duty).

The right wingers in CBS' news department (see the Dan Rather lawsuit for more on how that organization works now) fired General John Batiste when he spoke out in an ad against the Iraq War.

They go after the former General in charge of Iraq, Gen. Abizaid for saying America could deal with a nuclear Iran because we handled the Soviets when they had nukes and were a far greater threat.

They call the death of soldiers, "a small price to pay".

Not to mention Senator Chuck Hagel who happened to be the only Senator from the GOP with any integrity on this war, was labeled "SENATOR BETRAYUS" by Rush Limbaugh.

I guess only THEY can slam the military or use "Betrayus" right?

The sad part is that nothing is being done to stop the Iraq War. There is no end in sight unless you set January 2009 when a new President takes office as your timetable.

It's sickening that the pathetic lapdog media would go after MoveOn.org for telling the truth.

Why they have never picked up on this plan for American empire that they clearly outlined in the PNAC strategy, that Wolfowitz was in charge of and was leaked to the NY Times back in 1992 and that Wes Clark has warned he was informed of right after 9/11, is beyond me. It's blatantly obvious that they wanted war with Iraq and want war with Iran.

It's also becoming more evident that they don't want to stop there.

To call Petraeus out for lying for his boss to keep this war going is an honorable thing to do. Our troops deserve a commander who recognizes the harm his soldiers face by continuing these neo-con policies.

If they get their way, the soldiers will never come home.

Maybe the best voice on this is Admiral William Fallon, Petraeus' superior who attempted to develop plans for a draw down and said the following about Petraeus:

In sharp contrast to the lionisation of Gen. David Petraeus by members of the U.S. Congress during his testimony this week, Petraeus’s superior, Admiral William Fallon, chief of the Central Command (CENTCOM), derided Petraeus as a sycophant during their first meeting in Baghdad last March, according to Pentagon sources familiar with reports of the meeting.

Fallon told Petraeus that he considered him to be “an ass-kissing little chickenshit” and added, “I hate people like that”, the sources say. That remark reportedly came after Petraeus began the meeting by making remarks that Fallon interpreted as trying to ingratiate himself with a superior.

If only he were speaking to the gullible fools in Congress...

Thank you Admiral Fallon. You are a good and loyal American.

-Rp

The War Time President

Bush has often declared himself a "Wartime President". He seemed to do it with glee in a private interview with Tim Russert for Meet the Press a few years back. As ironic as it is for someone who went AWOL from their National Guard duty to now be Commander in Chief and declaring wars, he seems eager to not only continue his current wars but start new ones before he leaves.

General Petraeus is getting ready to give Congress that September report on Iraq as we have reported here several times. The media is gearing up for it by discussing how it might involve troop withdrawals from Iraq. It will be, as expected, positive media for Bush who will look like he's pulling some troops out and not being the complete stubborn prick he has been otherwise. The problem with this is the media again has no idea what they are talking about as troop rotations would require that some troops be redeployed or withdrawn anyway.

As I have said before, anything Petraeus says should be immediately dismissed. Republicans and Neo-Cons (like the World's Biggest Idiot, William Kristol on this The Daily Show appearance this week) try to play him off as some independent, non-partisan voice. As we know from my previous postings that is simply not true.

Not to mention everyone is waiting on his report to Congress as if whatever he says is what we need to act on. This would be a foolish decision for any Democrat in Congress to make especially now knowing that the White House is actually writing his report.

Yes, they've now admitted what I have been saying all along!

From the LA Times:

Despite Bush's repeated statements that the report will reflect evaluations by Petraeus and Ryan Crocker, the U.S. ambassador to Iraq, administration officials said it would actually be written by the White House, with inputs from officials throughout the government.

And though Petraeus and Crocker will present their recommendations on Capitol Hill, legislation passed by Congress leaves it to the president to decide how to interpret the report's data.

Well that pretty much sums up how truthful that report will be. Petraeus himself earlier this year slipped up and said the surge didn't stem the violence in Baghdad. Must have been a fleeting bout of conscience I guess.

As if that were not enough for Mr. Wartime President, his Vice-President Dick Cheney is urging for strikes on Iran. These people are unbelievable.

What I'd like to note here is that their flawed (as usual) premise is that the upswing in violence during the surge is somehow all Iran's fault and that all the Shiites that are fighting US forces in the surge are connected to Iran in some way.

Strange how they were surpressing the actual numbers of casualties by excluding deaths by bombing originally in this surge but are now using those numbers to justify a war with Iran.

The worst part is the lack of logic that goes into this explanation. Our surge, by it's very nature, is meant to induce more violence. We're going in and forcing more conflict with al-Sadr's Shiite sect and thus the violence between US Forces and Shiites has risen. It likely has little to do with Iranian influence as much as it does with Iraqi Shiites just wanting to force us out of their homeland.

From the Asia Times:

When a top US commander in Iraq reported last week that attacks by Shi'ite militias with links to Iran had risen to 73% of all July attacks that had killed or wounded US forces in Baghdad, he claimed it was because of an effort by Iran to oust the United States from Iraq, referring to "intelligence reports" of a "surge" in Iranian assistance.

But the obvious reason for the rise in Shi'ite-related US casualties - ignored in US media coverage of Lieutenant-General Raymond Odierno's charge - is that the Mahdi Army of Muqtada al-Sadr was defending itself against a rising tempo of attacks by US forces at the same time attacks by al-Qaeda forces had fallen.

-snip-

Odierno claimed intelligence reports supported his contention of an Iranian effort to influence public perceptions of the "surge" strategy. "They're sending more money in, they're training more individuals and they're sending more weapons in."

He repeated the charge in an interview with Michael R. Gordon of the New York Times published on its front page on August 8 under the headline "US says Iran-supplied bomb is killing more troops in Iraq". In that interview, he declared of Iran, "I think they want to influence the decision potentially coming up in September."

What Odierno framed in terms of an Iranian policy, however, can be explained much more simply by the fact that the US military mounted more operations on Muqtada's Mahdi Army during the spring and summer.

Sounds like they're framing the Iranians to force a war to me. Not all that differently than how they framed Saddam for 9/11 so they could go to war with Iraq.

What goes through the minds of these people? Our President is supposed to keep us safe no matter what. Peace is always supposed to be the option and war is supposed to be a reluctant, last ditch effort made in self defense. Your job as President is to keep us OUT of wars. In doing so your job REQUIRES you to use diplomacy, even with those who have not traditionally been our allies or that completely agree with us. You use law enforcement here and abroad (with the help of partner countries) to capture terrorist suspects before they strike. You strengthen our own country's security at airports, nuclear facilities and ports. You make tactical strikes where you need to but with the cooperation of leadership in that country to have help in flushing out the enemy. But you DO NOT STRIKE PRE-EMPTIVELY JUST BECAUSE YOU WANT TO. That is NOT the President's job. Afghanistan you can make a strong case for after 9/11 but Iraq is absolutely wrong and Iran would be as well.

Not to mention our military is stretched beyond their limits. It's to the point where they'll accept anybody. They lowered standards and missed recruitment goals in 2005. They lowered them further and barely reached recruitment goals in 2006.

Much of the money we're sending to the Pentagon to handle this war has gone to overpay contractors like Blackwater, whose mercenaries go to Iraq with no United States military jurisdiction and kill at will. It's become a nightmare and they're killing our troops now... while we pay them!

So back to recruiters, they'll accept anybody right? Well almost anybody. Remember that Max Blumenthal video we posted about drafting College Republicans? Well apparently on townhall.com a College Republican wrote an editorial trashing him for it and proved why those cowardly jerks who used every cheap health excuse in the book, REALLY couldn't serve.

At the July 2007 National College Republican Committee Convention, whining wannabe journalist Max Blumenthal asked attendees why they weren’t fighting in Iraq. The college kids in his amateur ambush video fumbled with their words and gave medical excuses like asthma and bad knees. They were young, nervous and in front of a jerk holding a camera. Guilt isn’t necessary. The reality is that most of us wouldn’t make the cut.

There you have it. College Republicans are physically and mentally inferior to high school dropouts, felons, racists, convicts, and illegal immigrants and cannot join the military. They said it, not me.

That being said, if that is the case, none of them should then ever be considered qualified to be elected for a public office. After all they're too dumb to pass the military recruitment exams, do we really want them working on complex budget issues, passing laws, or worse dealing with complicated policy negotiations? Please. Time to treat this bunch of fools worse than drop outs are treated. At least the drop outs have the courage to stand and fight for their country, unlike these chickenshits who just call for war while hiding behind their parents' money.

-Rp

It's Clearly Time to Stand Down

Well now what is Bush going to say? Is he going to say that even though the Iraqi people elected their Parliament and have a "democracy" that they are wrong and we're going to enforce our imperialism on them anyways?

Iraq Prime Minister al-Maliki sure put Bush in a tough position when he stated on Saturday that the US troops "can leave anytime they want". Then one of his top aides threw this in:

In addition, he said that al-Maliki has problems with the top U.S. commander, Gen. David Petraeus, who he said works along a “purely American vision.”

“There are disagreements that the strategy that Petraeus is following might succeed in confronting al-Qaida in the early period but it will leave Iraq an armed nation, an armed society and militias,” al-Suneid said.

So Petraeus, the guy Bush and the Right Wing hardliners are pushing for us to wait for a September report on is, no surprise here, not taking into account what Iraqis need or want in their own country. How anyone in the media could give the "waiting until September for an honest assessment from the General" line any creedence is beyond me. Face it, Petraeus is Bush's boy. His first media visit was to the Bush Network, er FOX News spouting the line of successes and saying they need more time... like 9 or 10 years more time. Ironically that's the same line the Bush Administration tells every media outlet they encounter.

He was quoted in the New York Times today saying the surge portion of the war won't fully work until "next Spring".

Why are we waiting until September when it's clear what his talking points are?

So the Prime Minister of Iraq wants us out, how about the Parliament of Iraq? Oh yeah, they do too. On May 8th a majority of Iraqi lawmakers signed a petition for the US to set a timetable to withdraw troops. Then on June 5th, this happened:

From alternet.org:

The parliament today passed a binding resolution that will guarantee lawmakers an opportunity to block the extension of the U.N. mandate under which coalition troops now remain in Iraq when it comes up for renewal in December.

-snip-

Reached today by phone in Baghdad, Nassar al Rubaie, the head of the Al-Sadr bloc in Iraq's Council of Representatives, said, "This new binding resolution will prevent the government from renewing the U.N. mandate without the parliament's permission. They'll need to come back to us by the end of the year, and we will definitely refuse to extend the U.N. mandate without conditions." Rubaie added: "There will be no such a thing as a blank check for renewing the U.N. mandate anymore, any renewal will be attached to a timetable for a complete withdrawal."

Without the cover of the U.N. mandate, the continued presence of coalition troops in Iraq would become, in law as in fact, an armed occupation, at which point it would no longer be politically tenable to support it. While polls show that most Iraqis consider U.S. forces to be occupiers rather than liberators or peacekeepers -- 92 percent of respondents said as much in a 2004 survey by the Independent Institute for Administration and Civil Society Studies -- the U.N. mandate confers an aura of legitimacy on the continuing presence of foreign troops on Iraq's streets, even four years after the fall of Saddam Hussein.

So there you have it. We're not wanted there. The Iraqis are clearly standing up and now it's our turn to stand down.

Of course this must have pissed off the White House something fierce because you know they made a call when just hours later al-Maliki's aides were backtracking a bit.

Clearly we need to go. We're in the wrong. The General's September speech will be what Bush tells him to say so waiting for him is pointless.

And now, as if that's not enough. The most Evil Man Alive (only because Hitler's dead because I would guess he would try to outflank him for this award), Dick Cheney, is pushing to begin a war with Iran.

If you thought we didn't have allies before for the Iraq war, I would assume we'll have none in Iran.

In fact our moves there (and the missile defense system we're setting up in Europe) is making Russia nervous. They pulled out of an arms treaty because of it and it seems are gearing up for possible action based on protecting themselves, a notion that wouldn't even be thinkable if Bush and Cheney hadn't made it clear that they don't mind invading anyone that disagrees with them. Russia, eager to avoid conflict with us, offered to help with the installation of a missile defense system in a location that was not threatening to their country. It appears Bush refused which pretty much points out why they want it. They want a new cold war as well as a new World War.

Furthering the tensions with another war in the Middle East will only make us the Nazis to the Muslim World. If idiot Americans actually believe that going into Iran is "fighting them there so we don't have to fight them here" when our military is ill-equipped for another war and when the creation of an entire future generational legion of terrorists is inevitable, then these people need to be put in mental health institutions and have their voting privileges revoked.

This Article by William Pitt from Truthout explains how the war in Iran would be a disaster.

We're on the brink people. Just where us "crazy liberals" told you it would go when we were protesting in the MILLIONS the Iraq War BEFORE it began. While you were all ignorant to whether or not Saddam had anything to do with 9/11 or if he had WMDs, WE KNEW. And we saw this coming too.

Wake the fuck up!

It's time to get out of Iraq and leave Iran alone. Only then will Iran feel safe and not feel the need to develop nukes for their own protection and only then will the Russians back down from their current elevated stance. WE are creating our enemies. WE are starting the next World War.

It's not too late to stop it. Call your Congressmen and ask for impeachment today. And if they're Republican, CHALLENGE them on their bullshit assertions about Petraeus' September Report or intelligence on Iran.

It may be our only hope. This is not a war we can win.

-Rp

Bush Administration Fueling/Funding Iraqi Civil War

Has anyone stopped to ask, "What if Bush doesn't want to win in Iraq"? I think it's a pretty solid question to ask.

It seems to me we're spending so much time expecting some sort of exit strategy from Iraq that we're missing the overall picture. That being that the Bush Administration is funding the Iraqi Civil War and trying to start World War III.

This sounds insane to the logical person but hear me out.

We're already in Iraq and Afghanistan creating chaos without any sort of plan. We refuse to pull out even if timelines and benchmarks are not reached. Why? What's in this for us? Oil?

Well the region is loaded with oil. So taking out various countries in the regions strengthens our grip on what's out there and available to US oil companies. It also makes certain friends of the corporations and their shareholders very rich when they determine the eaxct supply amount that is put on the market.

This however is something bigger. The Neo-Cons see this as a game of Risk. Taking one major region out is a means to strike and control another. They have been notably upset since the end of the Cold War and this certainly will stoke a new cold war (or possibly World War) with both Russia and China who most certainly would have their interests hurt by us controlling Iranian and Middle Eastern oil.

Consider this: The Bush Administration is now pushing for a $20 billion arms deal with Saudi Arabia. You know, the host country for the majority of the 9/11 hijackers? Not to mention the home country of Osama Bin Laden. So he's arming the Saudis who are Sunnis and whom American officials contend are already playing a counterproductive role in Iraq.

But wait, they're using our troops to protect the Shia government. Not to mention this is after the Pentagon helped Prime Minister al-Maliki train Shia death squads to slaughter Sunnis. This new deal arms both groups and puts our troops in the middle of a civil war.

Then you take a look at Iran. Hawks are pressing for war with Iran and the Administration already put out a release stating that they have a right to go to war with "rogue states" and "islamic terrorists" in 2002.

Their two main points in pressing this case are the same ones they tried unsuccessfully to make with Iraq. 1) They have or are trying to obtain weapons of mass destruction and 2) they are funding terrorists that are doing harm to the U.S. (or in this case our soldiers and Iraqi stabilization).

On the first issue we'd probably have been able to stop the Iranian nuclear program or at least know way more about it had they not outed the CIA's covert nuclear counter-profiliferation agent who was working on Iran, Valerie Plame. Of course we all heard how it was for "political" reasons because they wanted to get back at her husband, Joe Wilson, for exposing their lies on yellowcake uranium coming from Niger and being sought by Iraq.

The more logical explanation was that it shut down the CIA's undercover nuclear investigations in Iran and now with incomplete intelligence it makes the case for war that much easier to make. After all we have no idea just how far along their nuclear program is or what they have tried to obtain at this point.

Also we've been advising terrorists inside Iran to cause havoc there and inflame tensions with Ahmenijhad.

Former Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld wrote a memo that detailed plans to invade seven countries after 9/11, which General Wesley Clark brought up in this interview. It mentioned, "Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and, finishing off, Iran".

That sounds like a pretty big swath of countries in the ever growing in reality version of Neo-Con Risk.

And the tensions in Iraq only get worse. al-Maliki HATES Gen. Petraeus and is threatening to arm Shia Militias (in response to our arming the Sunnis) if we don't take him and his Bush-ordained view of Iraq out of there.

The funniest part is we already know what Petraeus will say in September because he follows Bush's orders (contrary to that BS line Bush gives about listening to his generals and not legislating what they do from Capitol Hill) and the White House has made sure to send them to RW shills like Fox and Hugh Hewitt to get their message out early.

Here he's causing more problems with Iraqi leadership, has pushed the Bush view on Iraq down their throats and is going to come back here and feed the same crap to us and we're supposed to take him at face value?

Of course at this point why should we take anybody in this Administration at face value on the tensions in the Middle East? It seems to me they'd rather fund terrorists, arm everybody and start a world war to take the entire region and create another century's worth of cold war with Russia and China.

If we fight them there, we don't have to fight them here. Riggghhhttt....

-Rp

Cowards.

As you can tell I haven't written anything this week. You'll notice a similar pattern back around the time when Democrats caved on the Iraq funding bill.

I come on here and talk about Democratic values. Values the mass majority of the party shares. The problem is that there are always some beltway Democrats that prefer to keep the status quo in place. Their constituents don't matter as much to them as the lobbyists that fill their coffers come election time and ultimately that money makes it impossible for real Democrats to pose a real primary challenge. When someone does, the other beltway Democrats get the all stars out and bring in the big donors and their clout clouds the media to believe this is the only Democrat running. The majority of voters, even in the Democratic party, rely on the media (foolishly I might add) to help them learn about the candidates.

Only the hardcore politicos get to know the candidates not on TV or in the news frequently and thus that lobbying money that buys ads and those other big name beltway Democrats (see: Sen. Chuck Schumer & Rep. Rahm Emanuel) buy clout with the media. The uninformed are told from the beginning that this candidate is the only one with a real chance to win because of that financial support and not wanting to lose the seat to a Republican, Dems go out and vote for the total loser who will just capitulate to the Washington way of life.

Case in point: Freshman Senator from Minnesota, Amy Klobuchar. She wasn't the best candidate. Many would say Ford Bell won the debates and was certainly the most progressive. Remember that word, progressive. Because that scared the hell out of the beltway Dems. So Schumer and his DSCC backed her before the primary had even begun. Before they had really begun they forced Patty Wetterling, a strong children's advocate whose son had been abducted, out of the race and had her endorse Klobuchar. In return the beltway crowd would support her House run against nutcase Michele Bachmann.

Then when Bell showed promise in the debates and made Klobuchar look like the clueless talking point-memorized putz she was, Schumer called in the "rock star", Barack Obama to do a fundraiser for Klobuchar. How can you compete with the biggest star of the party?

So she went on to the Democratic nomination, the win in the Senate race and so it shouldn't have been surprising when she voted with many other Democrats to give Bush expanded wiretapping powers that he didn't even ask for.

This is what we get with the beltway crowd. They are so insulated from the American people they refuse to listen to them.

Now as stated above, Klobuchar was not the only Democrat that voted for this. Many beltway Democrats felt some sort of incredible urgency to give Bush exactly what he wanted on this electronic surveillance bill.

What they should have been doing is investigating and bringing charges in the illegal actions performed previously on this issue. Bushco knew they were breaking the law and a secret court ruling leaked illegally by Rep. John Boehner told them the FISA courts could not give them authority to do what they wanted to do.

This was after it was let out by Mike McConnell the director of national intelligence, that wiretaps and e-mails were not the full scope of Bush's directive to spy on Americans. That's a pretty huge admission and yet Democrats not only caved on this bill and gave Bush everything he wanted, they actually made the person solely in charge of making these judgment calls....



Alberto Gonzales.

Yes... the guy they want an Independent Counsel appointed to prosecute for perjury in his testimony to Capitol Hill, the guy whom House members are putting impeachment resolutions in for. The most distrustful member of the Cabinet.

That guy.

You could make a case for the Democrats over the cave on Iraq War funding. After all they were between a rock and a hard place there. They didn't have enough votes to override Bush's veto and the media, as slanted to the right as they are, tried to blame them for not funding the troops even if it was Bush who vetoed their funding and even if Democrats gave the troops more than Bush ever wanted them to have. There was not much politically the Democrats could do then.

This time, there is not question that they were cowards. Afraid to look weak on terror, they gave this President carte blanche to spy on any American he chose. In fact considering the expanded powers he has already claimed, all this basically did was legalized the actions of this criminal cabal.

As if that were not enough, many Democrats seem eager to cave to Bush on Iraq again based on Gen. Petraeus' September report. As mentioned on this blog before, Petraeus is a Bush propagandist for the war. He's been spouting Administration talking points for the war dating back to 2004. Of course the Democrats would blindly trust another Bush hack. Are we really surprised?

It's time to stand up and vote the beltway, centrist Democrats who clearly have no spine, out of office. Whether it's giving Bush everything he wants on spying, the Iraq War, torture, the bankruptcy law, the medicare prescription bill... check all those votes that were WRONG and look at the names.. they should repeatedly look the same.

They hurt our cause as much as any crazy right wing Republican does, in fact more so. Because every time we come out and speak the truth about this Administration and try to call them to justice, the media points to those beltway jackasses and calls us the "Extreme Left" as if we're some sort of Communist/Socialist propaganda group.

We are the mainstream. Those in power would lose it if the media reported it that way or the Congress voted that way. That needs to change... and fast.

September 15th there is a march in Washington D.C. Unfortunately I can't make it but all of you that want real change, I ask you to attend. March to Capitol Hill and chant "SHAME!" at all the Congress. When House Republicans did it as a publicity stunt on a vote they lost (they were upset about the confusion but more so because they actually did lose the vote), the media but mostly those beltway Democrats came out and tried to appease them.

If only 100 right wing racists could get that kind of reaction from those who lay in fear of losing re-election of their cushy beltway jobs, imagine the kind of fear millions of Americans, pissed off, would create if they stared down the Congress and gave them the hell they deserve for handing our civil liberties to a criminal.

Finally I leave with a quote from a REAL patriot and ask the Congress to do something it doesn't appear it has ever done. READ THE CONSTITUTION. Yes, that paper below!



It is the foundation of this country, it is what our forefathers and generations afterwards that faced REAL threats to our society and Democracy relied upon and protected as YOUR OATHS OF OFFICE requires you do. Read it and weep, for you have failed America and failed what our country's real patriots made real sacrifice of life, limb, wealth and reputation for. You are cowards with no shame and for that may you be chased from office and replaced by true keepers of the Constitution.

They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.
-Franklin's Contributions to the Conference, Friday Feb 17, 1775

-Rp

The Dumbest Man in America?

Yes that's Weekly Standard founder and frequent FOX NEWS contributor William Kristol pretending to shoot a gun. I imagine he likes to pretend he's shooting a gun and playing war, kind of like me and my friends did when we were like Nine.

How else could this guy continually be so wrong and so dumb on issues of war? The man has had pretty much every prediction he has ever made blow up in his face when it comes to Iraq. In fact Glenn Greenwald has about 14 of them right here.

Then, as if that weren't enough, he went out advocating a war with Iran.

Maybe he was trying to get ahead of the curve. After all he and his buddies (Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Quayle, etc) have a doctrine for an American Empire as part of their thinktank group, "Project for a New American Century". War with Iran would most obviously take the Afghanistan and Iraq conflicts and turn them into a Middle Eastern based World War III.

He came out swinging again in an editorial he wrote for next week's edition of The Weekly Standard entitled, get this, "Keep On Surgin'". Yeah it's fun over there didn't you know?

In his column he says the following:

Over the last few months, the United States (finally) surged in Iraq. Al Qaeda in Iraq has now surged against the surge. Iran is surging against the surge. We're pushing them back. Now the Democrats in Congress, the mainstream media, and the foreign policy establishment have mounted their own surges against the surge. So far, Bush is beating them back. If Bush can hang tough, and General Petraeus can keep on surging, the Defeatists will fail. And the United States will have a good chance to succeed in Iraq.

This guy has to be the dumbest guy in America. Considering he was Chief of Staff to Dan Quayle and considering the idiocy of Bush and Cheney that's an incredible feat to lay claim to. But while Bush and Cheney wrestle for another title, "Most Dangerous Man in America, Kristol gets dumbest hands down. Luckily his effect on actual policy comes from pundity on television and a magazine rather then direct advisory to the Bush White House. But you would never know it since they have followed his exact words thusfar and been wrong on every single thing they have claimed would happen.

I wish I could get paid making ridiculous bullshit up and just consistently predicting false concepts that would come out of the war.

Week after week he's on FOX NEWS, granted they have no care for or concept of pesky facts anyway, but he's on there commenting on the latest news and predicting the next steps.

This is like getting an NFL handicapper that you're paying for betting advice on going 0-14 every week and even though he hasn't won a single game for you, you're calling him on Week 16 taking his picks again. Apparently you didn't learn a damn thing from the first 15 weeks, and neither has FOX, Kristol or this Administration.

Maybe Kristol can serve a purpose. He can keep predicting what we should do and we can do the opposite. After all, a 100% success rate would be a pretty fantastic thing when we haven't had a single success in Iraq other than deposing of Saddam Hussein (who clearly ran the country better than we have).

-Rp

It's Opening Day and the first pitch is the high heat...

There's been quite a bit of interesting news today, here on what is practically a national holiday for me... Opening Day of the MLB Season.

First, the Majority Leader of the Senate threw the high heat brushback and though Bush may get out of the way, Democrats have sent their message. It's too bad it took this long for the Democratic majority to get on board with Russ Feingold who has been right all along from the Patriot Act to the Iraq War to re-deployment, but it has finally happened.

-Senate Majority Leader signs on to co-sponsor Feingold Iraq Redeployment Bill

Second, John McCain and the Straight Talk Express (or is it the Bullshit Express?) seemed to veer quite a bit off course today. After proclaiming that Baghdad was safe enough that "General Petraeus went out every day in an unarmed humvee" and that "you and I could walk through those neighborhoods", he went out to put his money where his mouth is. Claiming Americans are not getting "the full picture", he went on a stroll... except he was equipped with a bulletproof vest and had 100 soldiers, 3 Blackhawk helicopters and 2 Apache gunships with him on that stroll.

Just your average walk through the park I suppose.

Third, the party which lives to suppress minority voters went to work again apparently. David Iglesias, one of the US Attorneys who were forced out because they weren't doing the political hackery of the Republican party, reports being pressed to prosecute a group that was registering minority voters. The type of Democracy that these people want to spread to the world is one with a very narrow world view. Only the rich and caucasian shall be major parts of this democracy and maybe a few minorities that are willing to be used for their skin color as false examples of diversity.

They are scared to death of minorities being wise to politics and registering to vote because they lose that vote in colossal numbers but worse this is a rather slimy, pathetic way to be using the Department of Justice and the US Attorneys. Who needs to prosecute real crimes? We have elections to win! :barf:

And finally, Bush is not throwing out the first pitch in Washington for the second straight year. Out of 64 previous opening days in Washington, Presidents threw out the first pitch 46 times. From the article: "Except for when the world was at war, only two other presidents, Woodrow Wilson and Richard M. Nixon, missed Opening Day ceremonies two years in a row. And Wilson had suffered a stroke."

So we're talking Bush and Nixon being in the same class permanently for something other than continued failed war policies, illegal political hackery, obsessive paranoia and being the most impeachable Presidents ever... Good company for Bush to be in.

The White House denies it but I think he's afraid of being booed out of the stadium. Can you think of a more deserving round for the boo birds?

-Rp

The Desperate Ramblings of The Right

Just when you thought you heard it all the Right Wingers came out swinging and ended up sounding completely nuts.

Let's start with the craziest idiot of them all, Dick Cheney.

Rep. Dennis Kucinich had planned on introducing his Articles of Impeachment in a press conference today that he plans to present in the House of Representatives. In an effort to avoid the obvious embarrassment that such a press conference would cause, Cheney's staff issued a release that Cheney was ill and going to the hospital once more. Only Cheney wasn't ill and he feigned the situation to garner sympathy. It worked too as Kucinich pulled his press conference. Then just as he does so, Cheney shows up at a press conference himself and blasts Harry Reid. To which Reid responded hilariously, "I'm not going to get into a name calling match with somebody who has a 9 percent approval rating."

Luckily Kucinich went back and decided to do that press conference today. Although chances of impeachment without actual charges are slim, it raises the profile of such charges and might open the door a bit wider down the road.

Bush himself came out with a rather crazy comment (like that's a shocker). Apparently according to Bush, the 2006 Mid-Term elections in which Democrats swept into power amidst the anger of Americans about the Iraq War, really was an election telling Bush to commit to the surge and THAT was the change of direction we the voters wanted. The elections were a mandate for the surge.

I shit you not:

Last November the American people said they were frustrated and wanted change in our strategy in Iraq. I listened. Today General David Petraeus is carrying out a strategy that is dramatically different from our previous course. But the American people did not vote for failure, and that is precisely what the Democratic leadership’s bill would guarantee.

Oh it gets crazier...

Republicans are now saying if Democrats go after the Bush Administration's Emails, then they will go after Clinton's emails.

This is hilarious for THREE reasons.

1. They are the minority party and don't have subpoena power to get ANYTHING. They couldn't even subpoena a television listing from TV guide if they wanted to. Welcome to the minority pals, you have ZERO power!

2. Independent Counsel already did this! Remember Ken Starr's old office? They tried everything, gathered every inch of info and NEVER found an impropriety in the Whitewater deals, which was the entire witchhunt that the GOP went on to get Clinton in the first place. Sorry, nothing to see here idiots.

3. What is it with these fucking guys? Bush has been in office for 6 years and it's still "Clinton's fault" with every single thing their leadership does. Regardless of HOW wrong their guys are they are always willing to try to turn it onto Clinton somehow. 50 years from now if they somehow manage to con Americans into electing another GOP President it STILL will be Clinton's fault when that guy inevitably fucks up.

But hey Clinton's not the only Democrat that should be held in the lowest possible regard. According to former GOP Rep. Tom Delay, Democrats are committing treason or at least very close to it for saying this war is lost. Ironically Delay did the exact same thing when it came to Clinton's Kosovo campaign. Is there a reason that guy is not in prison yet? Most certainly the Texas D.A. who is building the case against him has enough corruption proof to nail him by now.

Got to love the nutcases on the Right. They're going to sound even crazier in two years when they are pushed out of office for generations to come.

-Rp