Forget Bush-Impeach Cheney

A new report by a coalition of unions, faith groups and think tanks in Great Britain has said that war with Iran would be 'disastrous'. Besides destabilizing Iraq, undermining hopes for Iraeli-Palestinian peace, and emboldening hard-liners in Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's government, an attack could also drive up fuel prices, harming economies around the world(although providing more record profits for oil companies like Exxon-Mobil). But it's not only this coalition that has said this, there's also three US ex-military leaders who have stated this as well. Of course, there were a lot of people who said the war in Iraq would be disastrous, and nobody in the present administration listened to them, either.
Remember when the insurgency was in it's last throes? That was almost two yeas ago, but now, apparently, it's being aided by Iran, or so we're told. Of course, there's no intelligence to back up that claim, or at least nothing has been manufactured yet (like the forged yellow cake uranium receipts at the center of the plamegate case). The whole Scooter Libby case is about attempting to cover up the fact that the Bush administration knew the documents it was using were in fact a lie.
Over in Iran, they opened up one of it's nuclear sites to ambasadors and reporters, to prove they are not hiding anything. I can think of another Middle eastern country that has nuclear weapons, who would never agree to that, even as they push the US to attack Iran. Their lobby is so powerful, that even candidates for the opposition party feel compelled to stand before them and advance the lobby's agenda, ahead of American interests.
But don't expect congress to do anything to stop an attack. They're still debating a non-binding resolution on Iraq, which is kind of like debating which Super Bowl commercials were the most effective in June.
In 2005, Dick Cheney said that people who dared to question the White House's use of prewar intelligence were "reprehensible and dishonest" as well as "corrupt and shameless". This from a guy who manipulated intelligence (dishonest) to start a war that made a ton of money for his former company (corrupt and shameless)then oued an intelligence agent whose husband dared to expose his lies (which is an act of treason in war time) is fairly reprehensible himself. Cheney is the one within the administration who is pushing for an attack on Iran, even going as far as having CENTCOM draw up plans for a nuclear strike against Iran in 2005. And if Cheney did direct Scooter Libby to out Valerie Plame, then there is a strong case for impeachment.

Wake Up America, We're Getting Our War On Again

Who'd-a thunk it? With two American battleship groups floating around the Persian Gulf, and American stealth bombers ready in Bulgaria, Iran decides to attack US soldiers in Karbala. Yes, investigators believe the five attackers may have been trained by Iran, even though they drove American vehicles, used American weapons, had American-style uniforms and American IDs and spoke like Americans. Because there's nothing Iran wants to do more than engage the world's only superpower, who is just spoiling for a fight with them. Ahmadinejad maybe crazy, but he's certainly no fool, and wouldn't do anything to provoke a country led by a cowboy with an itchy trigger finger. It's not like the Iraqis would have anything to do with this, would they?
In the meantime, the US is warning Europeans not to invest in Iran's oil, which means that after we attack, all previous deals will be nullified, kind of like we did when we took over Iraq, leaving US oil companies like ExxonMobil to post record profits.Maybe it because some of Europe doesn't see a nuclear Iran as a dire situation.
The US has announced it wil use fighter jets to patrol the Iraq-Iran border, to deter Iranian assistance to Iraqi militants, while the US has delayed it's report on Iran's role in Iraq, because manufacturing evidence tales time, dammit, if you don't want to be exposed as a fraud. After what happened last time, they have to be a leetle bit more careful.

Didn't Any Of These People Read 'The Boy Who Cried Wolf'?

The Bush administration has a problem. Looking to start a war with Iran people still remember the lies they told about Iraq. Like the mangled maxim he muttered many years ago, "Fool me twice...can't get fooled again".
Already the dialogue has started to shift towards another end. Because they have been exposed, in part by Scooter Libby's trial, as manipulating intelligence on Iraq to give the appearance of a weapons program in Iraq that didn't exist, the whole "Iran is seeking nuclear weapons" crap has been been put on the back burner, and now has shifted to a "nuclear Iran",(mostly because Iran hasn't been found to be doing anything except building a nuclear power plant). Now, our failure in Iraq has been shifted from "terrorists and insurgents", to a Iranian backed insurgency. Yes, we are not fighting an occupation resistance, we are faced with an Iranian backed Sunni insurgency (which is strange, since most of Iran is Shi'ite).
So, for those of you who wish to see what Iran looks like before we nuke it back to the stone age, take a look here. Some people get what the troops surge in Iraq is all about, while others believe that it's all about winning. Or victory. Or not failing.
Thousands of people gathered yesterday to protest the war. Conspicuously absent were any Democratic presidential aspirants save Dennis Kucinich. John Edwards has stated:

"At the top of these threats is Iran. Iran threatens the security of Israel and the entire world. Let me be clear: Under no circumstances can Iran be allowed to have nuclear weapons."

Which if it doesn't explicitly state he supports a military option against Iran, it certainly is implicit. Hillary Clinton, busy campaigning in Iowa has said in the past:

"A nuclear Iran is a danger to Israel, to its neighbors and beyond. The regime's pro-terrorist, anti-American and anti-Israel rhetoric only underscores the urgency of the threat it poses. U.S. policy must be clear and unequivocal. We cannot and should not – must not – permit Iran to build or acquire nuclear weapons. In order to prevent that from occurring, we must have more support vigorously and publicly expressed by China and Russia, and we must move as quickly as feasible for sanctions in the United Nations. And we cannot take any option off the table in sending a clear message to the current leadership of Iran – that they will not be permitted to acquire nuclear weapons."

She also said that when she voted for the war in Iraq "I acted on the best judgment I had at the time." What if her judgement on Iran is wrong, too?

When Is A Lie Merely An Untruth?

Thank God for the corporate apologist media. Without them, we wouldn't know the diference between a lie and an untruth.
You see, a lie is when someone says something like "I did not have sex with that woman!". And for that, a man deserves to be impeached, not because of a partisan vendetta by an overzealous investigator who spent %50 million and had to show something for it.
No, according to the Albany (OR) Democrat Herald, when another man, under oath, Lewis Libby told a grand jury that he had heard Valerie Plame's name from a reporter, that wasn't a lie, merely an untruth, and he shouldn't even have to stand trial for it. Apparently, perjury isn't as big a crime when a member of the Bush administration commits it.

That’s the extent of the alleged crime — not remembering correctly and therefore not telling the grand jury correctly who told him about Plame.

That reminds me of the old routine by Steve martin, if you get arrested for something, merely tell the police you forgot is was a crime to drink and drive. I'm sure they'll let you go. Or the Albany Herald-Democrat will defend you.

Welcome to the Idiocracy

Over the weekend, I rented a movie called Idiocracy, written and directed by Mike Judge (Beavis and Butthead, King of the Hill, Office Space). While I didn't think it was a great movie, I did like the premise, that because people of lower intelligence breed faster than those of higher intelligence, in five hundred years the world will be populated by morons.
But I don't think it will take five hundred years, I believe we are on the fast track to an idiocracy right now. Just examine this evidence:
Sixty dollar logo t-shirts-Some people will actually fork out good money for the privilege of being walking human billboards. That's smart.
Liz Cheney-Just another member of the corpocracy who thinks we can win a war by sending more cannon fodder. Someone else's children, of course.
FOX News-A news network with an obvious bias calling itself "fair and balanced". And yet, people actually believe it.
Urban Hummers-People paying large amounts of cash for an off-road vehicle that loses it's value once you actually take it off the road. How intelligent!
NASCAR-There's something you don't see every day-cars driving. Considered to be a sport by the same people who consider getting off the couch to grab the remote control exercise.
Religious whackos who pray to ice-There's an oil stain imy parking lot that looks like St. Barnabus, better expect crowds gathering there, too.
Hillary For President-First she votes for the war. Then she says she didn't know Bush was lying (yeah sure). The she claims all America stands behind Israel as it dropped cluster bombs all over Lebanon last summer. Now she won't take a military option against Iran off the table, in part because she accepts donations from a foreign power. It's not her position that is stupid (well, it is, as Iran has not been found in violation of the NPT, so attacking them for complying with the law is stupid)but the fact that despite her position, she is still the front runner for the Democratic party, which made recent gains in congress by the anti-war people who put them there. I guess Democrats can be hoodwinked by a cult of personality as much as Republicans who voted for Bush were, all this really means is that in 2008, we'll be looking t President McCain.
Idiots.

Earn Your Pay, Or Shut The Fuck Up!

In the old Jetsons cartoons, the future was going to be a such a great place, but even with all the modern conveniences, humans weren't happy. How many times did George drag his tired bones home to complain to his long-suffering wife (as most television wives are) "These two day work weeks are murder!"
Thre future is here at least for Republican congresspersons, who under their leadership, got used to only working three days, and now are complaining that the Democrats are making them work a full five. hard work to put in three days a week, plus recesses and all for a measly $165,000 a year! These are the same people who talk about how we need to end entitlement programs, when it would appear that their own job is an entitlement!
What a slap in the face to the two income families where mom and pop both have to work and still are struggling to make payments and pay taxes so these complainers can sit on their fat asses and pass no legislation. Which I can understand, why pass legislation when the unitary executive will just issue a signing statement negating the bill they passed anyway?
As Minority whip Roy Blunt bluntly put it:

"It is like assuming that a surgeon only does the surgeon's work when they are in the operating room."

Well maybe not in the operating room , but I'm sure he does some of it in the fucking hospital! for crying out loud! He doesn't do it sitting at home while his long suffering wife fixes him another martini to watch FOX News with, that's for sure. Perhaps if the Republican leadership would have been more diligent about doing their job, they wouldn't have voted to give Bush the authorization to invade Iraq, because they would have known that all the intelligence they put forth was cooked up by the OSP and the WHIG.

The Corporate Media Strikes Again!

Reading the media coverage of the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists, one would think that Iran's civilian nuclear enrichment program, coupled with North Korea's weapons program were the only reasons, aside from global warming, which in most stories gets moved farther down in the story, that they decided to move the clock two minutes forward.
For instance

It was the fourth time since the Soviet collapse in 1991 that the clock ticked forward amid fears over what the scientists term “a second nuclear age” prompted largely by standoffs with Iran and North Korea.

or here

North Korea's nuclear bomb test, Iranian nuclear plans and atomic energy projects posed as an answer to climate change prompted the Chicago-based scientific journal to move the hands of its iconic clock on its cover to 11:55

Cleverly disguised propaganda designed to sway the public against Iran. Because what no article mentions is this part of the original statement:

a renewed U.S. emphasis on the military utility of nuclear weapons

That's right, the Bush administration policy of using nuclear "bunker buster"weapons has also helped push the clock two minutes forward, but you won't find that in any media report. Hell, they'll even mention global warming (which is a pariah subject in the media, with many non-scientists disputing the claims made by real scientists, but we've all seen An Inconvenient Truth, haven't we?) before they'd even hint that US policy is helping to push the planet closer to Doomsday. So much for fair and balanced reporting, or the myth of a liberal media.

Big Brother's Big Boondoggle

This weekend, I was able to see Why We Fight (realplayer version available here), the 2005 Cannes Grand Jury Prize winning documentary. If you haven't seen it, I highly recommend it as it explains the reasons we have gone to war, not just in Iraq, but in every military excursion of the last half century.(Go watch it now. I'll be here when you're done)
The rise of communism following the end of WWII gave an oppurtunity for the growth of the military-industrial complex, the enforcer arm of the corpocracy. It has since tightened it's grip on the Congress, buying candidates who shovel money back into the companies which then open factories creating jobs in the congressperson's district. It was a good scam, allowing the US to outspend all other counntries combined. But alas, it was too good, and communism fell. How to justify immense defense spending now?
The neocons had a plan, they knew that the one thing, aside from blood and money, that feeds the war machine is oil. Unfortunately, we are depleting our own oil supplies as the world heads into peak oil. The bulk of the world's remaining supply is in a region of our planet hostile to and wary of US duplicity. In order to rebuild and recast America as the world's only remaining superpower, we needed to guarantee unfettered access to that oil. All we needed to get the American television-watcher behind their nefarious scheme was, as they clearly put it, a "New Pearl Harbor".
Fast forward to 2001, and the neocons are in the White House, with the means and ability to implement their grand design, when all of a sudden, they get their "New Pearl Harbor". Coincidence? I'll leave that up to you to decide, but somewhere someone gets a better idea. Homeland security.
The difference between the USSR and alQaeda is the USSR and the US only fought proxy wars, we never confronted them head to head. Although the prospect of nuclear annihilation at the hands of the Soviets loomed over our heads through out most of our formative years ( great to use as an excuse to get stoned or get someone in the sack :"We could all be nuked tomorrow so let's live for today!"), we never were attacked on our own soil. That all changed. And somewhere, someone said, "Maybe we could use this to our advantage".
So we were urged to purchase duct tape and plastic sheeting. We were told that our mail, our electronic communications, even our bank accounts needed to be constantly monitored, because now the presumption of innocence has been replaced by the presumption of guilt. We could all be aiding "the terrorists".
To aid in the constant surveillance of Americans, a new eapon has been introduced:the HAA, or High Altitude Airship, a $40 million ka-ching for Lockheed Martin, who are expanding their work in defense to include spying on American citizens. What does the HAA do? According to the Athens News:

It is essentially another blimp. A giant one. Seventeen times the size of the Goodyear dirigible.It's designed to float 12 miles above the earth, far above planes and weather systems. It will be powered by solar energy, and will stay in a geocentric orbit for up to a year, undetectable by ground-based radar. You can't see it from the ground. But it can see you...

According to a summary released by the U.S. Army Space and Missile Defense Command, the HAA can watch over a circle of countryside 600 miles in diameter. That's everything between Toledo and New York City. And they want to build 11. With high-res cameras, that could mean constant surveillance of every square inch of American soil. "If you had a fleet of them, this could be used for border surveillance," suggests Dunlap.

So there you have it, the latest niche for the corpocracy to exploit. You can sleep better at night knowing that your tac dollars are being used to watch you. Constantly. And as long as there's money to be made spying on it's own people, you can rely on the people who have come up with creative ways to kill you to invent creative ways to watch you, forever.

STOP HIM BEFORE HE KILLS AGAIN!!!

There seems to be six degrees of separation between war pimps like Donald Trump and those who oppose any escalation or continuation of the war in the Middle East. Donald Trump has a show, The Apprentice, which is aired by NBC, which is owned by General Electric, which is a major defense contractor. It's a fun game you can play, just look at who's advocating an attack on Iran and follow the path back to Halliburton, defense contractors, big oil, or AIPAC.
It's the same with those who oppose expanding the war in the Gulf. Many of us have family members, or just a belief in the American system of democracy, with an expansion overseas, so we feel even more so righteous because we are losing something more valuable than money.
Dick Cheney says it's okay for the government to violate people's rights by examining their banking and credit records (very hypocritical from the administration that has kept White House secret service visitor logs away from the public), but how about opening up the banking accounts of all those now pushing for a US attack on Iran?
Today on Meet The Press, Cheney actually said "They're convinced that the United States will, in fact, pack it in and go home if they just kill enough of us." "They can't beat us in a standup fight, but they think they can break our will." The man who oversaw the illegal invasion of Iraq now expects the occupation resistance to fight fairly. Obviously, they can't kill enough of us because Bush and Cheney really don't give a fuck how many soldiers die, as long as we can give Iraq's oil to US comapnies for the next thirty years.
And now their eyes are on Iran. They got lots of oil, unfortunately, all earmarked for the Chinese energy needs, but with an invasion and a stroke of the pen all that can change too. All they need is an excuse to invade, which is why they've been doing all they can to provoke a reaction out of Teheran. But to suggest that Iranian Shi'as are aiding the Sunni insurgency is playing on the ignorance of your average television watcher who doesn't realize they're as opposed as the Irish Catholics and Protestants. So, instead of taking in the recommendations of the Iraq Study Group, as Bush claimed in his speech last week, and trying to engage Iran and Syria in talks to help bring peace to Iraq (which the Bush administration doesn't really want), Bush and Co. are instead trying to escalate the war in the Middle east to involve Iran.
There's only one way to stop them. And if the Democrats in Congress refuse to take action, there is another way.

Picking Apart The New Way Forward

THE WHITE HOUSE

Office of the Press Secretary

________________________________________________________________
EMBARGOED UNTIL DELIVERY January 10, 2007


ADDRESS OF THE PRESIDENT TO THE NATION
As Prepared for Delivery

Good evening.(licks lips) Tonight in Iraq(where it's actually tomorrow), the Armed Forces of the United States are engaged in a struggle that will determine the direction of the global war on terror(Hint:towards Iran) – and our safety here at home(behind the wheels of our immense gas guzzling SUVs). The new strategy I outline tonight will change America’s course in Iraq(if you consider going around in a circle a change of course), and help us succeed in the fight against terror(by creating more terrorists for us to fight against).

When I addressed you just over a year ago, nearly 12 million Iraqis had cast their ballots for a unified and democratic nation(and then we put our puppet in). The elections of 2005 were a stunning achievement(a rigged election with out the aid of Diebold and their touch screen voting machines). We thought that these elections would bring the Iraqis together (unfortunately, it was against us)– and that as we trained Iraqi security forces(who then went to work with the death squads), we could accomplish our mission with fewer American troops(even though then, as now, I have yet to clearly define what that mission is).

But in 2006, the opposite happened(Who could have seen that? I surely didn't). The violence in Iraq – particularly in Baghdad – overwhelmed the political gains the Iraqis had made. Al Qaeda terrorists and Sunni insurgents(See, I am a uniter!) recognized the mortal danger that Iraq’s elections posed for their cause(of getting American occupation forces to leave their country). And they responded with outrageous acts of murder aimed at innocent Iraqis( The ones that survived our shock and awe). They blew up one of the holiest shrines in Shia Islam – the Golden Mosque of Samarra – in a calculated effort to provoke Iraq’s Shia population to retaliate. Their strategy worked. Radical Shia elements, some supported by Iran, formed death squads. And the result was a vicious cycle of sectarian violence that continues today(But don't call it a civil war).

The situation in Iraq is unacceptable to the American people( because their family members are getting killed and maimed over there) – and it is unacceptable to me(because it looks bad for my legacy). Our troops in Iraq have fought bravely. They have done everything we have asked them to do. Where mistakes have been made, the responsibility rests with me(which is why I made Donald Rumsfeld step down).

It is clear that we need to change our strategy in Iraq(Unfortunately, I lack the vision thing to devise one). So my national security team, military commanders, and diplomats conducted a comprehensive review. We consulted Members of Congress from both parties, allies abroad, and distinguished outside experts. We benefited from the thoughtful recommendations of the Iraq Study Group – a bipartisan panel led by former Secretary of State James Baker and former Congressman Lee Hamilton.(We listened to all these people and ignored all their recommendations that Israel didn't like) In our discussions, we all agreed that there is no magic formula for success in Iraq(So there went my original plan of sending David Blaine). And one message came through loud and clear(Well, the way I interpreted it, anyway): Failure in Iraq would be a disaster for the United States(really, just for my legacy of cronyism and incompetence).

The consequences of failure are clear: Radical Islamic extremists would grow in strength and gain new recruits(Which, if you look at it objectively means we have already failed). They would be in a better position to topple moderate governments(also known as puppet regimes), create chaos in the region(That's our mission), and use oil revenues to fund their ambitions(That's why we signed contracts giving Iraq's oil to Western oil companies for the next 30 years) . Iran would be emboldened in its pursuit of nuclear weapons(And have them developed before we could invade them and take all their oil, too). Our enemies would have a safe haven from which to plan and launch attacks on the American people(Mostly the American people illegally occupying their countries). On September the 11th, 2001, we saw what a refuge for extremists on the other side of the world could bring to the streets of our own cities(A/K/A The Mossad). For the safety of our people, America must succeed in Iraq.

The most urgent priority for success in Iraq is security, especially in Baghdad. Eighty percent of Iraq’s sectarian violence occurs within 30 miles of the capital. This violence is splitting Baghdad into sectarian enclaves, and shaking the confidence of all Iraqis. Only the Iraqis can end the sectarian violence and secure their people. And their government has put forward an aggressive plan to do it(Unfortunately, we stand in their way).

Our past efforts to secure Baghdad failed for two principal reasons: There were not enough Iraqi and American troops to secure neighborhoods that had been cleared of terrorists and insurgents. And there were too many restrictions on the troops we did have(Which means more aggressive use of torture). Our military commanders reviewed the new Iraqi plan to ensure that it addressed these mistakes(The ones I didn't get rid of because they disagreed with me). They report that it does. They also report that this plan can work(Because I told them it would).

Let me explain the main elements of this effort: The Iraqi government will appoint a military commander and two deputy commanders for their capital. The Iraqi government will deploy Iraqi Army and National Police brigades across Baghdad’s nine districts. When these forces are fully deployed, there will be 18 Iraqi Army and National Police brigades committed to this effort – along with local police. These Iraqi forces will operate from local police stations – conducting patrols, setting up checkpoints, and going door-to-door to gain the trust of Baghdad residents(I know, I know, it's the same old plan, but I gave it a snazzy new name!).

This is a strong commitment. But for it to succeed, our commanders say the Iraqis will need our help. So America will change our strategy to help the Iraqis carry out their campaign to put down sectarian violence – and bring security to the people of Baghdad. This will require increasing American force levels. So I have committed more than 20,000 additional American troops to Iraq. The vast majority of them – five brigades – will be deployed to Baghdad. These troops will work alongside Iraqi units and be embedded in their formations. Our troops will have a well-defined mission: to help Iraqis clear and secure neighborhoods, to help them protect the local population, and to help ensure that the Iraqi forces left behind are capable of providing the security that Baghdad needs(I call it my "No Iraqi Left Behind" plan).

Many listening tonight will ask why this effort will succeed when previous operations to secure Baghdad did not(And you'd be crazy not to). Here are the differences: In earlier operations, Iraqi and American forces cleared many neighborhoods of terrorists and insurgents – but when our forces moved on to other targets, the killers returned. This time, we will have the force levels we need to hold the areas that have been cleared(Of course, this means we'll only be able to hold a smaller part of Iraq, but enough to look like some progress has been made). In earlier operations, political and sectarian interference prevented Iraqi and American forces from going into neighborhoods that are home to those fueling the sectarian violence. This time, Iraqi and American forces will have a green light to enter these neighborhoods – and Prime Minister Maliki has pledged that political or sectarian interference will not be tolerated.

I have made it clear to the Prime Minister and Iraq’s other leaders that America’s commitment is not open-ended(It will only last until the end of my term.). If the Iraqi government does not follow through on its promises, it will lose the support of the American people – and it will lose the support of the Iraqi people(In other words, we'll put in a different puppet). Now is the time to act. The Prime Minister understands this(His cushy job is on the line). Here is what he told his people just last week: “The Baghdad security plan will not provide a safe haven for any outlaws, regardless of [their] sectarian or political affiliation.”

This new strategy will not yield an immediate end to suicide bombings, assassinations, or IED attacks(It will merely move them to a different part of Iraq not covered by International media sources). Our enemies in Iraq will make every effort to ensure that our television screens are filled with images of death and suffering(The new season of 24 starts this Sunday). Yet over time, we can expect to see Iraqi troops chasing down murderers, fewer brazen acts of terror, and growing trust and cooperation from Baghdad’s residents(That's what I hope, anyway). When this happens, daily life will improve, Iraqis will gain confidence in their leaders, and the government will have the breathing space it needs to make progress in other critical areas. Most of Iraq’s Sunni and Shia want to live together in peace – and reducing the violence in Baghdad will help make reconciliation possible.

A successful strategy for Iraq goes beyond military operations. Ordinary Iraqi citizens must see that military operations are accompanied by visible improvements in their neighborhoods and communities. So America will hold the Iraqi government to the benchmarks it has announced(At least until the funding for the war comes through the Democrat controlled congress).

To establish its authority, the Iraqi government plans to take responsibility for security in all of Iraq’s provinces by November(By then, we should have a draft in place). To give every Iraqi citizen a stake in the country’s economy, Iraq will pass legislation to share oil revenues among all Iraqis(After it filters through the pockets of American oil companies). To show that it is committed to delivering a better life, the Iraqi government will spend 10 billion dollars of its own money on reconstruction and infrastructure projects that will create new jobs. To empower local leaders, Iraqis plan to hold provincial elections later this year(So expect a better unified theocracy). And to allow more Iraqis to re-enter their nation’s political life, the government will reform de-Baathification laws – and establish a fair process for considering amendments to Iraq’s constitution.

America will change our approach to help the Iraqi government as it works to meet these benchmarks. In keeping with the recommendations of the Iraq Study Group, we will increase the embedding of American advisers in Iraqi Army units – and partner a Coalition brigade with every Iraqi Army division. We will help the Iraqis build a larger and better-equipped Army (and we mean it this time)– and we will accelerate the training of Iraqi forces, which remains the essential U.S. security mission in Iraq(Right after securing the oil, of course). We will give our commanders and civilians greater flexibility to spend funds for economic assistance. We will double the number of Provincial Reconstruction Teams(There's only one right now, so two would be an improvement). These teams bring together military and civilian experts to help local Iraqi communities pursue reconciliation, strengthen moderates, and speed the transition to Iraqi self reliance. And Secretary Rice will soon appoint a reconstruction coordinator in Baghdad to ensure better results for economic assistance being spent in Iraq(Another corporate crony needs a government job on his resume).

As we make these changes, we will continue to pursue al Qaeda and foreign fighters. Al Qaeda is still active in Iraq(even though it wasn't before we invaded). Its home base is Anbar Province. Al Qaeda has helped make Anbar the most violent area of Iraq outside the capital. A captured al Qaeda document(We're not going to show it to you. trust us, we have it. have we ever lied to you before?) describes the terrorists’ plan to infiltrate and seize control of the province. This would bring al Qaeda closer to its goals of taking down Iraq’s democracy, building a radical Islamic empire, and launching new attacks on the United States at home and abroad(Which I keep telling you they're going to do, even though they haven't since September 11).

Our military forces in Anbar are killing and capturing al Qaeda leaders (THEY ARE SO MUCH EASIER TO CAPTURE ONCE WE'VE KILLED THEM)– and protecting the local population. Recently, local tribal leaders have begun to show their willingness to take on al Qaeda. As a result, our commanders believe we have an opportunity to deal a serious blow to the terrorists. So I have given orders to increase American forces in Anbar Province by 4,000 troops. These troops will work with Iraqi and tribal forces to step up the pressure on the terrorists(The ones we created by our illegal invasion). America’s men and women in uniform took away al Qaeda’s safe haven in Afghanistan(and let most of them escape to Pakistan. Don't ak about Osama though) – and we will not allow them to re-establish it in Iraq(Well, it was never established in Iraq before the war, but I repeat myself).

Succeeding in Iraq also requires defending its territorial integrity – and stabilizing the region in the face of the extremist challenge(And by extremists, I mean the neocons). This begins with addressing Iran and Syria(So you can expect we'll be invading these countries sometime in the near future). These two regimes are allowing terrorists and insurgents to use their territory to move in and out of Iraq. Iran is providing material support for attacks on American troops(We can't prove this, but it will give us an excuse to bomb Iran's nuclear facilities). We will disrupt the attacks on our forces. We will interrupt the flow of support from Iran and Syria. And we will seek out and destroy the networks providing advanced weaponry and training to our enemies in Iraq.

We are also taking other steps to bolster the security of Iraq and protect American interests in the Middle East(You know, the oil). I recently ordered the deployment of an additional carrier strike group to the region. We will expand intelligence sharing – and deploy Patriot air defense systems to reassure our friends and allies(really just Israel, who wish we would hurry up and nuke Iran already!). We will work with the governments of Turkey and Iraq to help them resolve problems along their border(That pesky place known as Kurdistan). And we will work with others to prevent Iran from gaining nuclear weapons and dominating the regionby bombing the civilian nuclear facilities).

We will use America’s full diplomatic resources to rally support for Iraq from nations throughout the Middle East. Countries like Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Jordan, and the Gulf States need to understand that an American defeat in Iraq would create a new sanctuary for extremists – and a strategic threat to their survival. These nations have a stake in a successful Iraq that is at peace with its neighbors – and they must step up their support for Iraq’s unity government. We endorse the Iraqi government’s call to finalize an International Compact that will bring new economic assistance in exchange for greater economic reform. And on Friday, Secretary Rice will leave for the region – to build support for Iraq, and continue the urgent diplomacy required to help bring peace to the Middle East.

The challenge playing out across the broader Middle East is more than a military conflict. It is the decisive ideological struggle of our time. On one side are those who believe in freedom and moderation. On the other side are extremists who kill the innocent(under direct orders from me, the decider in chief), and have declared their intention to destroy our way of life(Through legislation like the Military Commission Act). In the long run, the most realistic way to protect the American people is to provide a hopeful alternative to the hateful ideology of the enemy (A/K/A liberals)– by advancing liberty across a troubled region. It is in the interests of the United States to stand with the brave men and women who are risking their lives to claim their freedom (unless it those on hunger strike at Gitmo)– and help them as they work to raise up just and hopeful societies across the Middle East.

From Afghanistan to Lebanon to the Palestinian Territories, millions of ordinary people are sick of the violencebeing perpetrated by the US and Israel), and want a future of peace and opportunity for their children. And they are looking at Iraq(And seeing what happens when you cross the Great Satan). They want to know: Will America withdraw and yield the future of that country to the extremists – or will we stand with the Iraqis who have made the choice for freedom(By freedom, I of course mean becoming another tool of the corpocracy)?

The changes I have outlined tonight are aimed at ensuring the survival of a young democracy that is fighting for its life in a part of the world of enormous importance to American security. Let me be clear: The terrorists and insurgents in Iraq are without conscience(Kind of like me, only swarthier), and they will make the year ahead bloody and violent(Once again, just like me). Even if our new strategy works exactly as planned, deadly acts of violence will continue(But don't ask what's the point) – and we must expect more Iraqi and American casualties(Tough luck to you if it's a family member). The question is whether our new strategy will bring us closer to success(Informed opinion says it won't). I believe that it will(Of course, I thought Brownie did a heck of a job in New Orleans).

Victory will not look like the ones our fathers and grandfathers achieved(You know, well defined, and assured). There will be no surrender ceremony on the deck of a battleship(because there is no enemy to surrender). But victory in Iraq will bring something new in the Arab world (A new American puppet regime)– a functioning democracy that polices its territory, upholds the rule of law(Something the US hasn't been able to do under my watch), respects fundamental human liberties(something we're eradicating here at home), and answers to its people(Something I would never do). A democratic Iraq will not be perfect(But it does sound better than the mess I've made of the US). But it will be a country that fights terrorists instead of harboring them – and it will help bring a future of peace and security for our children and grandchildren.

Our new approach comes after consultations with Congress about the different courses we could take in Iraq. Many are concerned that the Iraqis are becoming too dependent on the United States – and therefore, our policy should focus on protecting Iraq’s borders and hunting down al Qaeda. Their solution is to scale back America’s efforts in Baghdad – or announce the phased withdrawal of our combat forces. We carefully considered these proposals(and realized there was no money in it for defense contractors or the funeral industry). And we concluded that to step back now would force a collapse of the Iraqi government, tear that country apart, and result in mass killings on an unimaginable scale(Kind of like what's going on now, except we gewt to blame it on the liberals). Such a scenario would result in our troops being forced to stay in Iraq even longer, and confront an enemy that is even more lethal. If we increase our support at this crucial moment, and help the Iraqis break the current cycle of violence, we can hasten the day our troops begin coming home(January 21, 2009).

In the days ahead, my national security team will fully brief Congress on our new strategy. If Members have improvements that can be made, we will make them(And if they work, we'll take credit for them). If circumstances change, we will adjust(It's no skin off our teeth if more soldiers die). Honorable people have different views, and they will voice their criticisms(And I will do everything in my power to ignore them). It is fair to hold our views up to scrutiny. And all involved have a responsibility to explain how the path they propose would be more likely to succeed(except for me).

Acting on the good advice of Senator Joe Lieberman and other key members of Congress, we will form a new, bipartisan working group(Chock full of congresspersons in AIPAC's pockets) that will help us come together across party lines to win the war on terror. This group will meet regularly with me and my Administration, and it will help strengthen our relationship with Congress. We can begin by working together to increase the size of the active Army and Marine Corps(by bringing back the draft for people's children who are not in Congress, or related to anyone in the corpocracy), so that America has the Armed Forces we need for the 21st century. We also need to examine ways to mobilize talented American civilians to deploy overseas – where they can help build democratic institutions in communities and nations recovering from war and tyranny.

In these dangerous times, the United States is blessed to have extraordinary and selfless men and women willing to step forward and defend us(You know, right wing chickenhawk bloggers). These young Americans understand that our cause in Iraq is noble and necessary – and that the advance of freedom is the calling of our time. They serve far from their families, who make the quiet sacrifices of lonely holidays and empty chairs at the dinner table. They have watched their comrades give their lives to ensure our liberty. We mourn the loss of every fallen American – and we owe it to them to build a future worthy of their sacrifice.

Fellow citizens: The year ahead will demand more patience, sacrifice, and resolve(Not one of these things have I demonstrated at all). It can be tempting to think that America can put aside the burdens of freedom(Which is why I will continue to go through your mail). Yet times of testing reveal the character of a Nation. And throughout our history, Americans have always defied the pessimists and seen our faith in freedom redeemed. Now America is engaged in a new struggle that will set the course for a new century. We can and we will prevail.

We go forward with trust that the Author of Liberty (Stephen Coonts)will guide us through these trying hours. Thank you and good night.

# # #

P

The Clock Is Ticking on Iran

Much has been made of an Israeli plan to nuke Iranian nuclear sites, which they deny. If they do have a plan, it's surely a contingency plan, in case AIPAC is unsuccessful in convincing Democrats into supporting military action against Iran. (you know, AIPAC, the invisible Israel lobby that owns most of Congress and even had new Majority Leader Steny Hoyer appearing before them declaring the use of force as an option in dealing with Teheran.Now they are pushing the US into attacking Iran.
In 1966, John Lennon said:

"Christianity will go. It will vanish and shrink. ... We're more popular than Jesus now; I don't know which will go first-rock 'n' roll or Christianity. Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. It's them twisting it that ruins it for me."

When his words were taken out of context, he was forced to apologize, and went on to say that if he had said television was bigger than Jesus, he'd have gotten away with it. What does that have to do with Iran?
Mahmoud Ahmadinejad stated that "This occupation regime over Jerusalem must vanish from the page of time." He also suggested it would go the way of the Soviet Union. But all we here is the Israeli-friendly MEMRI interpretation of Ahmadinejad's statement saying he will "wipe Israel off the map", an idiom that doesn't exist in Farsi. Once you take it out of the context of his original statement, it sounds very ominous, not like it was originally stated, another religious nutjob akin to Pat Robertson making predictions based on his particular belief system.
The recent changes in the Bush administration are believed to be brought on by a need to "darken" the Iran Intelligence Estimate. This leaves the swift boaters to push for an attack on Iran now, because the clock is ticking.
Bush is expected to ask for up to 40,000 more troops for his escalation, er, I mean, surge, in Iraq to stock troops as a prelude for an attack on Iran, which has been in the planning stages as a joint effort between US and Israeli forces.
The coming attack on Iran won't be good for anyone. The nuclear fallout will contanimate much of the region for years, much the way the use of depleted uranium in Iraq has done the same. That won't be good for the inhabitants of the region. And it won't serve American interests,as not only will our soldiers be killed, but Iran has anti-ship missiles (courtesy of Russia) that can block the Persian Gulf (which is the main trade route for the oil out of the region), preventing the free flow of Hummer juice to oil addicted Americans. The attack on Iran will only serve one party and one party alone, leaving Israel to be the only nuclear power in the region.

Bush Digs A New Surge

The US Army sent out 5100 letters to officers who had recently left the service, urging them to return to active duty. No problem, right? Well, there was one small problem. 75 of them were killed and 200 were wounded in action. The problem is Bush is pushing for 20,000 more troops for his surge, and there are only only 9000 troops available (Advocates for a surge state that 30,000 troops are needed to bring security to Baghdad). While the Army has apologized to the families of the deceased, the Shithead-in-chief never apologizes.
Sen. Joe Biden has said privately, officials in the Bush administration have conceded the war unwinnable, but want to extend it so the fall of the Green Zone falls on another president's watch. Then, one can imagine, Bush, looking smug and licking his lips saying how he could have won the war of he had the support of the Democrats in Congress, the liberal media, and if every American had bought more of those yellow ribbon magnets for their vehicles. That is where the blame for the failure will fall, on the Democrats in Congress, not on the people who invaded without a strategy, and who were unable to acheive a modicum of success in three years of blundering. The Democrats, perhaps sensing they are being set-up as the fall guys, oppose sending any more troops to Iraq. Meanwhile, in his weakly radio address, Bush failed to mention Iraq, or his "new" plan for "victory" at all, instead focusing on his "No Child Left Behind" program.

Where's Osama?

Mullah Omar hasn't seen Bin Laden for years. Which is not much of a surprise to me, since Osama is dead, pushing up the desert equivalent of daisies somewhere. Omar says he hasn't seen him since late 2001, after the US forces ousted the Taleban from Afghanistan. Which is right about the time his death notice turned up in an Egyptian newspaper.
So, either Osama is dead, or he's being protected by the people who should be hunting his ass down. Why?
Consider this: It is well known that Osama had a kidney problem that required dialysis treatment. While it would not be impossible for him to drag a dialysis machine around the caves of Tora Bora, it would be damned inconvenient. Not to mention close to impossible to power one. So in order to get treatment, or die, Osama must visit a hospital. Given that his choice of hospitals in the region are limited, especially for ones with dialysis machines, it wouldn't take a whole lot of operatives stationed at area hospitals waiting for him to check in to catch him. And since he needs the treatments every three months (I believe) or so, in five years, he certainly could have been caught by now, unless, being a CIA asset has afforded him a "hands-off" treatment. Or else he's dead. Which is probably why he has been silent since a French newspaper reported his death this past summer.
One place I'm sure he never was-Iraq.

Fecal Epiphany

By now you've all read about Marion "Pat" Robertson's conversation with God concerning a terrorist attack in 2007 that will result in mass killing. This from the guy that said God struck down Ariel Sharon, suggested the US assassinate Hugo Chavez, predicted a tsunami for last year in America and has also predicted that Muslims would all find Jesus. Robertson said God didn't say nuclear, but he believes it will be something like that. Because Marion and the powers that be want you to believe that Iran will attack us, so we better attack them first. "Pat" is probably heavily invested in the military-industrial complex.
The man is obviously more deluded than an auditorium full of American Idol hopefuls. As he prognostcated in 2005:

"Well, the Lord has some very encouraging news for George Bush ... What I heard is that Bush is now positioned to have victory after victory and that his second term is going to be one of triumph, which is pretty strong stuff. ... He'll have Social Security reform passed. He'll have tax reform passed. He'll have conservative judges on the courts. And that basically he is positioned for a series of dramatic victories which I hope will hearten him and his advisers. They don't have to be timid in this matter because the wind is blowing at his back, and he can move forward boldly and get results."

Considering George Bush was not successful (thankfully) in his bid to reform Social Security, it's hard to believe him this time. But then, as Marion stated today:

"I have a relatively good track record. Sometimes I miss,"

But you're hearing this straight from God's lips, so how can you claim that you missed? Personally, if God does exist and is speaking to Marion alone, I believe it's because He's trying to embarass Robertson so people will stop sending him money. Even the Baptists are mocking Robertson now, saying he's playing on the established fears of sixty percent of Americans who think there will be another terrorist attack this year.
It's a great scam "Pat" has going. Find out what most people fear the most, predict it will happen, then watch the donations roll in, which you then invest in banks and diamond mines and broadcasting networks.
Funny how God only talks to dollar worshippin' white guys in business suits who are holy like last year's socks. The saddest part are those who are gullible enough to believe him because he says the things they want to hear.

Jerry Comes Home To Rest

It's official! Jerry Ford's funeral has lasted longer than his presidency! Not really, but between dragging his carcass all over California, then dragging it all over Washington DC, and finally dragging it back here to Grand Rapids it has become the definition of interminable. Plant th carcass already and let's move on.
There was some concern on my part that the whole process might interfere with my homeward journey from work today. Jerry was due to touch down at his namesake airport at 2:45pm, then begin another journey to his final resting place. Unfortunately, the path he was to take was also my route home, and since I work by the airport, I was sure I would run into a blockade. You see, there was law enforcement placed at every on-ramp and overpass that stood between the airport and the Gerald Ford freeway. Every emergency access was blocked on the highway, in case, God forbid, Jerry should have to share the highway with common folk, or worse, terrorists should strike and make him deader than he already is.
But it appears the late Mr. Ford was late, so I was able to squeak by before they closed the highway down, and as I traveled, at every viaduct there were at least five to ten people standing in the cold to wait for Jerry's final motorcade to roll by one more time. The thing was, most of the people I saw didn't seem to have been old enough to have been born when Jerry was president (except the mullet headed guy in Cascade township with his flag stuck in the fence that separates his land from the highway), and seeing how mediocre Ford was as president, I can't see them having any affinity for the fellow.
I blame it on media hype. Even now as I type this, I hear news helicopters hovering overhead. For something as mundane as a funeral for someone as mundane as Ford, it sure has generated a lot of media coverage. I'll just be glad when it's all over.

A Difference In Fates

Never cross the corpocracy. Consider the fates of two people connected to it who both recently joined the choir invisible, Gerald Ford and Saddam Hussein.
Gerald Ford, who, as has been stated in a previous post altered the wounds on Kennedy's medical report to the Warren Commission to fit Arlen Specter's magic bullet theory. He also pardoned Richard Nixon, thereby ending any investigation into the malfeasence embodied by the Watergate scandal. What does "the weakest link in a long line of disappointing Republican presidents" get for his actions? A state funeral, complete with several twenty-one gun salutes, a tour of the halls of power by your corpse and plaudits from your corrupt compadres, including invocation from evil incarnate Richard Cheney of how vital your actions to protect the corpocracy were to "the Republic". That the man who authorized the leaking of an intelligence operatives name in retaliation to an op-ed by her husband criticizing the Bush administration for it's wrongful interpretation (and outright acceptance of forgeries) that led up to it's decision to illegally invade a sovereign nation should be talking about "forgiveness" is an exercize in irony.
Now consider the fate of Saddam Hussein. A man who was so connected to the corpocracy he once was able to shake hands with Donald Rumsfeld. A man who was supplied with weapons of mass destruction by the corpocracy to test out on his enemies. A man who executed only slightly more people than our sitting president did as governor of Texas (Bush killing more in a shorter perod of time). What was it that caused him to fall from favor with the corpocracy?
Whatever the reasons, his fate has been dealt out. An execution video passed by cellphone to cellphone and lastly over the internet. Burial in an unmarked wooden box in the dead of night with no service befitting a former head of state. The irony being Saddam being executed for committing executions himself. And while 300,000 deaths were attributed to him under the time of his rule in Iraq, in a fraction of that time, the US, under the orders of war president George Bush has over doubled that number. And yet, Bush, Cheney, Rice and Rumsfeld shall never see the hangman's noose for their crimes.
Never cross the corpocracy.

Iraq, Iran and the Uncertainty Principle

There's this guy, in Germany, Fritz something-or-another. Or is it? Maybe Werner, anyway, he's got this theory, you want to test something, you know, scientifically, how the planets go around the sun, what sun spots are made of, why water comes out of the tap, well, you got to look at it. But sometimes you look at something, your looking changes it. You can't know the reality of what happened, or what would have happened if you hadn't of stuck in your own Goddamned schnozz. So there is no what happened. Looking at something changes it. They call it the uncertainty principle. Sure, it sounds screwy, but even Einstein says the guy's onto something.

-Freddy Reidenshcneider in The Man Who Wasn't There
George Bush worked nearly three hours yesterday at his ranch to work out a new Iraq strategy. Wow! Three hours! He spent the time with, among others, Dick Cheney and Condaleeza Rice. They spent their time looking and loking at Iraq, hoping to apply the uncertainty principle (not to be confused with the observer effect)that merely by looking at something, they can change it. This is exactly the type of miracle Bush needs, a way to transform the situation in Iraq from an unwinnable quagmire to a notch in Bush's victory column, which he needs, considering the abyssmal failure his presidency has been.
Bush has somehow convinced himself, that success in Iraq is vital for national security, that if we fail there, as if we haven't already, not only will we be giving the "enemy", the extremists and radicals, a safe haven to launch further attacks (a safe haven that didn't exist pre-invasion, by the way), that they will be emboldened to "threaten the United States", which is one of the ten myths about Iraq. When all you have is unfounded fear to bolster your claims, you don't have a cogent argument.
The ISG, whose report on Iraq was released shortly after the election, suggested engaging Iran and Syria in diplomatic talks to help bring an end to the conflict in Iraq. The Bush administration may be planning to engage Iran, but not in a diplomatic effort. Already successful in bringing sanctions against Iran, for doing something they have a right do to do under a treaty signed by both the US and Iran, the next step is to provoke Iran into committing an act that will allow the Eisenhower Strike Group, already in the Gulf, to strike at Iran's nuclear facilities. And now all we need is a 'trigger' that will allow the US to strike at Iran. For it's sure that Bush sees Iran as the way out of Iraq, expanding the war to engulf all of the Middle East. Because the only truly certain thing is Bush will try anything to provoke another war.

Gerald R. Ford: Bagman For The Corpocracy

Living in Grand Rapids, it's difficult to escape the shadow of Former President Gerald R. Ford. The Gerald Ford Freeway passes within a mile of my place. The airport by where I work is also named after him. And if I travel downtown, I can find his Presidential Museum. While president, Gerald Ford recorded a mesage saluting the Coast Guard, that is still played during the Musical Fountain in my hometown during the closing night of the annual Coast Guard festival, and more recently, he recorded a message that was played at my youngest son's kindergarten graduation.
Gerald Ford passed away yesterday, his political legacy being our first unelected president and vice president. He was also our longest living president as well. But Ford's legacy extends far beyond those little blue pinback WIN buttons that were the only hallmark of his term as president.
Ford had admittedly altered the findings of the Warren Commission, creating the "magic bullet theory", one that effectively placed all blame for the Kennedy assassination on one man, which then ended any further investigation into the assassination. Ford has stated that ''My changes were only an attempt to be more precise'', when in fact, they were a lie.

"President Ford was a great American who gave many years of dedicated service to our country," President George W. Bush said in a statement on Tuesday.

Yes, tampering with evidence would make Ford a great man to the guy who cherry-picked intelligence to start a war that is in many eyes unwinnable.
In 1973, after Vice-president Spiro Agnew resigned, President Richard Nixon appointed Ford to take his place. When Nixon stepped down in disgrace almost a year later, Ford became our first appointed president. Almost immediately, Ford pardoned Nixon, effectively ending an investigation into what the Watergate break-in was really about, once again covering up the political assasination that led to the rise of the corpocracy.
Dick Cheney, who served as Ford's chief of staff said:

"Gerald Ford embodied the best values of a great generation: decency, integrity and devotion to duty."

Decency? Integrity? How someone like Cheney could stand in judgement of these qualities which he so obviously lacks is anyone's guess.

Lew Scannon's Annual Christmas Music Rant

Well, I am proud to say, that my ban on Christmas music at work has been very succesful this year. (yes, I'm one of them). It's not that i don't like Christmas music per se,it's just that I don't want to have to listen to the radio station that plays Christmas music. Why? Any number of reasons.
The first is Jingle Bells. They play it every hour and a half (and never play the barking dogs version) by various artists like Bing Crosby and the Andrews sisters version (which I like) to Barry Manilow's version (which is the same arrangement, rendering it entirely pointless). But what I've noticed is, although there are four verses to the song, nobody sings more than the first verse and the chorus. Repeatedly. Granted, Perry Como sang all four on his Christmas album, but they don't play that version, and Smokey Robinson did half the second verse on his version, but, once again, they don't play that version. (extra brownie points to anyone who can tell me how the second verse goes)
Second is Silent Night. I have a beautiful version of the song sung in Gaelic by Enya, but it's not something I necessarily want to hear while I'm working. It's better suited to listening at night, preferrably a snowy one (which we don't get too much of any more)At home, it's uplifting, at work, it's a downer. And I don't want to hear Clay Aiken, or any other former American Idol contestant's version of it.
Then there's the Christian disco version of Mary's Boy Child the radio station plays that is so wrong on so many levels that I can't believe that anyone would enjoy listening to it.
Or how about Have Yourself A Merry Little Christmas? Originally written, the song was kind of a downer. And sung properly (such as the Pretenders version), it's a beautiful song. But when the Carpenters do it, all meaning is drained form the song, and that's the most played version on our local Christmas music station.
Don't get me wrong, I'm no heartless Scrooge who proclaims "Humbug" like some Grinch with a small heart. I still get choked up watching Elf, and I've seen the movie several times. But there's a difference between something done well with real meaning, like, say John & Yoko's Happy Xmas (War Is Over), and something crass and exploitive done poorly, like Paul & Linda's Simply Having A Wonderful Christmastime. If Paul McCartney really wanted to tap into Christmas cheer, he'd have Apple release the Beatles 1967 Christmas record Christmas Time Is Here Again!, which would probably be a big seller, which leads me to believe he didn't write the song, otherwise he would have, so in the next Beatles documentary, he could take credit for it like he did for Sergeant Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band
Just because an artist is popular is no excuse for them to record a whole album of Christmas standards. When Bing or Frank, or Dean did it, many of these songs were just written, but when today's artist are recording the same songs with out adding anything new to them, it reeks of exploitation. Or when they try to write their own Christmas song manipulating the same cliches used by Mel Torme` when he wrote The Christmas Song (Chestnuts Roasting On An Open Fire) (best version:Chet Baker). And maybe it's me, but who really goes on a sleigh ride on Christmas (except for Santa) every Christmas?
Now, there's a list of songs that if these stations played, I might be more apt to tune into and listen, but since they're playing the crappiest of the crap, I'll just listen to them on my CDs.
1.Zat You, Santa Claus?-Louis Armstrong
2.Christmas Time Is Here Again-The Beatles
3.The Christmas Blues-Dean Martin
4.Christmas In Prison-John Prine
5.Please Daddy, Don't Get Drunk This Christmas-John Denver
6.Walking The Floor This Christmas-Ernest Tubb
7.Father Christmas-The Kinks
8.Christmas Wrapping-The Waitresses
9.Christmas (Baby Please Come Home)-Darlene Love
10.Merry Christmas (I Don't Want To Fight Tonight)-The Ramones
11. Let It Snow! Let It Snow! Let It Snow! -Vaughn Monroe
And then, there's the three Christmas songs I hear too much, and really need to be given a rest:
1.Rockin' Around The Christmas Tree-Brenda Lee
2.Blue Christmas-Elvis Presley
3.Holly Jolly Christmas-Burl Ives
Please feel free to add your own songs to either list, as I'm sure there's some for both I overlooked. Happy Holidays to all!

Obama Or Me

As 2006 winds down, and we head into 2007, when the campaign for the Presidency in 2008 begins to warm up, the US is offered two clear choices. On the one hand, there is the Republicans, led by John McCain, who wants to send more troops to Iraq, build more permanent bases there and attack Iran. On the other side we have the Democrats, led by Hillary Clinton who wants to send more troops to Iraq, build more permanent bases and attack Iran. That's what so nice abotu the two party corpocracy, real choices. We can bomb Iran as Republicans, or we can bomb Iran as Democrats. Just as long as we bomb Iran, who cares?
The only difference between McCain and Clinton is the cult of personality surrounding Hilary.(McCain lacks any personality for anyone to build a cult around)Many anti-war people will support Hillary because, well honestly, because she's a female, and will overlook and apologize for the tough talk rhetoric spewing from her as she appeases the DLC, who, even though seized control of congress due to an anti-war backlash, refuses to even mention drawing down troops.
In the meantime, the coporate media has already begun it's hit job on the only other serious contender for the Democrats, Barack Obama, hoping to find some skeleton in his closet that will haunt him as much as Clinton's vote for the authorization of force in Iraq.

"Obviously, if we knew then what we know now, there wouldn't have been a vote and I certainly wouldn't have voted that way," Mrs Clinton told NBC television.

Funny, but I knew that the Bush administration's claims against Iraq were all false, maybe I should be president! I mean if I was just voted person of the year by Time magazine, and was able to discern that Saddam had no WMD, while Ms. Clinton, with a large staff of well paid aides, wasn't, I guess she's no more qualified to be president than I. And certainly no more than Barack Obama (did you know his middle name is Hussein?)You see, we do have a clear choice in 2008, it's just not Sen. Clinton.

Newt Gingrich:Keeper Of The Corpocracy

Newt Gingrich, keeper of the Corpocracy, seems to have no problem suspendingfreedom of religion, or freedom of speech, as long as it's those whom he preceives as enemies he's silencing. (Fascism, anyone?) Gingrich also sees himself as outside the establishment, calling the ISG "appeasers", but refusing to openly criticize the current regime in DC outside of their lack of a second stage in their Iraq invasion plan. How a member of the CFR can paint himself outside the establishment, he is the establishment. He never will admit the invasion of Iraq was a bad idea based on lies, because he does work for the corpocracy, the people who have turned their backs on the voters who have called for a change in Washington and an end to the war in Iraq.
Newt also says that if we allow "defeat" in Iraq (without defining "victory" beyond the terms of the corporacy) then

"there are not enough Marine elements in the world to evacuate the embassies that’ll come under siege."

in other words, sending fear into the hearts of the television-watchers of a reprise of Iran 1979 to gain support for staying the course on a path that leads to nowhere.
Newt also thinks the way to win over the Iraqis is to flood the region with goods that would first be given to Iraqis and then later bought with paychecks (from jobs given to them to rebuild the country, an idea he shares with Sen. Clinton), in other words turn them into wage slaves buying products from American companies that are actually manufactured in China. Lots of money made for the corpocracy, none for the American worker. He's not really suggesting democracy, just mindless consumerism, which is what passes for democracy to the corpocracy.
All this preceeds Newt's awaited announcement of his candidacy for president in 2008. He states that if the Republican party does not have a clear front runner by Labor Day, 2007, he will toss his hat in the ring. Anything to prevent the election of a candidate who doesn't bend to the will of Newt's beloved corpocracy.

O Come All Ye Racists

Being a white guy, I'm not opposed to Affirmative Action. If you can't succeed on a truly level playing field then you are condemned to the ranks of the mediocre.
I think I also have a pretty good handle on satire, having learned to read from old copies of Mad Magazine. And, having gone on to reading The National Lampoon, I can understand and appreciate good politically incorrect humor.
So when I read that a group of white conservatives at Tufts University wrote a parody of the Christmas standard "O Come All Ye Faithful", i was interested. Having written many parodies of popular songs that my buddy, the Coach, still sings some fifteen years later, I wondered what they had published. Entitled "O Come All Ye Black Folk", their screed was aimed at affirmative action, a bunch of priviliged white boys disgusted that they should have to share their priviliged birthright to those they have deemed unworthy. The parody, which the editors of the conservative journal that published it claimed was anit-racist, contained lines calling blacks "boisterous" and contained lines such as "Born into the ghetto. O Jesus! We need you now to fill our racial quotas." and "No matter what your grades are, F's, D's or G's, give them all privileged status." Sophomoric stuff that should earning them a spot on the writing staff for Rush Limbaugh or at Fox News, but not really funny at all. So, in the spirit of turnabout being fair play, I give you my version, dedicated to the staff of the Primary Source, I give you the unbrainwashed parody of "O Come All Ye Faithful"
O Come All Ye Racists
O come all ye racists
Intolerant and ignoble
O come ye white Nazis to the Primary Source
Come show your hatred
For those of different colors
O come let us oppress them
O come let us oppress them
O come let us oppress them
It's our heritage

We hate black students
Soiling our great campus
So let's hide our racism behind comedy
Fraternities and sororities
Don't want no minorities
O come let us oppress them
O come let us oppress them
O come let us oppress them
It's what Jesus would do

And These "People", Folks, Are Our Allies

Israel should be thanking Iran for holding a conference investigating the Holocaust. Why would they oppose it? If the evidence is there that indeed this horrible tragedy occurred, having an anti-Zionist state such as Iran expose it would shut a number of deniers up, right?
I guess this is the same thing as Israel blocking an UN fact-finding mission By Bishop Tutu into Gaza to investigate Israel's killing of nineteen civilians in Beit Hanour. If they did nothing wrong, why not let the mission continue?
At least Israel is finally admitting it has nuclear weapons, one of the worst kept secrets ever.
"We never threatened any nation with annihilation," Olmert said on German television station N24 Sat1.

"Iran openly, explicitly and publicly threatens to wipe Israel off the map. Can you say that this is the same level, when they are aspiring to have nuclear weapons, as France, America, Russia and Israel?" he asked.
Well, Mr. Olmert, what Ahmedinejad stated was the Zionist occupation of jerusalem should be erased from the pages of memory, as Jerusalem is considered to be a Holy city but not only Jews and Christians, but Muslims as well.
Israeli Deputy Prime Minister Shimon Peres, considered the father of his country's nuclear programme, said Israel would remain mum on whether it has atomic weapons.

"Israel will not say or not say whether we have nuclear weapons," he told public radio. "It suffices that one fears that we have them and that fear in itself constitutes an element of dissuasion."

"Israel is the only country threatened with destruction. Israel does not threaten any other state," Peres said.
Really? Israel never threatened Iran? with an attack because of Iran's civilian nuclear program? And hasn't it been threatening Iran since the days of Sharon?
Of course, Israel needn't worry about attacking Iran when we have assholes like John McCain threatening to attack Iran for Israel. Hey, McCain, why don't finish up one war before you even think about starting another one, which like Iraq , is another war for Israel.

Shooting A Sploodge Of Democracy Into Iraq

Speaking at his farewell to his staff at the Pentagon, outgoing Defense secretary Donald Rumsfeld said that "to pull out of Iraq would be a mistake." Oh? And invading it wasn't? We constantly hear about the troops finishing their mision, but the mission was never defined. Bringing democracy was never the reason for our "mission", and as far as adding to stability to the region, we all know how that's working out.
Rumsfeld, who's up on a war crimes comp[laint in Germany for his role in authorizing the use of torture, as well as two cases filed by the ACLU and Human Rights First (which he's asked the judge to dismiss)doesn't see his disregard a for the Geneva Convention or the Constitution as mistake either.He said learning of the abuses of prisoners at Abu Ghraib,which was authorized by President Bush, and were approved by Rumsfeld himself.
Rumsfeld also today made a surprise trip to Iraq to say goodbye to the troops, and perhaps to search one more time for those pesky WMD that he claimed at one time Iraq was lying about not having.
Plus, as any stud like Rummy will tell you, you never pull out of the country you're fucking, first you shoot your spoodge of democracy, then you withdraw.

Where's My Share?

Now why didn't I think of this? It seems that some bloggers were selling out their web space to political campaigns, Why should I toil in poverty when I can make good money shilling for the likes of Sherrod Brown and Hillary Clinton? I've been wanting a plasma screen television set, so hey, where's my cut? The guy from Ankle Biting Pundits received $31,500 to tout John McCain, a small price for ones soul, but certainly enough to buy a big screen tv and a Mac, give me that much, and I promise not to write anything bad about the Senator. (Is that extortion? Mmmmaybe)Pay me enough annually and I might go away completely.
I realize that I don't generate the traffic of something like The Daily Kos (who had three diarist on the political payroll), perhaps that means I will work cheaper ( I personally think I draw more traffic than they do, the evidence is just being supressed by the man. It's all a conspiracy). Or maybe I can get a Max Cleland deal where I will continue to criticize the current administration until they appoint me to some board to shut me up. But since I don't see any of this happening, I'll continue to stay here and continue to do this for free.

Don't Let The Door Hit You On Your Ass On The Way Out Johnny

US Ambassador to the UN John Bolton has announced he will quit his position when his term expires at the start of the new congress. This is good news, not just for the US, but for the whole damn world. First off, the Justice Department doesn't have to spend time looking for away to skirt the law to keep Bolton in his position. Maybe now they can spend more time doing more important things like, I don't know, prosecuting terrorists maybe?
Bolton was always kind of upside down and opposite at the UN anyway. One of his proudest acheivements as our UN ambassador was his assembling a coaltion in an attempt to impose sanctions on Iran for, well, obeying the Non-Proliferation treaty. Meanwhile he vetoed a resolution against Israel for it's recent killing spree at Beit Hanour, in which 19 civilians were murdered by the IDF.
Deputy press secretary Dana Perrino, showing the disconnect withg reality prevalent in the Bush White House said Bolton had "strong bipartisan support from a majority of senators". Sure he did. that's why Bush used a recess appointment to put Bolton in his position. Of course these are the same people who insist things are going good in Iraq and victory is obtainable if only we throw our support behind the troops in their mission. The reality is Bolton had bipartisan opposition to his appointment, and with the Democrats sweeping Congres last month, Bolton's chances of a confirmation seems as likely as Donald Rumsfeld getting his job back.

Fun With Site Meters!

You know, sometimes when your sense of moral outrage gets stretched to the point it either won't spring back or snaps altogether, what can you do? How many times can you write about Bush's lack of plan strategy or foresight vis-a-vis Iraq before you fell you're just beating a horse that's been dead for quite sometime? Sure, it's ridiculous for him to state that we should stay in Iraq for victory without ever defining what that victory entails, but most of the time, we're just preaching to the choir. And everytime some right wing turd comes out to say we can't win in Iraq, we hear the same thing from the White House. Stay the course finish the job yada yada yada.
Weekends are getting harder for me too, because the kids are in the other room watching Pokemon, which makes it hard to find something outrageous enough for me to rant about (note to self:try to link Pokemon with alQaeda) because I know I should be doing something with them rather than spending all weekend at my computer. That's when I turn to my site meter.
Now I'm not all about traffic, I got a site tracker to help locate a long gone troll, so i rarely look at it now. But what's interesting is how people from all over the world come here to read the tripe that I type. For instance, there's a steady reader in Slovenia, and I think, why would anybody in Slovenia be interested in what I write?
Another thing I find interesting is how people find this page. The number one way for a new reader to find this page is to Google "aspertame", which leads them to this piece I wrote in February about Donald Rumsfeld and aspartame. The number one referring URL is The Truth Will Set you Free, a good blog, it just makes me wonder why they anyone reading well researched stories there would pick this page out of the many they have listed to go to next. (Must be the name)
But there are a couple things I find disturbing. One is the fact that someone from an unknown country visits here frequently. Why would you want to hide your country of origin to read ablog, especially this one?
The second concerns the map above. The domain name and ISP are unknown, yet it always gives this location (Lat?Long: 38, -97). I have two theories about this.
The first is hold over from my paranoid days, and the theory is that this is the NSA, monitoring my every word. They're just waiting for me to slip up and say something so they can declare me an enemy combatant and haul my ass away. Sometimes there is n referring URL, sometimes, they find this page by Googling aspertame.
My second theory is not quite as sinister. Since the browser they are using is Firefox, I think it's just me checking for comments using my Firefox browser, while my site meter is registered to my SBC/Yahoo browser. Then I become hankful i stopped smoking pot so many years ago, because if I still did, I wouldn't be here, I'd be barricaded in my bedroom, with the dresser pushed in front of the door, sure they were coming to take me away. Which they may do anyway, but not because of this blog.