Happy Halloween!

Bush On Trial

There are some similarities between George W Bush and Saddam Hussein. Both have caused the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Iraqis, they both are fond of torture and neither one was ever elected to their position of power. But even more, this November will be seen as judgement day for both, as the midterm elections will be a referendum on Bush's failed war policy in Iraq, and will also see the verdict in Saddam's trial as well, both occurring within days of each other.
Originally, Saddam's verdict was to be announced on October 16, but for some inexplicable reason was moved until November 5. However, Bush's trial that should be is not forthcoming, as Nancy Pelosi has stated that an impeachment trial for Bush would be a waste of time. Not that they couldn't cobble together a conviction for the many various violations he has committed, but by the time a trial was finished, Bush would be out of office (and well on his way to Paraguay)and irrelevant, and besides, then the Democrat in the White House would be liable to be held accountable for (gulp)her actions.
And if you think that the Bush ADDministration wouldn't politicize something like Saddam's verdict, you haven't been paying attention the last six years.A guilty verdict (unless you thought it'd be a different one) on the Sunday immediately before the elections would open up all kinds of corporate media chatter vindicating Bush for bypassing the UN and illegally invading Iraq, just the kind of blather they're hoping the television-watchers will believe. "See, Saddam was a bad guy(as if there was any doubt), so we were right to destroy that country". Plenty of plastic flags will be passed out and a fresh new crop of "Support Our Troops" magnetic ribbons will be purchased to replace the ones that have faded away. Given that October is almost over and Rove's promised "October Surprise" has yet to materialize, I'd bet the farm (if I were a betting man, or had a farm to wager) on this as being what Rove was talking about. Unless, of course, the other rumors were true and Bush is planning on invoking martial law to save his sorry ass.

For You Princess: A Peekaboo Poledance Toy!

At a loss as to what to buy your little daughter for Christmas this year? Why not buy her very own Peekaboo pole dancing kit? As shown, it comes with pole, peekaboo dollars, a 'sexy dance garter' to stuff those dollars into, an instructional DVD that shows suggestive dance moves! Unleash that sex kitten today!
And if you think about it, it's not such a bad idea (yes, it is), I mean, what with college so expensive and out of reach of most parents, why not train her in a career that will help her pay for college? If she has her sights set on an unrealisitc goal of being a doctor or lawyer, this will help bring her down to Earth while providing her the inspiration to 'ho her way through school!
This little item was actually for sale on Tesco's website until parental protests forced them to stop selling the item. they were also selling the Peekaboo Strip poker set as well. Tesco removed the item from it's toy section on it's website and moved it to the fitness accessories. Because a product this good is fit for everyone!

A Smudge On The Game

A controversy is brewing in this year's World Series over a smudge on the arm of Detroit Tigers pitcher Kenny Rogers, not to be confused with the chicken roaster and faux country music guy. A number of people are questioning whether a smudge on his arm from Sunday's game is actually another substance other than dirt.
I'm not really big on sports, in fact, if professional sports were eliminated tonight, tomorrow I would wake up and not notice any difference. But the year, Wilbur decided he was going to be a baseball fan, and so began to root for the home team, as the song goes, to win the world championship.
"Don't hold your breath," I told him, having witnessed many seasons of disappointing baseball coming out of Detroit. But, oddly enough, the Tigers started winning this year, each time I dismissed it with a "They still have plenty of time to blow it. We are talking about the Tigers, after all."
I don't know how serious the charges against Rogers are, like I said, I'm not much of a sports fan, but what struck me most was a quote I heard attributed to a player for the Cardinals. "If he was cheating and got away with it, good for him."
If he was cheating and got away with it, good for him.
Yes, Americans seem to admire a cheater who gets away with it, but if you're caught, well, just ask Bill Clinton. Yes, cheaters are respected in this country, it's how we got our current president. Everyone cheats, we are led to believe, so what's wrong with it? Look at Ken Skilling and the whole Enron scandal, just another cheat, and when he got caught, denied any knowledge he was cheating at all, while sitting on a big bag of ill-gotten gain. Who hasn't cheated at golf, on their taxes, on their spouse, on their job, or on a test? It's cheating that allows lawyers to prosper, even in hard times.
Now, I know a lot of people who were upset when the Tigers beat the pinstriped prima donnas, the NY Yankees, whether it was because of Rogers cheating, we'll never know, but what this exemplifies is our need to win at any cost. Right and wrong are consumed by the desire not to be the losers. And I feel I have a legitimate gripe, because in the long run, I pay the outrageous salaries of the ball players. Through tax breaks, advertising, and sky boxes for CEOs who, like the Yankees when they lose, earn their salaries whether their company is turning a profit or not, and feel entitled to perks like the best seats in the stadium, the price of baseball is tacked on to every Budweiser I buy*.
I realise sports stars are never good role mdoels, but what does it say about us when we condone practices in one person that we wouldn't in a business partner, just because they happen to play a game. How do you explain this behavior to your kid, if the ask, or do you chalk it all up to "winning isn't everything, it's the only thing." This is the mindset of those who would keep us bogged down in Iraq because they want a victory on their record. Sportsmanship and character don't count, because they can't buy you anything worth having.
Baseball, along with mom and apple pie used to represent Americans to each other, Now mom has been replaced by an SUV driving bleach blonde helmet headed MILF, apple pie is now mock apple pie and cheating seems to be America's favorite pasttime.









*I don't actually drink, but am merely using this as an example.

Digging Deeper in a Hole Just Gets You More Buried

Last night I saw a Republican ad lambasting Governor Granholm and it really got me thinking. Is Jennifer really responsible for the jobs leaving Michigan? She never supported NAFTA, as far as I know, like DeVos did, and NAFTA is the main culprit behind the mass exodus of manufacturing jobs in this state, oh Hell, why don't I just say the whole country.
In the ad, it featured a young woman, younger than me anyway, complaining about the conditions in Michigan, all the foreclosures, all the people who are going to lose money when they sell their house.
Which got me to thinking. Is it Granholm's fault these people ran up large debts on their credit card bills? Such large bills that these people felt compelled to bite the bait of refinancing? Did Granholm leave them to believe that the only way out of debt was to crawl deeper in to it? Didn't these people realize that what goes up (in this case, housing prices) must come down?
Now, the Republicans are all about personal responsibility, yet here they are running and ad where the people disavow any personal responsibility at all. I know people who have gone down the refinance road and now are stuck with a house they paid too much for, but I don't se where it's the governor's fault. And, lord knows, I've made some really stupid financial decisions in the last two and a half years, but in the end, they were my bad decisions, and while I may have at one time tried to blame someone else, I realize now it was my own pigheaded stubbornness that caused them and nothing else. I don't blame Jennifer Granholm, or Dick DeVos.
I can kind of see DeVos' argument for building a plant in China, they have protectionist policies in place there that require all goods sold there be made there. But why did he lobby Congress for MFN status for China if that is the case? If protectionist policies are bad for the US to have, then isn't just as bad for the US to continue to do business with other countries that have them?
And exactly what is DeVos' plan to change things in Michigan? Cutting the single business tax may help some, but the revenue would have to made up somewhere else, and DeVos hasn't clued anybody in to where they would come from. Unless, he continues to run deficits like Granholm's predecessor, John "Fat-Boy" Engler did. And if you ask someone who is paying more money for a house that was refinanced at the rate houses were going for before the housing bubble popped, getting deeped in debt won't get you anywhere but deeper in a hole. Is that where Michigan needs to be?

Borderline Sacrilege

Normally, I don't pay attention to the annoying Kidz Bop series of recordings of shitty pop songs rendered unlistenable by a chorus of warbling children, because what do I care if they ruin bad songs by the likes of Creed or Kelly Clarkson, it's all crap anyway. Now, however, they have deigned it upon themselves to destroy the music of one of the greatest rock and roll bands ever.
Yes, those wonderful folks at Kidz Bop have decided to make a whole CD of the Kidz Bop Kids singing Ramones songs. I can understand why, as the Ramones primitive melodies and basic two and three chord songs are perfectly suited for younger listeners. My youngest son loves the Ramones, and when he was four, refused to cut his hair because he wanted to be Joey Ramone.But the difference is, when Joey sang, the lyrics were somewhat unintelligible, so a song like "Beat On The Brat" sounded to my son like "Pizza On The Front". Now of course, they would have to change the lyrics considerably, which is akin to changing passages in the Bible.
It would be hard to imagine them recording a song such as "53rd and 3rd", a song about a famous chickemhawk corner in NYC where older men could buy the services of younger men, and it's story of one such chicken who, after servicing a trick, kills him with a razor blade to prove he's not gay. And while it was somewhat ironic to have a six foot Jewish freakazoid from Queens sing, in "Today Your Love, Tomorrow The World", I'm a Nazi schnatzi/ and I fight for the Fatherland, it would be totally wrong to have the Kidz Bop Kids sing that phrase, let alone get the glory like Charles Manson as Joey does in "Glad To See You Go".The less said about songs like "Chinese Rock" or "Wart Hog ( I feel so bad/I can't sit still/just took some dope/and I feel ill)the better.
The Ramones music is all over nowadays, songs like "Blitzkrieg Bop" are used in commercials for Vonage and Diet Pepsi, while movie trailers for RV and School For Scoundrels have used Ramones songs "My Brain Is Hanging Upside Down" and "I Wanna Be Sedated" respectively. It's just too bad none of the Ramones are around to enjoy this upsurge in their popularity, Joey having died from lymphoma five years ago, Dee Dee dying from a drug overdose shortly after, and Johnny dying from prostrate cancer two years ago.
My problem is the fact that even to record the milder songs in the Ramone oeuvre that the Kidz Bop people are covering will require extensive lyrical changes. Are they really going to sing "The KKK Took My Baby Away"? Or will they change that to something else? "Suzy Is A Headbanger"? What about "Blitzkrieg Bop"? When the original was used in Jimmy Neutron, Boy Genius, the offending line "shoot 'em in the back now" was edited out. Is that what the Kidz Bop Kids will do? They will also be recording "Rock And Roll High School". Hmmm. I don't care about history/that's not where I want to be/ I just want to have some kicks/I just want to get some chicks........I hate the teacher/and the principal/don't want to be taught/ to be no fool, I really can't see those staying. And then there's "I Wanna Be Sedated", which they also will record, but I can't imagine (well, I could imagine, but shudder to think) how they would change that song.
What's next? Kidz Bop Sings The Sex Pistols?

Can't See The Quagmire For All The Sectarian Violence

Bush yesterday acknowledged that the major offensive by the Iraqi insurgency (in it's last throes, according to Cheney, for the last year and a half, or so) is similar to the Tet offensive. Well, he didn't use the term Tet offensive because it's fairly certain that unless some one explained it to him, he wouldn't have a clue as to what the Tet Offensive was. No, he was just responding to an assessment by NY Times columnist Thomas Friedman.
One might think this could be a step towards acknowledgement by the people who keep telling us how wonderful their war is that maybe they're starting to recognize it as the quagmire it truly is, but these are the people who've seen Rambo:First Blood PtII one too many times and think we could have won in Viet Nam if only our soldiers had been given the chance to win. What they're really saying is that if all you war protesters just shut up and supported our troops, the enemy wouldn't feel energized to continue their campaign of resistance to a foreign occupation force. Because God knows, the liberal media here gives in-depth coverage to each and every protest staged in this country and beams it out all over the world via sattelite for the insurgents to see, when they have electricity to power their television sets.
White House press secretary Tony Snow stepped back from Bush's statement with utterly the most cockamamie statement of his own:

"We do not think that there's been a flip-over point, but more importantly from the standpoint of the government and the standpoint of this administration, we're going to continue pursuing victory aggressively."

Gee, it's about time! Perhaps if they had pursued victory aggressively from the start, this sordid little chapter in American history would be done with, but of course if they did that, all that off the books cash to defense contractors and the like would have dried up and they'd have to go back to cooking books to afford that new Park Avenue co-op.
Bush still sees al-Qaeda as being active in Iraq, what better place to recruit people to fight your enemy than the people whose country was completely destroyed by your enemy? Of course, al-Qaeda wouldn't even be in Iraq if we had stayed in Afghanistan to fight them, instead of cutting and running to a country weakened by years of economic sanctions.
Now even some of the wingnuts are saying the war was a mistake but

The WMD fiasco was a global intelligence failure, but calling Saddam Hussein's bluff after 9/11 was the right thing to do

Saddam's bluff? He never claimed to have any weapons of mass destruction, and anybody with a computer, an internet connection and half a brain could have told you that as well. Not only was the war a mistake, but it was totally unnecessary as well.

Don't Put Your Eggs In One Basket

A lot of concerned Americans are looking to this fall's midterm elections to change the course of the country. They feel that the current Republican majority under President Bush has taken the country far from it roots as a democracy and one step closer to a dictatorship. The current government has engaged our military in needless wars of choice, as well as showing disdain for any sort of diplomacy at all. And so these concerned citizens have placed their faith in a Democratic majority in changing all the detriment caused by the Republican leadership in the last six years. I say, don't hold your fucking breath.
A release by Nancy Pelosi of what Democrats plan to do in their first 100 hours includes a lot of nice token gestures to "the little people", raise the mininum wage, cut the interest rates on student loans, and work to lower prescription drug prices for Medicare patients. They also plan to put new rules in play to "break the link between lobbyists and legislature", as well as enacting all the recommendations made by the commission that investigated 9/11.
Well, what about Iraq? Or, more importantly, what about Iran? Will the Democrats pressure Bush into calling off the planned attack against Iran, or will they allow it to move forward? It seems the the Democratic leadership is putting it's money behind the candidates who oppose pulling out of Iraq. And now, potential Democrat candidate for president, Hillary Clinton, after saying no to torture has reversed her position, and said stated she is okay with torture.
The Longhouse Coalition has a list of things that the Democrats won't be doing, that they probably should:

impeachment of Bush and Cheney, reversal of the fascist Military Tribunal Act or the Patriot Acts, demands for documents from the White House so that Congressional oversight can be exercised, demands that the signing statements, which render Congress irrelevant, be stopped- in short, Pelosi and the Dems have NO PLANS to seriously challenge the Bush White House reign of terror vs. the American people.

Nothing about changing the tax laws back to reverse the flow of $$$ from poor to rich people, or restoring the privilege of bankruptcy. Nothing about restoring environmental protections. Nothing about withdrawal from Iraq, nothing about ensuring that Iran is not bombed gratuitously.

In short, the Democrats are just as much a part of the corporatocracy as the Republicans. It was a Democrat controlled congress that repealed the act that called for equal time on America's airwaves, which has led to the proliferation of Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity-types to permeate our airwaves. And it was a Democrat controlled congress that passed NAFTA, which was signed into law by a Democrat president, against the desires of a majority of American, that has allowed a mass hemorrhaging of manufacturing jobs out of this country. And while I would agree with most people's assessment of the Democrats as being the lesser-of-two-evils, the lesser of two evils is still evil.

When You're In The Company of Bill O'Reilly, You're In Good Company Dude

Bill O'Reilly and Fox News recently took on a 9/11 truth seeker on their broadcast. Listen to the logic Bill uses to discredit Jim Fetzer:

FETZER: Bill, you're obviously not going to give me a chance to talk about any of these things, so...

O'REILLY: No, I'm not, because you're a nut.

Yes, rather than take on the evidence piece by piece, O'Reilly has this gentleman on, proceeds to say things like:

why don't you just say that you have a Martian living in your bedroom, sir?

and of course, the favorite stand-by of all real truth seekers out there:

You hate your country

.
Yes, rather than look at or discuss any evidence Jim fetzer might put forth, O'Reilly had this man on to belittle him. That's good objective journalism.
So Mr. Fetzer was n't able to present evidence such as this:

This picture is evidence that thermite was used to bring the towers down. It's about the only evidence left, as the remains of the building were shipped off and destroyed before investigators could get a look at them. Now, if there were witnesses reports of explosions in the WTC before the towers fell, and we have photographic evidence that thermite, an explosive used by demolition companies to cut main support beams, was present at the WTC, I think that makes a strong case that something other than two planes crashing into the towers brought them down.
And since the charges would have had to been planted sooner (such as in the weekend before, when there were intermittent power outages in the WTC), that implies that someone was aware that the WTC was being targeted by alleged terrorists. I say alleged because at least six men on the FBI's list were found to be alive and innocent two weeks after the attacks occurred.
Now, for all these facts to come to light, there would have to have been a rigorous investigation. But after resisting for years to conduct a formal investigation, the Bush administartion finally set-up the 9/11 Commission. There were told what they could look at, essentially, intelligence failures, and then limited the amount of time and the budget for the commission. And if that wasn't enough, when called before the commision themselves, Bush and Cheney refused to testify under oath (Hello? Wasn't perjury what led to Bill Clinton's impeachment? Why give your poltical enemies that weapon to use against you?) So even thought there was eyewitness and photographic and even video evidence that thermite was used in the WTC, there was no follow-up investigation whatsoever. Why not? Who could have ordered any investigation not to take place?
Bill O'Reilly then finishes up his hit piece by concluding:

If you had the evidence, sir, you would be on the front page of The New York Times in a heartbeat.

Well, Mr. Embodiment-Of-Fair-Balanced-And Responsible-Journalism, if you won't let Mr. Fetzer present his case, why should the New York Times?

Once Again, The Pot Calls the Kettle Black

North Korea's recent testing of a nuclear device has elicited a strong response from the Democrats, and rightly so. John Kerry said:

"While we've been bogged down in Iraq where there were no weapons of mass destruction, a madman has apparently tested the ultimate weapon of mass destruction."

While the Clinton administration was offering incentives to Kim Jong II to stop his pursuit of nuclear weapons, the Bush ADDministration, in another golden moment of defining shortsightedness, decided to break off negotiations with the Jong regime. Way to go! Now look what you got.And while they never have stopped their planning of how to "deal" with Iran building a nuclear power plant, they just kind of let this madman within striking distance of the US develop WMD. Two words, one starts with an 'o', the other with an 'I'.
And once again the Republicans, in standard fall back position has chastised the Democrats for, are you ready for this, "playing partisan politics with a nuclear weapons threat." This from the people who turned playing partisan politics into an art form, blasting Democrats for being weak on national security for not allowing the president to repeatedly rape the constitution. And they've consistently played partisan politics with 9/11, even though they were the ones in charge of watching the henhouse when the tigers struck.
But by constantly calling the Democrats "weak" on national security (gee, isn't that playing politics with a threat?) the Republicans have opened themselves up to the same treatment when it can be shown that:
a). The war in Iraq has increased the threat of terrorism, not reduced it (the NIE)
b). By focusing on non-threats in the Middle East (Iran, Iraq) the Bush ADDministration has allowed real threats to become more threatening.
c).By refusing to use diplomacy at all, the Bush ADDministration has made the country less secure.
Of course, the Republicans are really grateful for this, as it allows the television-watchers attention to be turned away from the Foley-gate scandal. Of course, I don't think Kim Jong II making Bush look like a total fuck-up is going to help their case.

Questions I'd Like To Ask Dick DeVos

This Wednesday is the second gubernatorial debate between Gov. Jennifer granholm and wannabe Dick DeVos, which will be broadcast locally on WOOD-TV 8 and moderated by new anchor Suzanne Geha. Which causes me to ponder, if the last one was on Fox, and this one's on TV-*, when will the moderators be more favorable to Governor Granholm? Fox has shown it's tendency to lean right, and WOOD-TV has shown a clear republican bias, with mopderator Suzanne Geha nearly orgasmic when Bush stole, er, I mean "won" the election in 2000. When will the people have a chance to ask questions of the candidates?
Well, as it turns out you can submit a question here and perhaps it will be used by the moderator. So here are some of the questions I would like answered.
Mr. DeVos, you have been a major contributor to the Republican party, which has controlled the legislature for the last eighteen years, as well as a donator to many foundations such as the Heritage Foundation, which advocates the outsourcing of American jobs as one of it's beliefs, can you name a specific legislation passed by the Republican legislature that would create more jobs in Michigan that has been vetoed by Governor Granholm?
Mr. DeVos, in your campaign advertisements, you state you want to work to create a better Michigan for all people. How will your voucher program, which will take money away from public schools and fund private and parochial schools, make a better Michigan for everyone when we all benefit from having decent public education?
Mr. DeVos, you tout your leadership abilities to create jobs as President of Amway, yet you fail to mention your failure to address abuse problems brought ot your attention as a primary investor in Alterra, which continued after you took control and placed one of your cronies in charge. You also appointed a crony who mismanaged the Orlando Magic, causing attendence to drop at home games there, which you then attributed to the arena itself, to which you are now asking the city to give you a tax break to build a new stadium. Is this example of leadership, or the type of cronyism rampant in the current Bush administration, to which you contributed to as well?
Mr. DeVos, you blame the state's current economic woes on Governor Granholm, but isn't it true that she inherited a record deficit when she took office, which was created by her predecessor, John Engler, whom you supported and financed as the leader of the state Republican party? Can you name one piece of legislation that Governor Granholm has vetoed that would have worked to create more jobs in Michigan?
And finally, Mr. DeVos, since you as president of Amway shipped jobs to China, as well as invested in China, isn't it true that your interest in attaining the governorship is to forward your far right agenda of teaching intelligent design as science, funding religion from tax dollars, anti-abortion and anti-gay legislation and other extremist policies rejected by the voters of Michigan, such as your voucher plan?

W Stands For What The Fuck?

In a move moving the US one more step closer to becoming a fascist dictatorship, George Bush declared that he can edit security reports about whether Homeland Security is obeying privacy rules. Once again exhibiting his predilection for crapping on the Constitution, he claimed this power in another signing statement to a bill passed by Congress stating that no-one but the privacy officer could alter, delay or prohibit the mandatory annual report on Homeland Security department activities that affect privacy, including complaints. He claimed this under his power as the unitary executive, a position not outlined by the Constitution, but hey, to him it's just a Goddamned piece of paper anyway.
Bush also issued other signing statements in the Homeland Security spending bill, none of them maing much sense, least of all his disregard for a rquirement that the FEMA director have at least five years experience and "demonstrated ability in and knowledge of emergency management and homeland security."
And Bush's logic (or lack thereof)? It "rules out a large portion of those persons best qualified by experience and knowledge to fill the office." In other words, more political hacks he needs to appoint to a position because of favors owed to them by the current administration. Only a truly brainwashed television-watchin' Republican could understand why a law requiring a person to be qualified and knowledgeable would rule out a large portion of those qualified by experience and knowledge, but I can't understand why Bush has any support at all as he slowly descends the nation into a fascist regime.
And if you really extend Bush's logic, driver's licenses that require a driver to be qualified by experience and logic are ruling out a large portion of those people who want to drive cars. Or, states that require a doctor to be licensed as experienced and knowledgeable are stopping a lot of people from entering the medical field.
So if the Foley scandal hasn't already rendered this Congress to be irrelevant, then Bush's signing statements sure have.

It's All A Plot By The Democrats.....

...and Mark Foley is concerned with catching sexual predators! Even though The aide that convinced Foley to quit claims he told Dennis Hastert about it three years ago, the Democrats waited until right before the election to leak this. I saw Newt on CNN imply that this was leaked by a Democrat, although he offered no evidence, his implications enough to grab the attention of the corporate media. Well, if this story was leaked, that would infer that someone else was covering it up, wouldn't it? Lucky for Newt, your average television-watcher lacks the capacity to reason as much.
And the Reublicans are all ready for an investigation, only it's not the one that should be held. They want to find out why this story surfaced on the last day of the legislative business before the November election. Not why Fatturd's office sat on this story for three years, then denied any knowledge when the story broke. So if the Justice Department does investigate this, which investigation do you think El-Turdo will hold?

And by now, we've all seen the screen capture of Foley being indentified as a Democrat on Fox News fair and balanced Bill O'Reilly liefest. When all else fails, you can always count on the corporate media to disinform the television-watchers. Is it any wonder so many Americans still think that Saddam had something to do with 9/11?
What this is all about is people placing party politics first. Already struggling supporting an unpopular president and an unpopular war, not to mention spending the first part of the year embroiled in a lobbying scandal, Republican leadershits have proved that nothing is as important as their party (unless it's the party they're planning for the end of the war in Iraq)and will sacrifice anything or anyone to keep their majority.So it's only natural they'd blame the Democrats for leaking the story, it's what they would have done if the shoe was on the other foot.

Spoiling The October Surprises

Karl Rove promised to deliver George W. Bush and the Republican party an October surprise. Something that will help turn the party's sagging ratings around and help them retain the majority that they need in order to continue their plan of converting the US into a fascist corporatocracy. Many people have speculated on what this may be, I thought I'd take a second and speculate on what it won't be.
War With Iran
Right now the propaganda campaign is amping up for a US military strike against Iran. However, there is still some diplomacy being tried on the part of the EU, only because Bush is no statesman and Cheney doesn't believe in diplomacy. However, while I think an invasion will occur, I believe this won't happen until after the election. Here's why:
Right now, oil prices have begun to lower. There are many reasons and theories for this oocurance. One is the discovery of a huge oil field in the Gulf of Mexico. Another is the eased tensions in the Middle east due to Iran's desire to negotiate it's nuclear power ambitions. Another theory is that the oil companies have lowered the price of oil to help out their buddy in the White House.
However, the theory that I think fits best was postulated by Kunstler (September 18) in which he speculates that orders are down because Third World countries can't afford gas at $70 a barrel, therefore, they're not placing any orders. Also, the nation's largest consumer of oil, the US military may have stocked up on oil and has stopped placing orders as well. If they were planning on attacking Iran, they would need a lot of jet fuel as they seem to think they can win a ground war from the air, and would continue placing orders. A strike against Iran before the election would drive oil prices up again, thereby angering the US voters who are grateful to be paying over two dollars a gallon right now. Therefore, a strike against Iran as the October surp[rise, in my opinion, is out of the question.
Osama Bin Laden
Prior to the leaked intelligence out of France,Osama was suddenly on Bush's mind again. He even met with the president of Pakistan, where Osama was rumored to be holed up. Right here on this page, I speculated that the capture of Osama would be Rove's promised October surprise. But the cat's out of the bag now. While no one could prove he's dead, nobody could prove he wasn't either. The leak got a lot of people to question why Osama only turns up on tape when it serves the White House's agenda. A tape now would cause people to doubt it's authenticity, especially an audio tape alone, while Osama's "capture", undoubtedly dead, would give creedence to the rumors and have people (like me)say I told you so.
Another Terrorist Attack
Foiled or not foiled, another terrorist attack would prove to the people who are paying fucking attention that the NIE was right, and the Bush way of dealing with terrorism isn't working. There's not many more things that airline passengers can give up now short of flying naked, and we've all had a laugh at that. Another successful terrorist attack would prove that torture doesn't help, and that as much as they like to bluster about, the Bush regime cannot keep us as safe as the television-watchers have been led to believe. There is only one way that Bush could use another terrorist attack to his advantage.
In recent days, the Republicans have taken major hits. The Mark Foley scandal shows the voters that the people who claim to protect us from sexual predators are in actuality, the people we need to be protected from. The fact that party leaders sat on this information hasn't helped them out, especially if the corporate media has a field day with this, and cover-ups involving sexual improprieties is where they excel the most as far as exploiting. Nothing keeps the television-watchers tuned in like a good sex scandal and this one has all the details they need.
The lobbying scandals have caused some key Republicans to scurry off the map, campaign war chests in tow, which have now been converted into legal defense funds. All one has to do is remind the voters that the Republicans gained control of the legislature by running against the corruption in Washington, just don't expect it to come form the lapdog corporate media, because while they love a tawdry sex scandal, this type of scandal causes the television-watchers to switch the channel. So what's a war criminal to do when he loses his rubberstamp? It's almost as if he'd be better off if there were no elections at all.
Which is not that far-fetched. Powers granted to Bush via the PATRIOT Act include imposing martial law in case of an epidemic. Also, as Commander-in-Chief, Bush could suspend all elections. Congress just gave him the power to declare anyone, even American citizens, enemy combatants and the detention camps are being built. Is this the October surprise? I don't think so, although Bush's warning to citizens not to buy in to "the enemy's propaganda" concerning the NIE ( who is the enemy? The CIA?)sure gives one pause. All I know is what it won't be, so I guess we'll have to just wait and see.

But Who Will Protect Us From Them?

The Republicans like to tout there position on national security. It's their one strong point and they've used it to their advantage at every oppurtunity. But the truth is, beneath their glossy veneer, they're not really protecting the citizens at all.
The NIE that was leaked last week is one example. While Bush has been claiming the war in Iraq was protecting us from terrorists the truth is that it has been creating more terrorists. Which hs been good at protecting the security of defense contractors growing fat at the public tit, it hasn't protected our tax dollars that could be better spent here at home.
Another example is the rider attached to a bill passed by the Republicans exempting pharmaceuticals from lawsuits brought on by parents whose children developed autism from the mercury in childhood vaccines. They protect the corporations, at the expense of parents and children nationwide. It certainly seems that the Republicans are good at protecting their own.
The torture bill passed this week by Congress shows how far they will go to protect their President. Never mind that a post de facto law is unconstitutional, the actions of the president were unconstitutional as well, thereby justifying two wrongs making some twisted right. And written into that bill was a provision that the President could declare anyone who opposes him an "enemy combatant". Do you feel any safer knowing that this won't be abused by a so-called person who doesn't ever put your best interests up front?
When Hurricane Katrina hit last year, even though they received an advance warning that it would be the catastrophe it was, did the Bush regime make any effort to protect the people? Even when the Superdome was filled with dying people with no water and no hope, nothing was done to help these people.
But the icing on the cake has to be the recent revelation that Rep. Mark Foley was a sexual predator, which was revealed to Republican leadership months ago, and they chose not to do anything about it until it became public knowledge.

So here's one of their own, preying on teenage boys, and what does Hastert do? Does he act in the best public interest and do something about it? How about Boehner? Can't do anything against the party, in effect placing the party before the American people. I don't think we need them to protect us, what we need is someone who will protect us from these sleazebags.

DeVos: Christianazi In Business Suit

Dick DeVos' campaign took a tumble the other day when he showed his true colors. When asked about creationism, intelligent design, or any other label you want to put on the Christianazis attempt to put their narrow minded religious views into other people's children minds, DeVos stated he wants to put this scientific adbomination into school's cirriculum. Is that why he has stated that if elected, he'll accept no salary?
DeVos has always been about tax dollars going to create a theocracy. That's the whole purpose of his voucher plan, taking money from public schools and putting it into parochial schools. And the odds are pretty even that if elected, he'll try to get that plan back into action again, after being resoundingly rejected by the voters of this state before.
The thing is, we all benefit from having better public schools. Better educated people make for better citizens. Unfortunately, they also are more inclined to oppose DeVos' anti-abortion homophobic platform, which is why he wishes to replace studied reason with fairy tales.
DeVos is a fundie, a Christian Reformed person, and having lived around them my whole life, the Christian Deformed are the most reactionary of all Christianazis. To put their ideology in simple terms: you're all going to Hell.
DeVos has also recently started running ads featuring Lee Iacocca to appeal to the television-watchers. Lee Ioacocca is a wealthy man, so of course he'd want to have a man who supports outsourcing and tax cuts in the governor's mansion. Except that DeVos has said he won't live in the governor's mansion. Apparently, it's a step down for him.

How Much Does One Of These NIE Cost Me Personally?

"Either we're going to be fighting this battle, this war, overseas or its going to be right here in this country," said Bill Frist, the Senate majority leader.

Riiight. You'd have to be an idiot to believe that statement, especially following the release of the National Intelligence Estimate saying the war in Iraq has increased, not diminished, the terrorist threat to the US. Who are you going to believe, intelligence professionals or some guy who wants to hang onto his position as Senate Majority Leader? Personally, I'm going with the intelligence experts, not some guy playing to the television-watchers.
Remember why we went in Iraq? After all the lies had been stripped away, all they had left was Saddam was a bad guy who tortured his people. Well, now it seems that torture in Iraq is worse than under Saddam. Of course, not all of it is coming from the US occupation forces, but the fact that any of it is should leave decent Americans cold.
Today alone 14 people were killed in Iraq as the sectarian violence there continues to spread. And that violence would spread with or without American occupation, as there seems to be little US forces can do to stop the country's sectarian violence from becoming a "civil" war, if it hasn't already. So tell me again how we're saving the country?

``Now I've never criticized President Bush, and I don't think this is useful. But you do know we do have a government that thinks Afghanistan is only one- seventh as important as Iraq.''

-Bill Clinton

That's right, Bill. We have only 21,000 troops in Afghanistan, fighting the remnants of the Taleban and al Qaeda there. You know, the people we claimed were responsible for the horrendous attacks of 9/11 that started the so-called war on terror. Most of our troops were pulled from there to be used in Iraq, and what was I just saying about Iraq?
My theory is of course that Bush needs the threat of terrorism to exist and increase because he can use this to gut the Constitution. There's very little of the Bill of Rights that haven't been compromised in the name of "national security" by this administration, and they have two more years to go. They can be hindered if the people wise up and deliver a Democratic majority in November. With all the recent bad news for the ADDministration, there going to have to work really hard on that "October surprise" Rove has promised to deliver, I just hope it's not another war.
Because you see, anothe NIE that was issued last year said Iran is years from having a nuclear weapons program. And that's another report the Bush regime is sure to ignore.

Osama Dead (Again)

In a bid to possibly spoil Karl Rove's October surprise, a French newspaper has reported Osama Bin Laden is dead. This wouldn't be the first time Osama has been reported to have been demised, but the first time western sources have reported it. So much for finding him alive.
According to usually reliable sources in Saudi police forces, Osama died in Pakistan on August 23 of typhoid fever. Pakistani authorities do not have any information about Osama's death, but are relieved now that the US forces looking for him (I think there are about eleven) won't be bombing their country "back to the stone age" (in the word's of Dick Armitage) in their effort to locate him.
The CIA could not confirm the report, and the Washington-based IntelCenter was not aware of any reports on the internet. So unless Osama appears, Twain-like, on videotape to announce that rumors of his death are wrong, if he were to die he'd be the last one to know about it, I'm going to assume he has passed.
This also brings a question into my mind, is this the reason for Bush's sudden interest in Pakistan's Musharraf? Were they holding Osama on ice in Pakistan until right before the elections so he could be "captured" by US forces working in tandem with Pakistani forces? Wasn't it shortly after August 23 that Bush suddenly refocused his campaign on Osama?
The Fench are launching an investigation into how this intelligence was leaked, suggesting that it was being sat on until a) it was confirmed or b)after it was used by the Bush regime as an October surprise (hey! forget all about the war in Iraq and all the torture and spying voters! We got Osama!)to retain their grip on the legislature. (I'm voting on the latter, it's been nearly a month. How long does it take to confirm a dead guy is dead. Must be a fuck of an autopsy)Perhaps they were trying to smuggle him into Iraq, or Iran, in an attempt to justify one war or trhe other in those two countries.

Terrorizing The Television-Watchers

If you ever needed evidence that the US has become a nation of television-watchers, this past Tuesday morning was a good example. Morning radio shows all talked about the memorial service for Steve Irwin, a television conservationist who died confronting an animal best left alone. Everyone marveled at the speech given by his daughter. Everyone talked about what a hero he was. Except, he wasn't.
A couple times a week, America buries it's true heroes. They don't get tributes from morning radio shows, and dignitaries and celebrities don't turn out to honor them or pay them respects. The cries of their children, their spouses, their parents aren't glamorized by glib personalities. These heroes, too, died confronting something that was best left alone. There is no thank you for giving your life from those who have benefitted the most from their sacrifice. And because these people aren't beamed into our living rooms, spouting catchphrases and mugging for the media as they molest and maul mammals, the television-watchers don't care.
Oh sure, they'll slap a magnetic ribbon on the vehicle and think they've done their part, but the families who have lost a member don't get anything from that. Some cash-craving capitalists pockets the change and gets a tax-cut to boot. Because that's all they want-a tax cut. That and the freedom to exploit the paranoia of the television watcher nation.
This November, the citizens of this country face one of the most important elections since the last one. They have a chance to vote for change that will end the sacrifices made by our heroes for a cause that has turned out to be unjust. They will have the oppurtunity to prevent more heroes needlessly wasted to fill an agenda that serves only those at the top, who have not had to sacrifice a thing.
The tyrants in power know how to manipulate the television-watchers. They know they cannot run on their economic policies, which have created record trade deficits. They have created record budget deficits. They have allowed more and more of our jobs to be siphoned off, so they can enjoy more money, and then refuse to take responsibility for the consequences of these actions. Record foreclosures. Slowing job growths. Slowing construction starts. Lay-offs. Can't take that path.
And they cannot run on their social agenda. Poison the environment. Legalize discrimination and intolerance. Establishing a theocracy to rival those in the Middle East.
So they're back to the one card in the deck they know how to play. National security. The first step, create a problem where no problem existed before. Last time, it was Iraq. Nobody liked Saddam anyway, so no-one would squeak if we took him out. Now our eyes are on another country. Our president tried to convince the world that we needed to stop them. Before they acquired the means to stand up to our agression. Every violation of the constitution is justified for "reasons of national security".
And how are they able to achieve this? The talking heads tell the televison-watchers topics to think about. Glenn Beck says Iran is up to something. Bill O'Reilly says waterboarding is safe and reliable. Free speech is bad, strip searches are good. As long as the television-watchers are terrified, they can do as they please.

October Surprise?

President Bush went to the UN today to press for the case for war, er, I mean sanctions against Iran for it's nuclear program. Sanctions are highly unlikely as Russia, China, and now, even France oppose them. Look for french fries to become freedom fries again in the not-too-distant future. The UN will once become irrelevant and Bush will push ahead with the PNAC plan to rebuild the middle east.
Bush needs all this to hapen before October, so he can use the flag waving American propaganda machine the keep his rubberstamp Congress and hoping that the television-watchers will give it to him. Then, he can relax, as he knows once he keeps his congress, he can persuade them to protect his ass from any danger of impeachment for any number of crimes he has committed, and possibly save him from being tried as the war criminal he is.
Before that can happen, he needs a terrorist attack, and what do you know, he gets one. Or at least the threat of one. That's all it takes for the television-watchers' paranoia to kick in and he can violate any law there is, as long as he justifies it by using national security and invoking 9/11, although that last one is just about used up.
Bush' speech will draw distinctions between countries that want peace, such as most of the countries in the region, and those extremists who want to spread terror and violence, such as the US and Israel.

"The world must stand up for peace."

They do, Mr. President. That's why they won't stand for you.