Last November we voted the Democrats in position because they promised us the reward of working in our interests. Slaps head...we could have had a V-8! I think the reality is that we really in the end knew this would happen. Oh...we didn't want it to...hoped it wouldn't...despite our honest efforts to prevent it. Our situation with the leadership that we have is just a pus filled sore waiting to split open and dump its contents onto an unsuspecting multitude of good honest folk. We actually believed our leaders and trusted them to do right by us...for one, they said that they would. I'm cynical just about all the time...and even I bought into it...because I desperately wanted someone to genuinely care.


We've needed someone to care about 'we the people' for 6 years now and counting. I feel I've pathetically had unrealistic hopes of a better world, better America...better everything because I want it desperately for all of us. I'm not a selfish person...I'm willing to share the good times, the inevitable ups...the downs...the highs...the lows...it's second nature to us now...like breathing out and breathing in...we've grown accustomed to our life. (thank you My Fair Lady!) Yet we don't want out way of life at the expense of innocents dying in Iraq. I can no longer face the TV scenes when a car bomb has gone off and you hear the inevitable numbers of the tolling of the dead.


With so much going on we have to pause to take it all in...in smaller proportions to even begin to make sense (if there's any to be had that is!) The bottom line ~ if the Democrats do not vote down the blank check Iraq War supplemental bill they are proposing, they will be complicit in the war, and should expect to feel the consequences in monumental proportions. If you vote for it...you now own it! Russ Feingold said in March..."The realization is growing that the only way to stop this thing is to use our power." But, power is not always used for good...and I know you've read that in some fairy tales in your childhood somewhere.

Now here's a weird situation if I ever heard one. Some politicians are afraid to "take political ownership" of the war by using their power to end it. So, in the meantime as they focus on their particular brand of politics...while people are dying...it becomes clear that Feingold is right. "If the Democrats don't use their power, when we're in the majority in both houses, we're going to start owning this war." Russ Feingold who seems a man of integrity swimming in a pool of sharks also said, “It is George Bush’s war, but if we don’t get serious we’re going to start owning this war.” This is a critical point that many politicians are seemingly forgetting right now. The president may have started the war, and may own it politically, but he was also elected in 2004 just the same...or even in spite of it.

So this brings us to an uncomfortable realization about his being elected...he was elected on honest pretenses as pertaining to the war technically. The Democrats on the other hand...were put into office with a great deal of grassroots effort in 2006...drum roll...because they promised to end the war. So...by their betrayal (that's what it is to me) they've just turned around and become complicit in the very war they promised to stop...which by definition gives them a bigger chunk of ownership of the war than our Fearless Decider...because (and hang in here with me) they have broken their word to "us" and our country. Pure and simple.

A lot of people are bystanders walking way round this issue and say they do not have the ability to stop the war...which of course makes them innocent mostly in their own hearts and minds...but we know the truth about the shape of their spines. November was a heady time of joy and elation that lasted several days. We thought we'd gotten our country back and would soon get it moving toward a better understanding of what the American people wanted and needed. And some of what we wanted and needed was to get out of Iraq and leave those poor people and their families alone. They'd endured enough destruction and death to last a lifetime. And we knew we'd spend a lifetime making it up to them if given the chance. But...Nancy Pelosi said she would vote against the blank check bill...but she won't use her power to actually stop the bill from moving forward. Does that sound like a person with no power?

I've said this myself...and many lawmakers say it also...that the war is Bush's responsibility...not mine...not theirs...he must develop a plan to end the war. But it certainly doesn't mean our lawmakers don't have many ways at their disposal to force him to develop a plan. Through timelines tied to funding is a good example. If our Congress had the guts to brandish its Constitutional power of the purse strings and cut off funding by a certain date...it should force Bush and his so-called military commanders to furnish a much needed redeployment plan.

I guess that is whistling in the wind for what that's worth. But we can hope...there's always that. But I don't see the future as a bright presence any time soon. I think we have far more hurdles to jump before we land on good solid ground with this situation. It would be so wonderful for the Dub to wake up one morning...smell the fragrance of the flowers blooming outside of his bedroom...and turn to Laura and say..."you know Pickles...this war has gone on long enough, and too many people have died over it. It's time we brought our people home." She'd sit up and look at him...reach for her glasses...and say..."Who are you and how did you get in here?"

Holy Smoke...James Dobson
Conservative chairman of religious group Focus on the Family, said he will never vote for Rudy . Sumo spews her soda on keyboards...damn!

Religious leader James Dobson will sit out the 2008 presidential election (if need be) if former NYC Mayor Rudy Guiliani is the Republican presidential nominee. Isn't that special?! In a piece published on the conservative Web site World Net Daily, Dobby wrote that Guiliani's support for abortion rights and civil unions for homosexuals, as well as the former mayor's 2 divorces, were a big fat downer for him.


He said he cannot, and will not, vote for Rudy in 2008. It is an irrevocable decision. Well...la de freakin' da! Okay Dob...so you don't agree with Rudy...so what! He said if he were given a choice between Rudy and the Hills or Barack...he'd either cast his ballot for an also-ran--or if worse comes to worst...(and you know it always does)...just not vote in the election for a president for the first time in his adult life. Apparently...he has a conscience and moral conviction...because it won't allow him to do anything else. Is it high on that pedestal Dobby? He is doing this as a private citizen and not on behalf of any organization or party. Yeah right! And of course the first time he endorsed a presidential candidate was in 2004...and you know who that was right?

Okay...so this guy can reach lots of people...he has a daily radio program (don't they all?) with gobs of listeners...and a the Family magazines have over 2 million subscribers. Big deal...so there are over 2 million numbnuts on the planet...as if we didn't know. Me...even so...you've got to give ol' Rudy credit for supporting a woman's right to abortion. He's been criticized up one side and down the other for it...and for a time tried to be ambiguous...but in the end...still came out and said he supports abortion rights. Thems hard waters to navigate these days. But that doesn't mean he gets a presidential pass from me in Sumoland for that. Shoot...I hate abortion but I still stand for women's rights. I haven't needed one...but if I did...I'd sure want to have the right to consider it for myself. It's not other people's business. I hate lima beans...but I have no right to go to your house and stop you from eating them.

So Dobby says that Rudy isn't presidential timber. What's up with that? Since when did a president have to be a tree. I know George Washington chopped one down when he was a kid. I know that Abe Lincoln logged or something for a time. Dobson said..."Can we really trust a chief executive who waffles and feigns support for policies that run contrary to his alleged beliefs?" This sounds like the man of the cloth is getting a tad judgmental to me...and I thought these Bible thumpers knew their good book. So he's troubled by what he already knows about Rudy. So the right and brotherly thing to do is spread gossip about someone that you disagree with. Way to go God Guy Dobson.

Dobby says there are moral concerns about Guiliani's candidacy that other conservatives should find troubling. Well Dobson...I find your morality a concern and very troubling mister! People should think twice and then think again before they listen to a gossip monger and a judgmental religious leader that more than anything likes to listen to his own voice. Dobs...we don't give a rat's behind what you think or have to say about anything...except while I was expounding on your bad qualifications as a religious leader for this post that is. Heh heh! Have you been to the doctor to have your arteries checked lately? There seems to be a decline in the health here lately...just dropping dead almost like flies.

Jerry's punishment from his Lord...
to be resurrected like the flying Nun that just happens to look like Elvis...
Oh well...








Heh heh...gang...it's Lucifer here...just thought I'd drop in and say howdy to you all out there in the land of the living...for now that is. Yeah I've got some plans up my sleeve that you'll find interesting...you always do! Yeah...ol' Jer was taking too much of the limelight lately...so I recalled him. That's right I called him back home where he is needed to help keep the other crooks and liars in line while I go out looking for more worthy candidates. I still have levels in the Inferno that haven't been inhabited yet...some that Dante (that little devil) never was privy too...though he thought he was in the know...if you know what I mean!

You know...Jerry keeps the conversations going around here real good. People just are never at a loss for things to yell at him across the void of roiling flames. Tempers get a tad short around here sometimes...but I try to be understanding. Jerry is the new celebrity for now...or however long that lasts...because...see...I have this other guy on the hook and I'm about ready to reel his old ass in too. This guy hasn't got an excuse in the world for staying up there after some of the many...and I mean many...uncool things he's done...and some of it was to his friends no less!
His snarl alone will get him a good spot on the hottest level I guarantee you that! I know you think I'd be doing the world a favor...but actually I am thinking of all the many creatures of the Lord out in the forests and such. I do care about woodland critters you know...don't believe all the hype you hear about me...a lot of it isn't true...no really...seriously it isn't true. But...let's get back to the Big Dick again. You know? He makes me shiver in my red tights sometimes too...I've even lost the grip on my pitchfork a time or two. Betcha thought I was going to say sanity...come on...that's what you thought...you know you did! No...this guy really has done some damage in your world...and right now I am having a special down stairs...kind of a bargain basement kind of thing if you know what I mean? So send me those letters and emails and tell me how you really feel about this wanker...so I can make an informed decision. I don't want to be red in the face with embarrassment if I were to be too premature about it...if you know what I mean. Thanks...tah tah!

PS...just so's you know...Pat Robertson is looming large...if you know what I mean?

And thanks to the people that let me steal their pics...I'll take it into consideration when your turn for the worm comes...no really...I will!

I know everyone is absolutely stunned at the passing (?) of the only fat mortal to denigrate the Tink of Wink...better know as TinkyWink. Sad times surely lie ahead for us all...being the degenerates that we are...or perhaps just me. I did not hear of Jerry's passing (?) with anything resembling melancholy...no sir...not me. I rejoiced in it...reveled in fact that at last a terrible discordant voice had at last been stilled.

How does one describe a man of the so called cloth that held the amount of bigotry in that empty black heart...a man of the Lord? One doesn't...because he held secrets...dark secrets in his breast that he cloaked in religion...and the Lord's work that he was compelled to perform. If there really is a God...s/he should really look into the people that claim to represent his/her Godness...because so many of them make a mockery of the very diety they claim to represent.

I'm sure on one hand he presented his God as a merciful and loving God...one that loves all people and creatures of the earth...after all...s/he created them...right? That sounds rather like the intent to treat people and creatures equally to me. Oh...I know man has the dominion over the animals and the fishes of the sea...I know the drill. But if man were created in the Divine one's image...(love, faith, intelligence and mercy...or something like that...it's been a long time for me)...then why would a professed religious leader have such hate in his heart for others that God would automatically love equally?

That brings us to Jerry's selection of his choices for evil doers. Gays, Lesbians, anyone not white and a fundamentalist, democrats, same sex marriage, abortion...and a little something called free speech. He took it into his mind that free speech guaranteed by the Constitution...and written by some of the best minds in generations before and to come...that free speech wasn't such a good thing. Of course...he was completely free to say whatever he chose about others. He called Desmond TuTu a phony. That one really sticks in my throat. But one day he thought he'd tangle with Larry Flynt of Hustler fame and found that being the God Guy didn't seem to work for him this time.

Jerry tried to sue Larry for printing an advertisement for Campari (an apertif) that talked about a person's first time. It was a light hearted attempt with celebrities in mind. It lead people down the path that ol' Jerry had done IT with his mother-in-law in an outhouse. It was a parody. Well Larry got a fine...and then took it to the Supreme Court...that's right... Flynt appealed to the Supreme Court, which ruled UNANIMOUSLY for him in Hustler Magazine v. Falwell. The opinion, written by Chief Justice William Rehnquist, found that creators of parodies of public figures are protected against civil liability by the First Amendment, unless the parody includes false statements of fact made in knowing or reckless disregard for the truth.

No one could believe that Sandra Day O'Connor, Antonin Scalia, William Rehnquist and others would side with what was considered a pornographer vs. a preacher. The rule of the day was for free speech. It wasn't that Larry won that day...it was that the 1st Amendment won that day in all its glory...free speech stood alone in that moment in time...and ruled the day. Falwell was the detritus left at the side of the road of truth and right. You and I won that day of days...I'll never forget it. The Justices saw what was really at stake...and did the right thing. That must have clogged at least one of Jerry's arteries that very day from disappointment...and his lack of understanding how a righteous Dude like himself could possibly lose...but lose he did...and it was a marvelous thing to behold.

So we still had years to go listening to his judgments and pronouncements on people and their lives and what abject sinners they were. Being a bigot, homophobe, hate monger, glutton, man of avarice about town, I'll throw in liar, certainly greed (because we all know the preachers always need money for God)...not sure about lust...but he sure did talk about it a lot...so I'm suspicious I admit. Now by his girth alone I think he may have had a Henry the Vlll complex or something. Let's face it...the guy was a tub of lard! I think he enjoyed a little too much steak and lobster and maybe throw in a lot of alfredo sauce...some wine...and you have a major heart attack in the making.

Now I figure that he spent most of his religious life helping to fill people's heart with hate for others not involved in their fundamentalist views...even to the point of putting down Martin Luther King Jr. So for preaching hate to his followers and intolerance of others (in soooo many ways)...I nominate Jerry for a turn with the worms of eternity. May he not rest in peace...with the kind of body fat he carried around I'd say that he'll keep the creatures of the underworld gnawing happy for some time to come.

And during that time...he might reflect on his mistakes to his fellow man...equal in the sight of his God mind you...and suffer the pangs of the damned as according to his bible...he should be tormented for not following in the footsteps of his Christ who led a simple and pure life...and looked upon all men as worthy of love and kindness...something our Jerry was not capable of...ever. Was there not a commandment of the 10...that said love thy neighbor as thyself? He must not have liked himself. People look to denigrate others in order to make themselves look good...what a very sad day for religion that is indeed.

These are two quizzes to help determine which candidate best reflects your views.  Good luck...I didn't care for my results as it turns out.

http://www.speakout.com/Vot...

http://www.selectsmart.com/...

Have you been scratching your head trying to comprehend what in the world is going on in this country, look no further. I kept seeing more and more internet chatter about Ron Paul, Republican candidate for President and finally took the time to listen to his famous "We've Been Neoconned" address. It's lengthy, sobering and to me, is like someone slapping Americans in the face and yelling, "Wake up, Wake up!"

Here is a link to the video of that now banned by the mainstream media, especially Fox News and feared by the Neocon community.

Here is a link to the transcript.

Here is a link to Congressman Ron Paul Archives of other speeches.

"To the world you might just be one person, but to the one person you might just be the world"...

Mothers have been recognized in special ways for thousands of years. It's celebrated in over 40 countries around the world. An exact date and the reason it is celebrated, however, varies from one country to another since Ancient Greece. Here are some examples of today's Mother's Day celebrations done worldwide.

In the United Kingdom...

In England it is more popularly know as Mothering Sunday, the origins of the holiday date back to centuries when it was considered important for churchgoers to visit their home or "mother" church once a year. During Lent, the practice became quite popular, and in a society where children were often sent off to work in other villages at a very young age, it quickly became a time for family reunions and celebrations that were cherished. A special cake was usually provided for a festive touch to the celebration. Later, Mothering Sunday became a day when children and domestic servants were allowed a day off to see their families. Celebrated on the fourth Sunday of Lent, Mothering Sunday remains a time to pay mothers homage for all their love and encouragement with flowers, candies, cards, and other tokens of appreciation.

In America...

AMERICA'S FIRST MOTHER

It's said that Mother's Day was first suggested in the United States by Julia Ward Howe* in 1872 as a day dedicated to peace after the Franco Prussian War. The holiday gained its popularity mostly due to the efforts of Anna M. Jarvis. With the help of friends Anna began a letter-writing campaign to gather support for a national Mother's Day holiday when her mother passed away in 1905. She reached out to influential leaders, including William Taft, Theodore Roosevelt, and John Wannamaker...sending out solicitations for support of the idea. She believed mothers deserved their own special day and that it would help strengthen a families bonds. She persuaded her mother's church in West Virginia to celebrate Mother's Day on the 2nd anniversary of her mother's death, the 2nd Sunday of May. By 1911 Mother's Day was celebrated in almost every state, and flowers quickly became a lasting tradition to express love on that occasion. In 1914, Congress passed a resolution designating the 2nd Sunday in May as Mother's Day..."a public expression of love and reverence for the mothers of our country." President Woodrow Wilson issued the first proclamation making it an official U.S. holiday.

Other countries that celebrate Mother's Day on the 2nd Sunday in May include: Australia, Belgium, Canada, Denmark, Finland, Italy, Japan and Turkey.

In India...

Like the West, Indians also take Mother's Day as a time to reflect on the importance of their mothers in their lives. This day is the time to say a big thank you to Mother. The Hindu people celebrate for ten days in October in a festival they call Durga Puja. Durga is the name of a goddess who protects the people from evil and is also known as The Universal Mother. People send cards to their mothers, invitations for a meal so that she can have a days rest from the kitchen. They also enjoy giving out "goodies"...many tasty treats to be shared by all.

In Spain...

The holiday in Spain is more centered around religion, people respect and remember the Virgin Mary on December 8. Children also honor their own mothers on this day too.

In New Zealand...

This day is celebrated on the 2nd Sunday in the month of May just as in America. And since the idea of celebrating Mother's Day has come from the United States, the manner of their celebration is much the same. On Mother's Day people of New Zealand thank their mothers and recognize their efforts in bringing them up and caring for them. There is much excitement over the day and people celebrate it by going out for picnics and dinners. It is a very busy shopping time for Vendors...because the people make a point of buying gifts much like we do in America.

In Yugoslavia...

Their Mother's Day is observed two weeks before Christmas. The children sneak into their mother's bedroom and tie her up in bed. When she awakes she promises to give the children gifts that she has hidden in order to be untied.

In South Africa...

It is celebrated on the 1st Sunday of May. They celebrate their Mother's Day in its spirit by acknowledging the importance of mothers in their lives and thanking them profusely for all their love and care. Mothers receive flowers and cards as an expression of their heartfelt feelings of gratitude and affection.

In Japan...

Young children draw pictures called "My Mother" and enter them into an exhibit. This exhibit then travels to many different countries around the world.

In Canada...

Mother's Day is the most popular festival after Christmas and Valentines Day. It too is celebrated like America on the 2nd Sunday of the month of May. People pay tribute to their mothers on this day and thank them for their constant support and love. Cards and flowers are the most commonly used methods of expressing love for moms.

In Sweden...

They sell little plastic flowers before Mother's Day. They then use the money they they make from these flowers to send the mothers with many children on a vacation. They celebrate Mother's Day the last Sunday in May.

In Mexico...

Mother's Day, or Dia de las Madres, is May 10th in Mexico. It's a very popular occasion celebrated throughout the country, with special events sponsored by schools, churches, cities, and civic groups. The family tradition is for sons and daughters to come to their mother's house on the eve of Mother's Day. Festive Mother's Day masses, handmade gifts, flowers, cards, and children's school presentations are also often part of the nationwide observance.

Other countries that celebrate Mother's Day on May 10th include: Bahrain, Hong Kong, Malaysia, Oman, Pakistan, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and Singapore.

In Ireland...

Ireland's Mother's Day is celebrated on the 4th Sunday in the Christian fasting month of Lent. This corresponds to the day on which Mothering Day is celebrated in the United Kingdom...of course very close to Ireland. And just as in may other countries, people in Ireland honor their mothers on this occasion for all their love and affection.

Other Nations:

Similar holidays are common throughout the world, including Argentina (2nd Sunday in October), France (last Sunday in May), Lebanon (1st day of Spring), Norway (2nd Sunday in February), and Serbia (2 weeks before Christmas). The festival of Mother's Day is based on the emotions shared between mother and a child.

* And as far as Julia Ward Howe...being considered as an advocate for a national observation of Mother's Day is clearly denied by her own writing. In her "Reminiscences"...Howe states that she was in great opposition to Louis Napoleon from the period of the infamous act of treachery and violence, which made him Emperor. She wondered, "Why do not mothers of mankind interfere in these matters, to prevent the waste of that human life of which they alone bear and know the cost?" She felt if she sent an appeal to womanhood throughout the world that the waste of human life in war could be prevented. Howe's document referred to as "Howe's Mother's Day Proclamation" was not a proclamation about motherhood or her own mother in the sense that Mother's Day is expressed today but rather it was an anti-war movement. There is a photo of Howe dressed in black holding up a sign that reads..."Give peace a chance"...as we saw many do during the Vietnam War. And we find this happening now in this generation with the Wars in the Middle East with thousands protesting loud and clear about war.

So those in countries whom are not torn by the strife of war are able to enjoy the freedom of celebrating Mother's Day. Some mothers in America and it's allies will not be having a happy Mother's Day. Their children may have already lost their lives or become maimed permanently by a useless war. The mothers in the war affected Middle East also will lament the passing of their own children...and in turn comes the day when there will be children in pain from the death of their mothers from a useless...needless war. "All we are saying...is give PEACE a chance!"

The abortion rights “forces” you speak of are not a brutal army of baby haters.  We are mothers, fathers, and doctors, filled with love and compassion for all human life. Where we differ from you Mr. Brooks, is through our personal experience and depth of understanding on this issue.  We understand the complexities involved because we HAVE “looked this matter in the face.” We are offended by your cheap shots, moral indignation, and attempts to focus societal shame on grieving mothers like Julia.

We differ because we trust our doctors more than your politicians.  We differ because we also trust women.  We trust them to be moral, and ethical, and intelligent, as they face these issues head on, and we certainly don’t need uninformed people like you telling well trained doctors what to do. 

As for Thomas, his mother and father made the choice end the suffering of their beloved child.  They did this with heavy hearts, after many days of deep contemplation and prayer.  They did this on the advice of their doctors, and they did it with the welfare of Baby Thomas as their primary concern.  They wanted more time to decide, but were forced to move fast because of late term abortion laws. They discovered Thomas’s condition at 22 weeks, and were told the late term abortion law of 24 weeks was their deadline.  They wanted more time to consult with medical professionals and clergy, but people like you prevented that.

Julia writes: “In a procedure very similar to an amniocentesis, Thomas’s heart was stopped with a simple injection.  In that moment, as I held my husband’s hand, I met God and handed him my precious boy to care for, for all eternity.  Over the next 17 hours I labored to deliver Thomas’s body. It was a painful experience, but the only option given to a woman at 24 weeks gestation. Thomas Stephen was born into this world just after 6:00 a.m. on November 27, 2002 – the day before Thanksgiving.  The loving nurse who’d helped us through labor cleaned his fragile body and brought him to us. We held our boy for the next hour as we said goodbye. Our own eyes confirmed what our hearts had already come to know: that Thomas was not meant for this world. Thomas’s life and death have changed our lives in ways we will never fully comprehend… Through him, I’ve grown closer to God, who understands what it is to sacrifice your only begotten son in the name of mercy.”

That Mr. Brooks, is the face of late term abortion, and no matter how many essays you write about cute little heartbeats and hands, YOU SIR, have no business in that hospital room, unless God forbid, the child you speak of is your own.

In conclusion, I ask the editorial staff of The Dispatch to consider the personal pain inflicted on real people like Julia and her husband when a one sided article like this is printed by a pundit with credentials from The New York Times.  I hope in the future The Dispatch will work hard to ensure that both sides of every issue are presented fairly, in the unbiased manner expected of professional journalism.

cross-posted fromThe Fat Lady Sings...

WASHINGTON — The House Republican leader said Sunday that GOP support could waver if President Bush's Iraq war policy does not succeed by the fall. A top Democrat said it would be "ridiculous" to stop insisting on linking new war money and a troop withdrawal.

House Minority Leader John Boehner, R-Ohio, said Bush's troop increase deserves a shot.

"We don't even have all of the 30,000 additional troops in Iraq yet, so we're supporting the president. We want this plan to have a chance of succeeding," he said.

"Over the course of the next three to four months, we'll have some idea how well the plan's working. Early signs are indicating there is clearly some success on a number of fronts," he said.

But, he added, "By the time we get to September or October, members are going to want to know how well this is working, and if it isn't, what's Plan B?"

Thus far, Republicans have stood behind the president's increasingly unpopular war policies, including the troop increase and an open-ended war commitment.

http://www.huffingtonpost.c...

The United States Army is continuing along in Iraq, with as healthy an appreciation of self as your average heroin junky or to be even more precise, a hardcore gasoline huffing aficionado hunkered over its favorite can. Woozy, deteriorated and schizophrenic, this urge-driven beast has absolutely no sense of reality at this point, and is continuously having its face pushed down into the brain-cell destroying fumes by a never ending succession of glory whores who want to be the next Dwight Eisenhower.

One after another they attach their own dreams to a depraved submissive posture, and for the most part attempt to ride out their time in charge with enough competent-looking video and audio clips to keep their careers calibrated in a steady upward progression. They'll do everything but man-up and represent something other than themselves, with those officers looking up to them passing down the trait to every level beneath. This homicidal ambition is directly responsible for the continued abuse of enlisted soldiers.

Ambition plagues the officer corps now worse than it ever has in the past, and the fundamental weaknesses of our Army are being exposed so vividly today because of it. Simply put, when you offer an Army officer two choices - their dignity or the possibility of a promotion - there will always be people willing expose themselves by choosing the latter. It has been a hallmark of this period of war, for high ranking Army officers to gladly trade in the welfare of their enlisted soldiers in exchange for the opportunity to lick the shoes of someone a step or two higher in the chain of command.

At this point the privates, specialists and sergeants are toiling for one basic concept, and it has nothing to do with the future of Iraq or its people. It is really for the ambition and future job prospects of someone like General Peter Pace, that so many unnecessary hardships are wrought upon the masses of enlisted soldiers, some of whom may rightly feel at this point that they're nothing more than slaves. Predeployment standards that Representative Murtha proposed to include in the emergency funding bill, that Bush just vetoed, stand as a testament to how utterly spineless the Army brass continues to be.

Unless critical training prior to deployment, minimum unit readiness guidelines regarding equipment and personnel or the regulation minimum amount of rest time between deployments are all understood to be "quaint" ala the Geneva Conventions, why wouldn't it fall on these so-called leaders of our Army to stand up and provide a voice for all the soldiers counting on them to do so? Is the possibility of being smeared and involuntarily retired so much worse than having to see our bravest Americans continue to live through this horror of broken promises day after day? From my vantage point the answer is "YES!"

Take General David Patraeus for example. He's making statements now about the realities of our occupation, and apparently the specific skill-sets regarding anti-insurgency operations, that were supposed to make his appointment an upgrade to General George Casey, haven't produced the magical results his chariot ride into Iraq was going to create. Republicans hoist him and Army Field Manual 3-24, which he wrote, as proof that we're now on the right track. So much more intellectual-sounding than their moldy oldies (we're fighting them there so we don't have to fight them here; Osama bin Laden wins if we withdraw), but just as nonsensical.

I imagine that along with the Patriot Act and most other pieces of legislation passed in the past six years, most of these Republicans who claim to believe in FM 3-24 and the plan to apply its wisdom to one city within the entire country haven't even read it. Let alone taken the plan and referred back to General Eric Shinseki's prediction of the amount of troops needed to provide ample security in an occupied Iraq. That small amount of critical thinking and research alone would have prompted one of them to do some arithmetic and realize that there aren't enough available soldiers to make a difference at this point. And even that obvious reason to be pessimistic doesn't compare with the red flags that go up constantly when you're actually reading through the pages of FM 3-24.

Without too many words I can sum up the problem with General Patraeus' work (which by the way, I found to be fascinating on a lot of levels and consider to be a brilliant piece of military literature) and that is the simple fact that the stated preconditions and environmental resources required to carry out the prescribed tactics, that according to the manual are necessary to achieve victory, are impossible to meet and/or obtain. The overall strategy put forth in FM 3-24 relies on tactics that cannot be applied at all to the situation in Iraq, and I will highlight a couple for you here:

Pg3: "Conducting a successful counterinsurgency campaign thus requires a flexible, adaptive force led by agile, well-informed, culturally astute leaders".

Our military leaders invaded without an understanding of the culture, and today it is practically impossible for our soldiers and marines to be "well-informed" and/or "culturally astute" on either a micro or macro level.

Pg. 48: "3-1. Counterinsurgency (COIN) is an intelligence war...3-2. Intelligence in COIN is about people. U.S. forces must understand the people of the host nation, the insurgents, and the host-nation (HN) government. Commanders and planners must have insight into cultures, perceptions, values, beliefs, interests and decision-making processes of individuals and groups. These requirements are the basis for collection and analytical efforts. 3-3. Intelligence and operations feed back on one another. Effective intelligence drives effective operations, which produce more intelligence. Similarly, ineffective or inaccurate intelligence produces ineffective operations, which reduce the availability of intelligence."

Intelligence gathering within Iraq is as close to "Mission Impossible" as it gets. Not only does the military lack personnel that can speak Arabic fluently, but there is absolutely no incentive for locals to risk helping U.S. forces, as they will not be provided protection for themselves or their families, nor will they be allowed to immigrate to the United States. They will either be dead or forced to flee into Jordan, Syria or another Middle East nation that is already overrun with refugees. Not to mention the fact that upwards to 3/4 of the population now views U.S. forces as the enemy, a sentiment which was cemented following the Abu Gharib evidence becoming public.

Pg 112: 6-1. Success in COIN requires the establishment of a legitimate government which has the support of the people and is able to address the fundamental causes that the insurgents use to gain popular support. Achieving these goals requires the host nation to defeat or render irrelevant the insurgent forces, uphold the rule of law, and provide a basic level of essential services and security for the population. Key to all these tasks is the development of an effective host-nation (HN) security force."

McClatchy reports that "Training Iraqi troops, which had been the cornerstone of the Bush administration's Iraq policy since 2005, has dropped in priority, officials in Baghdad and Washington said."

Pg 141: 7-42. Abuse of detained persons is immoral, illegal, and unprofessional...Torture and cruel, inhumane, and degrading treatment is never a morally permissible option, even in situations where lives depend on gaining information. No exceptional circumstances permit the use of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment.

These are but a handful of examples out of hundreds that when combined, result in perhaps 10% of the information in this field manual actually being applicable to the mission in Iraq. If the overarching point about counterinsurgency being an "intelligence war" is taken to heart, the mission is already a failure. Likewise, if the requisite of a host government that can "uphold the rule of law, and provide a basic level of essential services and security for the population" is something that is necessary, the mission is already a failure. The Iraqi government deciding to now go on a two month vacation should really tell us all we need to know about that, as well as the pathetic level of effectiveness our State Department is operating at.

And it is because of these things that General Patraeus, like General Pace, is nothing but a bookmark. He may not mind this distinction, and like General Casey before him, may even ruffle some Republican feathers in Congress and the White House by telling the truth every so often. With the treatment Casey received during testimony following the end of his time in charge from people like Senator McCain, any delusions of grandeur being harbored about a political career after retirement should be reconciled accordingly. Pace is holding out hope, as was clear when he told America while wearing his uniform, that gays shouldn't be allowed in the military.

He is speaking his mind, and as long as that protocol is out the window, I suppose the slaves deserve their day in front of the microphone as well, no? I highlighted an event that took place a couple months ago, where a document called the 'Appeal for Redress' was presented to Congress and signed by over 1250 military personnel (1912 as of this moment) and read:

As a patriotic American proud to serve the nation in uniform, I respectfully urge my political leaders in Congress to support the prompt withdrawal of all American military forces and bases from Iraq . Staying in Iraq will not work and is not worth the price. It is time for U.S. troops to come home.

Following a segment on 60 Minutes where several of the signers and the originators of the idea appeared, there was a blanket of uncharacteristic tenderness on the part of our military towards these individuals, and the fact that they were well within their rights to speak out was affirmed by Pentagon officials. I happened to connect through correspondence with some of those featured in the 60 Minutes segment and others who post their thoughts on the internet. Following the broadcast they had nothing to report along the lines of repercussions or intimidation. Was the "law" enough of an authority all of a sudden for the US military and this government in particular to not bury these volunteers?

With the conditions at Walter Reed as a backdrop, it wasn't worth it I suppose, but in the same way that they went through the motions in response to all of that, they simply waited out the attention being paid to the 'Appeal for Redress'. Indeed, more than one of my sources (I will not specify who, where or how for obvious reasons) have reported a backlash within the past month, and they are scared. Having been in the Army, I know that nothing good can come from potentially exposing their identities, so you will have to take me at my word. To vouch for what I'm alleging though, consider the sudden burst of information that appeared all of a sudden on the internet after the stories broke.

A couple sites had been up and running prior, with testimonials posted, but within the past couple months, as more and more soldiers and marines began to realize their government had turned its back on them, the sheer volume of people telling similar stories managed to grow and sustain itself over time (while adding videos). And while the federal government and military under the command of George W. Bush has zero interest in things like PTSD, enlistment waivers for violent criminals, stop-loss, veterans' health care, a viable strategy in Iraq, etc...they have decided that all this truth being told by the slaves is simply unacceptable. Hence the new policy being enforced, making it a punishable offense for any slave to record or share their thoughts and ideas over the World Wide Web (email, blogs, websites, message boards).

The U.S. Army has ordered soldiers to stop posting to blogs or sending personal e-mail messages, without first clearing the content with a superior officer, Wired News has learned. The directive, issued April 19, is the sharpest restriction on troops' online activities since the start of the Iraq war. And it could mean the end of military blogs, observers say. (Source)

I have no doubt whatsoever that there hasn't been a series of documented leaks of classified information through military personnel posting their thoughts on the internet, and that this new restriction has everything to do with the fact that the truth regarding how poorly the US government has been treating its slaves is something they would rather no one knew about. Turns out, it's just as easy to stop this sort of thing in our country as it would be for Russia. As if the troops haven't earned the right to expect adequate medical care, rest between deployments, proper training or the best armor (if any) for their bodies and vehicles that money could buy - now they are having their rights taken away. Now they are told that their thoughts are US government property.

What might the Joint Chiefs of Staff have to say about this? If history is any indication, General Pace is shining the president's shoes or walking Barney right about now, and even if he wasn't tied up with those more important tasks, he's got a political career to think about and doesn't really give a damn about any of this anyhow. True, these slaves all fall underneath his framed 8x10 in the chain of command, but so what? Same for every other general with enough clout to speak up and be taken seriously I suppose. I'm sure they've got plenty of good reasons to ignore everything that is happening that shouldn't be, but the most prevalent excuse is the one they fail to even consider..."I'm too scared and self-absorbed at this point to be a leader. I too am a slave."

These are supposed to be positions of honor, but I'd bet that you're more likely to find that quality in higher doses within the enlisted ranks at this point. Honor is not a word that deserves to exist in the same room as these generals and their tough-guy bullshit persona, as for all the misery they oversee and exacerbate for a living, none of them come close enough to the horror their soldiers are faced with every day for it to compare at all with that thrill of personal aggrandizement that comes with promotions and extra rows of medals that advertise to the world and even more importantly, to their own mirrors, how extraordinary they are, how special.

I'm full of enough statements from retired generals at this point to know that all of them saying the same thing while standing in front of the White House holding megaphones up to their lips (there's an idea!) won't make a difference. The onus is on Patraeus and Pace and the star-studded whores at this point, to prove that they're something more than a gaggle of cowards...to prove that they've got enough character to know deep down inside that the time for simply taking orders and running through thorn bushes for the sake of a thankless tyrant is over. Do these men continue to pretend that they represent all those who serve under them, or do they ignore the obvious until its time for another bookmark to take their place?
cross-posted@TheBlueRepublic

All niceties aside, and one inescapable fact remains; this war on terror or the liberation of Iraq or the democratization of the Middle East or what ever the devil it has been the past four years has been a colossal failure since the day one. Absolutely nothing has improved during those long and bloody years and nothing will, no matter how much hawks in the House keep their fingers crossed and prayers going. We know, for sure, the following: 1.  Iraq, as it is today, is a failed state with no functioning government. 2.  Al Maliki has no credibility to pull the factions together and, by many accounts, is not even trying to do so. His agenda is, and will be, to strengthen the Shiite position. To America put their eggs in his basket is not only counterproductive but insane to boot. 3.  Nobody with any power in Iraq sees the situation the way the Bush Administration does. They are not interested in some sort of a pie in the sky dream of the unified Iraq for those days went away already more than three years ago, if they ever were there. 4. There is absolutely no desire for negotiations between the sects about the power sharing. This occupation has managed to destroy perhaps the most secular nation in the ME to the extent, that de facto civil war is simmering right now and the full blown one, unfortunately, has to follow to settle the score. 5.  Americans are just trying to imitate that legendary Dutch boy who inserted his finger in the crack of a dyke to hold off the flooding. Unfortunately, this is not a legend and American presence will do nothing to change an outcome in this tragedy. You can spend another gazillion bucks there the next 25 yrs and this bottomless pit will keep eating up your men, women, Iraqis of all kinds and accomplish nothing worthwhile. You either get the heck out or stay permanently in Iraq. Your money, your soldiers, your choice. Enjoy! It's fun to see what people from other countries are thinking about what happens here and  in Iraq.

I doubt that you will be reading this, because...well, you don’t read. And certainly your inner-circle of hero worshipping protectors won’t allow anything negative to disturb your detached world view. But, as you must be aware by now, you suck at being president. This should not be a surprise, of course, because you’ve sucked at every other thing you’ve ever done.

You were a mediocre student at Andover prep school, and really only excelled at being a cheerleader. You were named head cheerleader – wonder if the good ole boys in Texas know that? Then you got into Yale as a legacy – the old man was a graduate, and was pretty rich by then. You pulled “c” grades.

Then the Vietnam War was kind of a problem. So your daddy got some friends to get the Speaker of the Texas House of Representatives to get you into the Guard. Back in those days, being in the Air National Guard pretty much guaranteed you wouldn’t have to go overseas. Kind of ironic that you’re the one that has changed all that. Of course you didn’t even finish your tour of duty in the Guard. Just refused taking orders any more, and stopped showing up. Good thing you had friends (or your daddy did, anyway) that could take care of that for you. Later, of course, some more good friends “cleaned” those Guard records for you. You do have loyal friends – just not loyal to the law, moral principles, or to their country.

Oh yeah, and you ran for congress and lost. That should have told you something George. When the people who know you best don’t think you’re smart enough to be a congressman…well that’s not good. I don’t want to name names, but the U.S. House of Representatives is full of people barely able to tie their own shoes.

Remember the oil company your daddy’s friends financed for you. That didn’t go so well, did it? You basically ran that puppy into the ground – though in fairness you were doing “blow” and hitting the bottle pretty good back then. Then, in a move Bill Frist would have admired, you sold all your stock and the company went bankrupt.

Remember how you unloaded you shares about two months before the company announced a big loss? Remember how that triggered a big investigation by the Securities and Exchange Commission? For some reason the SEC took no action. Let’s see, that was in 1990 – who was president in 1990? Oh yeah, your daddy.

Then there was that time when your old frat buddy Roland Betts got you involved in movie producing; where your greatest achievement was a “B” slasher movie called “The Hitcher” staring Rutger Hauer (“the thinking mans Dolph Lundgren”). You didn’t know anything about the movie industry, but you did know those cocaine-snorting freaks knew where to get the really good stuff.

Then you got lucky and “bought” the Texas Rangers baseball team in a sweetheart deal. Of course this involved a lot of controversy, lots of tax payer dollars, and the seizing of lands for a fraction of its value. You only invested about $600,000 of your “own money”, but tax-payers were into it for $135 million. In the end it all worked out great for you – when the Rangers were sold you banked about $17 million. This, despite the fact that your most notable management decision was trading away Sammy Sosa.

The Rangers experience was a turning point for you Mr. President. You still sucked really, really bad at managing stuff, but you started making money. All those family “friends” who had kept you out of the war, and financed you failed business ventures were now starting to pay off in the wallet as well. You had finally become a successful “crony capitalist”.

Then came the Governorship of Texas. Of course Texas has what is known as a “weak governor” form of state government, but you were able to turn that on its head somewhat. You did manage to “relax” the pollution laws for the energy companies in Texas. And by relaxed, of course, I mean you “jack booted” them into a bloody limp amorphous blob and drowned them in your toilet. Thanks to your environmental policies, Texas is the only state no longer visible from the air.

You did manage to cut taxes for the rich, and bankrupt the state's treasury. But I guess your proudest achievement must have been allowing more executions (including some mentally impaired folks) than any Governor in American history.

After lining the pockets of the rich, economically crippling your home state, making it an environmental disaster, and killing a lot of mostly poor people of color...a lot of Republicans felt you were ready to bring those same policies to a national stage. And so you decided to run for President (or, have it your way, God decided). I guess with people like Karl Rove saying things like "huge amounts of charisma, swagger, cowboy boots, flight jacket, wonderful smile, just charisma - you know, wow” it must be very tempting to believe that crap. Though, frankly, most men would be really creeped out knowing their chief political advisor had a hard-on for them.

So you ran, and you lost by 500,000 votes, but your brother and some other political operatives pulled some crap in Florida, and disqualified a lot of votes, and then your daddy’s appointments to the Supreme Court made you President. It’s not the ideal way to get into the White House but you got there, and while most people that paid attention to the campaign regarded you as both stupid and unprincipled (that crap your people pulled in the South Carolina primary was really pretty disgusting), they at least were going to cut you some slack and see if you were going to be inclusive...and try to be the President of all the people.

You weren’t.

It was clear from the beginning your Presidency was going to be the embodiment of all the warnings over all the years that Democrats had said would happen if the Republicans truly got power. It frankly had gotten kind of embarrassing repeating the warning that the Republicans were the party for the rich. But I guess progressives will never have to worry about defending those accusations again.

The list of truly record shattering dumb-butt achievements of your time in office is too long to list here, but I’ll just remind you of a few highlights. The war in Iraq is certainly the biggest foreign policy blunder in U.S. history. You inherited a projected 10-year budget surplus of $5.6 trillion, and reversed that trend immediately.  We're now at over $500 billion in the red.  The national debt is approaching 9 trillion dollars! That represents over $400 billion of interest per year, and roughly $240 billion will be spent this year paying interest on the half that's held by public creditors (of which Japan and China are the largest). You’ve cut more benefits for the poor and gave more tax breaks to the rich than any other President in history. There is a very real possibility that much of your administration will eventually be indicted for a variety of crimes against our nation. The only bills you’ve ever seriously threatened to veto is one that reaffirms America’s historic opposition to torture and another spending bill that would help mitigate your disastrous policies in Iraq. And then there was KATRINA!!  Oh, and you take more vacations than a French hooker.

Mr. President, you are both a product of cronyism and a practitioner. You appoint cronies to important offices for which they are not only unqualifiedly but dangerously inept. Your tenure in office has not been one that will look too good in the history books. One hundred years from now students will be confused and ask their professors, “which one of the Bush Presidents was the really lousy President and which one was the total screw-up?”. Do not ask for whom the bell tolls G.W. – it tolls for thee.
cross-posted@The Blue Republic

Citizen's Iraq/Iran Foreign Policy Initiative to Speaker Pelosi We, the undersigned, urge Speaker Nancy Pelosi to do everything in her power to achieve the following: -- Bring our troops home from Iraq by the end or 2007; -- Mandate that the Bush administration get authorization from Congress before any attack on Iran; -- Begin investigations to see if there are grounds to start impeachment proceedings against George Bush and Dick Cheney. We thank you for your kind attention. http://www.democracyinactio...