Excuse me, but do you ENJOY being in the minority?
Excuse me, but do you ENJOY being in the minority?
This morning the Wall Street Journal reported that Senate Democrats were planning “to grill Bush confidant Karen Hughes” about her involvement in the ever widening leak-case. But, Senate Democrats must have gotten lost on the way to the hearing. Not one showed up. Instead, according to the Associated Press:
“A scaled-back Senate Foreign Relations Committee showered praise Friday on Karen Hughes and put the former political adviser to President Bush on a fast track to confirmation as the State Department’s top public relations official.”
The absence of the Democrats is even more glaring considering just today the New York Times reported that Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald called Karen Hughes before the grand jury to testify as to her involvement in the leak-case. Of course, this begs the obvious question: Karen Hughes, did you have a role in leaking the name of an undercover CIA agent?
Instead of any substantive questions, the Democrats simply didn’t show up. But we did get this statement from ranking minority member Sen. Joe Biden (D-DE):
“Mr. Chairman, I regret that previous commitments prevent me from attending the confirmation hearing this morning.
I am particularly interested in and supportive of the nomination of Karen Hughes to be undersecretary of state for public diplomacy. What this job requires, among other things, is continuity. The last two undersecretaries have stayed six and 18 months, respectively.
I met with the nominee yesterday and understand that, barring unforeseen circumstances, she is willing to stay through the president’s term.
I believe that she is highly qualified because of her professional background, and, importantly, enjoys the full confidence of the president and the secretary of state.
She will bring new energy and creativity to our public diplomacy efforts. I commend the president for choosing her and persuading her to return to Washington, and I look forward to working with her for the next three years on this important foreign policy priority.”
If the Democrats hadn’t failed to show up, here are some other questions they could have asked of Ms. Hughes:
What was the role of the White House Iraq Group, on which you served, in manipulating intelligence to sell the Iraq war?
Were you involved in declassifying memos to smear Richard Clarke?
Were you involved in the administration’s past efforts to hire fake news reporters to sell Administration policies?
Did you have any involvement in communications dirty tricks by the Bush administration? For example, giving Jeff Gannon Guckert White House press credentials?
Did you resist the administration’s efforts to politicize the September 11th attacks for political gain?
Did you intentionally falsify President Bush’s Guard record?
And here are the reasons why those questions need to be answered:
Did you have a role in leaking the name of an undercover CIA Agent?
The New York Times reports this morning that Hughes has been interviewed by the federal prosecutor investigating the leak of former covert CIA agent Valerie Plame. That revelation is not altogether surprising given that Hughes was “a member of the White House Iraq Group, an internal body that coordinated for, among other things, selling the war here at home.” At least two members of that group, Karl Rove and Lewis Libby, have been confirmed to be leakers of the agent’s name. In her book, Ten Minutes From Normal, Hughes discussed the leak, calling it “wrong” and “unfair” to Bush. Hughes earlier said the leak was “disruptive to democracy.” In her book, she said whoever conducted the leak “should come forward and not hide behind journalistic ethics for his or her self-protection.” She added, “The use of unnamed sources has become a convenient way for too many political operatives to hide and avoid accountability for their statements.” Will she stand by her previous statements and call for Rove and Libby to come forward and take accountability for their actions? And how does Hughes respond to her previous comments that she knew Rove wasn’t involved in the leak because “Karl has said he was not involved”?
What was the role of the White House Iraq Group, on which you served, in manipulating intelligence to sell the Iraq war?
The White House Iraq Group (WHIG) was specifically formed to sell the war in Iraq. Even Bush chief of staff Andy Card conceded WHIG’s purpose: “From a marketing point of view, you don’t introduce new products in August.” The Washington Post reported that the “escalation of nuclear rhetoric” during the pre-war stage, “including the introduction of the term ‘mushroom cloud’ into the debate, coincided with the formation of a White House Iraq Group, or WHIG, a task force assigned to ‘educate the public’ about the threat from Hussein, as a participant put it.” Hughes took a leading role in crafting Bush’s statements to convince the American public of the Iraqi threat. Besides the deceptive use of “mushroom cloud,” Bush made a number of false and misleading pre-war statements including the idea that Saddam wanted to “use al-Qaeda as a forward army” and his assertion that Iraq “has weapons of mass destruction — the world’s deadliest weapons — which pose a direct threat to the United States.” Hughes should be asked about her role in formulating these statements, what intelligence she saw to indicate these statements were true, and whether she concedes that these statements were exaggerations.
Among the false statements Bush made prior to the war in Iraq were his famous sixteen words in the 2003 State of the Union address: “The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa.” The Houston Chronicle (1/27/03) reported that Hughes was “involved in drafting the speech.” She said her primary goal in the process was to answer: “Why is Saddam Hussein’s continued defiance a threat to our country and to peace in the world?” In making the sale, the Bush team was overzealous in including a false statement for which Condi Rice, Stephen Hadley, Ari Fleischer, and George Tenet later had to apologize. Intelligence from the CIA and the State Department at that time indicated Iraq was not attempting to acquire uranium from Niger. So why did the Bush team ignore the conclusions of our own intelligence sources and instead cite the British? Was it an effort to include a statement known not to be true? Instead of addressing the allegations at the time they were made, Hughes defended the false intelligence and devised a communications strategy that questioned the motives of those who criticized the president (like Joe Wilson).
Were you involved in declassifying memos to smear Richard Clarke?
The New York Times (3/28/04) reported that Hughes “was an advocate of the howitzer treatment” of the former Bush counter-terrorism chief who made the mistake of criticizing the White House about its counter-terrorism strategies. In an attempt to attack and smear the character of Richard Clarke, the White House released numerous pieces of information that were previously classified, including an email from Clarke to Condi Rice shortly after 9-11 and Clarke’s resignation letter. The White House also revealed Clarke to be the source of an anonymous background briefing he had done on behalf of the president. However, the White House refused Clarke’s request to declassify his correspondence with Rice prior to 9-11 about the threats that were being ignored. Hughes admitted on ABC’s 20/20 that she was involved in these efforts against Clarke: “I’m involved in White House discussions about those issues… I think, from personal knowledge, that many of the things he said are not true.”
Were you involved in the administration’s past efforts to hire fake new reporters to sell Administration policies?
The Department of Education contracted with Ketchum public relations to produce and distribute “news” stories featuring a fake reporter announcing the availability of tutoring under No Child Left Behind. According to the Associated Press, the Administration paid $700,000 to Ketchum for the segment. The video includes a story featuring Education Secretary Rod Paige and ends with the “journalist” saying, “In Washington, I’m Karen Ryan reporting.” [AP, 10/10/04, Washington Post, 10/15/04; People for the American Way Release, 10/11/04]
“It is the kind of TV news coverage every president covets. ‘Thank you, Bush. Thank you, U.S.A.,’ a jubilant Iraqi-American told a camera crew in Kansas City for a segment about reaction to the fall of Baghdad To a viewer, each report looked like any other 90-second segment on the local news. In fact, the federal government produced all three. The report from Kansas City was made by the State Department Under the Bush administration, the federal government has aggressively used a well-established tool of public relations: the prepackaged, ready-to-serve news report that major corporations have long distributed to TV stations to pitch everything from headache remedies to auto insurance.” [NYT, 3/13/05]
Bush’s Health and Human Services Department also contracted with Ketchum to promote the president’s Medicare drug benefit. Using the same public relations consultant, Karen Ryan, Ketchum produced a series of video news releases that included scripted interviews and pictures of Bush receiving a standing ovation as he signed the legislation. During the first two months of 2004, the pieces aired 53 times on 40 stations in 33 major media markets. [New York Times, 3/15/04; Atlanta Journal Constitution, 3/15/04; LA Times, 3/16/04; Lexington Herald Leader, 5/19/04]
On May 19, 2004, the General Accountability Office (GAO) released its investigation findings into fake news segments produced by Medicare to promote the Bush Medicare bill. The segments, video news releases, were distributed to local television sessions to be run as part of the station’s news programs. The segments contained no identifiers that they were produced by the government, which the GAO found violates the propaganda prohibitions of the Consolidated Appropriations Resolution of 2003. The GAO concluded, “Because [Medicare] did not identify itself as a source of the news report, the story packages, including the lead-in script, violate the publicity or propaganda prohibition.” [GAO, Decision in Matter of Center for Medicaid & Medicare Services - Video News Release, 5/19/04]
The General Accountability Office also reviewed video news releases produced for the Office of National Drug Control Policy warning of the danger of drug abuse. Some portion of the segments aired on at least 300 local news shows. The GAO found in the first week of January 2005 that the releases violated federal laws against covert propaganda. [Washington Post, 1/7/04]
USA Today revealed that the Department of Education paid political commentator/talk radio host Armstrong Williams $240,000 to promote Bush’s No Child Left Behind (NCLB) initiative on his program and to other African American commentators. During these efforts, Williams failed to disclose his contract with the government. [USA Today, 1/7/05]
Did you have any involvement in communications dirty tricks by the Bush administration? For example, giving Jeff Gannon Guckert White House press credentials?
Jeff Gannon/James Guckert is the fake reporter with a false name given all-too-real press credentials by the White House. He’s known for asking biased, leading questions during press briefings before finally being exposed a month ago as a right-wing operative with no journalism experience, a fake name, and a shady past. Most White House journalists have what is called a “hard pass,” a permanent pass obtained after undergoing a rigorous FBI background check. Gannon skipped over that step. Instead, “the White House waved him into press briefings for nearly two years using what’s called a day pass.” Now, day passes are special exceptions that are “designed for temporary use by out-of-town reporters who need access to the White House, not for indefinite use by reporters.” If the background check is necessary for reporters with extended access to the White House, why were the rules circumvented for Gannon?
Pentagon officials confirmed that the Bush administration authorized the Department of Defense to create a vast data-collection project called the Total Information Awareness project. The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), headed by controversial Iran-Contra figure retired Admiral John Poindexter, was in charge of developing the project. Privacy advocates called the project “a supersnoop’s dream.” It aimed to take information collected by corporations such as credit card purchases, airline reservations and other personal information on U.S. citizens and add it to existing government databases to look for trends and patterns. [Washington Times, 11/21/02; Houston Chronicle, 11/26/02; National Journal's Technology Daily, 11/25/02]
In September 2004, the General Accounting Office concluded that the Bush Administration violated Federal law when it blocked the release of cost estimates of Bush’ Medicare proposal. The GAO instructed the Administration to retract 7 months of Scully’s salary for violating provisions of appropriations legislation. A Congressional Research Service report released in late April 2004 reached the same conclusion that Scully violated federal law and Supreme Court precedent in his attempts to muzzle Foster. [New York Times, 9/8/04; Philadelphia Inquirer, 5/4/04]
“When it came to lobbying the Security Council members, it turned out the administration hadn’t been satisfied with arm-twisting alone. It had resorted to espionage, bugging the offices of several U-6 nations.” The National Security Agency had mounted a surveillance surge aimed at undecided nations in the pre-war phase. The N.S.A.’s purpose “was to gain ‘insights as to how the membership is reacting to the on-going debate RE: Iraq, plans to vote on any related resolutions, what related policies/ negotiating positions they may be considering, alliances/dependencies, etc-the whole gamut of information that could give US policymakers an edge in obtaining results favorable to US goals or to head off surprises.’” [Vanity Fair, 5/04]
“The Bush administration has dozens of intercepts of Mohamed ElBaradei’s phone calls with Iranian diplomats and is scrutinizing them in search of ammunition to oust him as director general of the International Atomic Energy Agency, according to three U.S. government officials.” [Wash Post, 12/12/04]
Did you resist the administration’s efforts to politicize the September 11th attacks for political gain?
Ellen Goodman wrote about an exchange between Karen Hughes and CNN anchor Wolf Blitzer: “Wolf Blitzer asked the Bush adviser whether abortion would be an issue in this election. ‘Well, Wolf, it’s always an issue,’ she answered. ‘And I frankly think it’s changing somewhat. I think after September 11th the American people are valuing life more and realizing that we need policies to value the dignity and worth of every life.’ Just in case anyone didn’t get it, she added that ‘the fundamental difference between us and the terror network we fight is that we value every life.’” [Goodman, Washington Post Writers Group, 4/30/04, accessed on workingforchange.com]
In March 2004, during the early stages of the presidential campaign, the Bush campaign released an ad showing the charred shell of the World Trade Center, and another showing firefighters removing shrouded remains from ground zero. A firefighters union and relatives of victims objected to the politicization of 9-11. Discussing the campaign on CNN, Ms. Hughes said of the ads: ”I think it’s very tasteful.” [NYT, 3/5/04]
Did you intentionally falsify President Bush’s Guard record?
On page 34 of Bush’s autobiography, ghostwritten by Karen Hughes, he claims, that “after learning to fly the F-102 fighter jet, he was turned down for Vietnam duty because ‘had not logged enough flight hours’ to qualify for a combat assignment. Before going on to recall the ‘challenging moments’ that involved close formation drills at night during poor weather, he adds: ‘I continued flying with my unit for the next several years.’” [New York Observer, 2/2/04]
Bush Checked Box Not To Serve Overseas. On Bush’s application to the 147th Fighter Group at Ellington Air Force Base in Texas, Bush was asked what his “Area Assignment Preferences” were. Bush checked the box beside “Do Not Volunteer” for overseas duty. [Application for Extended Duty With The United States Air Force, 5/27/68]
Bush Suspended From Flying For Missing Physical. On Sept. 29, 1972, Bush was suspended from flying because he missed his annual medical examination. Air Force guidelines required Bush’s local commander to direct an investigation. Bush never regained his flying status. [Boston Globe, 2/12/04; New York Daily News, 2/12/04; Aeronautical Orders, Number 87, 29 Sept 72; AFM 35-13, Para 2-29m]
Sort Comments By: Top Rated | Date
50 Responses to “Excuse me, but do you ENJOY being in the minority?”
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
For God's sake, what can we expect from our Democratic leaders? One has to wonder when they will grasp the contempt we hold for their pandering invertebracy. Biden, Lieberman (what a wank!) and too many others in our party speak loudly and carry a limp carrot. We can only hope the Bush years fire up enough current unknowns to take on our entrenched milquetoasts who still fail to understand how deeply we resent their sacrifice of our principles. Anyone in the vicinity of this wimpish Democrat ilk should feel free to let fly a cold, cream pie.
If only Howard Dean could clone himself and revive the late, great Paul Wellstone...
July 22nd, 2005 at 4:56 pmObviously the Dems (with a few exceptions: Conyers, McKinney, Waxman, Byrd, Kennedy, etc.) DO enjoy being in the minority. But they probably don't look upon it as being in any minority. Sure, they may have a few less perks, but they still have all that campaign funding, all that job security (if they don't 'pull a McKinney' and stray), all the pay and benefits, all the prestige, most of the perks, no real threat from any third (second, really) party with a progressive platform, and none of the responsibility to actually do anything except nod their heads like little bobbing dolls whenever the CEO-in-Chief snaps his fingers and asks for more money and more authority. United We Stand, God Bless America. Pretty nice 'minority' to be in, thank you very much.
July 22nd, 2005 at 5:01 pmranscript from PlameGate Hearing and Video here - http://blog.thedemocraticdaily.com/?p=40
July 22nd, 2005 at 5:05 pmBiden is a pig. Plus, it's Friday and they're all trying to get out of Dodge.
. . .
July 22nd, 2005 at 5:22 pmThis what road greed leads you down. We need a REAL 3rd party.
July 22nd, 2005 at 5:26 pmYes, there are a lot of good, strong Democrat leaders. Sadly, everything they attempt is undermined by the Biden type who ducks not just before a shot was even fired, but before the enemy even hits the field. Don is totally right. They love the lifestyle and will do nothing that might jeopardize it, something like, I don't know... DOING THEIR JOB!
But that's the unfortunate thing about our Puritan election process. The people who have actually lived through normal traumas, fighting to makea go at it, maybe making some mistakes but learning from them, they fear their skeletons long ago buried. Only a coke-snorter like Bush, with his army of word-warpers, could overcome the follies of the past. But in a more thoughtful and compassionate person, these mistakes often give insights that inform their leadership with meaning.
July 22nd, 2005 at 5:33 pmReading this gives me the same feeling as watching Kerry debate and not even coming close to slamming Bush like he could have. Many Dems have taken a dive.
July 22nd, 2005 at 5:37 pmUnfortunately, politicians aren't always in it to "serve" their public.
Great post.
July 22nd, 2005 at 5:38 pmthe question is how are the dems that different from the republicans? Lets face it every time a real nasty piece of legislation comes down the pike, just enough dems jump ship to vote it through. While the rest yell about what a terrible law it is.
course the republicans did the same thing when they were the minority.
July 22nd, 2005 at 5:53 pmpolitics today = pro wrestling
July 22nd, 2005 at 5:59 pmmisdirection, salt(sand)in the eyes,predetermined winners, thrown matches, backroom deals, false indignation, outside interference, playing dead, bad decisions, eye gouges, fake blindness, good against evil, switching sides, hiding foreign objecst, playing innocent and in the end they all get paid and go out for a drink and a laugh.
Unfortunately we are the duped spectators.
Eh, let her get the job. Quite a few people probably don't remember who she is (was) from Bush's first term.
Better to let her get connected to Plame as a sitting member of the Administration, than as a former member.
Might as well have them all together when the foot comes down. Any chance that Ari will come back to work?
July 22nd, 2005 at 6:07 pmIt turns out that the jihadists were cowards and bullies, and thus selective in their targets of hatred. A billion Chinese were left alone by radical Islam  even though the Chinese were secularists and mostly godless, as well as ruthless to their own Uighur Muslim minorities. Had bin Laden issued a fatwa against Beijing and slammed an airliner into a skyscraper in Shanghai, there is no telling what a nuclear China might have done.
India too got mostly a pass, other than the occasional murdering by Pakistani zealots. Yet India makes no effort to apologize to Muslims. When extremists occasionally riot and kill, they usually cease quickly before the response of a much more unpredictable angry populace.
What can we learn from all this?
Jihadists hardly target particular countries for their “unfair� foreign policies, since nations on five continents suffer jihadist attacks and thus all apparently must embrace an unfair foreign policy of some sort.
Typical after the London bombing is the ubiquitous Muslim spokesman who when asked to condemn terrorism, starts out by deploring such killing, assuring that it has nothing to do with Islam, yet then ending by inserting the infamous “but�  as he closes with references about the West Bank, Israel, and all sorts of mitigating factors. Almost no secular Middle Easterners or religious officials write or state flatly, “Islamic terrorism is murder, pure and simple evil. End of story, no ifs or buts about it.�
Second, thinking that the jihadists will target only Israel eventually leads to emboldened attacks on the United States. Assuming America is the only target assures terrorism against Europe. Civilizations will either hang separately or triumph over barbarism together. It is that simple  and past time for Europe and the United States to rediscover their common heritage and shared aims in eradicating this plague of Islamic fascism.
Third, Islamicists are selective in their attacks and hatred. So far global jihad avoids two billion Indians and Chinese, despite the fact that their countries are far tougher on Muslims than is the United States or Europe. In other words, the Islamicists target those whom they think they can intimidate and blackmail.
Unfettered immigration, billions in cash grants to Arab autocracies, alliances of convenience with dictatorships, triangulation with Middle Eastern patrons of terror, blaming the Jews  civilization has tried all that.
It is time to relearn the lessons from the Cold War, when we saw millions of noble Poles, Romanians, Hungarians, and Czechs as enslaved under autocracy and a hateful ideology, and in need of democracy before they could confront the Communist terror in their midst.
But until the Wall fell, we did not send billions in aid to their Eastern European dictatorships nor travel freely to Prague or Warsaw nor admit millions of Communist-ruled Bulgarians and Albanians onto our shores.
©2004 Victor Davis Hanson
http://victorhanson.com/articles/hanson072205.html
July 22nd, 2005 at 6:27 pmJoe Biden is actively working against his own party, against the truth and he's aiding and abetting criminals. Joe Biden should be thrashed daily by the lefty blogs for his shenanigans. He's a whore.
July 22nd, 2005 at 6:41 pmVictor Hanson tries to pass off opinion as education.
July 22nd, 2005 at 6:42 pmBiden is a wierdo.
There are some great -- even brilliant Democratic leaders out there.
Sadly, there are also a number of DINO's in the mix who need to be kicked to the curb by their constituents, IMHO.
. . .
July 22nd, 2005 at 6:43 pmI missed Jay's comment.
Yes, Biden is pretty bad. I can never forget his antics during the Anita Hill/Clarence Thomas fracas. And then there's the MBNA mess.
His son is nice. I met him once at a fundraiser. He's very good-looking and solid. Maybe how his father once was a million special interest dollars ago???
. . .
July 22nd, 2005 at 6:46 pmI think this answers your question, as if you will ever wash the blood off your hands:
July 22, 2005, 4:40 PM EDT
WASHINGTON -- Democrats need to reach out to voters who oppose abortion rights and promote candidates who share that view, the head of the party said Friday.
Howard Dean, chairman of the Democratic National Committee, told a group of college Democrats that their party has to change its approach in the debate over abortion.
"I think we need to talk about this issue differently," said Dean. "The Republicans have painted us as a pro-abortion party. I don't know anybody in America who is pro-abortion."
Dean's approach echoed similar arguments advanced in recent months by former President Clinton and Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, D-N.Y.
"We do have to have a big tent. I do think we need to welcome pro-life Democrats into this party," said Dean.
Tell them Howler, and remember the guys with Confederate Flag stickers. And guns. And Bibles. LOL.
July 22nd, 2005 at 6:49 pmhttp://www.newsday.com/news/nationworld/wire/sns-ap-dean-abortion,0,3645289,print.story?coll=sns-ap-nationworld-headlines
July 22nd, 2005 at 6:50 pmEveryone, please ignore the microcephalic idiot.
July 22nd, 2005 at 7:01 pmDelay and Santorum shake in their shoes that Dems are sending overtures to pro lifers (like myself).
July 22nd, 2005 at 7:02 pmRepublicans will sabotage their own efforts before they really take on abortion with the same fervor as their rhetoric. This their one chance, and they will pass.
Biden is an appalling phony. I wish he were a Republican.
July 22nd, 2005 at 7:21 pmI bet that Biden loves V D Hanson when he catches a Hugh Hewitt blog -- Hanson is a paid neocon "thinker" who conveniently overlooks American state terrorism, which is murder on a grand scale, no ifs ands or buts.
July 22nd, 2005 at 7:55 pm[...] If this is the start of the 2006 election season, it looks like our party leaders in Washington (at least in Congress) are fine with not showing up. Think Progress and John Aravosis have more. [...]
July 22nd, 2005 at 8:44 pmHow about a Senator's aide putting these questions into letter form and sending them along?
July 22nd, 2005 at 9:02 pmYou lefties make me sick. You schmucks will even eat your own! Biden is one of the dumbest Senators in Washington, yet
July 22nd, 2005 at 9:07 pmhe's smart enough to know ITS OVER. Grow up.
I am not a fan of Biden, but I continue to appreciate John Kerry, and wish more people appreciated all that he had done during the campaign, and since on health, small business, military benefits, Iraq, as well as the other calls and outrage we all feel.
Today Kerry asked for records and information on John Roberts, despite many saying he is too smooth and unknown not to be confirmed, best we put our energies elsewhere. I thank him for not going quietly with the nomination.
July 22nd, 2005 at 9:20 pmHey Mike D.,
How about looking at it appropriately? We don't automatically support our leaders. We don't give them an automatic pass. We raise hell when they betray our principles. In sum, we're not a pack of lemmings like far too many of your ilk is. And why is that? Because we THINK for ourselves.
Now calm down and say something of merit because the foam coming from your mouth is slurring your speech.
July 22nd, 2005 at 9:40 pmHey Mike D., unlike you, intelligent people do not always agree with idiots based on party loyalty. You might give it a try some time and judge each politician individually. Not all posters here and voters are extremists like yourself. We have the ability to interview each applicant separately.
As for Kerry #7, he kicked Bushie's ass in all three debates. Bush looked like a fool and was my comedy central. I miss the debates, I never laughed so hard in my life.
Marjorie, Roberts doesn't deserve the job of Supreme Court Justice because he lacks experience. There are many others out there that have seniority and are much more deserving. Hiring Roberts would be like hiring a burger flipper at Mickey D's to do the job of Head Chef at Charlie Trotters.
July 22nd, 2005 at 9:47 pmpro lifers (like myself).
Brian
I see you are very principled. You just hate bush more than you love life.
paid neocon “thinker�
unlike David Corn who writes for free?
American state terrorism don
Yeah like the time we set that school on fire after taking the kids hostage, or the time we bombed that train full of commuters. Or the time we bombed that disco. Or when we killed those athletes at the Olympics. That's right, we don't target civilians. Anyone who can't tell the difference between our military and terrorists are either liars or stupid.
Clandy, how's that feeding the alligator thing going, still plan on being the last one eaten?
July 22nd, 2005 at 9:51 pmYeah suzy, I bet you were real proud when Cheney's daughter's sexual orientation became part of LT. Commies platform, that was a classic, and will be what history records of your LOOOOOSER candidate. That's it, all they will remember in 50 years about comrade Heinz.
July 22nd, 2005 at 9:56 pm[...] Karen Hughes was up for confirmation today and not a single Dem showed up to question her. [...]
July 22nd, 2005 at 10:01 pmMike Dildoman, It is over? You mean democracy,
July 22nd, 2005 at 10:14 pmand we are America haters?
fba,
July 22nd, 2005 at 11:12 pmMy feelings for Bush and feelings about life are in no way related. I just think more liberal minded people could end abortion faster than Christians. We'll never know as long Roe is on the books.
I also think Bush uses Christians for votes.
Hey, fake, have you ever heard of Hiroshima? Nagasaki, perhaps? If there were any actual records of foreign civilian casualties, which there are't, because as General Abizaid says, we don't do counts (of foreigners), then we would take the gold. Was it one million, or two million in 'Nam? -- nobody knows and few care. Not you, for sure. Don't give me that train and disco stuff, we deal wholesale. Here's something more recent, Afghanistan:
http://www.cursor.org/stories/civilian_deaths.htm
Departments of Economics and Women's Studies
Whittemore School of Business & Economics
University of New Hampshire
"What causes the documented high level of civilian casualties -- 3,000 - 3,400 [October 7, 2001 thru March 2002] civilian deaths -- in the U.S. air war upon Afghanistan? The explanation is the apparent willingness of U.S. military strategists to fire missiles into and drop bombs upon, heavily populated areas of Afghanistan."
When U.S. warplanes strafed [with AC-130 gunships] the farming village of Chowkar-Karez, 25 miles north of Kandahar on October 22-23rd, 2001, killing at least 93 civilians, a Pentagon official said, "the people there are dead because we wanted them dead." The reason? They sympathized with the Taliban [our former allies]. When asked about the Chowkar incident, Rumsfeld replied, "I cannot deal with that particular village."
To lighten a bit: Great analogy, Ken #10, Pro wrestling
One of my current neighbors is the former "Doctor Death," and he has some great stories of the choreographed matches with the likes of Gorgeous George. The analogy with our "representatives" is outstanding. They go through the motions for us dumb clucks in the paying audience, and force us to take sides with each other, as I am doing with 'fake but incomplete'. They're playing golf with each other and lifting glasses at their exclusive clubs while we duke it out on these websites. I thought we were paying THEM to duke it out? Who needs them if they always agree with each other? We need a "peoples congress" (and perhaps a 'shadow government') where Clandy, Fake, Mike, Ken and all us other yappers can let it fly. As Edward Abbey said: Democracy -- rule by the people -- sounds like a fine thing; we should try it sometime in America.
July 22nd, 2005 at 11:45 pm[...] A few additional thoughts about the lack of attention and respect given to the Karen Hughes hearing yesterday… [...]
July 23rd, 2005 at 12:07 amMore proof, as if we need it, that this country needs a true second party. No, that's not a typo.
July 23rd, 2005 at 10:02 amMilquetoast Democrats Strike Again
Bush’s approval ratings are lower than they have ever been, but congressional Democrats just can’t seem to absorb that fact. What are they waiting for?
July 23rd, 2005 at 11:23 amThink Progress tells the sorry story of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee meeting...
Before we get all crazy about Democrats loving minority status - we don't - lets find out what was actually going on. Friday was a very busy day in the Senate, with other hearings on real legislation and the $400 billion defense authorization being debated on the Floor. I doubt anyone was taking early vacation. This shows that there was need for better coordination on the committee, not that Democratic senators don't care about Iraq.
July 23rd, 2005 at 12:36 pmHey, Mike D. -- WHAT's over? Please explain.
July 23rd, 2005 at 12:51 pmI agree with you Judah. The dems e-mail me every day asking me to join them in resolving the war in Iraq.
I think thinkprogress is suggesting that Biden is behaving like Zell Miller.
July 23rd, 2005 at 12:58 pmBiden is a detractor and right wing plant. He's a whore for bankers and rigged market capitalism and has betrayed the Dems on every significant point.
He has NO credibility with me whatsoever.
As for why the Dems ducked Karen Hughes? GET A CLUE. The Dems = GOP lite.
Face it. The Republic is D E A D.
Roberts authorized and rubber stamped the "Imperial" Presidency for der Shrubenfueher, that's who he is.
He has now fully authorized (and as a SCOTUS judge will affirm) Chimpy's unfettered right to incarcerate ANYONE on a complete WHIM and at his SOLE UNFETTERED DISCRETION.
You remain at liberty solely at the Preznit's pleasure. The Executive will circumvent constitutional law through Executive Order, incacerate, try and convict you. Judiciary need not concern itself with a thing so insignificant as the continuing liberty of all American taxpayers and citizens of the world AT LARGE.
The do-nothings in Congress have just invented a new crime "Narco-terrorism" which effectively ties any drug-related activity (sales, possession, use, etc.) to TERRORISM, which places these activities within the ambit of that conduct to which the "extraordinary rendition" rights of the Executive apply.
Get it?
WELCOME TO THE NEW WORLD ORDER
Signed,
July 23rd, 2005 at 1:58 pmscared citizen of New Weimar
SNARK ALERT!
Q: What is the fundamental difference between a Baathist and a Bushist?
A: Two letters.
HAHA
July 23rd, 2005 at 2:29 pmVictor David Hanson's theatrical agent.
Benador Associates is a public relations firm that promotes conservative writers and speakers dealing with U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East.
So there are these peculiar archipelagoes of opaqueness in the world of news, where journalists are at the mercy of single sources that appear solid. It is very dangerous for the US cable news channels to depend so heavily for analysis of things like Iraq and the war on terror, on retired military officers and on well-connected cyphers like Walid Phares. (Hint to cable news personnel departments: if an academic has a spotty publication record and is at some small place or doesn't have a proper university post, but you get a call pushing him from some rightwing think tank in Washington or from the Benador Agency, be suspicious).
July 23rd, 2005 at 3:55 pmJuan Cole, Psy-Ops and News (http://www.juancole.com/2004/12/psy-ops-and-news-los-angeles-timess.html), Informed Comment, Dec. 3, 2004.
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Benador_Associates
July 23rd, 2005 at 3:55 pmAWOL Dem Senators from the Foreign Relations Committee, hope y'all enjoy your long weekend
So, Karen Hughes was up for confirmation for her new post on Capitol Hill, and NOT ONE SINGLE DEMOCRATIC MEMBER OF THE USSFRC could be arsed to show up and ask questions?
July 23rd, 2005 at 6:30 pmdems e-mail me every day asking me to join them in resolving the war in Iraq.-suzy
resolving - dhimmispeak, capitulate, retreat, withdraw, give up.
July 23rd, 2005 at 10:15 pmNow you're making sense, fake -- what took you so long?
July 25th, 2005 at 12:04 am[...] And, also as usual, the online/grassroots are doing all the heavy lifting. I am continually amazed at how much frustration, neglect and abuse progressive Democrats can take. Think Progress has a list of questions the Democrats might have asked if they could have gotten it up to attend the meeting. I assume they were too busy with their preparations to lionize John Roberts and didn’t have the time. [...]
July 26th, 2005 at 2:03 amhttp://aa.com
September 25th, 2005 at 11:40 pmhttp://www.aab1004.com
dollar to euro
Take your time to check out some relevant pages on stock day trader software
October 31st, 2005 at 12:05 am