Blue Collar Politics

[BREAK] Barb and I watched Keith Olbermann deliver this chilling piece. For those of you who read beyond the mainstream media, he adds nothing truly new. But he used prose that strikes a group of chords that could lead to a truly patriotic harmony. And his passionate but reasoned delivery emphasizes how close we are to it being TOO LATE to stop the true fascist juggernaut that is mightily churning through the homes in America, while the right-wing noise machine is kept at a volume that deafens many to the Repugnant juggernaut's explosive razing of all that's good about our country while it raises the country's once minor faults to where it is all that others, even in many country's that once were considered friends, can now see. If the American people don't forcibly take back the juggernaut's controls, either in the upcoming elections, or, assuming that the "fix" is in, by taking to the streets in protest, within but months we'll be at war with Iraq/Islam and the blood of our kids, their kids and kids unconnected to any of the machinations will forever stain the pages of our history. But not for long. Because, even with a school system in which students hear nothing of true history, civics or even get to use the critical thought process produced by a reading of simple geography, the history texts that are now available at the college level will be so sanitized that future generations in Amerika will be reading of the commie ideas of George Washington (democracy), Thomas Jefferson (public schooling, democracy), Abraham Lincoln (strong unions), Theodore Roosevelt and Harry S. Truman (health care), Franklin D. Roosevelt (EVERYTHING!), Dwight D. Eisenhower (Corporatocracy warnings), John F. Kennedy (Peace Corps), Lyndon B. Johnson (Civil Rights), Richard M. Nixon (EPA) and Jimmy Carter (human rights and honest government), while being treated to stories of the heroism, intellect and military mastery of the Bush/Cheney (AWOL/Draft Dodgers, war crimes, Patriot Act horrors, Katrina, 9/11) dynasty. Wake up, sheeple!!! (And pass the link below on to every Republican in your address book . . . AFTER you pass it to everyone else!) ===== [/BREAK]

Crooks and Liars � Keith Olbermann Delivers One Hell Of a Commentary on Rumsfeld - - - SNIP The confusion we — as its citizens - must now address, is stark and forbidding. But variations of it have faced our forefathers, when men like Nixon and McCarthy and Curtis LeMay have darkened our skies and obscured our flag. Note - with hope in your heart - that those earlier Americans always found their way to the light… and we can, too. The confusion is about whether this Secretary of Defense, and this Administration, are in fact now accomplishing what they claim the terrorists seek: The destruction of our freedoms, the very ones for which the same veterans Mr. Rumsfeld addressed yesterday in Salt Lake City, so valiantly fought. And about Mr. Rumsfeld’s other main assertion, that this country faces a "new type of fascism." As he was correct to remind us how a government that knew everything could get everything wrong, so too was he right when he said that — though probably not in the way he thought he meant it. - - - End of SNIPPET

[BREAK] Following a sunny blue sky horrific day in September, 2001, the Repugnants have, with much help from a manipulated mainstream media, heaped irrational fear onto the citizenry of the US, and tossed, or inspired to be tossed/placed by others, bomb loads of VERY RATIONAL fear onto countries far and wide. Now, as November looms large in their sights, fear has decided to take residence in the empty, dark recesses of the Repugnants themselves. This year, they fear those they once frightened, the American voters! How delicious is that bowl of irony! ===== [/BREAK]

GOP kisses up to liberal Chafee | Salon News Chances for a Democratic takeover of the Senate may hinge on whether Republican maverick Lincoln Chafee survives the Rhode Island primary. By Walter Shapiro Sept. 1, 2006 | PROVIDENCE, R.I. -- One of the nastier attack ads currently being aired anywhere in the country is being aired here, and is sponsored by the National Republican Senatorial Committee, the official arm of the GOP majority. The 30-second spot employs all the traditional techniques of political fear-mongering: a voice-of-doom narrator, grainy photographs, purported FBI warnings, menacing footage of a Willie Horton-like villain (a Hispanic illegal immigrant) and the stark closing question about the challenger, "Will he put our security at risk in the Senate?" The factual basis for the commercial is flimsy. The mayor of Cranston agreed in 2005 to accept Mexican-government-issued matricula cards as a valid form of identification, a position so radical that it is shared by the U.S. Treasury Department. But that justification is enough to allow the NRSC to tar the mayor, who is now running for the Senate, as a permissive advocate of open borders who is seemingly eager for every resident of a Mexican barrio to move into the mansions of Newport. What makes this GOP smear attack so unusual is that the target of this venom, Mayor Steve Laffey, is a Republican. And he is the only Rhode Island Senate candidate who voted for George W. Bush in 2004, supports the Iraq war and believes in the magic elixir of Miracle-Gro tax cuts. Laffey's unforgivable sin in the eyes of the national Republican establishment is that he has an even-money chance of defeating antiwar incumbent GOP Sen. Lincoln Chafee in the traditionally low-turnout Sept. 12 party primary. More Here

[BREAK] Unfortunately, while the meat of Frank's thought is fine, he makes one major flaw. He conflates Liberal with Democrat in his bash of politicians in the Democratic Party. Some of us can fathom the immense difference between a Liberal, like Ned Lamont or Denis Kucinich(Fair trade vs Free Trade, Health Care vs Neglect etc.), and some Democrats like Biden, Lieberman and, now, Hillary Clinton. Liberals and the (DLC's) "New Democrats" are like oil and water. Just because someone (Frank) tries to mix them together does not preclude the oil (Liberal) from rising to the top! Other than that conflating flaw, this op-ed be a precious jewel and well worth the viewing. [/BREAK] =====

The Unknown Candidate: Rendezvous With Oblivion By Thomas Frank The New York Times Over the last month I have tried to describe conservative power in Washington, but with a small change of emphasis I could just as well have been describing the failure of liberalism: the center-left’s inability to comprehend the current political situation or to draw upon what is most vital in its own history. - - - SNIP Historically, liberalism was a fighting response to precisely these conditions. Look through the foundational texts of American liberalism and you can find everything you need to derail the conservative juggernaut. But don’t expect liberal leaders in Washington to use those things. They are “New Democrats” now, enlightened and entrepreneurial and barely able to get out of bed in the morning, let alone muster the strength to deliver some Rooseveltian stemwinder against “economic royalists.” - - - End of SNIPPET More Here

[BREAK] Well, my fervor for Tasini takes a boost from a NY Times knock. And don't you just love it when the premiere media organ to help garner support for Bush's Baghdad Blunder, by publishing weeks on end worth of lies as to WMD and Iraq connections to Al Qaeda, deigns to explain and render innocuous Hillary's support for the war??? The Times has yet to successfully explain its own war mongering. And the Times, in a rare glimpse beneath the Gray Lady's skirts, seems to allow why it comes out so soon with an endorsement against Jonathan Tasini:

Mr. Tasini, a labor leader who once successfully sued The Times on behalf of freelance writers, is the politically impractical candidate from the left that many commentators incorrectly imagined Ned Lamont to be when he challenged Mr. Lieberman in Connecticut. Mr. Tasini deserves credit for making the run and we are sorry that Mrs. Clinton did not respond to his demands for a debate. But it is hard to imagine him working well in a large body of egotistic and generally conservative politicians.

Tasini fought the Times . . . and Tasini won! ===== [/BREAK] A Senate Primary in New York - New York Times - - - SNIP Mr. Tasini, a labor leader who once successfully sued The Times on behalf of freelance writers, is the politically impractical candidate from the left that many commentators incorrectly imagined Ned Lamont to be when he challenged Mr. Lieberman in Connecticut. Mr. Tasini deserves credit for making the run and we are sorry that Mrs. Clinton did not respond to his demands for a debate. But it is hard to imagine him working well in a large body of egotistic and generally conservative politicians. - - - End of SNIPPET More Here

[BREAK] Disney has this new propaganda film on 9/11 (“The Path to 9/11”)that puts the blame on Clinton. (So far, 9/11 Commision members and Richard Clarke, amongst others, have come out saying the 2-part, commercial free miniseries is full of lies.) For example, they show Clinton refusing a CIA request to kill bin Laden when they had him in their sites. In reality, the CIA says Clinton authorized the killing of bin Laden many times, every time the CIA asked.

“As we were watching, we were trying to think how they could have misinterpreted the 9/11 commission’s finding the way that they had,” Mr. Ben-Veniste said. “They gave the impression that Clinton had not given the green light to an operation that had been cleared by the C.I.A. to kill bin Laden,” when, in fact, the Sept. 11 commission concluded that Mr. Clinton had.

Wonder where the Democrats went to, after 9/11/01? Do certain bloggers and supposed "Liberal" media commentators/hosts confuse you with their sudden change into a cheering squad for Democrats who seemingly support Bush's Baghdad Blunder, or the bankruptcy bill that puts a boot on the throat of middle-class families suffering through major medical crisis?

Read this, (Antiterrorism Bill on Detainees, Geneva Conventions - Rushing Off a Cliff - New York Times), this (House Approves Bill on Detainees - washingtonpost.com), this (Don't Suspend Habeas Corpus - Los Angeles Times) and this!

Then think about where we're headed and what you need to do to change our course!
(My view was expressed here.)

[BREAK] Go read BuzzFlash here!

UPDATE:

Go Here to see how the Bushies are already starting to put a full court press on the Federal Judiciary. You see, we don't need no stinkin' judges in the new Bush/Cheney Amerika! (I'm guessing that were a judge to rule against Bush in one of the cases, he'd instantly have proved he "supported terrorism", and he'd be secretly kidnapped, incarcerated under the new rules and never be heard of again!)

END OF UPDATE!

We now return you to your regular program. ===== Now, for those idiot Repugnants (not true Republicans, but those who hijacked their party and turned into an echo of . . . here it comes . . . a certain party in the Germany of the 1930's) who want to throw "traitor" and "unpatriotic" around, here's my BS. Viet-vet, (volunteer) Combat Infantryman's Badge, Bronze Star, 2 Air Medals and a bunch of other pretty ribbons. Married 36 years, 2 grown kids. Never charged with taking bribes, pedophilia, shooting a friend and have had no affairs with interns (male or female). And I was coherent enough to march with other combat veterans on February 15, 2003 against Bush's Baghdad Blunder! In brief, it is obvious that I can't be a Repugnant Party member. Until yesterday, I had been a Democrat for 41 years. And, for almost all of those years I was a proud Democrat. I'll be switching my registration to Independent If I am forced to associate myself with a political party, it won't be one that capitulates with the torture of America's ideals while pretending to stand for those very ideals. Why associate with the Dems if they won't even filibuster a bill that will make legal the arrest of someone, many of whom will be innocents (based on the release of hundreds of detainees from Guantanamo, Abu Ghraib and elsewhere) WITH NO RIGHT TO BE CHARGED OR RIGHT TO GO BEFORE A JUDGE, will make legal the torture of an innocent AND would them deny that innocent the right to go to court and sue the torturer. Of course, some will say, "If we don't stay with the Democrats, the Republicans will do whatever they want." Wake the fuck up! The Republicans ARE doing whatever the Hell they want. You are just satisfying yourself with some psychic pacifier, sucking at the Democratic teat while your mom, America, is being beaten, raped and left to lie in a pool of her own blood. If it isn't time for a non-violent revolution in this country (general strike?), then we should officially declare those dumb rebelling bastards in powdered wigs of the late 18th Century with being sociopathic terrorists who led this country astray with an evil Constitution. Those men risked their fortunes, their lives, their families lives in order to grant us, their heirs, a right to have a judge approve of our detention, to force our accusers to step forward and face us, IN THAT COURT, to have a right to council and a right to be treated as a human being! Yesterday, the Democrats played with themselves while those rights were shredded and burned. They played pocket pool while the rape of a detainee, innocent or guilty, by the US personnel holding them became something less than torture. While the Geneva Conventions were reinterpreted to become a document whose meaning is solely decided by the Bush/Cheney Torture Team. As Bush signs this horrific assault on America, please recall one very important fact. The House and Senate of the United States, with the tacit applause of the majority of their fearful voting constituents, have surrendered America and her venerated Constitution to 19 young maniacs who brought some cheap box cutters on to 4 US passenger airliners. After fighting the mightiest militaries on the planet, in the late 1770's on up to the early 1940's, 19 young fanatics found America's soft underbelly just when America's population had lost the will to fight against an enemy they feared . . . albeit the smallest enemy every to defeat a world power. We now have, in the reality based world, no Constitutional protections. The only "persons" in America whose protections, from Constitutional ones to those bankruptcy protections, are still in effect are the mega-Corporations. Oh, and a fetus. The rights of an American are sacrosanct to the Repugnants, UNTIL BIRTH! Individual American citizens CAN be "disappeared" from our streets, if Bush thinks their statements provided support for any of his supposed "enemies". They CAN be jailed and tortured FOREVER, without EVER getting to see a judge or speak with a lawyer. AND THE WEAK-KNEED DEMOCRATS NOT ONLY FAILED TO FILIBUSTER, HARRY REID REFUSED TO EVEN ATTEMPT ONE. Of course, calling for a filibuster would have exposed the names of every one of the Democrats who now remain hidden behind a wall of "no filibuster was called for." Finally, the removal of legal rights was not the ONLY thing this bill accomplishes. It granted some startling new rights . . . to Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Alberto Gonzales, Bill Frist and Halliburton. They are now granted immunity from any past war crimes they, or their employees may have committed. I'M NOT PROUD OF AN AMERICA WHEREIN OUR LEADERS NEEDED RETROACTIVE IMMUNITY FROM WAR CRIMES??? I'M NOT PROUD OF A POLITICAL PARTY THAT REFUSES TO FILIBUSTER SUCH A BILL BECAUSE SOME OF THEIR MEMBERS CONDONE SUCH A BILL? That's not my America. That's NOT a political party to which I want to be associated. ===== Go here to see how your Senator and Member of Congress voted on torture:
Senate here!
House here! [/BREAK]

On Friday, September 29, It's Mourning in America | BuzzFlash A BUZZFLASH EDITORIAL Just as it is hard to fully comprehend the grief of a beloved friend or relative killed needlessly in an accident, it is excruciatingly painful to try to come to terms with the pernicious betrayal of our Constitution and liberty that occurred in the Senate on Thursday, September 28. In the past week alone, we have seen factual evidence that belies the need for the power play/pre-election attack on our Constitution. In fact, these developments indicate that giving Bush even more unprecedented power is not only unconscionable; it puts the national security of the United States of America in peril: Bush’s newly "revamped" top 16 intelligence agencies reached the conclusion that the Iraq War had become a primary cause in the growth of terrorists and the increased threat of terrorism to the United States. Bush called the report of his own top intelligent agencies "naïve." Meanwhile, a second U.N. report came to the same conclusion as the American spy agencies. The U.N. also reported that more Iraqis may now be being tortured under U.S. occupation than were tortured under Saddam Hussein. - - - SNIP Today, tears would flow down the olive robe of the Statue of Liberty if she were human. But she is just an inanimate symbol. We are the ones who have to cope with the pain of a democracy destroyed in a political play for power and permanent one-party rule, which is not a Constitutional form of government. That is called a dictatorship. And the one thing in common with dictators through history, whether Communist or fascist, is their state-sanctioned ability to torture people at will. Beyond the overwhelming facts this week that Bush has endangered the national security of the United States of America with his failed and costly fanatic ignorance, we are left with this sad fact. With the law passed on September 28th by Congress, we have become the Republic of torture. We not only have lost our claim to be a civilizing force among nations and abandoned our Constitution, we have appeased the terrorists by doing so. Because isn’t it Bush who keeps telling us that the "terrorists hate us for our freedoms"? So, to appease those same enemies of America, the White House and the Republicans have abandoned civilized standards of behavior and taken freedoms away. We are only beginning to grieve for the great beacon of democracy and justice that we lost yesterday. - - - End of SNIPPET

Read the whole BuzzFlash Editorial here!

[BREAK] The title of this blog means something to me. I wasn't always sitting at a computer while on disability. I'm proud of the work I did, and of the people I had the privilege of working for, with and/or over. When people found that I was a hard hat who was once the Treasurer of NYC Mensa, they often ask "How was it working with the people in the construction trades?" And, while I always found the question offensive, I always answered honestly. "I found more intelligent people in construction than I did at Mensa meetings." That's true! That's why I was horrified as I've watched, in shanties on high rise building construction in Manhattan, on oil refinery platforms in Canada, in nuclear plants in Ohio and New York, in paper mills in Maine and rocket fuel refineries in Baltimore, the morphing of once strongly Democratic blue collar, union workers into Republican cheerleaders. The reasons are, of course, many. Some are reasons for the switch do the Democratic Party proud. (i.e.: Anger at job losses due to desegregation of construction unions lost some Dem workers to the GOP.) But what seems to be a big reason is the "wimp factor." The men and women toil with their muscle, in outdoor conditions that make the complaints of office workers about how cold the walk from the heated parking lot to their heated office seem a bit shrill. There is little time for in depth conversation when welding steel on a parapet 90 feet above a cement floor, or while humping heavy pipe into place within confined spaces. So, these folk speak rather plainly. Nuance is not a constant companion. As the work is often dangerous, a blunt and factual intercourse is most appreciated. Long winded conversations are saved for lunch of after work at a local gin mill. The Republicans, while screwing these folks through the tax codes, loose pension regulation and anti-union legislation, did one smart thing. They stayed on message; they came up with easily understood points and fought for them even when they knew they would lose. Democrats tried to be all things to all people, and wound up being ill defined and seemingly weak. In just a few sentences, a newly minted Republican blue collar worker could give you a synopsis of the Republican Party that, while it might appeal to the lower, more base, prejudices and feelings of his/her audience, they made the listeners think that they'd be a part of a powerful movement. When was the last time a Democrat felt that she/he was part of anything powerful? For me, it goes back to JFK's inaugural speech . . . a time before most Americans were born. And, lately, the feeling of weakness is overwhelming. So, as I mentioned on this blog yesterday, it's time to change. While many of the Liberal mega-blogs, and many of the hosts on Air America, are frantically attempting to hide the fact that the Democratic Party could have stopped this heinous bill from being passed, thankfully, some see through the BS, including The Nation takes a stand and tells it like it is.

Did John McCain and his GOP colleagues cave? Yes. In particular, they betrayed the courageous military officers and Pentagon lawyers who for months fought for the rule of law. But the refusal of many Democrats to confront this constitutional crisis is more scandalous. For weeks Harry Reid and other Democratic leaders enjoyed the luxury of sitting on their hands while McCain and other Republicans publicly bucked the White House. But when vigorous Democratic opposition might have slowed the bill until a saner, less politicized moment after the election-season recess, a tepid Senator Reid refused to stand in its way: "We want to do this. And we want to do it in compliance with the direction from the Supreme Court. We want to do it in compliance with the Constitution." Never mind that the whole bill is out of compliance. As more than 300 law professors wrote in a letter to Congressional leaders, the enemy-combatants debate is "an urgent test of our nation's constitutional and democratic values." Democrats as well as Republicans have failed the test.

The Founding Fathers would not believe that, while America rolls back the clock to where a Monarchy again rules this land, and detention, torture and lack of legal redress once again soil America's skirts, Briton Cites 'Divergence' With U.S., with her top legal official taking pains to differentiate her justice with America's willingness "to do things beyond the law." It is a shame that blogs and organizations that gained trust by speaking honestly and directly about problems in America are now so tied into the Democratic Party that they have become a new DLC - The Democratic Liberal Chorus, instead of an independent voice. There is no hiding the fact that Harry Reid cut deals that failed the American people, Liberals and the standing of America in history. It is time for a Move-On, KOS, or Atrios to speak up for what is right, not what is politically convenient. It's time for Air America hosts to stop toeing the DLC line, and quit telling us "Democrats do speak up. Just turn on CSPAN3 and you'll hear them." While there is certainly a right-wing bias in the media, and Dems get much less face time on political talk TV, the Dem leaders DO get some time. And, they use it to again echo the GOP lines, but with a little sad violin accompaniment. Sure, you'll get a Russ Feingold or Carl Levin occasionally. But the vast majority of air time afforded Dems goes to the likes of Harry Reid and (once a firebrand, now a tumbleweed) Nancy Pelosi. And they both use the time poorly. So poorly, that things like Legislating Violations of the Constitutiongo virtually unnoticed by the majority of Americans. Sadly, it seems that the more popular the TV show, the less likely a Democratic leader will say anything that would distinguish her/him from a moderate Republican. (With that in mind, I was shaking my head as Lincoln Chaffee, a Republican, voted AGAINST an awful Republican bill on torture and detainment, but a bill on which the Democrats couldn't even muster a filibuster.) Things have gotten so bad, I wouldn't be surprised if Democrats somehow turned the new Woodward tome into a plus for Bush. By parroting the "We must put winning the 2006 election" above all of our important principles, we only play an electoral version of "Leave No Democratic Politician Behind", which may someday garner a political win, but you'll hardly recognize the candidate/party you've won with. The knee-jerk "Must Win" process allowed Clinton to bend over on flawed and vindictive Welfare Reform, instead of a bill providing training, child care and hope for those trapped in poverty. Of course, as this was pre-Katrina, many Democrats had fallen for the con from Republican (and Democratic Repug-Lite politicians) that there were only a few lazy "Welfare Queens driving their Caddies (Lexus's?) to pick up Welfare Checks" that would be effected by the bill. Clinton also signed the disastrous telecommunications bill, that left us with hate radio on so many stations across America, where now there are more different faces of right-wing talk radio than there are different (local) news broadcasts. Now, an operation like Clear Channel can produce a single radio news spot that will be run in hundreds of cities and towns, providing only that news that a huge media outfit would like their customers to hear. Now let me be clear, Clinton held back the fascist tied for 8 years, and accomplished much when faced with external forces and internal havoc. But he knew how far he could go without having his feet held to the fire by his left-wing. And that IS a problem. Both during and since the Clinton years, we (in the Democratic Party sense) have been gaining momentum in a slide to the bottom. While the worst, and most unappetizing group of fascist/theocratic thugs are riding roughshod over the true Republicans who still remain in that party, we seem to have mastered losing the unloseable elections. While Clinton was peaking in popularity, we lost the House. We needed to turn a Republican Senator, just to bring that body into a tie between Dems and Repugnants. And we then lost the Senate, giving the coming little coward an America who was hogtied and unable to resist the torture the little psychopath was looking to inflict. We ran a sitting vice-President (who had viced under an unbelievably popular, yet fully viced himself, President) against a cowardly pip-squeak who had trouble stringing two syllables together and would need help finding America on a map. We lost. Our candidate, many say, did the gentlemanly thing by not contesting the fraudulent election process, and standing by as a rogue Supreme Court decided that it, and not the voters, should decide Presidential elections. Should Gore have tried a coup? Maybe not. But shooting off a few paragraphs of fact and passion at the eulogy to democratic elections in America might have been appropriate. Gore could have, legally, been that single Senator that members of the Black Caucus so desperately needed in order to force a look into that fatally flawed election. But, we are the well-behaved Democrats in a school full of bullying sociopath Repugnants, and we wouldn't think of raising a fuss. Would we? We ran disabled war veterans (Max Cleland) against ugly, racist thugs, and lost. In 2004, all those mega-blogs told us we could NOT lose! We had a hot-damn honest-to-God war hero we'd run against the Howdy Doody on steroids playing landscaper in an ass-ugly, weed-covered farm in Crawford, Texas. Of course, our hero had to play the same game that Harry Reid and the Accessories played on this torture bill. He'd have to get so close to Republican positions that, were both sides in the foxholes one should expect in a political battle for the life blood of our country, if one sneezed the other would be wiping snot from their face. Kerry took that plan and ran with it. He played Repug-lite on Iraq. More troops? Sure! More money? Of course! Say anything about a totally illegal invasion? Nope! Criticize the tactics of fear? Not so much! Tell the flat out truth to the followers who so wanted a true leader? ARE YOU CRAZY! That's not how you play politics. So, after another miserable day of losing poll numbers, we were left to whine about "Election Fraud!", as if that was a brand new happening in American politics. For Christ's sake, I'll bet there was some finagling back during the early Greek democracy. Instead of whining for the passed 2 years, someone should have taken the entire membership of the Dem party, sat them down and screamed "You don't win elections by showing your people how closely you can follow every asinine thing your opponent does. You win elections by showing folks true leadership qualities. And, for a political party to inspire people, the party must stand for something. And NOT by standing up for something as meek as sitting on its hands when the country is imperiled! Do you really expect busy, overworked, underpaid Americans to look forward to standing in a line at a polling place in order to elect people who will, when America is about to be assaulted, cut deals that prevent the members of that party to try and stop the assault? Sure there's election fraud. But Democrats outnumber Republicans nationwide, and if you would only show that by electing Democrats our country would/could change, there would be such an outpouring of support that it would be near impossible to switch enough votes to turn the election with impunity. Instead, we get told "Forget what you just saw happen." If you'll only hold together and vote Democratic, after winning the election we Dem politicians will run into the nearest phone booth and switch to our Super Hero tights. Well, phone booths are hard to find, and after watching the Democrats, tine after time, capitulate and/or enable atrocity after atrocity to be enacted upon our Constitution and our ideals (from Patriot Act through Bankruptcy Bill, from Guantanamo to Abu Ghraib), many of us don't believe the Dems would know what to do with such powers. They'd likely ask the Repugnants for advice. So, as I said in yesterday's post, I'm switching registration. Green or Independent, I'm not yet sure. That certainly doesn't mean that I'll vote for a candidate from my new party who might have little or no chance of winning. But, if I'm only offered a Repugnant against a Dem-Lite, that yes I'll vote for neither. And the Democratic Party will change, or more and more Democrats will help form a party that actually follows the principles that made the Democratic Party great, and, for too short of a time, helped make America great! For now, I'll vote for anyone, from whatever party, who sincerely wants to get us back on track AND isn't afraid to stand up for what is decent and just . . . without looking to cut deals that lead to naught but Pyrrhic victories and leaving America hoist on a Republican-lite/Democratic petard. =====

Accessories to Torture These are grim days for the Constitution. The House and the Senate have passed the catastrophic "compromise" negotiated by senators McCain & Co. to the President's "enemy combatants" bill. The only thing compromised is the rule of law; the bill still strips detainees of the right to appeal, broadens the President's unilateral powers to decide who is an enemy and which interrogation methods violate the Geneva Conventions, and fatally undermines the War Crimes Act. The bill was rushed to passage just days after the Canadian government exonerated Maher Arar, "rendered" by the United States to Syria, imprisoned and tortured for nearly a year. Go here for the whole article!

[BREAK] If, like me, Seven Days In May caused you concern that someday we might have a devilish coup in America, you must be perplexed today. You might find yourself rooting for those particpating in a bloodless pseudo-coup. Instead of taking over the government, we have true patriots, with Generals in the ranks, using truth to cripple a harmful group that now sits in the power seats. In just the last couple of weeks we've had recently Retired Generals telling us that our democracy is endangered by war mongering civilians/Bushies and active duty Generals leaking memos that show Rumsfeld as a bumbler who deserves the blame for US troop deaths. The CIA and other agencies have begun steadily leaking classified memos and reports that show we were lied to, by the White House, since the first week the Bushies moved in, let alone the torrent of lies since 9/11 and the flood of them that got us into, and keeps us stuck in, Iraq. Now we find the long hidden Rep. Foley's sick email were NOT leaked by any Democrat. They couldn't have been; the Repugs kept the Dems out of the loop on the perveing of our House). They were leaked by Justice Dept. and FBI employees, who were sick of being told they had to assist in the cover up of the abuse of power by the Repugs. (Much of the right-wing punditocracy, while acting tough on Foley and, even, Hastert, is pummeling the Dems by, along with a sly conflating jab from the Washington Post, inferring this was just a homosexual scandal, which falls in line with the GOP "Gays Are Bad" theme. Edifying them as to the difference between homosexuality and pedophilia would be about as effective as an attempt to point out that Christ was not only a Liberal, but that, for his time, he would have seemed far to the left of today's Michael Moore.) As one who falls into the camp that says neither God nor any demon makes a man do anything, other than the Gods and demons he brings to the gray matter table himself, the term Evil fits too well in our current circumstances. (And now, with Foley pointing the finger of blame at a childhood priest, we have our package of Evil tied up with a fallen angel bow.) The quote I used as the title of this entry, "Evil draws men together" is from Aristotle, in the 3rd Century, BC. That it is still true today helps explain how, even in the face of contradictory facts, you have a group of powerful folk (Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rice etc.) who continue to spout the same novel of lies . . . no matter how foolish such a strategy makes them all look. "I was never briefed in July by Tenet or anyone on the al Qaeda threat prior to 9/11/01" is just the most glaring lie told by that crew this week. Lies (Osama + Saddam + WMD + 9/11 = Shock & Awe!) led to war on innocents, to the use of Depleted Uranium against generations of innocent Iraqis, to the use of so called "productive" torture (LEGALIZED TORTURE AS PART OF AMERICAN JURISPRUDENCE???), to the domestic lies used to harm future generations of Americans (deficits caused by tax cuts ["improves the economy" BS], lies to hide war profiteering (Cheney/Halliburton etc.), Government aided Corporate fraud (Enron, etc.), covering up child molestation, etc., etc., forever! And the Repugnants who have brought us this, they claim a certain closeness with a higher power. Bush claims that God told him to do what does. Flip Wilson might have told him different. If all of this horror weren't done behind the camouflaging curtain of Red, White and Blue, the term Evil Empire might be making a comeback. As election day approaches, I hope the true Republicans, who have been benched by the Repugnants since even before Bush's Baghdad Blunder, remember the words of one of their heros:

"The evil of the world is made possible by nothing but the sanction you give it." Ayn Rand

===== [/BREAK]

Wayne Madsen Report - Home October 3, 2006 -- WMR has learned from informed sources in the Justice Department that the salacious e-mails from Rep. Mark Foley were leaked to ABC News by career Justice Department prosecutors and FBI agents who are incensed that Attorneys General John Ashcroft and Alberto Gonzales covered up the House page scandal for political reasons. The back story of Pagegate is that there was a criminal conspiracy by the top political leadership of the Justice Department to cover up the predatory activities of Foley and other GOP members of Congress since at least 2003 and, likely, as early as 2001. Other informed sources in the nation's capital report that Pagegate will soon implicate a number of GOP staffers in both the House and the Senate who intimidated and pressured male pages into inappropriate sexual relationships. One source confided that the staff members' contact with pages was "more egregious" than Foley's behavior.

More Here!

[BREAK] This morning's Washington Post has a must read article by David Brown, that is derived from an AP report on a study conducted by a team of American and Iraqi epidemiologists. The article is titled Study Claims Iraq's 'Excess' Death Toll Has Reached 655,000 .

A team of American and Iraqi epidemiologists estimates that 655,000 more people have died in Iraq since coalition forces arrived in March 2003 than would have died if the invasion had not occurred. The estimate, produced by interviewing residents during a random sampling of households throughout the country, is far higher than ones produced by other groups, including Iraq's government.

While polls seem to indicate that somewhere around 30% to 35% of Americans will read the horrible results of the study and come away smiling and praising the military genius of the Bush crime family (see: White House Briefing -- News on President George W Bush and the Bush Administration - washingtonpost.com), the other two thirds of the saner folk will walk a little more slowly, bow their heads a bit more lowly, this morning. (And, with recent revelations about Republica's running in Congressional and State elections, the "Values Voters" are beginning to wake up. And it's doubtful that "Staff" will be able to deflect heat from the high level Republican cover-up in the Foley affair(s). Surprise, surprise! When you use all the horrendous weapons of conventional war, from pretty colored, toy looking cluster bombs through depleted uranium munitions that throw radioactive dust all over the environment of the country you claim to love so much you'll waste thousands of our own soldier's lives and the taxes of many future generations . . . all sorts of SHIT HAPPENS! And if there's anything Amerika has become expert at in the past 5 years, it's turning shouted good intentions into works resembling the most evil whispers of demons. On the other hand, if you read the unadorned AP report in today's NY Times, the chilling figures of death are given short shrift as early as the second paragraph: NY Times:

The timing of the survey's release, just a few weeks before the U.S. congressional elections, led one expert to call it "politics."

The whole damn Attack, Invasion, Occupation thing is nothing but politics, so how could a body count be not?! Just yesterday McCain blamed North Korea's nuke ambitions on Bill Clinton, 6 years into Bush's grabbing of the wheel of the good ship US. Was McCain's attempt to look good to the Repugnant, anti-Clinton base political. Of course it was. Yet, if a Democrat points out that the Bush administration is In Search of a North Korea Policy - washingtonpost.com, that person would be pilloried with "You're just playing politics!" As the US has a Congressional election every 2 years, and campaigning for the next one often starts before the votes have been counted in a current one, just when the Hell is it convenient to hang out the Repugnant's dirty laundry without being accused of playing politics? With the Repugnants damaging the fabric of America daily, and the corporate media laying back and counting the money left on the dresser (FCC "deregulation" bucks!), getting any facts on what is going on is a blessing. Be it the day before, the day after or the day elections are deemed unpatriotic. And that last wasn't meant as exaggeration to make a point. It was fearful, sorrowful prognostication, if anything. For redacting and shredding the Constitution has become the raison de être of this Administration, and it has had willing accomplices in the Republican AND Democratic parties. As Keith Olbermann pointed out last night, only the 3rd Amendment is still in effect. We don't have the King's soldiers in our living rooms nor his horses/tanks in our stables/carports. All other Amendments are no longer in effect, according to Bills passed by our fearful, spineless AND treasonous officials.

If a nation values anything more than freedom, it will lose its freedom; and the irony of it is that if it is comfort that it values more, it will lose that too. -- W. Somerset Maugham

Invading non-aggressor nations, abrogating treaties and other agreements made under the bond of "America's bond", dissing all of our allies while enraging and empowering our enemies and, last but far from least, treating our troops as if they were literal cannon fodder, to be sent into battle for longer than they were prepared to fight, with insufficient munitions and supplies (including rationing their food and water, while Halliburton ran up huge and uncontested contract overages), then cast aside as an insignificant waste necessary in the pursuit of empire. That's ALL POLITICS . . . and shining a light on any of it, INCLUDING THE PRICE PAID IN BLOOD BY THE VERY PEOPLE WE CLAIM WE CAME TO HELP! Let's remember a very relevant and timely quote:

Nazi Reich Marshal Hermann Goering, before committing suicide at the Nuremberg Trials, appeared to be advising the future neo-cons: Goering: "Why, of course, the people don't want war. why would some poor slob on a farm want to risk his life in a war when the best that he can get out of it is to come back to his farm in one piece. naturally, the common people don't want war; neither in Russia, nor in England, nor in American, nor for that matter in Germany. that is understood. But, after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship." (interviewer) Gilbert: "There is one difference. in a democracy the people have some say in the matter through their elected representatives, and in the United States only Congress can declare wars." Goering: "Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country." —Nazi leader Hermann Goering, interviewed by Gustave Gilbert during the Easter recess of the Nuremberg trials, 1946 April 18, quoted in Gilbert's book, Nuremberg Diary

Controlling the media, especially by using the old dodge "We're at war, and even if the printed facts are true they hurt our country now.", or the present one which combines our War-time need for self censorship with the plea that bad news could influence an upcoming election, makes Goering's message all the more chilling. One must realize that the Bushies, lacking much intellectual initiative for innovation, has been clinging to playbooks from the past. They know how the country rallied behind Roosevelt after Pearl Harbor and gave him powers that allowed him to take on a war against 2 major powers. And how, after WW II, Roosevelt used that good will to push through policies not thought possible. From Social Security through a Marshall Plan that set up working social democracies in Europe and proved to the world that by taking care of the poor and cultivating a secure middle-class you can have a healthy economic engine the likes of which was thought impractical by most Republicans and fiscal insanity by many. So the Bush regime, fully aware of the philosophy expressed by Goerring, saw the opportunity handed them by 19 young fanatics who really did little more than hijack 4 American domestic airplanes (hardly as mighty an attack as Pearl Harbor). The Bushies stoked and stirred the cauldron of fear until it was boiling over. Once the people were so blinded by irrational fear, which was "politically" fueled by the ingenious misuse of color coded charts inspiring timely fear, they forgot the original American heroes who took on the mightiest army on Earth (the Brits) in 1776 to garner certain inalienable rights and desired freedoms for future generations, the Bushies began stripping those rights and freedoms with more skill than any of America's past enemies had ever dared believed possible. Some have taken notice:

"I think this is the worst government the US has ever had in its more than 200 years of history. It has engaged in extraordinarily irresponsible policies not only in foreign policy and economics but also in social and environmental policy." "This is not normal government policy. now is the time for (American) people to engage in civil disobedience. I think it's time to protest - as much as possible." American 2001 Nobel Prize Laureate for Economics George A. Akerlof, who teaches economics at the University of California in Berkeley. The 61-year-old scholar's areas of expertise include macro-economics, monetary policy and poverty.

Of course, had Hitler stated, out loud, that, with the consent of a majority of both his people and the government officials of both his and the opposition's officials, he would destroy our Constitution, that he'd lock up Americans on a whim, with no regard for evidence (Habeas Corpus), that he'd torture those he arbitrarily chose . . . Japan might not have earned the dubious distinction of being the first nation to see only a mushroom cloud where a city once stood. Yet, here in Amerika, we allowed an elected leadership to turn America into something resembling the pre-Revolution colony of Royal subjects whose abuse in the name of the unjust regent was stirring the seeds of a glorious revolt. We, the silent citizenry who are turning our backs on the Washington's, Jefferson's and Lincoln's had both an Authorization For Force and a Patriot Act passed near unanimously, turning America into war-mongering freedom hating land. A further step back was the recent bill on Military Commissions that allows Bush to lock up Laura, if he likes, and she'd have absolutely no rights other than those King George would allow. (Thanks for your courage in opposition, Russ Feingold. May my nightmare of Hillary using you as her running mate to deflect the criticism of her jingoistic cheerleading for the illegal Iraq occupation, be something that scares me alone, and is never visited on the rest of our nation.) How then can we be told that any report that shows us exactly what we have become should be dismissed as "political?" Just because inconvenient truths are popping up all over now does NOT mean those truths were rushed, nor that they were held, just to harm the Republicans or help Democrats. Hell, I'd argue that most Democrats should carry those deaths over their heads as well. The harm those truths bring should have been front page news since prior to March of 2003, but should certainly be brought to light at whatever time the mainstream media finds itself with surplus testosterone . . . which, be it immediately prior to an election, may seem to be Divine justice for those who aided in the deaths so reported here. Remember:

"To initiate a war of aggression, therefore, is not only an international crime, it is the supreme international crime differing only from other war crimes in that it contains within itself the accumulated evil of the whole." -- International Military Tribunal at Nuremberg, 1946

Should a country not hold those who began an illegal war responsible for that action? Or is it deemed only a fair election if the electorate goes into the booth wholly ignorant of the abominations performed by their elected officials in their names? ===== [/BREAK]

Study Claims Iraq's 'Excess' Death Toll Has Reached 655,000 - washingtonpost.com A team of American and Iraqi epidemiologists estimates that 655,000 more people have died in Iraq since coalition forces arrived in March 2003 than would have died if the invasion had not occurred. The estimate, produced by interviewing residents during a random sampling of households throughout the country, is far higher than ones produced by other groups, including Iraq's government. It is more than 20 times the estimate of 30,000 civilian deaths that President Bush gave in a speech in December. It is more than 10 times the estimate of roughly 50,000 civilian deaths made by the British-based Iraq Body Count research group. The surveyors said they found a steady increase in mortality since the invasion, with a steeper rise in the last year that appears to reflect a worsening of violence as reported by the U.S. military, the news media and civilian groups. In the year ending in June, the team calculated Iraq's mortality rate to be roughly four times what it was the year before the war.

More Here

[BREAK] Great news for America! Even better news for our military!! Devastating news for the already faltering world domination plans of the current Evil Empire administration!!! Britain's top military man, General Sir Richard Dannatt, delivered a broadside against the handling of the Iraq occupation, and pulled no punches as to the devastating effect it is having on the British military AND on Christian values in his homeland.

- - - SNIP His comments come after an exclusive interview with the Daily Mail, where Sir Richard warned that the continuing presence of British troops "exacerbates the security problems" in Iraq and added that a "moral and spiritual vacuum" has opened up in British society, which is allowing Muslim extremists to undermine "our accepted way of life." The Chief of the General Staff believes that Christian values are under threat in Britain and that continuing to fight in Iraq will only make the situation worse. - - - End of SNIPPET.

Here's the DC take on this:

UK Troops Worsen Problems in Iraq: Army Chief - washingtonpost.com By Deborah Haynes and Peter Graff Reuters Friday, October 13, 2006; 5:42 AM LONDON - Britain's top army commander said the presence of British troops in Iraq was exacerbating security problems on the ground and they should be withdrawn soon. In an interview with the Daily Mail newspaper, General Richard Dannatt criticized post-war planning for the 2003 U.S.-led invasion and said the British presence in Iraq also hurt British security interests abroad, which British Prime Minister Tony Blair has repeatedly denied. More Here

Here's the Brits take, from the Daily Mail:

Army could be broken by Iraq, warns chief officer | the Daily Mail The Army could 'break' if it is kept too long in Iraq and British troops should be withdrawn 'soon', the head of the Army has said today. In a devastating broadside at Tony Blair's foreign policy, General Sir Richard Dannatt said: "I want an Army in five years time and 10 years time. Don't let's break it on this one. Let's keep an eye on time."

And, from this same Daily Mail article, we discover that the Gods of politics seem to love some irony. Check out the name of the British "Liberal Democrat Foreign Affairs spokesman"!

- - - SNIP Liberal Democrat Foreign Affairs spokesman Michael Moore said: "This is the frankest assessment we have had about Iraq. It illustrates that the government has no clear strategy." - - - End of SNIPPET More Here

As Repugnants keep using the long ago pictures of the "purple fingers" of Iraqi voters as their proof that attacking, invading and occupying Iraq was a good thing, they always fail to mention that the government the Iraqis voted for was overturned by American puppets, and that more changes to the UNELECTED Iraqi government continue. More Here [/BREAK]

[BREAK] You can spend hours arguing with a Bushie about the way the country has gone downhill since Bill Clinton left office. The economy, deficit, world standing, Iraq etc., etc.. But, with most of those arguments, one side continually answers with "Clinton lied." So, you'd be forgiven if you thought that all Republicans demand absolute honesty to the public, even if the subject was something as personal and not germane to the carrying out of his Presidential duties as an extramarital affair. Astonishingly, even if the lies were about an attack on the United States, an attack that was used as an excuse to send nearly 3,000 American troops and over a half-million innocent Iraqis to their death, you'd be wrong! It seems that only personal sins upset a large portion of the Bush followers. Lies told to the nation that cause waves of blood to be spilled are not as important as one that is attached to a stained blue dress. Let me be straight here. I don't believe the Bush administration has been honest about 9/11, and I'd still carry an umbrella if Dick Cheney called and told me it was sunny and dry out. I'm biased, but it is a bias based on past experience. ("Saddam wouldn't let the inspectors in" Bush says, as I watch them monitoring missiles being sent to destruction.) But I always assumed that some difference in genetics made it impossible for Bush's followers to understand that they were being led down a path paved with lies, deception and misdirection. I figured that genetic tic was what caused those Bushies to now rally against David Kuo's stunning indictment of the whole White House "Faith Based" circus and to ignore the incompetence chronicled by so many recent books on the Bush admin... I was wrong. Polls keep showing that, even at his worst, Bush has about a third of the people who view him favorably. Yet, a new poll shows that only about half those fans actually believe the Bush Administration tells the truth about something as serious as the September 11, 2001 attacks.

- - - SNIP Only 16 per cent of respondents say the government headed by U.S. president George W. Bush is telling the truth on what it knew prior to the terrorist attacks, down five points since May 2002. - - - End of SNIPPET

Boy, finding out that the vast majority of the American people, who I might have said were kept ignorant by the corporate media, actually believe that Bush/Cheney are frauds . . . well, that's encouraging, to say the least! Finding that only 16% believe them, but twice that number supports them, says some interesting things about Republican politics, to say the least. This should be some election! [/BREAK]

[BREAK] We finally know where River has been. Now, the more important questions are "Where are you? What are you doing?" I run a dinky little mailing list/service that pushes out news stories, articles and links to blog posts daily, for a bunch of activists, reporters, friends and relatives. (Okay, my wife gets hit with the full 50 to 75+ news articles I forward a day, while my daughter, whose boss believes she should read at home, can only suffer through a minimal list of about a dozen or so of the most important pieces.) I'd venture that everyone on the list is a Liberal, although some might seek the camouflage of the "Progressive" labeling. They all view the Bush admin as an enemy of all that was once good about America, and see through the Bushie use of fear as a political power enhancer.
They were well read, including reports in the international media.
Therefore, they were all against our attacking, invading and occupying Iraq. They are all good people, who work hard to leave the planet/country in as good a shape, if not better, than when they began helping to steer the ship of state. So, being that they are good people, I will unfairly use them as a sample for all the good people who complain about Bush, who think the Iraq war is farce - bloody, death dealing farce, but farce all the same - and who worry that future generations - including their own kids - will be deprived of the experience of knowing one lives in one of the most wonderful countries on the planet. While I fear this may look as a way of saying "I'm better than you", I mean nothing of the sort. For I believe that until I find a way to be part of something that stops our collective fall into a well of self-defeating insanity, I'm as much, if not more, guilty as anyone. If you've fought in an illegal war, as I have, you have a greater duty to prevent future illegal wars by your country. If you have children, your duty geometrically increases. If you possess any informational tools, such as my single typing finger or you have access to the much more powerful bullhorn of the Town Crier, mainstream media, and you waste such power in other, less worthy pursuits, guilt has to be your burden. (Not meaning to single out NOW, but this arrived in my mailbox, just as I finished reading the new Baghdad Burning entry. If, when studying the rise of . . . here it comes! . . . Hitler, we discovered that a major organization of opposition to Hitler's policies was sending out drivel like this instead of spending EVERY moment battling for the rights it stands for, we would be shaking our heads and wondering where the sanity of that group had gone. Come on, admit it! "LOVE YOUR BODY DAY!" It sounds like something from a Foley email that Hastert thought was just cute and friendly.) Here are some conclusions, based on my small sampling of good, compassionate people: Many "good people" avoid demonstrations/protests. for what I'm sure they view as legitimate reasons. Some have shared their reasons with me. Kids; fear of being seen by someone from work and, the number 1 reason, the organizers support other causes with which I disagree. The most recent protest I attended, a couple of weeks ago, was called for by The World Can't Wait. I was the ONLY member from my mailing list to attend.

Seems that:

• 1) it was held during working hours (though it continued until well after business hours.)
• 2) The organizers had some connection to either socialist or communist organizations.

# 2 was, by far, the most common excuse for avoiding the protest. Ironically, many of these folk would cheer those who battled against McCarthy, and would likely idolize those who provided help to the unfortunate souls who were blacklisted during the 50's. But to march in protest with folks who might have been on that list, or whose parents were on it, well, that would be just too much. On April 29, 2006 of this year there was a larger demonstration. Again, I was alone of my sample. (I should mention that my wife, on my right and holding the Military Families banner) also marches. I somehow think of her as someone more than a member of my sample.) Again, I found none of my associates there.

By August 16, 2005, attendance at protests were at a low. But a few of my list members did attend the candlelight marches in their neighborhoods.
Earlier on, there was more of a showing at marches. At the Republican Convention in NYC, the crowd was huge. And more than few of my mailing list members were there on August 29, 2001.

Barb and I at the Repugnant National Convention demonstration.
Of course, what should have been the most important demonstration of American sentiment of all, the February 15, 2003 (photo below) pre-attack march, was attended by the largest number of my sample. And, of course, it was when many of us discovered that the media had gone from biased propagandists to full out sycophantic whores for the Bush administration. Suddenly, a demonstration that could paralyze NYC on a weekend day was only attended by "thousands" of protesters, according to the NY Times. We, who were there, knew that the Times must have only counted people on one of the alternate/overflow avenues . . . and they must have only counted the "thousands" of crowd control cops there. But, the Times either wouldn't report, or couldn't conceive, that even after all of its front page lies about Iraq, and the barge loads of BS Judy Miller was transcribing Karl Rove's take on Ahmad Chalabi's fantasies, people, MILES AND MILES OF INTELLIGENT PEOPLE, still believed we had no business attacking Iraq.

February 15, 2003. A month prior to our illegal attack on Iraq. Why do I bore/chastise you with all of this? Quite simply, I'm looking for a way to do more to stop our country's decline into history's Hell. More Here [/BREAK]

[BREAK] Gee, with a supposed "Liberal-media" icon like the NY Times cheering us on, what more encouragement could we need . . . to blow our frigging brains out maybe? Editor & Publisher gives us an advance peek at an article in this Sunday's NY Times Magazine section by Noah Feldman. It is headed: "The Mere Midterms." The deck: "Even if voters send President Bush a strong message, he is not likely to listen." Somehow, this reporter, with the supposed premiere news media outlet on the planet, totally forgets or purposely deflates the powers of Congress.

"Nor," he points out, "can a Democratic Congress do much to make the Bush administration more competent," or block "hack" appointees to lower positions.

Well, I've worked in government, and blocking the top appointees is THE power you want, as the top sets the tone, direction AND politics of the body. (Yes, Virginia, there is politics in government agencies.) The competence is also influenced throughout by the team at the top. And, with Bush having instituted high bonuses for Federal employees, DECIDED BY THE GUY/GAL AT THE TOP, greed is also a factor. But the Times reporter really misses the forest by concentrating on what he believes is the sole tree standing, with this:

Finally: "What that leaves the Democrats is oversight--an idea that right now gets their hearts racing but whose limits will eventually become apparent....Government in the sunshine is a good thing--but a brightly lit Washington will still, mostly, be George W. Bush's Washington."

Oversight??? Can Noah Feldman have forgotten how lone Ken Star tied up our government for years, just because the Republican "majority" in Congress didn't like the President hiding his extramarital affair? Now, I would NOT advocate any impeachment hearing for GW Bush even if he were caught having sex with Condi AND Hastert. More of this post here! [/BREAK]