Bush FLIP-FLOPS on North Korea!

"We don't negotiate with evil," the shrub once said.

It's hard to imagine a bigger flip-flop than what happened this week. After years of criticizing Clinton for being soft (i.e. using diplomacy) on North Korea, particularly bribing NK with fuel oil to stop their nuke activity, Bush signed an agreement this week making THE SAME DEAL.

The Bushies have blasted Clinton's 1994 agreement as a disaster and a failure. Hmmm, maybe there's something to this. If anyone knows what a disastrous and failed policy should look like, it's the Bush administration...

Bush budget is pure militarism.

Militarism is growing in America. The recently proposed budget by Bush is proof positive. Bush is asking for $235 billion over the next two years to fund his manufactured wars. He is also asking for permanent increases in troop levels.

And how does he intend to pay for it? Cutting necessary programs to the bone.

We are the sole superpower in the world. Our military is already second to none (when used to fight a war; not so great at babysitting). The past five years have proven that our only shortcomings are in our decision-making. We don't need more troops. We need better leaders.

We were promised this war would pay for itself? So where's all that money going...?

Beware the growing militarism. Heed Eisenhower's warning about the growing military-industrial complex. Heed Orwell's warnings in 1984. They have come true.

The Marriage War.

A Washington group is using a peculiar legal tactic to defeat other restrictive laws on marriage by taking those restrictions to their logical ends. If marriage exists solely for procreation, then the legality of a marriage should be contingent upon that condition. And so, this group has proposed a state initiative to invalidate marriages that don't produce offspring. No kids = no marriage.

It won't pass, but it does make a point. If gays can't marry because marriage is for procreation, then that must legally apply to everybody. Old people, infertile people, and people who want each other but not kids must also be forbidden the sacred bond of matrimony.

The Crime of Truth and Common Sense.

Bush's big idea of a surge in Iraq has been condemned as a useless gesture by pretty much everybody outside of the White House and its blind loyalists in the GOP. Even generals think it is a waste of time. So why does the media continue to allow the GOP loyalists to characterize critics as "back-stabbers" against our soldiers?

Is no one allowed to say "that plan is bad"?

At what point did America become the Soviet Union...?

(If there was one problem with Soviet politics, it was the inability of officials to speak freely. The country ran on bad information for decades because nobody could say any policy was flawed. Sound familiar?)

They might be illegal, but they are not uninvited.

I can only wish that America would discuss the immigration problem realistically. Thus far, we only see rantings and ravings about unsecure borders and stolen jobs. These pleas to emotion help keep up TV ratings, but they don't explain why this problem is so difficult to solve.

1. CRIMINAL EMPLOYERS -- As long as American businesses get away with hiring illegals, they will continue to come here.

2. MEXICO'S IMMIGRATION PROBLEM -- Unbeknownst to many Americans, Mexico is itself experiencing this exact same problem. Their southern border is being flooded by South and Central Americans looking for a better way of life. This is why Mexico doesn't care about the U.S. border issue. They NEED for some of their people to leave the country.

3. NAFTA -- Companies have moved to Mexico because they want to pay the lowest wage possible. These new jobs attracted workers from even poorer nations south of Mexico. So, instead of raising Mexico's standard of living (as we were promised by Clinton and the GOP), it has lowered it. Because whatever low standard of living the Mexicans would accept, the Guatemalans and Hondurans would be happy to accept even lower. This has pushed southern Mexicans into the north, and northern Mexicans into America.

4. POLITICIANS -- Can anyone win the Presidency by losing California, Texas, and Florida (and probably every other southern border state)? That's the price for trying to launch an effective effort to catch and throw out the illegals. You throw out Juan, leaving his American-citizen child to a foster home, and all of Juan's American-citizen relatives will vote against you. As well as all the other sympathetic Latino-Americans.

5. PUBLIC SERVICES -- It's easy to agree that illegals shouldn't be able to come here and live off the fat of our social safety net. But officials would have a major crisis on their hands if they had to contain entire neighborhoods full of uneducated starving people. Ever see "Escape From New York"? Just add Spanish. Imagine that next door, but without the massive retaining wall.

This problem is NOT going away. And no amount of "tough talk" is going to solve it. We might vote for candidates who preach shutting down the border, but that will only make the ladders taller and the tunnels deeper. The forces inside America and Mexico who want those illegals here are far more powerful than the public's demand to keep them out. The solution begins and ends with addressing those forces.

The rest is just TV theater.

KKK rears its ugly head again.

I imagine this resurgence began something like this...

KKKurt: Man, America sucks. We're not allowed to hate anybody anymore.

KKKen: Can't hate the jews. Can't hate the negros. Can't hate the homos...

KKKurt: If I don't get to publicly hate somebody soon, I'm gonna quit shaving my head.

KKKen: (Puts in DVD of Gangs of New York) I got it! Let's go old-school! We can hate the immigrants! America's already primed for a big ol' hate on immigrants--especially Mexicans!

KKKurt: Oh yeah, baby! We're back in business!

Minimum Wage

The GOP surprised me. They did not pass their own wage hike before being ousted by last year's elections. I expected them to steal the Democrats' thunder, and also undermine the cause by passing a flawed bill. But they let their term expire and now the Dems will take the credit.

One thing didn't change, however. The GOP in the Senate have attached tax cuts for the rich and now a Joint Committee (House and Senate) will have to reconcile the two bills. I don't expect the Minimum Wage bill to hit the President's desk without some kind of payoff to the rich.

New posts again

After dropping out for awhile, I have a few things to say again. I'd love to do this blog regularly, but I'm a feast-or-famine kind of guy. So I'll just be posting when the mood strikes me (or when I have time).

Expansion of military courts. US pushing further into fascism.

As I said once before, a key component of fascism is a de-powerment of the courts. The Bush administration has created a plan to expand the reach of the military government and "allow the secretary of defense to add crimes at will to those under the military court's jurisdiction."

What once was decided by our regular court system would now be in the hands of the military. And keep in mind that most Constitutional rights DO NOT APPLY to military courts. Clearly, this is an another move to destroy the Bill Of Rights and drive America into fascism.

This plan would include "those accused of joining or associating with terrorist groups engaged in anti-U.S. hostilities, and of committing or aiding hostile acts by such groups, whether or not they are part of al-Qaeda." Keep in mind: this administration has already labeled a teacher's union as a terrorist group, and repeatedly refered to ALL dissent as "aiding the terrorists. And without any oversight from another gov't agency, they would be able to arrest us all merely on their say-so. EXACTLY the way the Nazis rounded up the Jews.

It all gets very easy once the Constitutional checks and balances have been removed.

9/11 - The Lies Not Worth Punishing.

The 9/11 investigative panel were told so many extreme and deliberate 'misrepresentations of fact' (which are lies to the rest of us) by the Pentagon that they believed there was an intentional cover-up going on. Sadly, the panel merely handed this information over to other gov't agencies rather than push directly for prosecution.

Read this stunning excerpt from the WaPo story:

John F. Lehman, a Republican commission member and former Navy secretary, said in a recent interview that he believed the panel may have been lied to but that he did not believe the evidence was sufficient to support a criminal referral. "My view of that was that whether it was willful or just the fog of stupid bureaucracy, I don't know," Lehman said. "But in the order of magnitude of things, going after bureaucrats because they misled the commission didn't seem to make sense to me."

Exactly when IS it a good idea to go after bureaucrats who lie to Congress???

Apparently, lying about the murder of 3,000 innocent Americans doesn't quite rise to the "magnitude" of lying about an Oval Office blowjob...

Republicans bribe themselves to pass minimum wage hike.

The GOP is going to raise the minimum wage this year. A cause for celebration, even though it's only to steal away a Democratic campaign issue this fall. But it shows just how desperate, and how vulnerable, the GOP really is.

Of course, this act of charity isn't exactly charity. It comes with a hefty price. In the same bill is a MASSIVE tax gift to the rich. America's wealthiest 7,500 families will get a cut in their inheritance taxes owed. What does this mean?

It means the GOP tax cut is going to people who DID NOT EARN THE MONEY. It's one thing to give money back to those who earned it, but this tax cut will go to those whose greatest labor could be nothing more than being born. So apparently, the GOP favors the rich so much that they'll even give their relatives a tax cut, whether they deserve it or not. Kinda makes all those working class Republicans look like saps.


Back to the bribing... Since the wage hike was the GOP's doing, which would have passed overwhelmingly with Democractic support, this tax gift was entirely unneccessary--except as a bribe to get support from within the GOP.

(I'm all for tax cuts. But why does the GOP definition of "tax cut" ONLY apply to the richest people, those who have absolutely no need for it?)

Neocon Kaplan admits he was wrong (sorta)

Neocons aren't done with their mea culpas. Frontliner Lawrence Kaplan has come to the revelation that the Neocon plan for Iraq (forcibly interjected democracy) is a failure. While he offers no apologies, he does seem to take the position of "who knew?" Here, he is being either obtuse of dishonest.

MANY people spoke against the invasion on the basis that Iraq will not embrace democratic reforms at gunpoint. The chief reason being deep religious and ethnic hatreds among the three major groups (Kurds, Sunnis, Shi'ites). The neocons are now acting like this is somehow a new development, with the implication that the Bush administration couldn't have forseen it. In fact, ONLY the Bush administration (and Tony Blair) failed to see this problem back in 2002.

Kaplan tries to make the argument that Bush's lack of prewar planning is now irrelevant, citing recent acts of unimaginable cruelty (a girl was allegedly beheaded and had a dog head sewn in its place) as essentially proof that the Iraqis are too savage to be civilized. I hope this isn't the GOP's next trick to protect Bush. Before 2003, Iraq was one of the most advanced--culturally and economically--nations in the Middle East...all held together as one political unit by the iron fist of Saddam Hussein.

Bush willfully ignored the history of Iraq, a country with artificial boundaries set by self-serving Brits in 1920 that disregarded native demographics. We can never forget this, out of respect for the soldiers if nothing else. Presidents owe it to the soldiers to make foreign policy based on ALL the info available--not the cherry-picked info that rationalizes a preconceived agenda.

Amnesty would bring an end to millions of corporate crimes each year.

The GOP continue to blast the Democrats by saying that the Dems want to "reward the criminal behavior" of the illegal immigrants in America by granting them amnesty. The GOP is correct about one thing--this issue IS about rewarding criminal behavior...by corporations.

See, either way the U.S gov't will be rewarding criminal behavior. By doing nothing, the GOP will be rewarding all those millions of illegal hirings by corporations over the years. Yep, the GOP wants to continue to allow corporations to pass over decent hard working citizens in favor of cheap illegal foreigners. They want to continue to ignore state and federal laws that punish employers for hiring undocumented workers. And they want to continue the illegal source of employees who do not demand fair wages, work safety, health and retirement benefits, and any other labor right that citizens possess.

So we can either forgive the Mexicans who only want to earn a better life, or we can forgive all those criminal employers who have turned their backs on their citizen neighbors just to put more money in their already over-stuffed pockets.

There's the choice: we'll either have two groups of criminals sticking it to the American citizenry, or we can make both groups honest and above board.

Immigration: the false debate.

Expect a heavy dose of posturing this election year on the issue of immigration. But do not expect anything to be done about it. Neither party is getting rid of anybody, so let's put aside that pointless hope.

The only unsettled matter this year is which party will cobble together an acceptable excuse to leave the illegals here. If you want to resent them for their trespass, you might vote GOP. If you want to forgive them for their trespass, you might vote Democrat.

Either way, Jose will continue to trespass--and continue to cut your grass.

Right-wing apologies not quite on target

Conservative "hawks" have been coming out of the woodwork to qualify or retreat from their support of the Iraq invasion. They tend to either say "who knew it would be so bad?" or somehow blame the Democrats for not being appropriately supportive. Hogwash on both counts.

Here's one apology from a rightwing pundit that is profound and a good read. But he doesn't really apologize for anything except that the war hasn't gone so well. Nor does he apologize for the devastating harm done to our Constitutional process.

I just want to be clear that there WERE plenty of people who DID know and say that this invasion was going to be a mistake. I saw plenty of legitimate experts--such as former weapons inspector Scott Ritter--who provided sound argument and evidence that (1) Saddam had no WMDs, (2) Saddam had no ties to Al Qaida, (3) Saddam might be a threat to Israel but not the U.S., (4) the Defense department's small-force approach would not work, and (5) the war would devolve into bloody street-fighting. These folks were all labeled "liberal traitors" and such by all those talking heads on the "liberal media." The rightwingers pounced swiftly on any "unloyal" talk that gainsayed the administration. Some people still talk before they think, sadly.

My two points here are thus: One, free speech is criticial in times of crisis; that silence and unconditional support for leaders is the richest asphalt for paving the road to hell. And two, it's a flat LIE to say "nobody knew the truth" prior to this war. Many people knew, and they spoke up. But the "liberal media" shut them out in favor of yet-even-more Ann Coulter style blathering.

If there's anything to apologize, it's not so much the support for the war. It's for DEMONIZING people who knew what they were talking about.

'Operation Swarmer' nothing but a photo op

The "liberal media" reported incessantly this week about a major new development in the war in Iraq, the largest "air assault" since the war began. Hoo-boy, did the "liberal media" help Bush distract America from his dreadful ratings. (Bush's ratings are only good when the fighting is going well.) As it turns out, this major military operation was nothing but a photo-op. From Time magazine:

"But contrary to what many many television networks erroneously reported, the operation was by no means the largest use of airpower since the start of the war. ("Air Assault" is a military term that refers specifically to transporting troops into an area.) In fact, there were no airstrikes and no leading insurgents were nabbed in an operation that some skeptical military analysts described as little more than a photo op. What’s more, there were no shots fired at all and the units had met no resistance, said the U.S. and Iraqi commanders."

50 helicopters and 1500 troops to nab 31 insurgents and some small arms caches. Wow, is this administration desperate.

If true, Bush finds new way to violate Constitution

Either Bush doesn't know or understand the Constitutional process of signing a bill into law (not a surprise, given that Bush isn't "a reader") or he has willfully violated the Presentment Clause by signing into law a bill that did NOT pass both houses of Congress.

The White House was informed that the version before Bush had not passed the House BEFORE he signed it. And yet he signed it anyway.

Maybe it was a mistake. But given Bush's insistence that the law says whatever he wants it to say, this is likely just another case of der leader wiping his ass with that "goddam piece of paper" the rest of us call the Constitution.

GOP in congress find backbone, buck Bush on port deal

The GOP in Congress see the writing on the wall: if they back Bush on this Dubai port deal, the GOP is DOA come election day. So it's looking like the port deal itself is dead. The House appropriations committee voted 62-2 to kill the deal. That's strong enough to suggest Congress could and would override Bush's threatened veto.

(There's a whole 'nother story here about Bush not vetoing anything in hisfive-plus years as president. It's disturbing that the only thing worthy in his eyes is to force America to suffer terrorists running our ports.)

At this point, 'fascist' is an appropriate label for the Bush Administration

No more dancing around the subject or ignoring the elephant in the room. This Bush administration is a gang of fascists trying to subvert the U.S. Constitution--render it hollow--and turn America into an autocratic dictatorship.

This is not to say the Bush administration is as successful or competent as Hitler or Mussolini, but the political philosophies and tactics are about the same.

Typical characteristics of a fascist government include:

Fraudulent elections. Fascists hate any competition of ideas, so they either rig elections or use coercion to guarantee victory. There's no room for doubt now (thanks to a non-partisan investigation by the Government Office of Accounting) that the 2004 election was rigged. As was the 2000 election.

Aggressive Nationalism. Everything is done for "the State." All policies are rationalized as necessary for the "embetterment" of the State. And if you disagree, you must be an enemy of the State. Merely questioning the president's policies are now "aiding the enemy."

Cult of Personality. The nationalist movement must be centered around a person, someone who embodies the State (and serves as its chief executive). For the GOP, Bush is that man. He's "good, moral, and godly"--even though he was the killingest governor in America, and has killed more innocent Iraqis than Osama killed Americans.

Militarism. National Security against "the enemy" is paramount. Resources must be redirected for the primary goal of increasing the military. Social programs must be cut. Plus, the State has the "right" to resolve any issues by use of force. Such as "pre-emptive strikes."

One-Party rule. Democracy is slow and uncontrollable. The squabbling of legislators is counterproductive towards the ends of the State. While the GOP cannot yet declare the Democratic Party is obsolved, it brazenly refuses any attempt at bipartisanship and rigs the rules of Congress against them. A major GOP strategist, Grover Norquist, said that bipartisanship is "date rape."

Removal of Checks and Balances. If there are any legal obstacles, they must be removed. All of government must be turned around to serve the State. The legislature and judiciary must be realigned to serve the goals of the executive. Checks and balances are... inefficient. Since domestic spying is necessary to combat the "enemy," then requirements for warrants are neutralized or ignored.

De-powerment of the judiciary. The GOP are hell-bent to "reform" the courts to the point where they have no power to check the other two branches. We have already seen the GOP Congress restrict the federal courts from hearing certain types of cases. This war against the judiciary is designed to render the body powerless. And then...then they can really ram their agenda through the Congress. If the courts can't hear a case, they cannot rule against it nor declare a law unconstitutional. This is a CRITICAL tactic for any tyranny.

Loss of individual rights. To promote the State, the individual must become secondary. "Rights" are an outdated concept. Privacy (for the individual) does not exist. No searches or seizures are "unlawful." Anyone deemed an "enemy" can be arrested and detained indefinitely without warrant or indictment. Torture is legal (because the state defines what "torture" is--and if the state does it, it's not torture; only the "enemy" commits torture).

Propaganda. Control and manipulation of information is critical. The truth is whatever the State says it is. The Bush admin has been trying to hide information from the public by RE-classifying old material, even television programs that have already aired. The BA was also caught hiring "journalists" to lie (or spin) about his policies, since the policies are so atrocious that only a soulless sellout could defend them. From WMDs to No Child Left Behind, Bush has needed and used massive propaganda to distort the facts so that the public would not revolt against him.

Treaties are to bind others, not yourself. Hitler once said his signature was worthless; he would do what he wished. He violated the Non-Aggression Pact with the USSR, just as Bush violated the United Nations charter by waging war without a vote of approval by the Security Council.

....this abbreviated list is the political philosophy of the Bush administration, as proved BY THEIR OWN ACTIONS.

Bush: liquidate everything, including National Security

Bush has been hell-bent to liquidate everything in America since he got (s)elected. Our environment, our natural resources, our public schools, everything under the sun is to be converted into cash quickly. And now, that list even includes America's national security.

The Dubai port deal is, in the immediate, about money. The Bush family is directly tied to the Carlyle group (vastly wealthy international business), to whom the UAE is a major investor. So when the UAE wants to buy control of our ports, Bush is going to make it happen (one way or another). And why not? Directly or indirectly it puts cash into the Bush family coffers (by encouraging more UAE investments).

Critics of Micheal Moore's Fahrenheit 9/11 now need to rethink Moore's allegation that when Bush goes to sleep at night he's more concerned about wealthy Arabs than Americans' security. This port deal proves Moore right.

This deal does nothing to improve national security and does everything to compromise it. There's no way to rationalize that a foreign government with terrorist ties should control our ports.

Port fiasco shows Bush's true colors

Bush invaded Iraq over FAKE ties to Al Qaida, but wants to hand our ports over to a country with TRUE ties to terrorists. Somebody please explain how this isn't proof ol' Dubya is insane.

The fact that the Bush propaganda machine is defending this by playing the race card is further proof that the idea is fundamentally f****d up. Who gives a rat's ass if Emirates' feelings get hurt?! We're talking about our ports, for cryin' out loud. Y'know, those places where terrorists are supposed to try to sneak in nuclear bombs so our cities go up in mushroom clouds?

Now all of a sudden we're supposed to ignore our own national security so some corporations can make a quick buck??? (Somehow this is also tied into Bush's recent appointment of one of the port-buying corporation's employees to a prominent position in the U.S. Department of Transportation, and the million dollars the Bushes got from UAE & other Arabs for the Bush library...)

What makes all this worse are the excuses. The Bush admin says Bush didn't know about the deal until he saw it on the news. Nor did our Homeland Security director. So are we to believe that a lowly assistant's "OK" is all it takes for a country tied to terrorism to buy our ports???

At this point, I find myself edging closer to the conspiracy camp. That this whole 9/11 and Iraq mess was concocted by NeoCons (as plotted on their website, Project For A New American Century) as justification for a takeover of middle east oil industries by Western oil corporations. Why? Because NONE of this crap adds up.

This port deal makes NO SENSE. Nor does Bush WANTING it to happen. Nor does all the Bushbutt-licking pundits' INSISTENCE that it's all okay. Hell, half the GOP is afraid of this deal. THAT should tell you something's up. Dubya don't allow no dissention in the ranks.

China is insane.

No country should be allowed to have nukes that thinks a horse's cock and balls are good eating.

The spying just got WORSE.

A Republican is suing the Bush administration for illegal surveillance tactics. They're not just listening on your phones anymore. This has gone Big Brother.

According to the suit: "RFID tags 'that monitor their vehicle movements' were placed on his wife's car."

Next there will be a law--a secret provision put in a bigger law that no one would oppose--that says cars sold in the U.S. must have this RFID installed.

Welcome to the future of the "land of the free."

The wiretapping scandal: keeping on topic.

The media continues to allow Bush to dodge the issue regarding wiretapping. The issue is the warrants, not the spying itself.

Bush keeps saying the spying is necessary, to which few disagree. But the FISA law says he must get a warrant or the tap is illegal.

Bush keeps saying the spying needs to be quick, to which few disagree. The FISA law lets him send flunkies to get a FISA warrant up to 3 days after the tap. So there is nothing stopping our spies from doing anything they need to do in a timely manner.

Which begs the question of why Bush doesn't want to account for his spying before a FISA court designed to give rubber stamps to federal spying. They will only say "no" if it's obvious there is no reasonable cause for the tap.

So, the situation is this: Bush wants to conduct spying that even the FISA court would not approve 3 days after the fact.

That should tell you he's up to no good. If he can't come up with some half-assed excuse for a tap within three days, then there is absolutely no reason for that tap in the first place.

If it's not straight, then it's crooked.

As anyone who has dealt with the public (children or adults) knows, if someone or some group's story isn't straight, then somebody is hiding something. The mess surrounding VP Cheney's shooting of a hunting companion is a clear case of a story's facts changing with every telling. Here's a quick description of how the major details changed over time.

These discrepancies add up to only one thing: a cover up. So whether Cheney merely had an innocent accident or got drunk and nearly killed a man, it's still a case of the truth being too damaging--either politically or legally or both--to let the public know.

When a victim begs forgiveness for being attacked, you know something very screwy is going on.

Whittington to Cheney: "Thank you, sir, may I have another?"

The man who was shot by VP Cheney actually told the press that he was sorry for the trouble that Cheney was going through. This is not a human response. This is the response by a soulless shill still trying to curry favor.

The most charitable, natural, human response to being accidentally shot in the head is to OFFER forgiveness. Not beg for it. Something is very peculiar here.

Cheney keeps seeing phantoms...

It's all crystal clear now why the U.S. military kept giving now-VP Cheney all those deferments back during Vietnam. Apparently the military couldn't trust him with a gun. And now, decades later, ol' trigger-happy Cheney has shot a companion hunter--in the face and neck, I believe--because he keeps seeing things (this time, quail) that he doesn't actually see.

But this isn't new. Cheney's biggest act of recklessness was jumping into a war based on phantom enemies in Iraq. Then he was seeing nukes everywhere. Now he's seeing quail everywhere. For the sake of national security, somebody please disarm this walking calamity.

Hawaii to middle class: we don't want you.

Read between the lines of this article. Hawaii no longer wants or needs your piddly middle class dollars. Tourism has saturated the islands, and it's time to thin the herd. That's right, to keep you working people away, prices are going to rise. Hawaii will become exclusive once again. The destination du jour of fat wallets. And you commoners can drag your squawling brats back to Myrtle Beach where they belong...

Accept the implant, or get another job (this is only the beginning).

Remember all those alarmist old sci-fi movies projecting a horrible Orwellian future? Well, the future is now.

This data company now demands certain employees to receive an implant called an RFID or get another job. (They're not necessarily fired, but they lose the job they had.)

Top spy fired over opposing torture

Just another day in Bush-America. Last week the head of the CIA's counter-terrorism centre was fired because opposed Bush's hobby of kidnapping foreign citizens and shipping them around the world to be tortured. (Bush says they're "terrorists," but if Gitmo is any gauge, over 90 percent are innocent.)

Straight talkin' George

Scooter Libby has admitted that he was authorized by his superiors (such as VP Cheney) to leak classified information to the press. He still doesn't say he revealed CIA agent Plame's name. These crooks insist they didn't reveal her name. But they obviously didn't have to. Saying "Wilson's wife works for the CIA" is all they need do. But they don't directly deny that they made any reference at all about Plame. That's too broad a denial, the kind they can go to jail for.

The recent CNN story on this added Bush's quote from early in the investigation and it got me thinking about how Bush talks. Yep, this is another one of those times when ol' George is telling you--in double-meaning words--precisely what he's going to do...

On September 30, 2003, President Bush said, "If there is a leak out of my administration, I want to know who it is, and if the person has violated the law, the person will be taken care of."

Not fired, not prosecuted, not punished. "Taken care of."

Well, George is true to his words. He's been working overtime to take care of these traitors--to make sure the law never touches them.

Pulling Bush's strings.

Ever see those old westerns where the town drunk and/or idiot gets "elected" as sheriff? The reason is typically that the real powers in the town don't want the laws enforced. That, or the new sheriff is nothing more than a puppet to carry out the unseen powers' agendas.

Enter Bush's State of the Union Address. In front of God and everybody, Bush declared to the world that he was determined to reduce America's dependency on Middle Eastern oil by 75% in the next two decades. The very next day, his lackeys were running around telling the media that Bush actually didn't really mean it.

So, who's words were we hearing during Bush's speech? If they were his own, then whose words have we been hearing since?

Bush suppressing science...at NASA!

If you thought FEMA's Michael Brown was Bush's worst case of cronyism, you're wrong. Ol' Dubya's topped himself. And this time he got a two-fer. By putting in a totally unworthy person as NASA's public relations official, he also gets to manipulate and suppress valuable scientific information from one of the world's leading science organizations.

NASA scientists are outraged that George Deutsch, the crony in question, has interfered to "alter, filter, or adjust" the content of their messages. (Check the details here, but quickly before the NY Times archives it.) The gist is this: Deutsch is twisting the language to favor Bush's arch-conservative/pro-fundamentalist Christian world view. In other words, it's the Dark Ages again at NASA.

So who is this Deutsch guy that Bush appointed to NASA? Apparently, a total nobody. (Check out this blog's research on the guy.) He's a college dropout who wrote a bunch of right-wing gibberish for the school paper (such as claiming that the ties between Saddam and Al Qaida were so "clear" that it was obvious Saddam was involved in the 9/11 attacks)--and that's it. The closest he ever came to writing about science is a few video game articles. But he worked on Bush's campaign, so that makes him "qualified."

We're in a fight for the very fabric of our society. The GOP is hell-bent to twist every fact into an opinion and every opinion into a fact. They want to keep us so disinformed that we are totally manipulatable--that we don't can't even formulate questions, let alone understand answers. This way, their machine keeps chugging along. We keep doing all the work that makes them rich and powerful, including dying in foreign wars so they can rake in "record profits."

America was headed in the overall right direction before November 2000. Now we're at the edge of a cliff. And Dubya's happy to provide a push...

GOPs try to steal another election--this time from themselves.

Oh good grief.

The GOP members of Congress voted today to select a new majority leader in the House. And...I am not making this up...they had "voting irregularities."

Yep, they had more votes cast than there are GOP members of Congress.

They even have to cheat in their own in-party elections. That's how bad the corruption is in the Republican party.

Wow--Bush's on-tape statements prove he's lying.

Here's a video clip where Bush ADMITS that FISA warrants are required for wiretaps. Which is opposite of his current position that he doesn't need them.

What's proven here is that Bush knew warrants (he calls them "court orders") were required by law, and then willfully went ahead and ignored them anyway.

Let's play "Big Brother" again

Here's some technology that sounds useful, but as you read the story it becomes apparent why this really exists. You think you're adding chances to keeping your car safe. But you're actually making it easier to get repo'd. And you only have to pay about $1000 per year for the privilege...

Let's play "Big Brother"

Don't leave your cell phone unattended, not even for five minutes. Or you could be monitored, or worse.

Bush--back to his lying ways...

This is the kind of LYING this Bush administration is habitually guilty of. They make a big, bold statement one day, the provide a "clarification" the next--which basically unsays what was said the day before.

They do this completely on purpose. They know millions of people watched the SOTU address and heard the big claim by Bush that America will cut Middle East oil imports 75% over the next two decades. Wow. Monster promise.

And then the next morning Bush's cronies tell the media that Bush "didn't mean it literally."

What the--?! How can you mean that figuratively???

These jerks aren't even trying to hide it anymore. Bush has gotten away with so many big, important lies that he believes he's totally untouchable, unaccountable for anything he says.

And the worst thing is, he's right. Nobody holds this man accountable for anything.

Alito is confirmed. And so it begins...

With Alito's confirmation, Bush has pushed the Supreme Court clearly to the right. Now the real agenda begins.

Maybe Alito's confirmation wouldn't be so troubling if we didn't see footage of all those church members cheering. It's pretty obvious that Alito is EXPECTED to help install a new theocracy.

Not that that is why he was really nominated. Abortion (and religion) is just the grease the right-wing extremists use to squeeze in their REAL agenda: a total corporatocracy.

(Bush almost screwed up royally with Meiers, who was a lure for religious support but turned out to be quite liberal on other issues--which would have undermined the ultimate goal of corporatocracy.)

So, first we'll endure all this pandering to the religious vote: end of abortion, imposed prayer in schools, meaningless posting of Ten Commandments everywhere, etc. None of this gets in the way of establishing the corporatocracy.

Once the Holy Party is firmly entrenched and unchallenged, they will gut the system. But all the phony Christian packaging will remain. And sadly, the Christian zombies won't ever realize the unholy construct they helped create.

Assuming, of course, that the liberals and/or Democrats can't reverse this process. And given their total lack of fortitude, that's a fair assumption.

Bush knows addiction.

Instead of a dull State of the Union address, last night Bush gave us the oil version of an AA confession. Yes, America is addicted to oil.

But it's easy for the head junkie to talk the talk. Bush was "talking" about alternative fuels six years ago. Aside from giving away tax money for "research" (sometimes code for: free money that doesn't require actual results), Bush has done nothing about real rehabilitation. So in real terms, Bush wasn't actually talking about ending America's need for oil. He was explaining something far more important...

There are times when Bush truly is a straight talker. Except he uses imprecise language that can be interpreted a variety of ways. But the message is there if you think about it.

Last night Bush admitted to the world that he invaded Iraq for control of its vast oil industry.

A junkie will do anything for a fix. Especially lie. Oh, most definitely that.

He simply couldn't help himself. There it was, just lying there in plain open sight and virtually unguarded. How could anyone expect an addict to simply leave it be? You can't leave oil laying around a Bush anymore than a leave a raised skirt around a Clinton. Some things must be tapped!

So, Bush just gave the biggest AA speech of his life. And America is probably too dim-witted to realize it.

Dem's staff 'cleans up' Wikipedia entry.

I hate Wikipedia. It's just a bad idea all around. How can any "encyclopedia" be reliable if anyone can change the entries at will? Talk about being ripe for manipulation. And now we're seeing one of the ways that self-serving politicians can exploit it.

Congressional staffers of Democrat Representative Marty Meehan wrote their own bio of Meehan and replaced the previous Wikipedia entry, including any references to unpleasant facts such as Meehan's broken promise of only four terms and his massive campaign "war chest."

What's worse, there have been a thousand such revisions by congressional staffers over the past six months. And not all have been so...congenial. There's nothing like looking in an "encyclopedia" and reading that you "smell of cow dung"! Whoever these jokers are, and they appear to be staffers for Democrats, they're just hurting their own cause. When you're trying to dethrone the King of Lies, it's pretty stupid to put such a crown on your own party's head.

Hamas takes over Palestine!

My how sticky the democratic process can be. In last week's Palestinian election, a majority of votes went to a gang of terrorists whose primary goal is to wipe Israel off the face of the Earth. Oops. I guess Dubya didn't see that one coming. (File it next to Harriet Miers.)

Maybe Dubya shoulda sent over some of those Diebold voting machines used in Ohio (that the GAO confirmed were rigged).

Bush says the U.S. cannot support a government who expresses a desire to destroy another country. But isn't Bush a Neocon? And didn't the Neocon 'Mein Kampf' known as the Project For A New American Century state as its first task the invasion of Iraq? I guess if that kind of behavior is good enough for America, it's probably good enough for Palestine.

SC justices on the take now, too?

Supreme Court justice Antonin Scalia did not attend the swearing in of new Chief Justice John Roberts because, he says, he had a prior commitment he "could not break." What was this all-important commitment? According to ABC News:

"Justice Scalia spent two nights at the luxury resort lecturing at the legal seminar where ABC News also found him on the tennis court, heading out for a fly-fishing expedition, and socializing with members of the Federalist Society, the conservative activist group that paid for the expenses of his trip." And..."One night at the resort, Justice Scalia attended a cocktail reception, sponsored in part by the same lobbying and law firm where convicted lobbyist Jack Abramoff once worked."

Is there no end to the corruption of this government?

ABC also reports that many judges take such gifts. "Justice Clarence Thomas has received tens of thousands of dollars in valuable gifts, including an $800 leather jacket from NASCAR, a $1200 set of tires, a vacation trip by private jet, and a rare Bible valued at $19,000."

I don't care what the law technically says about giving gifts to judges. There is only ONE reason to give gifts to judges! And that's to curry favor, to get judicial rulings they wouldn't otherwise get.

The perception of impropriety is just as damaging as impropriety itself. Democracy only works because people believe it works.

If the Supreme Court can be bought with baubles, our whole system is bankrupt.

Get over yourself, Hillary.

Thanks to a rerun of The Daily Show, I got to see a clip of Senator Hillary Clinton's controversial "plantation" speech. I don't know if I've ever seen a worse case of a Democrat pandering to minorities. A multi-millionaire whining about getting the cold shoulder from other multi-millionaires isn't exactly my idea of a master-slave relationship. Take hint from Ted Kennedy, Hillary: just try to show us you're one FOR the people, because we're already certain you're not one OF the people.

Illegal spying now a cornerstone of Republican culture

A Republican group is offering UCLA students $100 for proof of "liberal views" being espoused by professors during class. First off, this is sleazy (but not out of character for right wingers these days). But second, it's strictly a violation of university rules. Class lectures are copyrighted protected material, and there are specific rules about the use of any recordings.

The group who is exploiting college students is called the "Bruin Alumni Association," which has no official association with the university. A bit misleading, perhaps? Of course. Orwellian in style? Definitely. Which probably explains their "black list" of professors they deem radical, all of which are supposedly liberal.

Are we surprised by this? No. The GOP/cons have been attacking education for decades because they teach people things that don't jibe with right-wing rhetoric. For them, the truth is "biased" against them. (You can imagine why big corporate polluters would be upset that a university biology class educates people about the environment. These things end up cutting into their profits, and therefore are "liberally biased." I have lungs on both the left and the right, and my totally non-partisan respiration system says there's a lot of dangerous crap in the air these days...)

If I were a UCLA professor on this black list, I would tell my classes about this spying plot. And then I would tell them that I am still willing to help them make some extra cash by beginning every class with a "liberal" statement. With about 30 students per class and three meetings per week (and, say, four courses being taught), that should cost these spies over a 15 week semester about $540,000 per semester per professor. With 31 professors on that list, that tallies up to over $33 million for the year.

And then hit them with a lawsuit once they balk at paying the students.

No surprise, Dubya LIED about why (and when) he ordered illegal wiretapping.

We recently learned that Bush had ordered the illegal NSA wiretapping well BEFORE the 9/11 attacks. Why is that important, beyond the obvious? Because King Dubya said that it was 9/11 that prompted him to take such drastic steps to protect America from further terrorist attacks.

Either Bush flat out LIED, or he has precognition (which is a whole 'nother conspiracy theory). Because there's no way he could have started illegal wiretapping in early 2001 because of attacks in late 2001.

So now we have to go back and ask the habitual liar (far worse than Clinton and Nixon combined) to provide another reason why he authorized illegal wiretaps of U.S. citizens. I fully expect the Reagan defense this time: "uh, I don't recall..."

(For a well written column on this topic, click...here.)

"Merit pay" for teachers sounds good, but is not fair or effective.

Houston just voted to link teachers' pay to their students test scores. Teachers responded with mixed reactions. Everybody's got an opinion. But for me, I just want to understand how it can be fair and effective.

A major criticism of relying on test scores is that they can easily be misleading. First off, each group of students are different. You might have a brilliant class go through one year and a struggling class go through the next year. Obviously, the scores will differ. In those cases, the teacher will simply get extra money because of the kids' talents not necessarily their own (the same quality of teaching will still get widely varied scores). This will not "incentivise" better teaching, but stronger lobbying for the better students. It will make education more political, and in all the worst ways.

If testing is done in staggered years, how do we know which teachers contributed what? If Johnny does well on his 4th grade testing, was it the 4th grade teacher or the 1st-3rd grade teachers who did had the most impact? One teacher shouldn't get all the credit (or blame) for the work of everybody else.

But it gets murkier at the higher levels. Should the history teacher be penalized because Johnny can't read on a high school level? Some high school teachers are hamstrung by students who are not prepared to be there. So many high school teachers will be "incentivized" to turn to the in-office politics of cherry picking the best students to get the rewards (and avoid shame), which tells us nothing of that teacher's ability to teach. There are already too many "good ol' boy" networks in public administration. Nothing is accomplished by adding more.

Also, not every teacher within a department has the same quality of students. Not every science teacher gets to teach the Advance Placement classes (even if every teacher is equally gifted, there's just not enough AP classes for everybody). And who's in the AP classes? The school's best students in that subject. So a great teacher who's assigned regular or sub-par students--where they are arguably needed most--will be penalized instead of rewarded.

And I won't go into the disparities from school to school, such as magnet schools (which are a good thing) who get the best students and leave other schools with lower performers. And how unfair it is to compare rural "catch-all" schools with urban specialized schools?

The media insists on painting resistance to "merit pay" as teachers wanting to avoid accountability. By and large, this is a falsehood. Good teachers would dearly love to be rewarded, and see bad teachers get their come uppance. But "merit pay" based on test scores--as typically proposed--will not accomplish this.

The only way would be to treat each district as a whole, and by tracking students longitudinally through the whole system from kindergarten to high school graduation. No teacher or school succeeds or fails in a vacuum.

Lies about American education.

ABC's John Stossel of 20/20 is a big lying fool. His "expose" about America's failing schools is nothing but a thinly-veiled whine for privatization of public schools. Why would he want that? Because his Republican and corporate masters have told him so.

Stossel repeats the same faulty refrain: our schools are failing our kids because they don't have "choice" and they perform worse than foreign kids. And that's all caused by, as you can guess, teachers' unions and tenure.

Stossel conveniently never mentions that American kids score lower than foreign kids because American schools test EVERY student the same, including special education kids. So it's not a surprise that the average is lower (America's best performs as well as anyone else). Nor does Stossel mention that charter schools test higher because they can CHERRY PICK THEIR STUDENTS. Hey if I could pick out the very brightest kids, I could teach them out of my garage and outperform the leftovers too.

Idiots like Stossel believe that a corporate-run school would somehow do better. Y'know, the same way corporate-run prisons were supposed to outperform state prisons. Where'd that end up? Inmates took over the prison and they had to be shut down. (All caused by typical corporate spending cuts.) Say what you will, but public schools still put education first. No corporation will ever put education ahead of profits. They simply are incapable of putting anything ahead of profits. They don't know how. They're not designed for it.

And notice that Stossel never mentions the role of parents or the students. They can't possibly have anything to do with it. (Hint: the number one reason a student underperforms? They don't try very hard.)

No, all the fault lies with the ones who just happen to have a union. And we all know how much rightwingers hate it when employees stand up for themselves.

Something very fishy about this 'confession.'

Here's a story that makes no sense (a follow up to the aforementioned death of a Washington journalist). A man goes in to a police station to ask why his face is on TV regarding the murder. Suddenly he's arrested, then whisked away to another police station where he 'confesses.'

Does this even pass the laugh test?

If he murdered somebody, he would NEVER show up at a police station TO ASK WHY HE'S LINKED TO THE CRIME!

The AP story says he went to "turn himself in." If so, why'd he ask a bunch of questions about his picture on TV?

None of this adds up. And from the story, it looks like the police aren't the least bit curious why.

Which is a clear sign that something's being covered up.

Real ID cards: Big Government GOP-style

Those Communist Republicans are marching America into a bunker of totalitarianism, where Big Brother obliterates our State's Rights in favor of a one-size-fits-all national identification card. This unfunded mandate will hobble the states' budgets to the tune of billions, further reducing a state's ability to be free to decide for itself how best to issue driver's licenses. What's next, Commie Republicans, numbers tatooed on our arms (or crowns) and weapon registrations?

...at least, that's what the country's Republicans would be saying if it were the Democrats passing such a law.

But, more laws demanding more tax money from citizens that reduce the 50 states to mere clerks' offices is a-okay as long as a Republican congress and president passes them. Kentucky's license fees have already jumped from $8 to 20 this past year. Thanks, GOP, for ushering in all that "change" you boasted about back in 1994 and 2000. I thought you meant "different," but you only meant "more, and lots more of it...."

Iran + nukes = GOP's wet dream?

Iran wants nukes. And Iran has the ability to develop them. But Iran is a Muslim nation that hates America. (Unfortunately, U.S. meddling in the 1950s-70s is the cause of that. But let's be good Americans and pretend that history doesn't exist...) It's not in America's interest, especially our oil-related interests, for any Muslim nation with strength and courage to have nuclear weapons. That would mean American politicians and businesses would have to actually treat them as equals, or at least with a modicum of respect. And that's just bad for our imperial agenda, not to mention bad for business in general.

The future is now being set. America will either go to war against Iran or engage in another multi-generational "cold war" against Iran and probably many other Muslim nations. A war would be our best bet of stomping their Christ-disrespectin' heathen souls back into third-rate status. A cold war might just end up giving them respect and aid from other nations who don't trust America (which is most of them, at this point).

There is one more possibility, and it's the absolute worst option: another Vietnam-like proxy war where the U.S. and Iran fight it out indirectly in a third country--like, oh, Iraq. Sadly, it's also the likeliest scenario. That way American politicians can crow to war-lovers at home and abroad that they are fighting against terrorism and nuclear proliferation without actually having to win that fight. Not losing ground is all that they need. It keeps the country in a constant state of war (complete with war powers for the president) and the military industrial complex showering in bloated contracts.

Alito: the issue that matters.

The most disconcerting fact about Alito is that the conservatives have evolved. They used to rely on simplistic Bush-like speech that any half-witted liberal could blow a hole straight through. But Alito, like John Roberts and the Intelligent Design proponents, is on a whole new track. Now they use the same dull, monotonous, excessively wordy jargon-laden ramblings that the "liberal elite" is known for. Which can lull a listener into a zombie-like state where they think they've heard something profound but actually only dodges the question.

The other trick is to reject anything resembling a specific answer on any issue that the judge might have to rule on later. My, how convenient since--for the Supreme Court--that includes everything.

We won't hear anything controversial from Alito. The cons are now smart enough to keep their anti-constitutional views to themselves, waiting for their chance to let their freedom-destroying rulings do their real talking.

If polar bears all turn bisexual, it's our own damn fault.

Somehow, flame-proofing chemicals for furniture is causing
gender/sex confusion in polar bears. To the point of making them hermaphrodites.

We're. Killing. This. Planet.

Bremer: "I'm Bush's scapegoat."

In his new book, Paul Bremer (former head of the coalition provisional authority in Iraq) says he's being used as a scapegoat by the Bush administration, that he's being blamed for their failures. Particularly, Bremer insists he wanted many more troops to quell the insurgency but was refused. He also says the coalition was of the "unwilling," because of their hesitancy towards fighting.

Bremer indeed deserves some of the blame for the mess in Iraq. He disbanded the Iraqi military, for one thing. But the failures of Bremer are actually the failures of Bush. Bremer had no qualifications for the job. Which may have been his greatest qualification of all. Since it was a virtual certainty that Iraq would immediately devolve into chaos, why put someone valuable in charge? Instead, put in a crony who's expendable and then let him take the blame for what happens.

No doubt, Bush defenders will now dismiss Bremer as a "disgruntled employee" with "an axe to grind" seeking quick cash from a book deal. Well, so what? That retort is exhausted to the point of cliche. All that matters is whether he's telling the truth. And if the truth gives him vindictive satisfaction or fattens his bank account, well bully for him. Because if anything should be profitable in the land of the free, it should be the truth.