Thursday Open Thread

Everyone attacks Giuliani from both the right and the left because he is ultimately the most qualified and competent candidate in this campaign. I don't think his opponents will be able to bring him down.

Sunnis in Iraq are fighting Al-Qaeda more and more, especially after stories like this .

This is an Open Thread.

Comments :

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

heh

In the highly recommended The poor must remain poor , French Socialist and beloved kossack Jerome a Paris yet again illustrates that the Left's willingness to overlook blatant fascism so long as public relations stunts are executed in support of the "poor".

Venezuela's president, Hugo Chavez, has struck a discounted fuel deal with London mayor Ken Livingstone in exchange for expertise on tourism and public transport in Caracas. The move will give up to a million Londoners living on benefits half-price fares on the city's buses.

Hugo Chavez, who is currently trying to make himself a dictator for life, is pulling yet another stunt pretending to care for the World's poor and providing help to those whose standard of living is actually higher than that of a middle class in his own fairly impoverished country. The Left cheers and evil capitalists are condemned. Left Wing Dictators are a-ok!

"To discuss evil in a manner implying neutrality, is to sanction it." AR

…………

Wasn't recced by me

But if they want to take money from Chavez, who cares? Spends just the same.  The sad thing is that I get the feeling that some of you right-wingers are irked by the fact that Chavez, in his delusions of grandeur, sees himself as a legitimate rival to U.S. power.  It's Venezuela, dude, get over it-- it's not a huge country.  So he's got a big mouth-- big deal.  So did Castro-- and we made a bigger deal out of him than we should have also.

Besides, Chavez, though not my idea of a perfect leader by any means, is a better leader for Venezuela than what they had in the past.  If he uses some crooked tactics to keep power-- well, it wouldn't be the first time that ever happened in the world... If he doesn't run a perfect free-market system-- well, that's happened before too.

The main thing that distinguishes him from the leaders of a lot of other countries is his big mouth and his propensity to stick it in the eye of W.  Well, if I was in his spot, I wouldn't be kissing up to Bush right now either. 

………… parent

but it's not HIS money of course; though

w/his power consolidation, Petróleos de Venezuela, the state oil company, is all but his personal piggy bank, I guess? I kinda wonder how the really poor folks in Venezuela feel about this, but I doubt anyone can ask 'em! ;)

Hey, even the New York Slimes ;) get Chavez

Chavez' Power Grab

Politics is a clash of interests masquerading as a clash of principles. – Anonymous

………… parent

Couple things

1) it wasn't a gift; Venezuela gets "tourism and transportation expertise" in return...

2) Fuel doesn't cost Venezuela much...

3) If Chavez strikes a deal like this with a foreign country, how is that equivalent to him treating the nation's treasury as his own personal piggy bank?  The U.S., for instance, gives aid to many countries, and sometimes the President might try to get some good PR for himself in the process by sealing the deal in front of the cameras-- does that mean that U.S. foreign aid is like the President treating the treasury like his own personal piggy bank?  Are the poor in this country especially up in arms about our foreign aid spending?

………… parent

you raise some good points, skymutt;

I just can't get exorcised over Chavez this morning.

Politics is a clash of interests masquerading as a clash of principles. – Anonymous

………… parent

I call B.S.

at least on your description of the diary. Jerome is writing about the reactions in London to the subsidies, not about Chavez. In fact, there's no commentary whatsoever on Chavez - it's all on the discussion of neoliberal ideology.

Meanwhile, you have one good comment in Chavez' favor (here and here ), two negative, here and here ), not counting your discussion, where no one came to Chavez' defense. That's out of 122 comments. So I think it's a bit of a stretch to use this as an example of the left's attitude towards Chavez, eh?

Believe me, I've had this argument there before, and it's a pretty striking split. I once made the mistake of stepping in on a particularly rabid fan , but that's worth the laugh.

Saint, n. A dead sinner revised and edited. - Ambrose Bierce

………… parent

Wow

That "rabid fan" sure liked CAPS better than carriage returns...

………… parent

why is using Chavez at all

to illustrate problems of the Developed World valid? That is what I was talking about. There is nothing genuine about that swine.

"To discuss evil in a manner implying neutrality, is to sanction it." AR

………… parent

Official position on Chavez

My position on Chavez can be summed up like this-

He makes me uncomfortable and I suspect he'll end up becoming a tyrant but the Venezuelan people chose him widely twice and in the meantime at least he pisses off all the right people.

Watching the wingnuts tear out their hair because Chavez had the gall to win two popular elections and survive a CIA based coup is damn entertaining.

I came. I saw. I posted.
Veni, Vidi, Bitchy.

………… parent

Ari Fleisher's new role as Sideshow barker.

Have you seen him on the talk shows yet? You've seen the headlines elsewhere.

Today Taylor Marsh has a post where she calls in the "hotline" number Ari's commercial lists that will get you through to Congress to express your views on the Iraq war . What Ari doesn't say is that they make you take a "survey" first. The first question is Do you think the war in Iraq supports the war on Terror. If you say no, they politely hang up on you.

Taylor thinks they only want supporters of the occupation to be able to get through to talk to Congress. Me, we all know that Ari is being paid big bucks by "somebody" to front Freedom Watch. Follow the money. I can't believe they think even supports of the war don't think this new "outreach non-profit group" is shallow as hell.

…………

Did you know that the Federal Government has increased

federal spending on contracts awarded without open competition and has tripled, to $207 billion, since 2000, with a $60 billion increase last year alone. (via SF Chronicle) The article says:

"Scott Chronister, a senior official in the Office of Counternarcotics Enforcement, reached out to a former colleague at a private consulting firm for advice. The consultant suggested that Chronister's office could avoid competition and get the work done quickly under an arrangement in which the firm "approached the government with a 'unique and innovative concept,' " documents and interviews show. A contract worth up to $579,000 was awarded to the consultant's firm in September. And the firm they hired showed them how to do it."

Tripled since 2000 you say? Hmmm....Something smells fishy. Where's my tax money going and why isn't it being bid out to competitive bidders? I'd think the financial conservatives here would be up in arms about this kind of thing.

…………

Well of course everyone attacks Giuliani!

The Republican candidates are running against him, and they all attack each other. The Democratic candidates suspect he might be the candidate, so they attack him.

But the one who's really under attack from both sides is Thompson. I'm amazed how much FOX is trying to bring him down, considering how he was supposed to be this golden outsider. Heh, first time I've agreed with FOX on anything I know.

Saint, n. A dead sinner revised and edited. - Ambrose Bierce

…………

Heh! I guess they got the memo;

Thompson eludes me totally -- he's gone thru 3 campaign managers already -- quite a feat w/o a campaign; maybe the 4th one's the charm? :)

Politics is a clash of interests masquerading as a clash of principles. – Anonymous

………… parent

Baloney

. . . .because he is ultimately the most qualified and competent candidate in this campaign.

Don't make me laugh. Rudi's as crooked as they come and is ideologically wishy-washy to boot. Electing him would be like thinking George would make a fine president. Twice. Oh, wait, right, nevermind ;}

"Perplexity is the beginning of knowledge" -- Kahlil Gibran

…………

Man, you're going to get it for that one....

But I think it's true.

………… parent

Nah

Just slappin back with a smile. I recognize Ender's brand of humorous hyperbole when I see it. I doubt he's as sold on Guiliani as it sounds. Of course, any R is preferable to a D, by definition ;}

"Perplexity is the beginning of knowledge" -- Kahlil Gibran

………… parent

I think that the evidence of some

minor corruption is nothing unusual when compared to all the other presidents we've had and his competence (has nothing to do with ideology) and pragmatism are in full display when you check what he's done as Mayor.

"To discuss evil in a manner implying neutrality, is to sanction it." AR

………… parent

But the rest of the country

doesn't much care about NYC. He may carry some parts of the Northeast, but to be elected he has to convince many more of us that what he's done has been superior, and he's not done an outstanding job of that, IMHO.

He's a hawk, but I recommend looking for more than just that in a candidate. Again, I refer you to our experience with George. Hawkishness and competency do not necessarily go hand in hand.

NYC schools are still a mess; he did not fix that. NYC is still blue; he did not convince them to switch parties. Just what exactly has he done that is so outstanding?

"Perplexity is the beginning of knowledge" -- Kahlil Gibran

………… parent

He's a leader! he's a leader!

and for R's that's enough, I guess; I'm surprised at Rudy's staying power, frankly ... but it also reflects the weakness of their field

The South Carolina primary polls are kinda fascinating, w/Rudy in the clear lead, followed by Thompson? and even McCain beats out Romney --- the holy rollers can't abide Romney

realclearpolitics

Politics is a clash of interests masquerading as a clash of principles. – Anonymous

………… parent

do you know anything about Giuliani?

Doesn't seem like it...

"To discuss evil in a manner implying neutrality, is to sanction it." AR

………… parent

I never met him

but here is one thing I know about him, and this shows why republicans are desperate. If this is the best they've got, I think we democrats are in good shape.

………… parent

Ender, you are WAAY overstating his affinity.

As I've already stated, my REPUBLICAN siblings who live in NYC think Guliani is trash. They say they'd NEVER vote for him, ever again. They think he's a horrible person and nothing but a self promoter. All sizzle, no steak. And these are your camps people, not mine.

So where you're coming off saying how he'd be such a popular figure.....I can't say. I don't share your views, and that's me saying what I think politely.

………… parent

I was keeping an open mind about him --

and I even thought he might serve to distance the R's from their ever encroaching moral collectivism, but what turned me off? when i learned he was 'too busy' capititalizing on 9/11, to participate in the 9/11 Commission -- that rang so hollow with me, and i don't respect him for it.

Politics is a clash of interests masquerading as a clash of principles. – Anonymous

………… parent

The good news in those poll numbers

seems to be that the Republican base is perhaps not so put off by Guiliani's stance on abortion as in prior years. So maybe that's one issue that is loosening its grip on the nation. One can hope.

"Perplexity is the beginning of knowledge" -- Kahlil Gibran

………… parent

come on

NYC before and after Rudy is like night and day. NYC had a slew of incompetent mayors who've run the city into the ground. Businesses were running away. Crime was rampant. Dirt was everywhere - 42nd street was like a one giant glory hole in a seedy establishment that was NYC. And the last Mayor managed to do absolutely nothing about racial tensions and blow ups.

Fast-forward to Rudy - he increased the police force and strengthened their rules of engagement to actually fight crime aggressively and without apologies, as it should be fought. He cleaned up the streets so families can once again feel safe to be on the streets of our great city. He quickly moved towards business friendly tax policies to get business back into the city and increase revenues that helped all New Yorkers. He fought the rampant corruption of the socialists on the City Council.

Bloomberg inherited all these wonderful things and a city that has rebounded in the most incredible way if you actually saw the before and after and the cold statistics of change. He's done a good job and improved some but it is a lot easier to do a good job when you inherit a city in a good condition, than if you get what Giuliani inherited.

I love that guy. Great mayor and a great executive. I will gladly vote for him against any democrat and probably against any republican.

"To discuss evil in a manner implying neutrality, is to sanction it." AR

………… parent

Any critical points?

I'm wondering if there are some things you don't like about RG or if there some things that he didn't do right in NYC. I'm wary of a candidate who struggles to even admit any mistakes he's made in the past.

http://wealthweekly.blogspot.com
Wii FC:2805-8311-8040-2678
Brawl: 2277-7051-2186

………… parent

of course there are some things

He is a bit too liberal and I really don't appreciate his views on:

Gun Control
Public Funding for abortion (I could potentially agree with it but not with his rationale - that abortions are a right that we must subsidize)

There are probably other things that I can't think of right now.

"To discuss evil in a manner implying neutrality, is to sanction it." AR

………… parent

OK, to summarize

He (1) improved law enforcement, (2) provided tax breaks to businesses, and (3) challenged entrenched city councilmen

OK, that's three good things for a mayor to do. But all good mayors do that, in one way or another. (The first two are simply versions of throwing money at a problem, which takes few skills other than the ability to craft a budget. Did they affect the debt or fiscal situation of NYC?). That doesn't mean they're qualified to run a nation. In fact, I would say that these activities are far too hands-on to serve as good qualifications for the presidency.

What would impress me with true leadership skills in a complex and difficult situation would be taking on the NYC school system. Did he do anything there?

"Perplexity is the beginning of knowledge" -- Kahlil Gibran

………… parent

taking on the teachers' unions?

Al-Qaeda might be easier! i kid, sorta .....

Joel Klein, the city's top education guy, was on Charlie Rose last night, and he said Bloomberg's admin made some dents -- like a principal can hire a teacher for the first time -- but! the biggie --- a years' long process -- to fire a bad teacher -- is still entrenched in their contracts; easier to impeach a president, literally!

Politics is a clash of interests masquerading as a clash of principles. – Anonymous

………… parent

Well, Al-Qaeda *is* hard

and so are the NYC teachers unions. Both require creative and bold approaches to complex problem solving. If he cannot handle the one, why should I believe he can handle the other?

Or, to put my underlying point a bit differently, either his experience as NYC mayor matters or it does not when judging him as a potential candidate.

"Perplexity is the beginning of knowledge" -- Kahlil Gibran

………… parent

of course it matters; it's integral

to his candidacy, but which specific issues matter, i can't say --- I have no idea of teachers' unions' resonance at the national level.

Imo, the union Rudy he needs to be wary of, and is, is the Firefighters' Union -- they've got it in for him, and if wingnuts think they can marginalize or demonize firefighters? good luck!

Politics is a clash of interests masquerading as a clash of principles. – Anonymous

………… parent

you gotta be kidding me...

Is this criticism serious? To pull a city out of hell and remake it into a shining world capital takes a lot more than just throwing cash at problems... But if you prefer to think that way, fine. Just don't expect me to take your argument here seriously.

As for the school system, I think the only good way of approaching changing them is by destroying the Teachers Union.

"To discuss evil in a manner implying neutrality, is to sanction it." AR

………… parent

destroying the teachers' union? hehe

please see my signature :) ... or, how did Arnold fare 'cleaning house' with the prison unions, the nurses' unions, and the teachers' unions in Kaleefornia?

They are mighty powerful, entrenched interests! who represent millions of good paying jobs, so you sit down and negotiate.

Politics is a clash of interests masquerading as a clash of principles. – Anonymous

………… parent

I know they are powerful and entrenched

so I presented the idealistic solution... Not necessarily the most realistic one. Just another notch in Giuliani's belt - that he did not go mad dealing with those parasites. :)

"To discuss evil in a manner implying neutrality, is to sanction it." AR

………… parent

Yes, but you miss my point

You see what he's done, but the rest of us don't necessarily see it the same way. NYC matters to you, maybe not so much to others west of the Mississippi. The weighting is not the same. To you it's outstanding, because you're there. Do you think the folks in Seattle, San Francisco, Atlanta, Denver, or Houston see it the same way?

Not to divert the thread, but on the schools, I'd go one better: Pull a Reagan. Destroy the whole thing and start over.

"Perplexity is the beginning of knowledge" -- Kahlil Gibran

………… parent

Rudy's case to the Republicans is

that he could win in the general election and the others running cannot. (The polls are backing him up on this). Many Republicans are in the doldrums since they feel that 2008 will be a Democratic year, after 2 terms of a now unpopular Republican Presdent. They are afraid of HRC, so to avoid that fate they will overlook Guiliani's pro-choice, pro-gun control, and non-support of Consitutional amendment banning gay marriage and will come around to supporting Rudy. However, Rudy will have to convince the party that he is now sincere in wanting to enforce the borders. Guiliani will also have to commit to having a VP partner who is conservative on the social issues and has a history of favoring border enforcement.

name the enemy, win the war

………… parent

good lord what a moron

"To discuss evil in a manner implying neutrality, is to sanction it." AR

…………

yeah

Egad! Why would anyone want to save money like that? It's crazy. Un-American! Life's all about consumption, not sustainability!

Oh, and thanks for the link. I'll be reading this for the next 30 days for sure.

We are the environment. There is no distinction. What we do to the earth we do to ourselves. —David Suzuki

………… parent

hehe

You are welcome. Sure, I think it's un-american to bash capitalism and to even give credence to the idea that consumption of resources is bad or that those loser freegans are anymore more than hippie bums with no clue about morality.

"To discuss evil in a manner implying neutrality, is to sanction it." AR

………… parent

What in the heck is wrong about not wasting stuff?

There is nothing un-American about conservation, saving, and not wasting stuff.  In fact, our "Greatest Generation" who grew up during the Great Depression, were/are legendary for their penny-pinching, waste not/want not ways.  And that generation led America into its greatness.

I'm a bit of a saver/penny-pincher.  I recycle.  I don't buy stuff I don't need.  I have a small economy car and I could afford a bigger one.  I plant a vegetable garden every year.  I turn the thermostat down to 60 at night in the winter, just like my dad (b.1930, experienced Depression) did growing up.  That's as American as it gets, my friend.  We need to get back to being a touch more frugal, and obviously for most people that doesn't mean being a Freegan, but we need to do better.  We have a negative national savings rate-- that means we aren't building wealth because of all this consumption.  We need to get back to saving and investing, and ditch this idea that consumption is what makes America special-- it isn't.

………… parent

Here here..

Of course, investing being one of my favorite topics, I agree. However, I think the big thing is that Americans don't care about savings but will probably get upset if you force them to reduce their consumption. I think the choice should reside with the individual to do so.

However, one thing I think the State can do is encourage its citizens to invest--for instance, offering a lower tax rates on investment income will encourage more Americans to invest a portion of their income.

I also don't have much of a problem with consumption, but when the consumption gets so bad that people start looking to the State to bail them out of their bad decisions (cough-housing market-cough), the State will of course look to those who chose to save. It's an unfortunate characteristic that most of us will have to just suck up one way or another.

The country will have a smaller savings rate as long as they know the Gub'mint will come and help them with an ever-growing larger safety net.

Long story short--everything in moderation folks.

Edit: BTW my firewall blocks the article. What is it about?

http://wealthweekly.blogspot.com
Wii FC:2805-8311-8040-2678
Brawl: 2277-7051-2186

………… parent

Overview

Basically, this reporter is going to try to live a "Freegan" life-- Freegan being a "person who employs alternative strategies for living based on limited participation in the conventional economy and minimal consumption of resources. Freegans embrace community, generosity, social concern, freedom, cooperation, and sharing in opposition to a society based on materialism, moral apathy, competition, conformity, and greed".

Here's her life rules that she's going to try to follow:

1.    I will not buy anything except for food, medical needs or in case of emergency.

2.    I will be a vegan.

3.    All my food will be organic (and local if at all possible) and only from local sources such as New York City's greenmarkets or the Park Slope Food Co-op. I will also investigate waste reclamation and wild foraging. (Gross maybe, but Americans waste more than 90 billion pounds of food a year, and that can feed a lot of starving activists.)

4.    I will scrupulously recycle, reuse and compost. If I want something, I will barter for it or go to freecycle.org or try and find it in that house of horrors I call a storage space.

5.    I will not throw away what I already have and buy "green" items. I will use what I have until it's gone.

6.    I will aim to reduce my energy bill by 50 percent and be carbon neutral.

7.    I will only use eco-friendly transportation (including the subway), but I will take a car if it is a matter of personal safety (such as late nights).

8.    I will open a Freedom Savings Account where I will put the money I save. This money will, in time, give me the freedom to quit working if I want to. And when I get the Man's foot off my neck, I'm going to move upstate and read used books.  

9.    Most importantly, I will mindful of the impact of my actions on the earth.

………… parent

Good for her I guess..

I mean, I think that's good if it works for her, but honestly, I think it's a practice in feel-good pretentiousness. It seems to give an air of "I'm much better than you because I don't [enter human behavior here]."

Maybe I'm just looking too much into it, but I think I've seen these things happen before. More power to her though.

http://wealthweekly.blogspot.com
Wii FC:2805-8311-8040-2678
Brawl: 2277-7051-2186

………… parent

Other thoughts

Well, they've already given us the lower capital gains tax...and it hasn't seemed to help much-- people seem to have gotten it thru their thick skulls that it'sessential to lease that BMW and buy that jet-ski and that fancy grill, so they don't have any money left over to invest and take advantage of it.  Myself, I think stocks are almost universally overvalued so I'm in cash and bonds and so I really don't get much of a tax break from that either.

The thing that has worked better are the 401k plans-- tax free, and behind the scenes once it's set up. requires less discipline.  Even there, people have figured out that they can borrow from that.  It's a sickness almost.

I know that Australia has a forced savings plan, along the lines of the "personal savings account" proposed by the Bush Admin, except that theirs is totally on top of their equivalent of social security.  But according to this , Australias savings plan caused overall savings to fall.

………… parent

Hmm

I just scanned the Constitution , I did not find anything about consumption or capitalism. Strange.

I think you are being un-American for criticizing people for choosing to live how they wish. Remember that whole freedom/liberty thing?

I think greedy pigs should wallow in their own filth for destroying the environment and not living up to their Christian morality of taking care of the meek and poor.

(See, these mini-rants don't really say much do they?) :-)

………… parent

rants are fun

in general. You can defend people's rights to live however they wish while at the same time calling them morons for living like ones. :)

"To discuss evil in a manner implying neutrality, is to sanction it." AR

………… parent

Calling someone

a moron from your subjective viewpoint and calling them un-American (the favorite right-wing way of saying someone is a traitor) are worlds apart.

………… parent

I think I referred

to their lifestyle as unamerican. I stand by it as it is a rejection of our good ole capitalist principles that have made us the Freest, Wealthiest, and the most Powerful nation in the world.

In this case I'll clarify it - I do not mean that they are traitors. Just unamerican morons :)

"To discuss evil in a manner implying neutrality, is to sanction it." AR

………… parent

Do you even

understand what 'freedom' means? You throw it around as some kind of deity, but then you turn around and call someone un-American for using that freedom. I will never understand your ilk.

………… parent

why are you using the term "ilk"

towards me? :) I am free to call other people un-American just like those un-Americans are free to be un-Americans as long as they don't 5th column us when the Islamofascists invade.

"To discuss evil in a manner implying neutrality, is to sanction it." AR

………… parent

'ilk' means

'your kind' with a negative connotation, you know as in hypocrite. :-)

………… parent

I know what it means...

and am not sure why you would apply it to such a staunch independent like me.

"To discuss evil in a manner implying neutrality, is to sanction it." AR

………… parent

I know what you mean Ender.

I have always found you to be very middle of the road, actually.  And very sensible (as in able to get along with others).  If you were anything else you have have been banned at dkos long ago!  :)

I don't know where these blue bars get off using that "ilk" word anyway.  They're the "ilk" as far as I am concerned!  He he.

Republican Maverick at Large
-4:Strongly Disagree; 0:Meh; +4:Strongly Agree

………… parent

no kidding bud

I don't understand the hostility directed towards me as if I was some radical. Sensible and middle of the road describes me exactly.

Thanks man!

"To discuss evil in a manner implying neutrality, is to sanction it." AR

………… parent

Ha!

I will never understand your ilk.

And yet you champion the use of Political Correctness as a means of punishing those who hold beliefs that differ from yours?   Ha.  Ha ha ha ha.  Did I say ha?

Don't point the dreaded finger of "ilk" about lest that finger be pointed at thee!  :)

Republican Maverick at Large
-4:Strongly Disagree; 0:Meh; +4:Strongly Agree

………… parent

I don't have

today to discuss PC other than to say 'ilk' is not really related to my discussions of it (in other words, how I frame it and see it in the academic sense) nor is punishing those who hold beliefs that differ from mine. And secondly, Ender and I were more or less joking around as noted by the multiple smilies in the thread (absent that one comment, but I thought it was understood).

………… parent

Speaking of smileys ...

Don't point the dreaded finger of "ilk" about lest that finger be pointed at thee!  :)  <-- Note Here!

Can't I play too?

Republican Maverick at Large
-4:Strongly Disagree; 0:Meh; +4:Strongly Agree

………… parent

un-American to bash capitalism??

how's that? I am, we are, first and foremost citizens, and not consumers!

and in a free market of ideas, it's folks' right to choose to 'drop out' of society whether for secular reasons, any darn reason, or for religous reasons (like the Amish in my area).

If not, then what are individual rights, and individual freedoms, all about? just another marketing tool? yikes

Politics is a clash of interests masquerading as a clash of principles. – Anonymous

………… parent

of course they have that right

Americans also have a right to lead un-american lifestyles and bash their own country :) It's their right. I am not for banning those activities that don't blatantly run afoul of our laws.

But that doesn't mean I won't call em like I see em.

Also capitalism != consumers. So I am not sure why you are making that equivalence when I didn't.

"To discuss evil in a manner implying neutrality, is to sanction it." AR

………… parent

I guess I'm more liberterian? live and let live,

and individual, voluntary, grassroots efforts don't bother me at all; quite the opposite!

I scanned the freegan link; typically, it's sanctimonious, contemptible, and holier-than- thou! but it has its charms, for those so inclined.

Politics is a clash of interests masquerading as a clash of principles. – Anonymous

………… parent

Meh

[ See skymutt, you've educated me! ]

Let these people live however they want.  I am married to a women who might actually have become such a person if she had not married such a war mongering, resource wasting, planet killing conservative!

I still hope to reform her.  :)

Republican Maverick at Large
-4:Strongly Disagree; 0:Meh; +4:Strongly Agree

………… parent

Heh

See skymutt, you've educated me!

I educate you with every post my son.  Some of it just hasn't sunken in yet :-)

………… parent

yeah

I am not saying that they can't. But they are still morons. :)

"To discuss evil in a manner implying neutrality, is to sanction it." AR

………… parent

How to lose, badly

This is not only nauseating but stupid as well:

Maybe what the war in Iraq needs is not more troops but more religion. At least that's the message the Department of Defense seems to be sending.

Last week, after an investigation spurred by the Military Religious Freedom Foundation, the Pentagon abruptly announced that it would not be delivering "freedom packages" to our soldiers in Iraq, as it had originally intended.

What were the packages to contain? Not body armor or home-baked cookies. Rather, they held Bibles, proselytizing material in English and Arabic and the apocalyptic computer game "Left Behind: Eternal Forces" (derived from the series of post-Rapture novels), in which "soldiers for Christ" hunt down enemies who look suspiciously like U.N. peacekeepers.

The packages were put together by a fundamentalist Christian ministry called Operation Straight Up, or OSU. Headed by former kickboxer Jonathan Spinks, OSU is an official member of the Defense Department's "America Supports You" program. The group has staged a number of Christian-themed shows at military bases, featuring athletes, strongmen and actor-turned-evangelist Stephen Baldwin. But thanks in part to the support of the Pentagon, Operation Straight Up has now begun focusing on Iraq, where, according to its website (on pages taken down last week), it planned an entertainment tour called the "Military Crusade."

Apparently the wonks at the Pentagon forgot that Muslims tend to bristle at the word "crusade" and thought that what the Iraq war lacked was a dose of end-times theology.

*&^%ing idiots.

I came. I saw. I posted.
Veni, Vidi, Bitchy.

…………

This is great stuff!

Only because of the effect it has on tlolac!  :)

[ In this case I tend to agree with him, though. ]

Republican Maverick at Large
-4:Strongly Disagree; 0:Meh; +4:Strongly Agree

………… parent

Wonkette summary of the war to date

Top U.S. generals in Iraq have some bad news for fans of Democracy: Iraq cannot have some.

Nearly five years into the greatest American war ever, Army brass are finally admitting what nearly everyone else on Earth (including Dick Cheney) has known for so many years: Bombing the %$#^ out of a distant country for no actual reason and killing half a million of its people and scattering its armed military forces and destroying its entire infrastructure and executing its government and raping its children and elderly in torture chambers and forcing its educated and professional classes to flee to other countries is not, in fact, a surefire way to spread democracy in the Middle East.

Even more tragic, it's not even a good way to seize the oil fields, which are still suffering from destroyed infrastructure and daily attacks by all those Iraqi army guys we put out of work.

But for the first time, exasperated front-line U.S. generals talk openly of non-democratic governmental alternatives, and while the two top U.S. officials in Iraq still talk about preserving the country's nascent democratic institutions, they say their ambitions aren't as "lofty" as they once had been.

"Democratic institutions are not necessarily the way ahead in the long-term future," said Brig. Gen. John "Mick" Bednarek, part of Task Force Lightning in Diyala province, one of the war's major battlegrounds.

I came. I saw. I posted.
Veni, Vidi, Bitchy.

………… parent

Nine Nineties in Nine

I think this would be a very interesting way to get the debates going once the candidate is selected. Because there will only be two candidates and the average American's attention span may not got over more than 1 hour for anything on TV that's not some reality show, I think Newt has an interesting point here.

I figure since there will be nine debates, there should single topics in all of the debates--one on foreign policy, one on health care, one on the tax system, etc. I would like it.

I would also like to see a debate where the top three candidates from each side stand on one stage, alternating D-R-D-R-D-R and they field questions from the audience. Talk about nervousness--imagine the contortions they'd have to go through to avoid being seen as too far to one side.

Although it would never happen, what do you guys think? Good or not good? (I'm referring to both the 9Ni9 and the mixed multi-candidate debate)

http://wealthweekly.blogspot.com
Wii FC:2805-8311-8040-2678
Brawl: 2277-7051-2186

…………

Soft discrimination in bloom

Via Baloon Juice:

Unsurprising news, via Steve Benen:

Nightmarish political realities in Baghdad are prompting American officials to curb their vision for democracy in Iraq. Instead, the officials now say they are willing to settle for a government that functions and can bring security.

Hell, Saddam brought security. He also counterbalanced Iran, kept a lid on jihadist crazies and tortured far fewer Iraqis to death on a per-month basis than the bloodthirsty gangs who will end up running the country. Iraq had electricity, sanitation, a vastly lower crime rate and a functioning medical system. Ethnic cleansing before/after Saddam seems to be a wash, only these days it is done with fewer beaurocrats and more cordless drills. Hey, at least we kept our credibility! Now when any middle easterner hears about America the first thing that comes to mind is abu Ghraib.

The sad thing is that Iraq really isn't any better off with our current attempt to play god than they were with our last one.

I came. I saw. I posted.
Veni, Vidi, Bitchy.

…………

Bah. Humbug.

Republican Maverick at Large
-4:Strongly Disagree; 0:Meh; +4:Strongly Agree

………… parent

Democrats backtracking?

Democrats Refocus Message on Iraq After Military Gains :

Democratic leaders in Congress had planned to use August recess to raise the heat on Republicans to break with President Bush on the Iraq war. Instead, Democrats have been forced to recalibrate their own message in the face of recent positive signs on the security front, increasingly focusing their criticisms on what those military gains have not achieved: reconciliation among Iraq's diverse political factions.

[ ... ]

"We've begun to change tactics in Iraq, and in some areas, particularly in Anbar province , it's working," Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) said in a speech to the Veterans of Foreign Wars on Monday.

"My assessment is that if we put an additional 30,000 of our troops into Baghdad , that's going to quell some of the violence in the short term," Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) echoed in a conference call with reporters Tuesday. "I don't think there's any doubt that as long as U.S. troops are present that they are going to be doing outstanding work."

Enough said.

Republican Maverick at Large
-4:Strongly Disagree; 0:Meh; +4:Strongly Agree