If in your presence an individual tried to sacrifice an American serviceman or woman, would you intervene?
Would you at least protest?
What if he had already sacrificed 3,003 of them?
What if he had already sacrificed 3,003 of them — and was then to announce his intention to sacrifice hundreds, maybe thousands, more?
This is where we stand tonight with the BBC report of President Bush’s “new Iraq strategy,” and his impending speech to the nation, which, according to a quoted senior American official, will be about troop increases and “sacrifice.”
The president has delayed, dawdled and deferred for the month since the release of the Iraq Study Group.
He has seemingly heard out everybody, and listened to none of them. ... The additional men and women you have sentenced to go there, sir, will serve only as targets.
They will not be there “short-term,” Mr. Bush; for many it will mean a year or more in death’s shadow.
This is not temporary, Mr. Bush.
For the Americans who will die because of you, it will be as permanent as it gets.
The various rationales for what Mr. Bush will reportedly re-christen “sacrifice” constitute a very thin gruel, indeed.
The former labor secretary, Robert Reich, says Sen. John McCain told him that the “surge” would help the “morale” of the troops already in Iraq.
If Mr. McCain truly said that, and truly believes it, he has either forgotten completely his own experience in Vietnam ... or he is unaware of the recent Military Times poll indicating only 38 percent of our active military want to see more troops sent ... or Mr. McCain has departed from reality. ... But to the rest of you in the Republican Party:
We need you to speak up, right now, in defense of your country’s most precious assets — the lives of its citizens who are in harm’s way.
If you do not, you are not serving this nation’s interests — nor your own.
November should have told you this. ... Sacrifice, Mr. Bush?
No, sir, this is not “sacrifice.” This has now become “human sacrifice.” ... Our meaningless sacrifice in Iraq must stop.
The Election Assistance Commission (EAC), which is responsible for accrediting testing labs that inspect electronic voting machines, failed to notify local officials that it has refused to accredit Ciber, which tests the software for most of the electronic voting systems currently in use.
Ciber was allowed to certify software patches, such as the ones that fix problems that surfaced in the run-up to November's mid-term elections, notably in Maryland, where e-poll book devices caused havoc during the 2006 primaries.
Officials in California and other states also relied on a report from Ciber that dismissed concerns raised by computer experts who demonstrated security flaws in electronic voting machines.
Local election officials were not made aware of Ciber's status, however, reinforcing claims by election integrity activists that the EAC is more concerned with protecting voting machine vendors than the rights of the electorate.
WASHINGTON (AP) -- Harriet Miers, President Bush's failed Supreme Court nominee and longtime adviser, on Thursday submitted her resignation as White House counsel.
He's thinking William Shatner's character in Boston Legal might be good.
WASHINGTON - President Bush has quietly claimed sweeping new powers to open Americans' mail without a judge's warrant, the Daily News has learned. The President asserted his new authority when he signed a postal reform bill into law on Dec. 20. Bush then issued a "signing statement" that declared his right to open people's mail under emergency conditions.
That claim is contrary to existing law and contradicted the bill he had just signed, say experts who have reviewed it.
Gee - good timing on getting that out in the holiday rush George - didn't want people to actually pay attention to what you were doing would you?
And what are you doing? Your signing statements are actually so much doodling on the constitution - to the point where it's getting hard to read it.
Here's a post just in time for the Christmas season
And for those of you who think I'm late on posting this I say "Ha! If I'm so late than how come this is being posted even before my Christmas cards go out!"
From the Actual FBI Memorandum: COMMUNIST INFILTRATION OF THE MOTION PICTURE INDUSTRY
With regard to the picture "It's a Wonderful Life", [redacted] stated in substance that the film represented rather obvious attempts to discredit bankers by casting Lionel Barrymore as a "scrooge-type" so that he would be the most hated man in the picture. This, according to these sources, is a common trick used by Communists.
In addition, [redacted] stated that, in his opinion, this picture deliberately maligned the upper class, attempting to show the people who had money were mean and despicable characters. [redacted] related that if he made this picture portraying the banker, he would have shown this individual to have been following the rules as laid down by the State Bank Examiner in connection with making loans. Further, [redacted] stated that the scene wouldn't have "suffered at all" in portraying the banker as a man who was protecting funds put in his care by private individuals and adhering to the rules governing the loan of that money rather than portraying the part as it was shown. In summary, [redacted] stated that it was not necessary to make the banker such a mean character and "I would never have done it that way."
First off, I love what the FBI considers good storytelling - can you imagine how bad this movie would have been if Potter was an upstanding fellow with good looks and youthful appeal - which seems what would have been required to make this film acceptable to the FBI.
But the bigger picture here is that the FBI has confused small business, working together, and care for your neighbor with communism. Actually George's concern for his customers (investor's in the savings and loan) was what made the Bailey Savings and Loan a successful business. It was a business. It made money.
It seems the FBI didn't like that George didn't maximize his profits. Perhaps it was concerned that George didn't mock those who were not as well off.
This isn't looking back with nostalgia and laughing at the silly FBI agents of a past era. This is still happening today. The GOP has confused greed and avarice with good business and capitalism. Actually - Greed does not work - apologies to Michael Douglas's character in Wall Street.
In 2001 and on the results of greed have required profit restatements at the minimum and often the destruction of peoples' life time savings.
Here's a newsflash - the energy companies' manipulation of the energy prices in California in 2000 and 2001 severely weakened that state's economy. A state that fuels the economy of the entire country. And the GOP shielded the energy companies, despite the fact that they were removing money from the economy - slowing growth - stiflingly innovation and hurting investors.
Today's GOP supports business practices that hurt business. They are not promoting a free capitalist society - they are promoting government welfare for cronies.
The GOP always shields their initiatives under the guise that it is good for "small business." Generally when small businesses are not effected. Often the initiative stifles innovation and provides industries with barriers of entry - limiting the opportunities of small business.
Small businesses are what not only made America an economic powerhouse, they are the only means of continuing our economic strength and the GOP has been working to stop that - for short term profit - both financially and politically.
Investing long term is good practice and good policy.
Our first post of 2007 is also the 5,000th post for this site – that’s over 4 posts a day since we started in March, 2003 (and you are around our 80,000th visitor/vist) – so time for a little site talk.
As regulars (and I do have a few, poor souls that they are) have no doubt noted site postings have been a bit irregular. No longer have the posts been every day, but in little bursts now and then, this will probably continue – this site will definitely not keep up with the pace of the previous 3 years and 9 months. And yes I realize for the past year or so the posts are often simply news clips with a side of snide.
When we started this blog back on March 6, 2003 we wanted make our voice heard. The Iraq war was a done deal though it was still a week and a half away. Back then you had to spend time reading articles that were buried in the B section of the papers and not on the front page, to know the reasons behind the war were questionable. Even then it was known that the reason for the war was simply because they wanted a war; but you wouldn’t know it if you read or watched the majority of the media of the day.
Earlier that year MSNBC had fired its top rated anchor because they were worried he wouldn’t be pro-war enough (or at all). The Iraq war was a “cake walk” that would “pay for itself” and that we would be “greeted with flowers.” But some people already knew that was all false. You just didn’t hear it from the corporate media. All you heard was that Bush’s approval rating was one billion percent and that he was more popular than the Beatles.
So out of frustration and a need to scream – this site was born.
Because criticism is important – complaint is necessary. In 2003 there seemed to be very little. It was the era of Vox Clamantis In Deserto.
It isn’t that way now. Reporters are often reporting the truth (not enough though). People are openly showing their fear/disgust of Bush. There is a feeling that the darkness is lifting.
So maybe with the feeling of frustration just starting to lift – our need to post to this site isn’t as extreme. But it will still be there. I hope you still will be.
In the meantime I’d like to thank the many folks who also post here at TCS. Thanks to Michael for giving us his wonderful essays the first two years of TCS (and a lot of info about Pinochet, Chile, and the CIA you don’t read elsewhere ) and the other two Michaels who post here. Also thanks to Edoc and B, to Jer and Alex, to the Cookie Guy in Japan and to the Liberal Penguin (I hope I didn't forget anyone).
Thanks - always - for visiting – and come on back now, we’ll be waiting (and even posting some times).
This is a "team" blog. We are a bunch of
Americans, whose rising distress
in our leader's decisions brought us together to make this site.
As Bush said, he's a "uniter." Many of us have never even met.
That's the internet for you.
"To announce that there must be no criticism of the
president, or that we are to stand by the president, right or wrong, is
not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the
American people."
- Teddy Roosevelt
"Government has a final responsibility for the well-being of
its citizenship. If private cooperative endeavor fails to provide work
for willing hands and relief for the unfortunate, those suffering
hardship from no fault of their own have a right to call upon the
Government for aid; and a government worthy of its name must make
fitting response."
- Franklin Delano Roosevelt
"I am not an advocate for frequent changes in laws and Constitutions, but laws must and institutions must go hand in hand with the progress of the human mind. As that becomes more developed, more enlightened, as new discoveries are made, new truths discovered and manners and opinions change, with the change of circumstances, institutions must advance also to keep pace with the times. We might as well require a man to wear still the coat which fitted him when a boy as civilized society to remain ever under the regimen of their barbarous ancestors."
- Thomas Jefferson
"The means of defense against foreign danger historically have become the instruments of tyranny at home."
"All men having power ought to be distrusted to a certain
degree."
- James Madison
"I believe in human dignity as the source of national purpose, in human liberty as the source of national action, in the human heart as the source of national compassion, and in the human mind as the source of our invention and our ideas. It is, I believe, the faith in our fellow citizens as individuals and as people that lies at the heart of the liberal faith. For liberalism is not so much a party creed or set of fixed platform promises as it is an attitude of mind and heart, a faith in man's ability through the experiences of his reason and judgment to increase for himself and his fellow men the amount of justice and freedom and brotherhood which all human life deserves." - John F. Kennedy
"Should any political party attempt to abolish social security, unemployment insurance, and eliminate labor laws and farm programs, you would not hear of that party again in our political history. There is a tiny splinter group, of course, that believes you can do these things. Among them are [a] few other Texas oil millionaires, and an occasional politician or business man from other areas. Their number is negligible and they are stupid."
- Dwight D. Eisenhower
More Sites we often
like:
more coming...
"There's nothing wrong with America that can't be fixed by what's right with America." - Bill Clinton.
Hey, this is what our banner looks like. You like it?
Hey, feel free to put it on your site and link it to here.
We'd really appreciate it.
you don't have to of course, but if you do that's great.