What can be said regarding the total capitulation of Senators McCain, Warner and Graham on the torture bill? A reading of the compromise seems to indicate that the primary function of rewriting the bill, and with it our non-compliance with Common Article 3 of the Geneva Accords, is to relieve those individuals at the top of the chain of command, who actually issue the guidelines for interrogation, from all culpability in the torture of prisoners, leaving that responsibility to those low level people in the ranks who actually perform the torture.
Let us understand this, we are not talking about "playing loud music" or "depriving prisoners of sleep" (although that is quite inhumane) or any of the other ridiculous acts that those on the right are saying this legislation is about. No, we are talking about torture by any standard, for who among us is willing to concede that 'waterboarding' is not torture, knowing that the act entails covering the head of a prisoner with plastic wrap or cellophane, etc. then running water over his face in an effort to simulate drowning? Who among us has had their sense of morals so warped by the fear mongering of Bush and his enablers that they cannot see 'waterboarding' for what it is, torture plain and simple?
When Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld et al agree to endure "waterboarding" or any other of the "alternative interrogation" methods (read torture), then, perhaps then will I rethink my opposition to such unamerican methods. There is no chance that such a scenario will come to pass because first and foremost Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld et al are morally bankrupt cowards who would never submit themselves to that which they wish to impose on others.
Somewhere The Founders surely weep at what has become of the dream that was America, certainly the citizens of this great country whose moral and ethical compasses still read true to the ideals of those great men are outraged at the path this cowardly and corrupt administration has taken the nation.
As for the Democrats, sorry to say that it seems they are only concerned with keeping their positions rather than standing up to those who would corrupt the American ideals of ethics, morality and above all, fair play. Democrats have not earned the right to retake the halls of congress for they have shown themselves to be as cowardly as the Republicans they wish to replace.
A pox on both their houses.
Friday, September 22, 2006
What he said!
RE: The Torture Agreement
Hullabaloo: "Kudos to Digby for calling this exactly right from the start. Shame, shame, shame on the cowards in both parties that permitted this disgracefully grotesque farce to happen. This is as inexcusable a stupidity as the neglect that permittted the 9/11 attacks, the idiotic reasoning and intellectual blindness that advocated and executed the Bush/Iraq war, and the failure to prepare for Katrina. What the hell is going on, that a country that prides itself on its heritage of freedom and liberty, that fought such an awful war over the degrading enslavement of human beings - that such a country would vote to permit some of the most repulsive and evil practices human beings are capable of and place the power to do so directly in the hands of a moral midget?"
The shame and anger at what has become of America is overwhelming this day. The anger is not only focused on the republicans who went along with this farce because they are republicans after all. No, the lion's share of the anger and shame is reserved for the democrats who would not, could not find the backbone to stand for America and say ENOUGH!
There is not much pride in being an American this day.
Hullabaloo: "Kudos to Digby for calling this exactly right from the start. Shame, shame, shame on the cowards in both parties that permitted this disgracefully grotesque farce to happen. This is as inexcusable a stupidity as the neglect that permittted the 9/11 attacks, the idiotic reasoning and intellectual blindness that advocated and executed the Bush/Iraq war, and the failure to prepare for Katrina. What the hell is going on, that a country that prides itself on its heritage of freedom and liberty, that fought such an awful war over the degrading enslavement of human beings - that such a country would vote to permit some of the most repulsive and evil practices human beings are capable of and place the power to do so directly in the hands of a moral midget?"
The shame and anger at what has become of America is overwhelming this day. The anger is not only focused on the republicans who went along with this farce because they are republicans after all. No, the lion's share of the anger and shame is reserved for the democrats who would not, could not find the backbone to stand for America and say ENOUGH!
There is not much pride in being an American this day.
Saturday, September 16, 2006
Preznit Toretureboy
Perhaps it is time to ask the pathological liar and certifiable psychopath in the White House if he would be willing to undergo the procedures that he wants to inflict upon others. I suspect that everyone of the ankle biting bedwetters on the right would soil themselves at the prospect of enduring some of the non-torture interrogation techniques favored by the Coward-in-Chief.
His performance at the press conference was eye opening to say the least. One gets the impression that he is ever so close to totally losing it on national television. The grimaces, contortions, the tics and whining were highlighted by the redness of his face, as he strained mightily to keep his famously petulant, fratboy temper in check. Let it go George, blow your stack on national TV and show America just how unfit you are to hold the office of president.
The time is coming when he will lose it completely, ranting and raving at the reporter who asked the question, looking for all the world like the petulant, immature failure he is.
His performance at the press conference was eye opening to say the least. One gets the impression that he is ever so close to totally losing it on national television. The grimaces, contortions, the tics and whining were highlighted by the redness of his face, as he strained mightily to keep his famously petulant, fratboy temper in check. Let it go George, blow your stack on national TV and show America just how unfit you are to hold the office of president.
The time is coming when he will lose it completely, ranting and raving at the reporter who asked the question, looking for all the world like the petulant, immature failure he is.
Saturday, September 09, 2006
The ABC (Always Blague Conservative) Crockudrama, "The Path to 911"
So now comes the latest in a long line of conservative hit pieces. This time playing upon the pain and anguish of the events of September 11, 2001. While it is not surprising that those without ethics or honor would try to use the grief and shock of that infamous day for partisan political advantage, it is quite astounding that they would try and pass off as fact situations and circumstances so obviously constructed of distortions of fact and outright lies.
If one is determined to create a 'docudrama' of an historical event, especially one of such mind bending, heart searing import as that which transpired on September 11, 2001, it would be wise to tell the tale truthfully. Failing that requirement, if the telling of the tale was meant to be a propaganda piece, as this crockudrama obviously is, it would seem that the major requirement of the telling would be to wait until those who were witness to the events had passed on to their final reward.
The perpetrators of this sick fantasy have much in common with all those who have traded in lies and slander in service to a political idea, party or leader. They need an uninformed citizenry and a willingness to invent circumstances, situations and dialogues for those whom they wish to defame under the guise of dramatic license. Dramatic license is a colloquial term used to denote the distortion or complete ignorance of fact.
While the creators of 'The Path to 911' clearly distorted the facts of the years leading to that terrible day it cannot be said to have been done out of ignorance for the perpetrators of this outrage are the ulra-conservative relatives of other shameless prevaricators on the right. There is no lie too outrageous, no slur too low when it comes to trying to deflect blame for the events of that tragic day away from the current occupier of the People's House.
Facts be damned, in the manner of childish whiners the world over, they scream, 'It's not our fault!' In this they remind me of the scene from The Blues Brothers in which John Belushi as Jake Blues, when confronted by Carrie Fisher, playing his jilted lover, goes into a litany of lies, each more outrageous than the last, explaining why he did not show up for their wedding.
That one scene captures the essence of the extreme conservative effort to recast the tragedy of September 11, 2001 for purely partisan ends. Perhaps there is fear on the right that maybe, just maybe, the people have had enough of the lies and deceptions of Bush and his minions. That they have had enough of the lies and deceptions of the republican majority in congress, a majority that seems hell bent on destroying the civil liberties and time honored constitutional guarantees that have made America a beacon of freedom and opportunity.
Perhaps they are fearful that the people will come out and vote for change in such numbers that no amount of tweaking of voting lists by corrupt Secretaries of State or underhanded adjustments of vote counting programs by Diebold, Sequoia or ES&S will prevent the tidal wave of voter outrage that just may occur on November 7. Perhaps they decided that one more outrageous attempt at propaganda, worthy of a Joseph Goebbels, is all that stands between them, and their enablers, of a true judgement day at the hands of the people. Perhaps they are so desparate that they concluded that a lie of such magnitude about the signal event of the new century is all that will keep them from reaping the justice they so richly deserve for their incompetence, their arrogance and most of all, their lies.
The time for truth is long past. The time for retribution draws near. Above all things, remember that truth and retribution is what the ultra-conservative fears most. For the warcrimes of allowing torture and gulags, to the waging of war, and squandering our national treasure and the lives of our children, built on boldfaced lies, to bringing America down to the moral standards of a third world dictatorship, to the avalanche of lies told to the people, for all this and more, the day of reckoning draws nigh.
If one is determined to create a 'docudrama' of an historical event, especially one of such mind bending, heart searing import as that which transpired on September 11, 2001, it would be wise to tell the tale truthfully. Failing that requirement, if the telling of the tale was meant to be a propaganda piece, as this crockudrama obviously is, it would seem that the major requirement of the telling would be to wait until those who were witness to the events had passed on to their final reward.
The perpetrators of this sick fantasy have much in common with all those who have traded in lies and slander in service to a political idea, party or leader. They need an uninformed citizenry and a willingness to invent circumstances, situations and dialogues for those whom they wish to defame under the guise of dramatic license. Dramatic license is a colloquial term used to denote the distortion or complete ignorance of fact.
While the creators of 'The Path to 911' clearly distorted the facts of the years leading to that terrible day it cannot be said to have been done out of ignorance for the perpetrators of this outrage are the ulra-conservative relatives of other shameless prevaricators on the right. There is no lie too outrageous, no slur too low when it comes to trying to deflect blame for the events of that tragic day away from the current occupier of the People's House.
Facts be damned, in the manner of childish whiners the world over, they scream, 'It's not our fault!' In this they remind me of the scene from The Blues Brothers in which John Belushi as Jake Blues, when confronted by Carrie Fisher, playing his jilted lover, goes into a litany of lies, each more outrageous than the last, explaining why he did not show up for their wedding.
That one scene captures the essence of the extreme conservative effort to recast the tragedy of September 11, 2001 for purely partisan ends. Perhaps there is fear on the right that maybe, just maybe, the people have had enough of the lies and deceptions of Bush and his minions. That they have had enough of the lies and deceptions of the republican majority in congress, a majority that seems hell bent on destroying the civil liberties and time honored constitutional guarantees that have made America a beacon of freedom and opportunity.
Perhaps they are fearful that the people will come out and vote for change in such numbers that no amount of tweaking of voting lists by corrupt Secretaries of State or underhanded adjustments of vote counting programs by Diebold, Sequoia or ES&S will prevent the tidal wave of voter outrage that just may occur on November 7. Perhaps they decided that one more outrageous attempt at propaganda, worthy of a Joseph Goebbels, is all that stands between them, and their enablers, of a true judgement day at the hands of the people. Perhaps they are so desparate that they concluded that a lie of such magnitude about the signal event of the new century is all that will keep them from reaping the justice they so richly deserve for their incompetence, their arrogance and most of all, their lies.
The time for truth is long past. The time for retribution draws near. Above all things, remember that truth and retribution is what the ultra-conservative fears most. For the warcrimes of allowing torture and gulags, to the waging of war, and squandering our national treasure and the lives of our children, built on boldfaced lies, to bringing America down to the moral standards of a third world dictatorship, to the avalanche of lies told to the people, for all this and more, the day of reckoning draws nigh.
Friday, September 01, 2006
Keith Olberman!
The man who sees absolutes, where all other men see nuances and shades of meaning, is either a prophet, or a quack. Donald H. Rumsfeld is not a prophet.
Mr. Rumsfeld's remarkable speech to the American Legion yesterday demands the deep analysis--and the sober contemplation--of every American.
For it did not merely serve to impugn the morality or intelligence -- indeed, the loyalty -- of the majority of Americans who oppose the transient occupants of the highest offices in the land. Worse, still, it credits those same transient occupants -- our employees -- with a total omniscience; a total omniscience which neither common sense, nor this administration's track record at home or abroad, suggests they deserve.
Dissent and disagreement with government is the life's blood of human freedom; and not merely because it is the first roadblock against the kind of tyranny the men Mr. Rumsfeld likes to think of as 'his' troops still fight, this very evening, in Iraq.
It is also essential. Because just every once in awhile it is right and the power to which it speaks, is wrong.
In a small irony, however, Mr. Rumsfeld's speechwriter was adroit in invoking the memory of the appeasement of the Nazis. For in their time, there was another government faced with true peril--with a growing evil--powerful and remorseless.
That government, like Mr. Rumsfeld's, had a monopoly on all the facts. It, too, had the 'secret information.' It alone had the true picture of the threat. It too dismissed and insulted its critics in terms like Mr. Rumsfeld's -- questioning their intellect and their morality.
That government was England's, in the 1930's.
It knew Hitler posed no true threat to Europe, let alone England.
It knew Germany was not re-arming, in violation of all treaties and accords.
It knew that the hard evidence it received, which contradicted its own policies, its own conclusions -- its own omniscience -- needed to be dismissed.
The English government of Neville Chamberlain already knew the the truth.
Most relevant of all -- it "knew" that its staunchest critics needed to be marginalized and isolated. In fact, it portrayed the foremost of them as a blood-thirsty war-monger who was, if not truly senile, at best morally or intellectually confused.
That critic's name was Winston Churchill.
Sadly, we have no Winston Churchills evident among us this evening. We have only Donald Rumsfelds, demonizing disagreement, the way Neville Chamberlain demonized Winston Churchill.
History -- and 163 million pounds of Luftwaffe bombs over England -- have taught us that all Mr. Chamberlain had was his certainty -- and his own confusion. A confusion that suggested that the office can not only make the man, but that the office can also make the facts.
Thus, did Mr. Rumsfeld make an apt historical analogy.
Excepting the fact, that he has the battery plugged in backwards.
His government, absolute -- and exclusive -- in its knowledge, is not the modern version of the one which stood up to the Nazis.
It is the modern version of the government of Neville Chamberlain.
But back to today's Omniscient ones.
That, about which Mr. Rumsfeld is confused is simply this: This is a Democracy. Still. Sometimes just barely.
And, as such, all voices count -- not just his.
Had he or his president perhaps proven any of their prior claims of omniscience -- about Osama Bin Laden's plans five years ago, about Saddam Hussein's weapons four years ago, about Hurricane Katrina's impact one year ago -- we all might be able to swallow hard, and accept their "omniscience" as a bearable, even useful recipe, of fact, plus ego.
But, to date, this government has proved little besides its own arrogance, and its own hubris.
Mr. Rumsfeld is also personally confused, morally or intellectually, about his own standing in this matter. From Iraq to Katrina, to the entire "Fog of Fear" which continues to envelop this nation, he, Mr. Bush, Mr. Cheney, and their cronies have -- inadvertently or intentionally -- profited and benefited, both personally, and politically.
And yet he can stand up, in public, and question the morality and the intellect of those of us who dare ask just for the receipt for the Emporer's New Clothes?
In what country was Mr. Rumsfeld raised? As a child, of whose heroism did he read? On what side of the battle for freedom did he dream one day to fight? With what country has he confused the United States of America?
The confusion we -- as its citizens-- must now address, is stark and forbidding.
But variations of it have faced our forefathers, when men like Nixon and McCarthy and Curtis LeMay have darkened our skies and obscured our flag. Note -- with hope in your heart -- that those earlier Americans always found their way to the light, and we can, too.
The confusion is about whether this Secretary of Defense, and this administration, are in fact now accomplishing what they claim the terrorists seek: The destruction of our freedoms, the very ones for which the same veterans Mr. Rumsfeld addressed yesterday in Salt Lake City, so valiantly fought.
And about Mr. Rumsfeld's other main assertion, that this country faces a "new type of fascism."
As he was correct to remind us how a government that knew everything could get everything wrong, so too was he right when he said that -- though probably not in the way he thought he meant it.
This country faces a new type of fascism - indeed.
Although I presumptuously use his sign-off each night, in feeble tribute, I have utterly no claim to the words of the exemplary journalist Edward R. Murrow.
But never in the trial of a thousand years of writing could I come close to matching how he phrased a warning to an earlier generation of us, at a time when other politicians thought they (and they alone) knew everything, and branded those who disagreed: "confused" or "immoral."
Thus, forgive me, for reading Murrow, in full:
"We must not confuse dissent with disloyalty," he said, in 1954. "We must remember always that accusation is not proof, and that conviction depends upon evidence and due process of law.
"We will not walk in fear, one of another. We will not be driven by fear into an age of unreason, if we dig deep in our history and our doctrine, and remember that we are not descended from fearful men, not from men who feared to write, to speak, to associate, and to defend causes that were for the moment unpopular."
And so good night, and good luck.
Mr. Rumsfeld's remarkable speech to the American Legion yesterday demands the deep analysis--and the sober contemplation--of every American.
For it did not merely serve to impugn the morality or intelligence -- indeed, the loyalty -- of the majority of Americans who oppose the transient occupants of the highest offices in the land. Worse, still, it credits those same transient occupants -- our employees -- with a total omniscience; a total omniscience which neither common sense, nor this administration's track record at home or abroad, suggests they deserve.
Dissent and disagreement with government is the life's blood of human freedom; and not merely because it is the first roadblock against the kind of tyranny the men Mr. Rumsfeld likes to think of as 'his' troops still fight, this very evening, in Iraq.
It is also essential. Because just every once in awhile it is right and the power to which it speaks, is wrong.
In a small irony, however, Mr. Rumsfeld's speechwriter was adroit in invoking the memory of the appeasement of the Nazis. For in their time, there was another government faced with true peril--with a growing evil--powerful and remorseless.
That government, like Mr. Rumsfeld's, had a monopoly on all the facts. It, too, had the 'secret information.' It alone had the true picture of the threat. It too dismissed and insulted its critics in terms like Mr. Rumsfeld's -- questioning their intellect and their morality.
That government was England's, in the 1930's.
It knew Hitler posed no true threat to Europe, let alone England.
It knew Germany was not re-arming, in violation of all treaties and accords.
It knew that the hard evidence it received, which contradicted its own policies, its own conclusions -- its own omniscience -- needed to be dismissed.
The English government of Neville Chamberlain already knew the the truth.
Most relevant of all -- it "knew" that its staunchest critics needed to be marginalized and isolated. In fact, it portrayed the foremost of them as a blood-thirsty war-monger who was, if not truly senile, at best morally or intellectually confused.
That critic's name was Winston Churchill.
Sadly, we have no Winston Churchills evident among us this evening. We have only Donald Rumsfelds, demonizing disagreement, the way Neville Chamberlain demonized Winston Churchill.
History -- and 163 million pounds of Luftwaffe bombs over England -- have taught us that all Mr. Chamberlain had was his certainty -- and his own confusion. A confusion that suggested that the office can not only make the man, but that the office can also make the facts.
Thus, did Mr. Rumsfeld make an apt historical analogy.
Excepting the fact, that he has the battery plugged in backwards.
His government, absolute -- and exclusive -- in its knowledge, is not the modern version of the one which stood up to the Nazis.
It is the modern version of the government of Neville Chamberlain.
But back to today's Omniscient ones.
That, about which Mr. Rumsfeld is confused is simply this: This is a Democracy. Still. Sometimes just barely.
And, as such, all voices count -- not just his.
Had he or his president perhaps proven any of their prior claims of omniscience -- about Osama Bin Laden's plans five years ago, about Saddam Hussein's weapons four years ago, about Hurricane Katrina's impact one year ago -- we all might be able to swallow hard, and accept their "omniscience" as a bearable, even useful recipe, of fact, plus ego.
But, to date, this government has proved little besides its own arrogance, and its own hubris.
Mr. Rumsfeld is also personally confused, morally or intellectually, about his own standing in this matter. From Iraq to Katrina, to the entire "Fog of Fear" which continues to envelop this nation, he, Mr. Bush, Mr. Cheney, and their cronies have -- inadvertently or intentionally -- profited and benefited, both personally, and politically.
And yet he can stand up, in public, and question the morality and the intellect of those of us who dare ask just for the receipt for the Emporer's New Clothes?
In what country was Mr. Rumsfeld raised? As a child, of whose heroism did he read? On what side of the battle for freedom did he dream one day to fight? With what country has he confused the United States of America?
The confusion we -- as its citizens-- must now address, is stark and forbidding.
But variations of it have faced our forefathers, when men like Nixon and McCarthy and Curtis LeMay have darkened our skies and obscured our flag. Note -- with hope in your heart -- that those earlier Americans always found their way to the light, and we can, too.
The confusion is about whether this Secretary of Defense, and this administration, are in fact now accomplishing what they claim the terrorists seek: The destruction of our freedoms, the very ones for which the same veterans Mr. Rumsfeld addressed yesterday in Salt Lake City, so valiantly fought.
And about Mr. Rumsfeld's other main assertion, that this country faces a "new type of fascism."
As he was correct to remind us how a government that knew everything could get everything wrong, so too was he right when he said that -- though probably not in the way he thought he meant it.
This country faces a new type of fascism - indeed.
Although I presumptuously use his sign-off each night, in feeble tribute, I have utterly no claim to the words of the exemplary journalist Edward R. Murrow.
But never in the trial of a thousand years of writing could I come close to matching how he phrased a warning to an earlier generation of us, at a time when other politicians thought they (and they alone) knew everything, and branded those who disagreed: "confused" or "immoral."
Thus, forgive me, for reading Murrow, in full:
"We must not confuse dissent with disloyalty," he said, in 1954. "We must remember always that accusation is not proof, and that conviction depends upon evidence and due process of law.
"We will not walk in fear, one of another. We will not be driven by fear into an age of unreason, if we dig deep in our history and our doctrine, and remember that we are not descended from fearful men, not from men who feared to write, to speak, to associate, and to defend causes that were for the moment unpopular."
And so good night, and good luck.
Wednesday, August 30, 2006
FIDOnet Follies
FIDOnet, is an old BBS centered network, where one can find some truly bizarre commentary. The following examples from 2004 postings to the Politics Area are authored by one Stan Hardegree, erstwhile soldier and owner, editor and chief reporter for a shopper's weekly style newspaper which can be found on the web at http://www.villarica.com
He is a good catholic and a pillar of the community.
Makes one wonder about the well being of his community and catholicism.
Since these random notes from 2004, he has become even more vulgar. His use of vulgarity seems to increase in proportion to the decreasing numbers of Americans who support his idol, George W. Bush.
****
From: Stan Hardegree
To: Suzanne Terio
Date: 2004-07-01 16:31:00
Subject: Humphrey's Dishonesty
VH>> I would have thought such language was beneath you, Bob
ST> Interesting. Day after day, week after week, year after
ST> year, we get this and lots worse from Vern Humphrey's
ST> friends and biggest supporters. Do we see Mr. Humphrey
ST> remark about Hardegree's foul language?
Fuck off.
---
* Origin: Bill Clinton - only elected president ever impeached (1:379/1.2)
SEEN-BY: 633/267 270
@PATH: 379/1 396/45 106/2000 633/267
Note: Mr. Humphrey has yet to comment regarding the vularity of Mr. Hardegree.
****
From: Stan Hardegree
To: Ed Connell
Date: 2004-06-28 18:10:10
Subject: MONICA
JB>> Indeed except he and Hillary kept writing the checks. Must
JB>> be our funny American system of justice.
EC> I hear that Monica is not too pleased with Clinton's
EC> description of what happened. He'd better watch out.
When I heard that filthy bastard drawling about Monica and her '15
minutes of fame,' I thought, 'This is the stupidest son of a
bitch I have ever seen.'
Really.
---
* Origin: Against all enemies, foreign and domestic (1:379/1.2)
SEEN-BY: 633/267 270
@PATH: 379/1 396/45 106/2000 633/267
Note: This from the man who decries anyone who finds fault with his hero,
George W. Bush. Hypocrisy anyone?
****
From: Stan Hardegree
To: Steve Asher
Date: 2004-05-12 17:15:22
Subject: Withdrawal On The Cards?
SA> At some point during the 13 days, US officials took custody
SA> of him, & held him & would not allow him to make phone calls
SA> or contact a lawyer, according to his father.
You are a fucking liar and his father is a fucking liar. I know that and so do you.
---
* Origin: I will speak of controversial things (1:379/1.2)
SEEN-BY: 633/267 270
@PATH: 379/1 396/45 106/2000 633/267
Note: This is what passes for reasonable discourse from a conservative.
****
From: Stan Hardegree
To: John Hull
Date: 2004-05-09 14:36:24
Subject: Fair Story
SA>> More like an own goal.
JH> You people are so full of crap. You get all worked up over a
JH> handful of US troops exacting some vengeance for their
JH> murdered comrades, yet you couldn't even see anything wrong
JH> when Saddam was torturing and raping and murdering 300,000
JH> plus of his own citizens and burying them in secret mass
JH> graves so nobody would know about it.
JH> Goddamn yellow cowardly appeasers, every stinkin' one of you.
He may or may not be a coward, but Asher is a self-loathing, paranoid
little third worlder who sees a conspiracy lurking around every corner.
---
* Origin: Bill Clinton - only elected president ever impeached (1:379/1.2)
SEEN-BY: 633/267 270
@PATH: 379/1 396/45 106/2000 633/267
Note: In this example one can see that the vularity is not limited to the comments of Mr. Hardegree. Mr. Hull regularly goes over the top as well.
****
From: Stan Hardegree
To: Alan Hess
Date: 2004-03-17 04:42:30
Subject: Socialist
VH>> Look for a major effort by Al Qaida to attack the United
VH>> States in October, in an attempt to influence our elections.
AH> Only if they want Bush to win. A pre-election attack would
AH> allow him to play soldier and homeland savior again.
Fuck you.
---
* Origin: Boss Percy mean. He kill Dell mouse. (1:379/1.2)
SEEN-BY: 633/267 270
@PATH: 379/1 396/45 106/2000 633/267
Note: Once again the elegance of the professional journalist come to the fore.
He is a good catholic and a pillar of the community.
Makes one wonder about the well being of his community and catholicism.
Since these random notes from 2004, he has become even more vulgar. His use of vulgarity seems to increase in proportion to the decreasing numbers of Americans who support his idol, George W. Bush.
****
From: Stan Hardegree
To: Suzanne Terio
Date: 2004-07-01 16:31:00
Subject: Humphrey's Dishonesty
VH>> I would have thought such language was beneath you, Bob
ST> Interesting. Day after day, week after week, year after
ST> year, we get this and lots worse from Vern Humphrey's
ST> friends and biggest supporters. Do we see Mr. Humphrey
ST> remark about Hardegree's foul language?
Fuck off.
---
* Origin: Bill Clinton - only elected president ever impeached (1:379/1.2)
SEEN-BY: 633/267 270
@PATH: 379/1 396/45 106/2000 633/267
Note: Mr. Humphrey has yet to comment regarding the vularity of Mr. Hardegree.
****
From: Stan Hardegree
To: Ed Connell
Date: 2004-06-28 18:10:10
Subject: MONICA
JB>> Indeed except he and Hillary kept writing the checks. Must
JB>> be our funny American system of justice.
EC> I hear that Monica is not too pleased with Clinton's
EC> description of what happened. He'd better watch out.
When I heard that filthy bastard drawling about Monica and her '15
minutes of fame,' I thought, 'This is the stupidest son of a
bitch I have ever seen.'
Really.
---
* Origin: Against all enemies, foreign and domestic (1:379/1.2)
SEEN-BY: 633/267 270
@PATH: 379/1 396/45 106/2000 633/267
Note: This from the man who decries anyone who finds fault with his hero,
George W. Bush. Hypocrisy anyone?
****
From: Stan Hardegree
To: Steve Asher
Date: 2004-05-12 17:15:22
Subject: Withdrawal On The Cards?
SA> At some point during the 13 days, US officials took custody
SA> of him, & held him & would not allow him to make phone calls
SA> or contact a lawyer, according to his father.
You are a fucking liar and his father is a fucking liar. I know that and so do you.
---
* Origin: I will speak of controversial things (1:379/1.2)
SEEN-BY: 633/267 270
@PATH: 379/1 396/45 106/2000 633/267
Note: This is what passes for reasonable discourse from a conservative.
****
From: Stan Hardegree
To: John Hull
Date: 2004-05-09 14:36:24
Subject: Fair Story
SA>> More like an own goal.
JH> You people are so full of crap. You get all worked up over a
JH> handful of US troops exacting some vengeance for their
JH> murdered comrades, yet you couldn't even see anything wrong
JH> when Saddam was torturing and raping and murdering 300,000
JH> plus of his own citizens and burying them in secret mass
JH> graves so nobody would know about it.
JH> Goddamn yellow cowardly appeasers, every stinkin' one of you.
He may or may not be a coward, but Asher is a self-loathing, paranoid
little third worlder who sees a conspiracy lurking around every corner.
---
* Origin: Bill Clinton - only elected president ever impeached (1:379/1.2)
SEEN-BY: 633/267 270
@PATH: 379/1 396/45 106/2000 633/267
Note: In this example one can see that the vularity is not limited to the comments of Mr. Hardegree. Mr. Hull regularly goes over the top as well.
****
From: Stan Hardegree
To: Alan Hess
Date: 2004-03-17 04:42:30
Subject: Socialist
VH>> Look for a major effort by Al Qaida to attack the United
VH>> States in October, in an attempt to influence our elections.
AH> Only if they want Bush to win. A pre-election attack would
AH> allow him to play soldier and homeland savior again.
Fuck you.
---
* Origin: Boss Percy mean. He kill Dell mouse. (1:379/1.2)
SEEN-BY: 633/267 270
@PATH: 379/1 396/45 106/2000 633/267
Note: Once again the elegance of the professional journalist come to the fore.
Wednesday, August 09, 2006
Lieberman
GONE!
If Lieberman continues his quest as an independent, and ignores the will of the Democratic voters of Connecticut, Harry Reid should remove him from every committee on which he sits.
Immediately!
If Lieberman continues his quest as an independent, and ignores the will of the Democratic voters of Connecticut, Harry Reid should remove him from every committee on which he sits.
Immediately!
Saturday, July 15, 2006
The Guns of July.
Are we witnessing the start of WW3?
Keep in mind that in June 1914, following the assassination of Archduke Ferdinand of Serbia and his wife, no one thought they were on a slippery slope to what would become 'The War to end all wars' either.
Required reading: The Guns of August, Barbara Tuchman 1962.
Keep in mind that in June 1914, following the assassination of Archduke Ferdinand of Serbia and his wife, no one thought they were on a slippery slope to what would become 'The War to end all wars' either.
Required reading: The Guns of August, Barbara Tuchman 1962.
Friday, May 05, 2006
Porter Goss Resigns
Was it a case of the Rats Deserting a Sinking Ship Syndrome or is a video, starring Porter in a starring role, of HookerGate about to surface?
Inquiring minds want to know!
Inquiring minds want to know!
Tuesday, May 02, 2006
Iran
Surely the American people cannot be so gullible as to believe the rising tide of lies regarding Iran and nuclear weapons?
Should not the bullshit alarm be going off in the media and in the mind of every thinking person in the country? If we decide to attack Iran it will mean the beginning of World War 3. Perhaps that is what Bush and his Band of Bunglers want.
I was too young to remember Pearl Harbor and our entry into WW2 but I know that we will become a pariah nation, no friends, no allies, only utter contempt and hostility from the civilized world.
Lest these miscreants believe that we can do this again, attack another country who presents no danger to us or anyone else, without fear of retaliation because we are the only superpower, I would remind that there is more to power than military might.
The lesson we will have to learn will be bitter, indeed and it will rest on the heads of not only Bush and his cronies but on the heads of every one of us who allowed this travesty to come to pass.
Should not the bullshit alarm be going off in the media and in the mind of every thinking person in the country? If we decide to attack Iran it will mean the beginning of World War 3. Perhaps that is what Bush and his Band of Bunglers want.
I was too young to remember Pearl Harbor and our entry into WW2 but I know that we will become a pariah nation, no friends, no allies, only utter contempt and hostility from the civilized world.
Lest these miscreants believe that we can do this again, attack another country who presents no danger to us or anyone else, without fear of retaliation because we are the only superpower, I would remind that there is more to power than military might.
The lesson we will have to learn will be bitter, indeed and it will rest on the heads of not only Bush and his cronies but on the heads of every one of us who allowed this travesty to come to pass.
Stephen Colbert
Much has been written about how unfunny Colbert was, or how out of line he was in his entertainment. Can none of the talking heads and giants of journalism understand that he was not trying to be funny but that he was holding a mirror up to Bush, the press and the Bush sycophants?
I suspect that they did in fact "get it" but pride, ego, vanity, whatever, keeps them from admitting it. What they saw in Colbert's performance is what we, the people, see in their performance and that of Bush and his sycophants as well.
I suspect that they did in fact "get it" but pride, ego, vanity, whatever, keeps them from admitting it. What they saw in Colbert's performance is what we, the people, see in their performance and that of Bush and his sycophants as well.
Friday, April 28, 2006
Random thoughts.
With Bush and the republicans tanking in the polls as a result of their corruption and incompetence, democrats and progressives have high hopes for November. I would remind one and all that voting, in and of itself, is not enough for it is the counting of those votes that is of paramount importance. As long as Diebold, ES&S, Sequoia, etc. are supplying voting stations without a paper trail capability and disallowing any review of the tallying software by independent agents, we can expect a redux of the elections of 2000, 2002 & 2004, elections where exit polling, a valuable and accurate tool for some twenty years or more, turned out to be 'inaccurate' and hence discarded. This phenomenom was also noted in selected state and local elections since 2000. So take heart from the tanking numbers, indicators that even republicans are seeing the truth, take heart but be on guard for another round of election thievery, for those in power know that with the loss of control of even one house of the congress would come the inevitable downfall of the abominable Bush regime.
Carl Rove's fifth appearance before the Grand Jury, regardless of how it is spun, cannot be a good thing. Look for an indictment in the coming days. Under indictment, the last thing on Rove's mind will be the coming elections. His focus will be on keeping himself out of jail because he, of all people, knows that with Bush, once anyone cannot do for him, that person is as the saying goes, 'Out of sight, out of mind' and given that this attitude is a Bush family tradition, Rove knows that there will be no pardon should he be convicted. No pardon, only a long and lonely stretch of twisting in the wind. That is a Bush family value.
Related to the election, if the democrats are successful in wresting control of one, or both, houses of congress from republican control, that will result in the most dangerous time in the history of the republic for the handwriting would be writ bold on the wall for Bush and his cronies and, in the time honored tradition of rats when cornered, they will do anything in order to stay the consequences of their actions both here at home and abroad these past 6 years.
Carl Rove's fifth appearance before the Grand Jury, regardless of how it is spun, cannot be a good thing. Look for an indictment in the coming days. Under indictment, the last thing on Rove's mind will be the coming elections. His focus will be on keeping himself out of jail because he, of all people, knows that with Bush, once anyone cannot do for him, that person is as the saying goes, 'Out of sight, out of mind' and given that this attitude is a Bush family tradition, Rove knows that there will be no pardon should he be convicted. No pardon, only a long and lonely stretch of twisting in the wind. That is a Bush family value.
Related to the election, if the democrats are successful in wresting control of one, or both, houses of congress from republican control, that will result in the most dangerous time in the history of the republic for the handwriting would be writ bold on the wall for Bush and his cronies and, in the time honored tradition of rats when cornered, they will do anything in order to stay the consequences of their actions both here at home and abroad these past 6 years.
Sunday, April 16, 2006
The Generals
The retired generals who have spoken out, in retrospect, calling for Rumsfeld's head while admirable, misses the point, I believe.
Until the generals, and other officers and men, are prepared to stand up for America and voice their opposition to the inept, unamerican national leadership, nothing will change.
Please spare me the nonsense about loyalty for the only loyalty is that of to the Constitution, period. Had the German Wehrmacht the courage to tell Hitler that they would not swear an oath of loyalty to him but would continue in the honored tradition of loyalty to the fatherland, the history of Europe, and the world, may well have taken a different path.
I understand that it is difficult to stand up in opposition when it makes likely the fact that all you have worked for will disappear but no one ever said that keeping our freedom was easy. The Founders risked everything to give us that which is now being trampled by George W. Bush and his willing henchmen in their task of transforming America from the last, greatest hope of humanity into just another cold and cruel imperialistic power.
Time grows short, the flame of liberty flickers dangerously low.
Until the generals, and other officers and men, are prepared to stand up for America and voice their opposition to the inept, unamerican national leadership, nothing will change.
Please spare me the nonsense about loyalty for the only loyalty is that of to the Constitution, period. Had the German Wehrmacht the courage to tell Hitler that they would not swear an oath of loyalty to him but would continue in the honored tradition of loyalty to the fatherland, the history of Europe, and the world, may well have taken a different path.
I understand that it is difficult to stand up in opposition when it makes likely the fact that all you have worked for will disappear but no one ever said that keeping our freedom was easy. The Founders risked everything to give us that which is now being trampled by George W. Bush and his willing henchmen in their task of transforming America from the last, greatest hope of humanity into just another cold and cruel imperialistic power.
Time grows short, the flame of liberty flickers dangerously low.
Friday, March 31, 2006
A plan for Democrats.
Does anyone have a clue as to the plan of attack of the Democratic Party in the upcoming election? Insisting that they aren't like republicans just isn't going to make it.
Voters who had had enough of the criminal incompetence and corruption of Republican rule will vote Democrat, Progressive or Independent for sure, but what of the moderate or (gasp) liberal republican? Democrats need to lay out a plan to reverse the near irreparable damage caused by republicans during the last 5 years.
Here is an idea or two.
The war on Iraq. The current plan of staying until the Iraqis can provide "their own security" is not a plan, it is a recipe for more of the same and anyone advocating such a "solution" is part of the problem. The American people are not tired of the war because it seems to be dragging on, rather they are tired of the war because they know, they know, we are there as a result of a lie. They want a plan, any plan short of the one they remember from Vietnam. Can the Democrats deliver on this?
Perhaps the first thing that should be done is to acknowledge that the government of Iraq belongs to the people of Iraq. If it is truly a sovereign government then the United States should cease meddling in Iraqi affairs of state, the recent call by Bush for the prime minister to step down comes to mind. We should honor the request of the Iraqi government and remove our troops from the country, period. As for the security of the oil fields, perhaps when we realize that oil field security is the responsibility of the Iraqis and the oil itself belongs to them.
To paraphrase a comment from the days of Vietnam, how can we get the troops out of Iraq? Ships and planes, the same way they got there in the first place. Could a post US dominated Iraq be any worse than the Iraq of today? Not likely and perhaps, just perhaps, once we are out of Iraq, the Iraqis will come together. If they don't and the Civil War continues, then what? Like the rest of the world did during OUR civil war, LEAVE THEM ALONE! It is THEIR country, it is THEIR problem, it is THEIR place to work out a solution.
How about a no nonsense, straight forward ban on the use of torture, gulags and abuse of the Constitution and Bill of Rights? How about a serious effort to restoring the good name of America in the eyes of the world?
Congress on the take? How about requiring lobbyists to document all gifts, donations (including meals), etc. in addition to the time, location and subject of their meetings? How about requiring the same of congressmen? How about requiring publication of these logs in a new, public journal? Or, as an alternative, how about allowing no gifts of any kind? How about disallowing any congressman from joining, as a lobbyist or in any capacity, industries which they regulated or otherwise ruled over while they were in office?
How refreshing it would be to see democrats offering a clear alternative to the corruption and incompetence of republican rule.
Newt Gingrich was correct when he said that the best slogan democrats could have would be two words, "Had enough?" But a catchy slogan, no matter how appropriate, is not enough. Democrats must offer real choices for the real problems created by republicans, they must show the people that they "get it" and will bring real change, governed by the voice of the people, to Washington.
Voters who had had enough of the criminal incompetence and corruption of Republican rule will vote Democrat, Progressive or Independent for sure, but what of the moderate or (gasp) liberal republican? Democrats need to lay out a plan to reverse the near irreparable damage caused by republicans during the last 5 years.
Here is an idea or two.
The war on Iraq. The current plan of staying until the Iraqis can provide "their own security" is not a plan, it is a recipe for more of the same and anyone advocating such a "solution" is part of the problem. The American people are not tired of the war because it seems to be dragging on, rather they are tired of the war because they know, they know, we are there as a result of a lie. They want a plan, any plan short of the one they remember from Vietnam. Can the Democrats deliver on this?
Perhaps the first thing that should be done is to acknowledge that the government of Iraq belongs to the people of Iraq. If it is truly a sovereign government then the United States should cease meddling in Iraqi affairs of state, the recent call by Bush for the prime minister to step down comes to mind. We should honor the request of the Iraqi government and remove our troops from the country, period. As for the security of the oil fields, perhaps when we realize that oil field security is the responsibility of the Iraqis and the oil itself belongs to them.
To paraphrase a comment from the days of Vietnam, how can we get the troops out of Iraq? Ships and planes, the same way they got there in the first place. Could a post US dominated Iraq be any worse than the Iraq of today? Not likely and perhaps, just perhaps, once we are out of Iraq, the Iraqis will come together. If they don't and the Civil War continues, then what? Like the rest of the world did during OUR civil war, LEAVE THEM ALONE! It is THEIR country, it is THEIR problem, it is THEIR place to work out a solution.
How about a no nonsense, straight forward ban on the use of torture, gulags and abuse of the Constitution and Bill of Rights? How about a serious effort to restoring the good name of America in the eyes of the world?
Congress on the take? How about requiring lobbyists to document all gifts, donations (including meals), etc. in addition to the time, location and subject of their meetings? How about requiring the same of congressmen? How about requiring publication of these logs in a new, public journal? Or, as an alternative, how about allowing no gifts of any kind? How about disallowing any congressman from joining, as a lobbyist or in any capacity, industries which they regulated or otherwise ruled over while they were in office?
How refreshing it would be to see democrats offering a clear alternative to the corruption and incompetence of republican rule.
Newt Gingrich was correct when he said that the best slogan democrats could have would be two words, "Had enough?" But a catchy slogan, no matter how appropriate, is not enough. Democrats must offer real choices for the real problems created by republicans, they must show the people that they "get it" and will bring real change, governed by the voice of the people, to Washington.
Thursday, March 23, 2006
The Bush Regime
"They were careless people, Tom and Daisy -- they smashed up things and creatures and then retreated back into their money or their vast carelessness or whatever it was that kept them together, and let other people clean up the mess they had made"
--- From The Great Gatsby
Isn't that really what Bush was saying with his comment that ending the war of aggression in Iraq and bringing the troops home would have to wait for another president? Has not that been the story of his life?
Time and again, like Blanche DuBois in A Streetcar Named Desire, Bush has “always depended on the kindness of strangers' to clean up the messes he has made of everything he's ever done. A failure in business who could not find oil in West Texas. A failure in the baseball world who would trade Sammy Sosa away for next to nothing. A failure in the world of state government, running Texas into the ground and burying its people in an ocean of red ink. Sound familiar?
Bush is a failure as president, running up the largest deficits in the history of the republic, bringing the specter of financial ruin to generations yet to be born. He is a failure as Commander-in-Chief, for as a result of his ill thought out war of aggression in Iraq, the army, reserves and national Guard are near the breaking point in terms of both men and material.
Finally, he is a failure of monumental proportions because of the damage he has done to the reputation of The United States of America. From pre-emptive war, to the acceptance of torture, to the Soviet style gulags in Guantamano and elswhere, to the brazen violation of the Bill of Rights in conducting warrantless monitoring of the words and deeds of American citizens.
It is past time to say ENOUGH! In the words of Robert Welch so long ago, 'At long last have you no shame?' Words today meant not for Bush, his Band of Bunglers and Cadre of Corruptables but words meant for the American people!
At long last America, have you no shame as a result of what these corrupt criminals have done and continue to do to America?"
--- From The Great Gatsby
Isn't that really what Bush was saying with his comment that ending the war of aggression in Iraq and bringing the troops home would have to wait for another president? Has not that been the story of his life?
Time and again, like Blanche DuBois in A Streetcar Named Desire, Bush has “always depended on the kindness of strangers' to clean up the messes he has made of everything he's ever done. A failure in business who could not find oil in West Texas. A failure in the baseball world who would trade Sammy Sosa away for next to nothing. A failure in the world of state government, running Texas into the ground and burying its people in an ocean of red ink. Sound familiar?
Bush is a failure as president, running up the largest deficits in the history of the republic, bringing the specter of financial ruin to generations yet to be born. He is a failure as Commander-in-Chief, for as a result of his ill thought out war of aggression in Iraq, the army, reserves and national Guard are near the breaking point in terms of both men and material.
Finally, he is a failure of monumental proportions because of the damage he has done to the reputation of The United States of America. From pre-emptive war, to the acceptance of torture, to the Soviet style gulags in Guantamano and elswhere, to the brazen violation of the Bill of Rights in conducting warrantless monitoring of the words and deeds of American citizens.
It is past time to say ENOUGH! In the words of Robert Welch so long ago, 'At long last have you no shame?' Words today meant not for Bush, his Band of Bunglers and Cadre of Corruptables but words meant for the American people!
At long last America, have you no shame as a result of what these corrupt criminals have done and continue to do to America?"
Wednesday, March 22, 2006
Random thoughts
Massaoui, arrested on Aug 20, 2001, was charged as an accessory in the events of 9/11 because he knew of the plot and did nothing to alert the authorities so that they might have prevented the attack.
George W. Bush, given the PDB of Aug 6, 2001 titled "Bin Laden determined to strike the US" knew of the plot and did nothing to alert the appropriate security personnel so that they might have prevented the attack of 9/11.
George W. Bush possessed this knowledge, and was in a position to do something with it on Aug 6, 2001, a full 13 days before Massaoui was arrested.
Explain to me again why Massaoui is on trial and Bush is not.
South Dakota passed into law an anti-abortion law that bans all abortions, out of an alleged reverence for the life of the fetus, save when one is required to spare the life of the mother.
Does this mean that South Dakota values the life of the mother over the life of the fetus? If so then the law is a sham and is more about limiting what a woman may or may not do in the event she finds herself in the first trimester of an unwanted pregnancy.
The doctor or other medical personnel performing an abortion can be charged with a felony. Given the fact that there are few examples of a doctor forcing a pregnant woman to have an abortion, one can presume that said doctor would not be doing the procedure were it not for the woman requesting it. If the doctor can be charged with a felony does the law also address the fact that the woman is an accessory and therefore also subject to a felony charge? If not then the law is a sham and designed only to limit the choices that are a woman's right regarding the outcome of unwanted pregnancies.
George W. Bush, given the PDB of Aug 6, 2001 titled "Bin Laden determined to strike the US" knew of the plot and did nothing to alert the appropriate security personnel so that they might have prevented the attack of 9/11.
George W. Bush possessed this knowledge, and was in a position to do something with it on Aug 6, 2001, a full 13 days before Massaoui was arrested.
Explain to me again why Massaoui is on trial and Bush is not.
South Dakota passed into law an anti-abortion law that bans all abortions, out of an alleged reverence for the life of the fetus, save when one is required to spare the life of the mother.
Does this mean that South Dakota values the life of the mother over the life of the fetus? If so then the law is a sham and is more about limiting what a woman may or may not do in the event she finds herself in the first trimester of an unwanted pregnancy.
The doctor or other medical personnel performing an abortion can be charged with a felony. Given the fact that there are few examples of a doctor forcing a pregnant woman to have an abortion, one can presume that said doctor would not be doing the procedure were it not for the woman requesting it. If the doctor can be charged with a felony does the law also address the fact that the woman is an accessory and therefore also subject to a felony charge? If not then the law is a sham and designed only to limit the choices that are a woman's right regarding the outcome of unwanted pregnancies.
Wednesday, February 15, 2006
Paul Hackett
The decision by Paul Hackett to withdraw from the Ohio senate race after being urged to do so by senior Democratic Party officials is offensive.
These senior officials will not get very far in promoting the Democratic Party by acting like republicans.
Absolutely disgraceful.
These senior officials will not get very far in promoting the Democratic Party by acting like republicans.
Absolutely disgraceful.
Wednesday, February 08, 2006
Destroying the Constitution in order to save it
After hearing the following idiotic comment in answer to the FISA lawbreaking president, "FISA doesn't overrule Article 2" I am continuously amazed at the willful ignorance of those on the right.
I would ask someone, anyone, to articulate where, exactly, in Article 2 of the constitution that the president is empowered to "protect, preserve and defend the constitution" by disregarding it.
I would ask someone, anyone, to articulate where, exactly, in Article 2 of the constitution that the president is empowered to "protect, preserve and defend the constitution" by disregarding it.
Wednesday, February 01, 2006
Cindy Sheehan
Cindy Sheehan was arrested in the capitol building last night for breaking the law barring demonstrations inside the building, she was wearing a T-shirt with, '2,245 Dead. How many more?' printed on it. Safia Taleb Al Souhail, on the other hand, an Iraqi woman was applauded by Bush during the SOTU address in 2005 for waving her purple finger, after he had noted the election in Iraq
So we have two demonstrations, a year apart. In one, the demonstrator is applauded for her action while in the other she is arrested. Perhaps the law should be changed to say that only those demonstrations against The Coward who would be king are prohibited for that is the implication.
The Founders, wherever their spirits reside, must be saddened by the events unfolding in their dream that became America.
So we have two demonstrations, a year apart. In one, the demonstrator is applauded for her action while in the other she is arrested. Perhaps the law should be changed to say that only those demonstrations against The Coward who would be king are prohibited for that is the implication.
The Founders, wherever their spirits reside, must be saddened by the events unfolding in their dream that became America.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
