It’s pretty simple. Obama is calling you conservatives out. You’re all talk, and yes, you’re powerful enough to gum up the works—but you don’t have a good reason to do so. You’re just doing it out of spite. (“Obama to pro-repeal Republicans: ‘Go for it’,” USA Today, Mar 25, 2010) Read the rest of this entry »

I’m feeling apathetic about things, lately, but I want to keep up some momentum, so this one’s just a short one.

Go read this: http://www.truthout.org/061009L. It explains how, so far, our Government has been turning a small profit on the bailout.

Yes, that’s right– not only did the bailout start the recovery process, it has also been good for the budget.

I’m only telling you this so that you’ll have it when your conservative friends lambast Obama for giving away our money to fatcats.

If they have a valid argument to make, listen to them, and discuss.

But if they’re just bashing, out of a sense of political loyalty, hitting ‘em back with the article.

Peace.

In a press conference on Wednesday, our President and Commander in Chief said, “I was struck by an article that I was reading the other day talking about the fact that the British during World War II, when London was being bombed to smithereens, had 200 or so detainees… And Churchill said, ‘We don’t torture,’ when the entire British — all of the British people were being subjected to unimaginable risk and threat.”

Seems straight forward. He’s comparing our situations with theirs. Their situation was worse, and their leader still didn’t advocate torture.

And of course, the conservative are jumping all over the statement. “The president needs to learn some history. The British used enhanced techniques on captives during WWII!” One blogger wrote: “The premise here is that the Brits didn’t resort to harsh interrogation techniques in WWII… But if the premise relied upon fails — as it seems to here…”

No, that’s not the premise– so it doesn’t “fail”. The premise is that the president was struck by an article that he read, and that Churchill said “we don’t torture.” The phrase “enhanced techniques” is not in there.

Remember, conservatives, you’re the ones who were insisting that what the US was doing to those prisoners was not ‘torture.’ You insisted it was ‘enhanced interrogation.’ Or something. Hannity is for ‘enhanced interrogation.’ O’Reilly is for ‘enhanced interrogation.’ And the reason they’re for it is so they can be against torture.

So don’t compare what Churchill, and now Obama, are saying about torture, to what the British actually did to German PoWs in WWII. You guys are the ones who insisted there is a distinction. If anything, you’re the ones making Obama look more like Churchill with these statements.

And, please, let’s not start a discussion about our President’s needing a history lesson; let’s not start talking about education, intelligence, and being articulate. Let’s not starting quoting Bush. That joke is played out..

The image is of rats leaving a sinking ship. And they’re all rats, right? I mean Rove, and Gonzales, and now Snow. They’re all leaving bush, and one wonders why. I have to imagine that this sort of thing is typical, that with thousands of cronies in any administration, there’s always a fare share of attrition. But as I’ve said before, the Bush team doesn’t even TRY to make us feel good about any of these. They just pitch us the lies and the doublespeak that we expect.

Some things to note: Old Tony says he’s leaving for financial reasons, not health reasons. He’s out of money. So in Bush’s America, 186k a year doesn’t cut it. Good god. And he also says the reason he’s out of money is because of hospital bills. Got that? In Bush’s America, even people who make six figures can’t afford health care. I think old Tony should have curried more favor with Cheney and the war profiteering.

Should we be afraid? Are these guys taking off because they know the apocalypse is night? Maybe. But as long as Darth Dick is still there, we know it’s not bad enough for him to disappear with his billions. That’s irony, see, that Dick’s presence means things are not completely doomed (yet).

(Article of inspiration: Tony Snow to Step Down in September – New York Times)

Alberto Gonzales has finally resigned, which I’m sure will be spun every which way. The right has been calling the investigation into the attorney firing scandal and the wiretapping scandal nothing more than a political exercise (cough *monicagate*) so listen soon for Ann, Rush and Bill to point out how dems don’t do anything but harass figures out of office. And if you disagree with me, or you disagree with them, I think we can all agree the fight to appoint another AG will be bitter– that the Justice Department has been useless since this all started will be nothing compared to the stalemate that’s about to ensue between the president’s choices and congressional approval. Heck, who wants to take money on how fast the race card gets played, and by which side?

(article of inspiration: Embattled Attorney General Resigns – New York Times)

You can mark this one as a huge uh oh. Other than W himself and old Cheney, this is the one man Congress is trying to get their hands on. And while he may claim he is retiring for the sake of his family, I’m thinking Rove is just taking advice from that old addage about heat and kitchens. He’s getting out while the getting’s good.

On the other hand, although this fuels the idea that there’s something foxy in the chicken coop, there’s also the notion that he’s not as protected as W and Cheney themselves. Otherwise, he’d stay. But since they can’t protect him, there’s possibly more chinks in the armor. And maybe someone can find a way to exploit those.

I suppose Rove can still refuse to testify. and he might be able to even hide behind some private citizen rights that only the rich and powerful have the lawyers to defend.

But at least the man behind all of the election shenanigans is gone– unless he’s going to work for the next great white wonder.

(article of inspiration: Karl Rove to Resign At the End of August – WSJ.com)

Are they allowed to do this? Karl Rove is joining in on the power-abuse fun. Here’s what I want to know: is this just arrogance, or do they realize we know they must be hiding something. You would think that, if they were hiding something, they’d just testify and lie. Gonzales did, after all. Then again, maybe they see how he’s being caught up with, finally. And then there’s tapes of Cheney watching tapes if himself contradicting himself. So maybe they think this refusing to testify is the only way to stay afloat.

Caause that’s what it’s all about, right? Stay afloat until Bush is out of office, wring as much money as possible out of the war chest. I mean, did you see the 26 billion arms deal they negotiated with Saudi Arabia? That’s going to keep terrorists in power for a long time, well after Bush is gone.

So they do everything they can to delay the inevitable. What makes this very frustrating is that, even if we find a way to throw them in jail, for a long time, the damage will have been done. Not only damage in terms of out and out theft from the American people of their tax dollars, but damage in terms if ripping the constitution to shreds.

You hear about this political structure or that government or this dynasty, through history, and how they eventually came to an end. And you think, but not my country. America forever. Sadly, no. The conservatives have gone too far, and we are all doomed.

(article of inspiration: The Raw Story | Rove refuses to testify on role in prosecutor firings)

He’s gone and admitted it. Bush has admitted that his office probably leaked Valerie Plame’s name to the press. And now he’s saying we have to move on. Hello? Mr. Bush? Just what country do you think you are president of? We don’t move on in this country. We sell newspapers and magazines. (And fornicate). Everyone says you’re stupid, but for the Love of God(tm), do you really think we’re just going to move on?

And then he tries to even shift blame back to the everyone else: “I’ve often thought about what would have happened if that person had come forth and said, ‘I did it.’ Would we have had this endless hours of investigation and a lot of money being spent on this matter?” If there was even a 1% chance we were going to move on, this statement shouts “Monicagate” louder than anything else. Someone, surely, will march out the money comparison chart.

Or the consequence chart. At the end of the day, Clinton lied about a BJ. I think the only repurcussion is that some men used it as an excuse to cheat on their wives. Libby, or whomever, leak a name in retaliation for intel they didn’t like, and now we’re in an illegal war with thousands of troops dead, tens of thousands injured,hundreds of billions spent. Yeah, sure, let’s move on.

(article of inspiration: Bush admits administration leaked agent name – Politics – MSNBC.com)

Missed a few wrinkles on the Dic/Executive Branch thing. So far, we have Dick refusing to archive the VP papers, violating an executive order. Then Dick says, get rid of the National Archives. Yeah, right. Then he says hey now, I’m not part of the executive branch. Excuse me? Next you have a brave congressman saying, “fine, then you don’t get any of the money from us slotted for the executive branch.” Oops. So now Dick’s people are saying “Well, the only one who can enforce an EO is the president, so it’s up to George.”

Let’s strip away the whole constitutional debate right now and get straight some good old fashioned integrity. Dick, you said you were not part of the executive branch. Either admit you were wrong, or suffer the consequences. I’ll tell you, what this administration lacks, making them out-and-out hypocrites, is accountability. I mean, do you realize that EVERY scandal-politic in the last 6 years has been compared to Monicagate by the pundits?

Impeach Cheney. Let’s excise this boil and start the healing.

You may have heard this one already: Laura Bush, in an interview today, said they we have welcomed many Iraqi refugees into these our wonderful United States. You know, all 500 of ‘em. Maybe she had a confused conversation with Babs Bush, the First Matriarch, and thought she was talking about that stadium full of Katrina Victims.

Don’t know why I am chagrined, really. Can’t say I’m surprised. I mean, the prez himself is not so bright, so why should his wife be? I mean, just because First Ladies in the past have been so influential. I think Hillary spoiled us. Can you see Laura running for the Senate after W takes up permanent residence on the pension couch? (Then again, we never though George would be prez himself, so there you go. Be scared, New York.)

For the record, as all those websites referencing L’s gaff will point out, we’ve only allowed 56 refugees from Iraq in this year. So, we’ve got 500 out of the 2 million world wide, which for you mathaphobes is one quarter of a tenth of a percent. How many of the refugees did L’s hubby cause to become homeless in the first place? That number’s a little higher– closer to a word that rhymes with “ton mudred serpent.”

Why bring it up at all? Just so have that much more ammunition when you want to speak to the cluelessness of the White House… or maybe it’s W’s fault, maybe he knows that pillows talk, maybe he keeps L in the dark just in case, you know, they want to stick HER in the National Archives. Maybe. Do they sell Marlboros there?

(article of inspiration: “Laura Bush Falsely Claims That ‘Many’ Iraqi Refugees Have Been Welcomed Into The U.S.”)