This morning I turned to the sports section to catch up on the latest football scores and also to sort out what has become one of the more exciting pennant races in history. In the midst of the stories about whether the Mets would manage to pull it out on the last day, whether the Yankees had a chance against Cleveland, and the complex mathematics of a potential National League playoff, I found a column by the the New York Times Selena Roberts, who seems to always have something interesting to say.

Today the story she had to tell involves Heisman trophy winners, Swift Boats, ivory towers, Rutgers University’s football team and a storm gathering over America. (more…)

By now most of you reading this page have probably read a great deal about the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP) The only comment I will make is that the vote on this bill shows how far the Bush Administration has fallen and how out of touch it is with reality. The ideological rhetoric raised by the administration in defense of its opposition to the BIPARTISAN bill is as reprehensible as it is irresponsible, for it holds the lives of American children hostage to an ideology.

My book The Strange Death of Liberal America has as its epigraph the following quote from the late Paul Wellstone:

I believe that every infant, every child we hold in our hands, no matter what color of skin, no matter boy or girl, no matter rich or poor, no matter rural or urban, and no matter what religion, that every child that we hold in our hands, is one of God’s children. I believe that every child, every infant should have the same chance to reach his or her potential. I tell you, that is the goodness of this country, that is the American dream, that is what makes us a great Nation, and that is the most important goal for our Nation. And whatever makes that possible, I’m for it. And whatever stands in the way of that, I’m against it.

Rather than add yet another opinion piece to the already large number of posts on the subject, I thought I would do something different. In researching CHIP, I found myself engrossed by the Senate debate that took place on September 26. (more…)

You just had to know, with the rights unbroken string of attacks on military hero’s who do not agree with their politics dating back to before the smearing of McCain in South Carolina, that the next example would happen any day now.  Well here it is, courtesy of Rush Limbaugh.

Remember, it is Limbaugh who is being credited with originally making the pun on the name of Petraeus.   Check out this Jan 29th article describing Limbaughs referencing of Senator Hagel as Senator Betrayus ”a dittohead derivation of the name of Gen. David Petraeus”. 

Now Rush has gone and done it again, today telling a caller that service members serving in Iraq who publicly express the opinion that the United States should end the occupation are “the phony soldiers”.  

Rush Limbaugh has a singularly cowardly record regarding military service, being exempted from the draft during the Vietnam war for having a pilonidal cyst. (Pilonidal Cyst is proper medical terminology for having a boil on the butt, and no I’m not making that up, I’m not that creative!)  Somehow that butt boil doesn’t keep him from sitting on it all day and smearing military members who don’t hold his political views!

Consider the fact that two of the seven members of the 82nd Airborne who wrote a widely publicized Op Ed calling for the withdrawal of our forces have been killed in Iraq since they expressed themselves.  Another of those members was shot in the head after writing the Op Ed and is expected to survive.  How dare Rush Limbaugh, Mr. Butt Boil Deferment Right Wing Chicken Hawk, call those dead and maimed hero’s “phony soldiers”.  It really boggles the mind!

When I got home from work last night I caught the last half hour of the Democratic debate. In those final stages I thought Senator Clinton turned on a high inside hardball from moderator Tim Russert and knocked it out of the park.

The moment came when the candidates were in the lightning round, which meant they had a 30 second clock to answer various questions. Tim Russert tossed the candidates a hypothetical question based upon a former guest he interviewed on Meet The Press. The hypothetical involved a high ranking Al Qaeda member being captured, who our intelligence service is certain possesses knowlege about an attack on America in the next couple of days. Under that circumstance Russert’s guest had asserted that American intelligence operatives have the duty to beat the information out of the detainee.

Russert tossed the ticking time bomb to Senators Obama and Biden first, who both answered that torture was wrong under any circumstance. Then he moved to Senator Clinton who echoed the previous answers.

It was at this point that Russert wound up and delivered his beanball: “The guest who laid out this scenario for me with that proposed solution was William Jefferson Clinton last year” (more…)

Rudy Giuliani raised a few eyebrows by telling the NRA convention that he had switched his position on gun control because of 9/11.

His explanation of that flip flop only causes further confusion as far as I’m concerned. Giuliani was very staunch in favor of gun control in 2002, and 2004 so he must nuance the relationship between his change on the issue, and 9/11. He does so by noting an appeals court ruling which overturned a ban on private ownership of handguns in Washington D.C. To Giuliani this ruling evidently caused an epiphany: The rights enshrined by the Constitution are especially dear, particularly in light of 9/11. Here is the exact quote from the A.P.

“It is a very, very strong description of how important personal liberties are in this country and how we have to respect them,” he said of the ruling, adding it “sort of maybe even did more to crystalize my thinking on the whole gun issue in light of Sept. 11.” the ruling “sort of maybe even did more to crystalize my thinking on the whole gun issue in light of Sept. 11.”

“I think, after Sept. 11 — I mean I probably would have had the same impression before, I’m not sure — but after Sept. 11, all that seemed much more powerful to me,” Giuliani said.

That logic is a stretch to be sure, but consider the measures which Giuliani supports as a direct result of 9/11, such as wiretapping without a warrant which is a direct violation of the fourth amendment, or the suspension of habeas corpus on suspects determined by the President to be enemy combatants with no judicial oversight whatsoever. How can Giuliani so cavalierly determine that some constitutional rights are more important after 9/11, while others can simply be disregarded at the whim of the President because of 9/11. (more…)

Due to a scheduling quirk, I was able to catch Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s speech to the U.N. live.   So here is my take on the speech.  I have not been able to find a transcript, so this is all from memory.

The entire western news establishment is all atwitter about Ahmadinejad’s use of the term “arrogant powers” in an obvious reference to the United States.  I think the focus on this particular term shows just how egocentric we Americans are collectively.   I for one was expecting a more pronounced and spirited attack on the west, but Ahmadinejad never actually said the words George Bush or America as far as I can recall. (more…)

The A.P. reports on a speech by Lt. Gen. Ricardo Sanchez (h.t. Truthout) in which Sanchez decried the partisan split in our nations leadership in the so called war on terror.  

According to the story, Sanchez would not name names, but fingered the “most senior leadership in our nation”. 

Sanchez is spot on with his observations, but let me reach the conclusion which he felt (probably from a sense of not wanting to seem overly partisan) was best left unsaid.  This administrations insistence on using the war on terror as a political tool to gain and hold power is one of the greatest travesties ever perpertrated upon this nation by any numbskulled leader in our entire history.  (more…)

Check out this quote from Peter Pace, outgoing chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff:

One of the mistakes I made in my assumptions going in was that the Iraqi people and the Iraqi army would welcome liberation, that the Iraqi army, given the opportunity, would stand together for the Iraqi people and be available to them to help serve the new nation,”

IF Pace is being honest here, (and that is a big if for reasons which I will detail shortly) that is one of the most wrong headed and stupid statements in the history of wrong headed stupid statements. Lets take the misconceptions in this quote one at a time… 

(Republicans should click the more link to see yet another example of a dirty f’ing liberal attacking a man in uniform) (more…)

The Bill Press Show blog. 

Bill Press is one of my favorite guests on CNN and MSNBC.  He does a great job defending Dems against any random right-wingnut.  You can also find him on Sirius Satellite Radio, Sirius Left 146, M-F 6-9AM EST.

One of the greatest failings from the perspective of anyone you ask about Iraq is the lack of a political settlement. Not only is there no political settlement, there is very little prospect going forward that one will ever be reached. In my view this is particularly true so long as American forces continue occupying Iraq.

The over arching question which must be answered is this: Would it be possible for the United States to facilitate a political solution which was contrary to our own interests?

Given that Americans can not be expected to fight and die for a solution which harms our own interests, I conclude that any possible political solution while we occupy Iraq must follow principles which most people in Iraq find objectionable. (more…)

Check out the new additions to our Classifieds…

The Strange Death of Liberal America, by our regular contributor Ralph Brauer.

and

Complete set of F.D.R. Speaks,on 33 1/3 records, includes his radio program on the day Pear Harbor was bombed, booklet of pictures during this time and a letter from Mrs. Roosevelt.

Andrew Sullivan links to a commercial from Rudy Giuliani attacking Hillary Clinton for her stance on the war in Iraq. My original take on Giuliani’s unfair attacks on Clinton can be found at this post, appropriately titled “Giuliani: Against Character Assassination, Still A Stupid Putz”

So now that Giuliani is attempting to stake out a position as daddy Republican who supports the troops and slams around the dirty f’ing hippie liberals… lets take a look at his record when it comes to the military shall we?

That record is of a Vietnam draft dodging/modern day Iraq quagmire cheerleading Republican.  In fact, believe it or not, Rudy’s record of military service is even less impressive than George Bush’s!  (more…)

The other day I received a phone call from friends in Iowa that gave me a chance to get up to date over the Presidential race in that state. What I found marks a major shift in the conduct of Iowa campaigns–one not necessarily for the better.

(more…)

Rudy Giuliani spent time campaigning in Georgia today, and I must say that his message demonstrates a singular lack of understanding of our American democracy, coupled with a liberal dose of hypocricy.

Giuliani is targeting Hillary Clinton for questioning General David Petraeus when he testified to Congress this week.  In particular Giuliani finds it offensive that Clinton told Petraeus that in order to believe the Generals outlook on the surge that “you had to suspend disbelief”.  To Giuliani, Clinton saying that was somehow a personal attack on a four star general.  Futhermore, Giuliani tried to link Clinton to the General Betrayus ad run in the N.Y. Times by MoveOn.org.  Giuliani is concerned that Clinton’s questioning of Petraeus followed the Moveon ad “in a very, very coincidental way.”   

No freaking duh!  The reason the ad was run when it ran was to try to influence public opinion surrounding General Petraeus’ testimony to Congress.  What Giuliani conspiratorily tags as “coincidence” is actually a very fundamental aspect of American democracy.  Congress conducts oversight hearings during which members of Congress (like SENATOR Clinton) question witnesses, and outside groups try to influence public opinion based upon these hearings.  It happens all the time and I bet this is the first time that someone has seen the makings of a conspiracy in the process.  Would someone on Giuliani’s staff please clue him in?  (more…)

By now, if you read any newspaper or blog at all, you have probably had more than enough of the analysis of the Congressional testimony of General Petraeus and his charts and statistics, enough that you may even be able to spell his name without resort to Google. This battle of the charts demands an English satirist along the lines of Alexander Pope or Jonathan Swift who could properly capture this increasingly arcane discussion of brigades and IED fatalities that sends most people’s heads spinning.

As the bloggers trot out their own numbers or just throw their version of spitballs at the flip charts, they seem to not realize this is exactly the battleground on which the White House wants to fight, for as long as the dispute is about numbers and statistics, most of the American people will side with General Petraeus since he is, after all the commander in place and presumably the expert. Bush and Cheney would love to frame the debate as “Do you believe the credibility of the General’s numbers or those of MoveOn?”

As usual, ignored in all this discussion was what may well prove the most significant moment of those much-discussed hearings. The moment came fairly early in the discussion and featured a little-known Democratic representative from South Carolina, John M. Spratt. My guess is that he is hardly a household word, but his questioning on Monday may well signal a huge shift in the Iraq logjam. (more…)