The Right “Puzzled” By McClellan’s Criticism

You know, I wasn’t inclined to pay much attention to fomer White House spokesman Scott McClellan’s new book about his tenure beginning soon after our dance of death began in Iraq. As McClellan took the job, we heard a lot about how decent a guy Scotty was and that the only explanation for him taking a job like that was loyalty to Bush. Strange how loyalty with a Bush lasts only so long, eh?

But I tell you, the more the right jumps up – from current and former WH bigwigs to semi-dead former righties (like Bob Dole) to Republcans-dressed-as-objective-news-consultants (like William Bennett, Karl Rove, et al) – to denounce the book and McClellan, the more they’re convincing me to buy it.

I mean, why else would the right mount such a campaign over a relatively small disagreement in perspective? It’s not like the American people like Bush anymore. They’re trying to protect their own, which includes a lot of people who want to ride back into another term under the third Bush term known as the first McCain term.

Maybe you should read McClellan’s book, too. Then you can learn more for yourself how Bush was intimately involved in the “outing” of Valerie Plame, then one of the CIA’s major agents on WMD, at a time when Plame was invaluable to our “ending terrorism”. But Bush had to have her “put down” because it was more important to smarm anything attached to Plame’s critical hubby, former Iraq ambassador Joe Wilson, than to stop real WMD in the world.

No, don’t get me wrong: McClellan is no hero for telling us now. If he’d outed Bush at the time, however…. But the book might be worth a read if only to see what other scum surfaces in it.

Show Dem Party By Voting McCain In Michigan?

When this poster offered a comment on my piece from yesterday about a decision made not to have a “do over” in either Michigan or Florida after both states insisted on running primaries ahead of “legally deadline”, his suggestion – one I’ve heard more and more lately – is for “Democrats to show Democrats they’re wrong by voting for McCain in November.”

Uh, what kind of sick puppy must you be to decide that the way to deal with a personal disappointment is to force 4-8 more years of self-righteous (while absent any kind of social consciousness) Christian crusades and empire building on not just the rest of the U.S. but on the entire world?

At best, this sounds like an extremely poorly conceived – and done by people who have even LESS respect for the people of Michigan than people outside the state – idea put forth by the closest thing Michigan has to Karl Rove.

Some body please explain what I’m not seeing. How in hell would voting for a dangerous two-faced political felon like McCain who would do even worse things to this nation and to the world will do anything but further EVERYONE’S suffering?

The Power Glitch: Democracy Good, Politics… Uh… Not Always So Fun

Ricky noted the situation with Barack Obama’s senior foreign policy advisor, Samantha Power (a Harvard prof and author of some good material), her decision to leave the Obama team, and comments about/from Hillary Clinton that seemed to lead to the divide.

I was sad to hear Power was leaving. She’s been profiled on Democracy Now recently for her latest book (on one of the most important men at the U.N. lost in the Iraq UN assault early in the war) and the lady strikes me as way smart.

But I couldn’t help but wonder exactly she felt she had to quit at the same time I found myself wondering (yet again) about both whether:

  • an intelligent, passionate, wants-to-make-a-real-change-but person like a Power can survive in a world where politics interferes with a true democracy in every bit as lethal a way as most religions as practiced and promoted (IMHO) get very much in the way of a person’s spirituality and relationship with whatever He/She sees as his/her creator
  • why what happened had to result in Power leaving and Obama accepting her resignation; it seems like overkill for the situation
  • But I’ll say as I have before: we don’t need nasty. We need truth and honesty, something we KNOW we won’t get from McCain yet WANT to demand from Obama and Clinton.

    And we sure as hell don’t need any Democratic operatives trying to channel the rat bastard AND American traitor as well as world war criminal, Karl Rove. Period.

    FCC Official Wants Probe of “60 Minutes” Blackout

    On February 24th, “60 Minutes” covered a story on former Alabama Gov. Don Siegelman, and how his prosecution was driven by politics in the state against the Democratic governor. Unfortunately, Alabama CBS affiliate, WHNT, reportedly had a technical difficulty while airing “60 Minutes” that blacked out exactly that story. Check out the actual story here:

    The blackout of the segment in Huntsville prompted an editorial in The New York Times the following week that raised comparisons between the WHNT incident and systematic efforts by a Mississippi TV station to suppress information about the civil rights movement during the 1960s.

    WHNT denied that the blackout was politically motivated. It said it had failed to get the segment on the air because of an equipment failure at the station that cut off the feed from CBS. WHNT said the problem was corrected a few minutes before the end of the Siegelman segment.

    Originally, the error reported was that CBS screwed up. CBS immediately replied: bullshit. But that’s just a paraphrase.

    Bring on the FCC. In this case, they might actually do some good.

    Republicans And Sex Scandals: The John McCain Version

    While Ricky posted about this story here, I’ve been reticent to say much until I read more and tried to ferret out how much evidence there is regarding the story ferreted out by The New York Times re: whether John McCain during his 2000 GOP presidential nomination bid was inappropriately involved (sexually/romantically/lobbying wise lobbyist Vicky Iseman) with a woman who was not only a lobbyist but represented organizations/companies whose work would be covered by the kind of committees and subcommittees McCain chairs/chaired in the Senate.

    But here are my initial insights:

  • I love how the Republicans are blaming The Times like the newspaper is responsible for what McCain may have done
  • I love, too, how Republicans say, “I thought we called a truce to that kind of salacious story” like they weren’t the ones who made Bill Clinton’s sex life the focus RATHER than national security in the years leading up to the attacks on the U.S. in 2001
  • Does anyone recall how angry McCain was for much of his 2000 campaign? And the odd way he dropped out? He was particularly nasty to the media when the indication was that the real nastiness came from Republicans, particularly George W. Bush and his Turdblossom, Karl Rove. Makes me wonder if the Iseman story wasn’t an issue then.
  • I love, too, how the networks use mostly Republican spokespeople to discuss this story, including that idiot Vicky Morgan (is it?”) who brings such breathless insights like, “The thing this campaign shows us is that people LIKE to vote for people they LIKE.” She’s apparently the new token black Republican. Sigh.
  • Let Us Remember Another S.C. Primary Winner

    Bill Clinton responded to a question about why Senator Obama is having to run against two Clintons by invoking Jesse Jackson’s primary victory’s in South Carolina.

    Clinton swears that was not an attempt to inject racial politics into the debate… and even though I am an Obama supporter, I may agree with Bill on this one.  Because considering one previous South Carolina primary winner in particular is cause for believing that Obama is on the march to the White House: Governor Clinton carried the state in the 1992 primary. But sadly, considering that Bill has been widely labeled as the 1st black President, maybe invoking past S.C. primary winners actually does raise racial questions.

    Shucks! There goes my illogical attempt to justify President Clinton’s oddly out of context ‘Jackson won S.C. too’ answer. Continue reading

    C’mon Already: Different Standards For Dems Vs. Repugs

    Like probably at least some of you, I watched the Tuesday Democratic debate in Las Vegas, the one that VERY WRONGLY excluded Dennis Kucinich, treated John Edwards like an afterthought, and played to something less than useful with Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama.

    First, I am sickened when candidates are excluded. I’m not necessarily in Kucinich’s camp (I’m still somewhat undecided) but with many already out (Biden, Dodd, Richardson), what possible excuse did MSNBC have for rescinding its invitation?

    Second, can someone in the media at least PRETEND this is not simply a fight between Barack and Hillary? Pretty please, with voters’ hearts and minds on top? I want to hear from ALL the candidates; what I don’t need to hear is “the gloves are off” every three seconds and then questions that just play for Clinton and Obama, with no regard to either the other candidates or – even more importantly – what AMERICA WANTS AND NEEDS.

    Third, Karl Rove and others in the Republican Party – whose candidates seem to be skating much of the nastiest attention focused on Democrats – are at it again, telling us WHO MUST be the Democratic presidential nominee. Can’t the Dems – pretty please – choose their own candidate this time around? We let them shape 2004 and steal both 2000 and 2004 in votes. Why should the Repugs choose both their candidate AND their opposition’s? And why does so little press go to Rove’s egregious, over-the-top play on stereotypes when knocking Obama while they focus attention solely on the white woman vs. black man issues?

    Bush V. Iran: The Summary

    For those who want a roundup of how BADLY the Bushies tried to spin the story of two little speedboats somehow presenting a MASSIVE THREAT to two big ass U.S. warships (who perhaps do NOT themselves belong in the fucking Strait of Hormuz in the first place) in Bush’s latest attempt to launch war with Iran, see Cernig’s (excellent) Newshoggers.

    Myself? I laughed at the incident once I saw the video (wow, was that dumb) but laughed less when CNN’s poll yesterday said that 44% of Americans agreed that Bush is right about Iran being “such a threat”. However, CNN’s damned poll is also REALLY easy to vote multiple times in, so it could be Karl Rove with an hour on his pudgy, murderous hands changing the vote (not exactly the first time he’s done that, is it?).

    Bushies On Iran: Since They Can’t Attack Us, We Must Attack Them Even Faster and Harder

    I talk with many progressive, moderate and increasingly, well right of center Republicans who these days not just readily admit but rant and rave themselves that the Bush Administration’s logic on almost everything it does is so very bad as to be criminal (meaning: OK, we gave him the benefit of the doubt for a long time, but you can’t fuck this much up without a PLAN!). On Iran, even some of the neocon fans, however, are reeling from this administration’s latest approach.

    The IAEA studied Iran’s capabilities for some time and said that Iran is not ready to do any real damage with nuclear power to anyone (even Israel, which is often the greatest fear though Israel’s got MUCH bigger ones and a penchant to use their weaponry with some abandon). Major U.S. intel on Iran determined Iran really poses no threat and, because the intel determined this, it’s sat hidden for a year.

    NOW, the day AFTER other national intelligence tells us Iran is in no position to do us or anyone else much damage for some years to come, what do the Bushies do?

    Why, they scream louder that we need to attack Iran … you know, before they attack us. Then, in a few years and several trillion dollars (not to mention untold numbers of lives lost, because Iran DOES have enough of a military to hurt us in ways Iraqis could not organize while we’re being told that the U.S., perhaps with Israel, could go after Iran’s so-called nuclear reactors which would kill millions of Iran citizens), Karl Rove can come out again, like he did this past weekend, and claim Congress made Bush do it.

    I’m a pretty compassionate person. But when it comes to the Bushies, I’d take a page out of the great lyrics for “Sweeney Todd” (for a pacifist, this is my all time FAVORITE musical oddly enough), the fantastic musical turned into a Tim Burton film for Christmas release with Johnny Depp:

    Never forget. Never forgive.

    Laugh Til You Sob #2: Rove Revisionism: “Congress” Made Us Attack Iraq

    Karl Rove has a new fairy tale he’s spinning to anyone who will listen: that it was Congress (and the Democratic MINORITY in Congress at the time at that) that forced the Bush Administration to attack Iraq when George W. Bush (who pumped his fist and grinned just before he gave the orders, so happy he finally got to be the BIG man to wage war from in front of his TV set) really didn’t want to do so.

    This latest Rovism goes way past a bald lie and into complete and utter unconscionable, treasonous, murderous psychopathology. But then, that’s all the Bush Administration and its pals have displayed from BEFORE they stole the election in 2000.

    When No News Is Huge News, & Vice Versa

    One of the major political stories roiling the waters is Scott McClellan’s assertion that he was sent forth to lie about the Valerie Plame Wilson affair at President Bush’s behest (evidently). From the report in Politico:

    €œI stood at the White house briefing room podium in front of the glare of the klieg lights for the better part of two weeks and publicly exonerated two of the seniormost aides in the White House: Karl Rove and Scooter Libby,€ McClellan wrote.

    €œThere was one problem. It was not true.€

    McClellan then absolves himself and makes an inflammatory €” and potentially lucrative for his publisher €” charge.

    €œI had unknowingly passed along false information,€ McClellan wrote.

    €œAnd five of the highest ranking officials in the administration were involved in my doing so: Rove, Libby, the vice president, the president’s chief of staff and the president himself.” Continue reading

    Karl Rove: Frogmarched Right Into Newsweek


    Karl Rove’s new “fair and balanced” column for Newsweek has debuted. Newsweek actually has the nerve to claim it gives balance to political issues. And – wonder of wonders – his first topic is “how to beat Hillary Clinton next November.”

    Excuse me?

    Not even still-Bush-supporting Republicans can possibly believe that line of bull.

    President Bush Just Makes Stuff Up… Again

    There are several stories getting major attention from Robert Drapers interviews with President Bush. One of the major stories revolves around the President’s claim to Draper that his policy was to keep the Iraqi military organized after the invasion, but Paul Bremer inexpicably pulled a wild cannon and that policy was mysteriously changed without the President having anything to say about it.   When Bremer heard this tall tale he produced documentation proving that Bremer followed Presidential instruction to the letter and was fully supported by the President. Which makes Bush either very forgetful regarding one of the biggest policy errors of his disastrous regime, or a flat our liar. Which is worse?

    Looking at the N.Y. Times report on the book I found one of the ending sentences further illustrative of the Presidents lack of candor, or mental capacity.

    €œOne interesting question historians are going to have to answer is: Would Saddam have behaved differently if he hadn€™t gotten mixed signals between the first resolution and the failure of the second resolution?€ Mr. Bush said. €œI can€™t answer that question. I was hopeful that diplomacy would work.€

    Continue reading

    Let’s NOT Have The GOP Tell The Dems Whom To Run For President

    It’s happening again. And we should not allow it.

    Remember in 2004, when Howard Dean was the hot new face on the Democratic presidential campaign trail and the Repugnants kept winking and saying, “Run Dean because John Kerry would be too scary a candidate for us!” So Kerry got the nod and, of course, the Karl Rove Crime & Slime Machine ate him alive, helped by rigged voting in Ohio overseen by Bushie’s black male version of Katherine Harris, Blackwell.

    Now they’re doing it again. They keep saying, “Oh, run Hillary!” And Karl Rove – who should be doing the rest of his life in prison for nothing less than treason – leads the way yet again, spending more than the past week badmouthing Hillary especially.

    Is their agenda to be sure Barack Obama is the Dem choice for 2008? Not sure.

    But I’ll tell you one thing: the GOP is NOT the best “decider” of whom the Democrats, along with the rest of the country, need for president. Just look at the imbecile in the White House now, if you have any doubt. Oops, wait…. sorry, the imbecile is usually on vacation. Look under a rock then.

    Dog Days: Vacation Suggestions for Dubya, Rove, the Media, Pelosi and Others

    Congress finally stumbled into its annual August recess, a long-standing tradition that legend has it goes back to the days when Washington wasn’t air-conditioned and everybody abandoned the city to the mosquitoes for a month.For some reason the Dog Days of August seem to bring out the weirdness in people, maybe that’s why there is a recess–to get away from it all. With everyone on vacation, the media are scrambling to fill their pages with Washington gossip, so here are a few suggestions about some stories they might pursue to keep themselves busy. Continue reading

    Answer the damn question!

    I’ve never bought into that “take the high road” bullshit regarding politics.  My motto has always been, if you want to get rid of those right-wing nuts, you have to be willing to get right down in the dirt with them and hit’em where it hurts.

    I’ve often heard right-wingers speak of women as if they were somehow not a full person deserving of one’s respect.  That was commonplace during the Clinton years (Limbaugh’s “testicular lock-box” remarkMcCain calling Chelsey “ugly” and her mom a lesbian, etc., etc.).  I was raised to stand-up for women, so I have no problem going after “the architect” of all things evil, Karl Rove, who has been on a week-long, personal attack campaign against the right’s favorite female punching bag, Senator Hillary Clinton. 

    The Bush administration, led by turd-blossom, has been arguably the most anti-gay and lesbian administration in history.  And yet the web is full of reports and testimonials concerning Karl Rove’s rumored homosexuality and the “Gay Republican Mafia”.  The mainstream media and the majority of bloggers have allowed Rove to avoid confirming or denying the reports and, if true, explain the reason for the anti-gay and lesbian policies (self-loathing, perhaps?). But now that he’s out on his “I Hate Hillary” press tour, he places a target squarely in the middle of his lily-white forehead.  it’s time for the blogging community to put sustained pressure on Rove and demand answers to the question that gives right-wingers nightmares:

    Karl Rove, are you gay?  Answer the damn question!


    Why do you hate gay and lesbian Americans?

    Why do you hate women?

    The Myth of Karl Rove

    The resignation of Karl Rove has provided a field day for progressive and Democratic bloggers. For all of us it produces yet another piece of evidence the Bush administration is unraveling. After all, the biggest rat of all has left the sinking ship.

    Rove leaves a fistful of Congressional summons behind him as well as still unanswered questions about his role in the 2000 Miami Rent-a-Riot. You’ve probably forgotten the Riot by now but it was the only deliberate attempt in our history to try to change an election by using force.

    Rove’s departure now elevates Dick Cheney to the position of the Fuehrer of this misguided Reich. In fact I will go further and speculate Cheney helped to push Rove out the door. It all reminds me of one of those medieval dramas where the evil Machiavellian bumps off his rivals one by one. Continue reading

    Bush Minus Bush’s Brain = “Lame Brain”?

    With the big surprise news today of Karl Rove’s resignation (only seven years too late, and he should have been frog marched out to stand trial for treason, IMHO) and the disgusting display by the president which made it sound like Rove is responsible for American democracy and all the other best things in life, I keep wondering what this really means.

    OK, sure, my first reaction to his supposed leave to “spend more time with his family” made me wonder, “Which family? The Addams Family? The MANSON family?” He has no family. I’m not even certain he’s a mammal.

    But there’s more at play here. It’s not just because Capitol Hill Dems are eager to get him to testify under oath. Rove has always been a lying, corrupt, vicious, evildoer and this did not change. Nor does his resignation stop Dems from subpoenaing him (again), although the Bushies will continue to claim executive privilege.

    What do you think is behind his sudden departure?