"My Mom Says I'm a Catch, I'm Popular." (Or Not.)

To bolster his sagging approval rating and the country’s waning confidence in our “mission” in Iraq, the president scheduled an address to the nation . . . held at Fort Bragg, with his “audience” being a group of soldiers. As opposed to a press conference where he’d have to actually answer questions. (You’d think that speaking in front of a group of people you have, by extension, been sending to die for the past two years would be harder than speaking to the White House press corps.)

We were promised (or I was promised, by Kelly O’Donnell of NBC Nightly News) “something we haven’t heard before.” What, like a new justification for invading Iraq? See, this is why I’m so confused about the Downing Street memos. Because, if you believe them, the memos suggest that the facts in Iraq were being shaped to justify going to war. Which is kind-of like how the current reality in Iraq is being used to retroactively justify the invasion. First it’s “regime change,” then WMD, then “freeing the Iraqi people,” then the “War on Terror.” Why does no-one believe that this Administration is capable of this level of deception?

So, anyway, back to the speech:

∞ “Their aim is to remake the Middle East in their own grim image of tyranny and oppression — by toppling governments, by driving us out of the region, and by exporting terror.” Really? Because the same could be said of us, no? From the Muslim perspective? Might be why they hate us?

∞ “Our mission in Iraq is clear. We’re hunting down the terrorists.” Again, really? Why didn’t you just say so back in March 2003? I know I don’t know nothin’, but it seems to me that Iraq is only a success in that it’s the front in the War on Terror because it’s a fuckin’ terror magnet. “Some wonder whether Iraq is a central front in the war on terror. Among the terrorists, there is no debate.” WE MADE IRAQ SAFE FOR TERRORISTS! JUST ASK THEM!

∞ “Some of the violence you see in Iraq is being carried out by ruthless killers who are converging on Iraq to fight the advance of peace and freedom. Our military reports that we’ve killed or captured hundreds of foreign fighters in Iraq who have come from Saudi Arabia, Syria, Iran, Egypt, Sudan, Yemen, Libya and others.” Look, I don’t wanna split hairs, but isn’t Zarqawi from Jordan? Still, if the president didn’t want to upset our allies, perhaps he shouldn’t have put Saudi Arabia at the top of the list.

∞ “As we determine the right force level, our troops can know that I will continue to be guided by the advice that matters — the sober judgment of our military leaders.” And Karl Rove. And God.

∞ “I thank those of you who have re-enlisted in an hour when your country needs you. And to those watching tonight who are considering a military career, there is no higher calling than service in our Armed Forces.” Were his daughters among “those watching?” I guess not because even pulling strings to get a kid into the National Guard (as happened for him during the last Vietnam) won’t keep said kid out of Iraq. Guess it depends on which nation we’re guarding, huh?


The Administration used to run a tight ship in the message-synchronicity department. Pre-Invasion, everyone was on the same page (except for ol’ Powell, and look where he is now). But they hit a snag because the mindlessly repeated, narrow argument for going to war turned out to be off, which made it all the more embarrassing when the course was adjusted from weapon-finding to freedom-distributing to terror-fighting. The new tactic seems to be letting Cheney and Rummy get beat up in the press for their wildly conflicting views and then have Dubya blather on for 30 minutes and sound comparatively reasonable. Can we set this bar any lower? I’m asking.

Meet the (Full-Court) Press

Yesterday, (NBC Bureau Chief and Moderator of Meet the Press) Tim Russert’s guest was Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld. Now, you can view/read the interview two ways: Mr. Russert is a badgering simp who can’t even come up with his own questions and wants to cast the secretary as a Bush Administration apologist, or Rumsfeld is crotchety King Neocon who talks out of the side of his face as much as Cheney and someone in this Administration needs to own up for launching a preemptive war for no goddamn reason.

Often the Truth is somewhere in the middle, but I'd like to think that, in this case, both are true.

The Fourteen

During last month’s wrangling over the “Nuclear Option,” 14 Senators (led by John McCain) forged a bond that could potentially keep the extremists in both parties in check. Of course, the purpose was merely to squelch the battle over the filibustering of judicial nominees. But what if this feeling of cooperative moderation could become a fixture in the Senate? (As it was in the 90s with Breaux and friends.)

I realize that the talk-show-Thunderdome aspect of politics is more entertaining, but is that what we want from our politicians? Entertainment? I’ve often said that the two-party dynamic is failing the American people. Politicians are no longer able to govern effectively or fairly. When politicians are beholden to their parties who are, in turn, beholden to various lobbyists and poli-corporate action conglomerates, you don’t get government by the People and for the People. We don’t need intimidation, bullying, or pandering. We need good government.

I’ve always been a big fan of moderate politicians. Maybe it’s my predisposition toward diplomacy and “trying to keep everyone happy.” The Orlando Sentinal’s Kathleen Parker wrote an uncharacteristically (fair and) balanced column about centrism in American politics. And there’s a coalition of political blogs that support this idea as well. It seems like a just cause, doesn’t it?

Survey Saaaaaayyyys . . . EVIL!

Conventional wisdom would suggest that the White House and Guv'ner Jeb didn't know that Katherine Harris was planning to run for the U.S. Senate in 2006. Surely they didn't think she'd continue to sit on the sidelines (where she was relegated in 2004 because Dubya didn't want all the 2000-borne bile in Florida to swamp his 27 electoral votes). Evil don't play that shit.

Look, everyone to the Left of Hitler's 60-years-dead, withered cock wants "anyone but Harris" for Senate in 2006. (Unfortunately, a significant block of Florida voters are politically aligned with the misguided member . . . and/or retarded.) The relatively unknown former Democrat from the "Redneck Riveria" might have a shot if the White House is serious about backing him to beat incumbent Bill Nelson. But there's something bigger happening behind the scenes.

Keep an eye on this story.

More Trouble for Everyone’s Favorite Professional Conservative Carnival Barker

It seems that Rush Limbaugh wants to avoid embarrassment by shirking the law. Too late. Should of thought about that before he started popping the OxyContin like breath mints. And certainly before he mouthed off on his radio show about how we should be treating the nation’s drug addicts:

“The answer (to drug use) is to find the ones who are getting away with it, convict them and send them up the river.”

What an embarrassment.

White House: Thank God for Michael Jackson

Ignore the man behind the curtain. That could be a Republican motto. The GOP is better organized, has more message-discipline, and has a tighter reign on the MSM than the Democrats. But they have to.

Smoke and mirrors. It’s great when it works. One day, things are humming along and the president can do no wrong (according to the MSM and, thus, in the eyes of the Public). And then there’s a bump in the road. Suddenly, it’s, “Good God, can you believe what Howard Dean is saying?”

Yes, things haven’t been going so smoothly for the White House as of late. Social Security, the ever-present pall of death in Iraq (and the ominous Downing Street memo), John Bolton, Jeff Gannon . . . I’d bet they’re pretty happy that the MSM is frothing over this star-fucking Wacko Jacko bullshit. If any news outlet sticks with an unflattering news story for more than a couple days, they’re accused of being “liberals.” Or “unpatriotic.”

Meanwhile, the Democrats have been flying under the radar. And people are starting to notice. Do they have any direction? Howard Dean’s grassroots-building? What, is this a rebuilding DECADE? Don’t you need a message first? Sure, they’re doing good by proving they can make a deal with moderates from the GOP (even if it was ultimately just them caving to the conservatives). And how about controlling the news cycles? (BZZZZZ! The Dems suck at that.) Or catching the Republicans off guard? They tried that during last year’s Republican convention, when Kerry broke with tradition to do some campaigning. And no-one cared. (So [in retaliation, perhaps?], during the Democratic Convention, hours before Kerry formally accepted the nomination, the Administration announced that they’d captured a high-ranking Al Qaeda operative. Who turned out to be no-one spectacular. But still, effective enough to make people forget about Kerry’s speech.)

We’re in that lull before the midterms and before campaign 2008, where there will be a big push among the Democratic Party faithful to circle the wagons . . . and nominate Hillary Clinton. A woman who cannot win the general election because one-third of the country hates her. Hates. Like, if a burning bush told right-wing evangelicals to vote for Hillary, they’d dig out their standard-issue cyanide capsules and bite down. Hard. Snatching defeat from the jaws of victory? Again? Or is that too rosy of a scenario?

In summary: The Republicans have the power, and the Democrats are trying their best not to take it away. Like all of the other distractions in the world (literally), the White House will just brush the Democrats aside until it’s time for Bill Frist’s inauguration.

. . . and I Found Her Soul and It was Only Darkness

As if to prove that this blog is not committed to high-brow political commentary:

I Fucked Ann Coulter in the Ass, Hard.

Prelude to . . .

I didn’t really have any idea how this whole thing was going to start. But, as it’s a fucking blog, I guess the “introduction” needn’t be too grandiose. Still, the idea’s been talked about to death and it’s time to DO something. And, in that respect, any “introduction” would seem inadequate.

Anyway, I opened the paper today (actually, it was on the front page, above the fold, so not really “opened,” but the front page was underneath the “Business & Editorial” section for whatever reason) and this is what I saw. It should be noted here that I live in Tallahassee which, you may remember, was the Center of the Universe for thirty-some-odd days in 2000 when Al Gore challenged the presidential election results.

A lot has been made (by those on the Left) of the quote the vice-president of Diebold made prior to the 2004 election and the results of testing done by Black Box Voting. Turns out, the Supervisor for Elections in our own county invited BBV in. And now he’s getting scolded for it by several (local) elected officials and the counsel for Diebold (who, at the same time, has acknowledged that the voting machines might not be reliable).

Like me, the Mr. Sancho isn’t much of a conspiracy buff. But I think there’s a very real possibility that something shady could happen in Florida (if it didn’t already). The point is: We really need transparent voting (and tabulating) procedures, including a paper trail. Whether it’s federally mandated or not. Do we need to have these issues come up again in 2008?

Hasn’t enough been stolen already?