|
For The Trees
Who is our economy FOR, anyway? About the Authors: Dave Johnson John Emerson Richard Reich Thomas Leavitt
Recent Posts: BEST OF STF: Dave's: Articles not at STF: The ATLA Speech on building a progressive infrastructure Lowering the Bar The Attack on Trial Lawyers and Tort Law Who's Behind the Attack on Liberal Professors On the Right and their communications infrastructure: Why Republicans Win Win or Lose The "Conventional Wisdom" Machine Some History of the Conservative Movement HOW TO FIGHT BACK An Amplifier Of Our Own Don't Blame the Democrats How They Do It 1 2 3 4 Getting Rolled Other: You're Gonna Get Drafted Scalia and Self-Government Who is Our Economy For? Voting Machine Story Link Collection What's Wrong with this Picture? (Voting Machines) Like Meat in the Supermarket Get Active Thin Line 1 2 3 Fixing Social Security Seeing the Forest I, II, III "Incredibly Positive News" The Breadth of It The Republican Crony Club Moon Bush Ralph Nader is a Scab John's Best Of: Kerry Smear Page Bandar Bush 9/11 Commission Report Damages Bush -- if you read it Florida Goon Squad Intimidated the Supreme Court The Use and Abuse of George Orwell Zizka's Archives (John's previous identity) Zizka Sampler News Sources: AlterNet BuzzFlash Common Dreams Cursor Drudge Retort Information Clearing House Smirking Chimp TruthOut What REALLY Happened Links to Other Weblogs: |
 6/30/2003 Insider Trading at AEI If you know who American Enterprise Institute is, go read this at TBOGG about insider trading at AEI! If you don't know, go here first. And here. And here. --- Posted at 6/30/2003 04:26:00 PM by Dave Johnson Link to this | | | | e-mail this post  
6/29/2003 Blatantly Exploiting A Tragedy Over at Eschaton they have a series of "Bait and Switch" pieces talking about what the Bush people have been scamming on us. I left this comment (edited to make me look better): As blatantly as anything you have ever seen in your life you are watching the results of politicizing what happened to the country on 9/11. 9/11 is the reason no one is paying much attention to all the things Bush is doing to the country. 9/11 is the reason they are getting away with it. They are USING 9/11 to push through this far-right agenda. They keep the public terrified and eager for war, which leaves little room to pay attention to the complicated details of legislation. Then they push through all of this extreme far-right agenda on us, using the tactic of overwhelming us - by the time anyone can build up public support for something it's too late, and they have moved on to 3 or 4 other attacks on us. And when we DO build up public support - like we did for the FCC rule changes - they just say, "fuck you" and go ahead with their agenda anyway. Look how MUCH they have done to change the country since 9/11 and especially since they started their drumbeat for constant war. The tax cuts have effectively gotten rid of Social Security a few years from now. The FCC change effectively gets rid of the last bits of honest news. The hidden Medicare changes in the new "drug benefit" effectively get rid of Medicare soon after the new rules kick in. Etc. and on and on. (Gutting the Clean Air act. Gutting most other environmental laws and regulations. Gutting public education. Gutting Veterans' benefits. Gutting the AmeriCorps program. Etc.) This is the most blatant politicization of a tragedy that I have ever heard of. And BECAUSE they are so shamelessly politicizing a tragedy they are getting away with it. Everyone is too stunned to deal with it all. One thing you can do is get everyone you know - write to your relatives, etc. - to start getting their news online, like from BuzzFlash. It's important that more people start getting good information about what is going on - that is how we can fight this. The general public DOES NOT KNOW what is really going on, because they do not have sources of good information. Help people find good sources of information by letting them know where YOU get YOUR information. --- Posted at 6/29/2003 10:04:00 PM by Dave Johnson Link to this | | | | e-mail this post
6/28/2003 Choosing a Candidate Liberal Oasis has a great post on choosing a candidate to support. As for me, I just got back from an excellent Dean house party. --- Posted at 6/28/2003 06:03:00 PM by Dave Johnson Link to this | | | | e-mail this post
6/27/2003 Hate Mail I've been getting some hate mail since posting this about the Green Party sign that disrupted Governor Dean's candidacy announcement. --- Posted at 6/27/2003 04:21:00 PM by Dave Johnson Link to this | | | | e-mail this post
6/26/2003 A Comment I Posted Over at Brad DeLong's, on the effects of the Bush tax cuts: OK, so the effects of the tax cut are not what the Republicans said they would be. It isn't about creating jobs, etc. With everything Republicans SAY these days, you have to put your hands over your ears, and look at the effect of their ACTIONS to discern why they are doing something. What they SAY is just a smokescreen - a diversion. The EFFECT of these tax cuts is that the government has to borrow perhaps $400 billion this year, and maybe even more, and continue to do this every year from now on. This means we won't be able to pay Social Security, Medicare, or do anything else the government needs to do. And it means we'll instead be paying out massive debt interest checks to ... well guess who! (Over $300 billion interest payments this year.) Maybe what the tax cut DOES is why they DID it. --- Posted at 6/26/2003 02:03:00 PM by Dave Johnson Link to this | | | | e-mail this post
Corrupted Absolutely Read this story to understand the extent of the absolute, flat-out, wide-open, blatant, bald-faced, unhidden, shameless, arrogant, complete and total corruption of the Republican Party. --- Posted at 6/26/2003 01:14:00 PM by Dave Johnson Link to this | | | | e-mail this post
God Said Zeitgeist has a piece with an Israeli newspaper claiming a quote from Bush saying directly that God told him to strike al-Queda. --- Posted at 6/26/2003 11:27:00 AM by Dave Johnson Link to this | | | | e-mail this post
Income and Taxes New York Times story, Very Richest's Share of Income Grew Even Bigger, Data Show: The 400 wealthiest taxpayers accounted for more than 1 percent of all the income in the United States in the year 2000, more than double their share just eight years earlier, according to new data from the Internal Revenue Service. But their tax burden plummeted over the period.But wait, there's more: All of the I.R.S. data is based on adjusted gross income, the figure reported on the last line on the front page of individual income tax returns.This is a very important point in any discussion of income and taxes. This is the ADJUSTED income AFTER DEDUCTIONS. Here is a bit about why this matters: The figures do not include the incomes of the many wealthy Americans who use shelters to reduce their reported incomes below the level of the top 400. In 1999 and 2000, for example, William T. Esrey - then the chief executive of Sprint, the telecommunications company - earned more than $150 million in stock option profits, lofting him onto many lists of the best-paid corporate managers. That income might have put Mr. Esrey in the I.R.S.'s top 400 taxpayers. But, as later came to light, Mr. Esrey bought a tax shelter from Ernst & Young, the accounting firm, designed to let him delay reporting the profits for tax purposes until the year 2030. Sprint's board forced Mr. Esrey to resign in March after he acknowledged that the shelter was the subject of an I.R.S. audit.Got that? This is the income that they could not hide from taxes. There could be a tremendous amount of income that is not included in reports like this one. So when you hear right-wingers complain that the poor, suffereing rich pay a high percentage of income taxes, remember that the share of income they receive is also high, and even the shocking studies showing that the very richest are bringing in extremely high incomes - an ever higher proportion of the country's wealth - don't report the income that is sheltered from the IRS. This report, for example, saying that only 400 people receive over 1% of all the income in the United States, is skewed because it only report SOME of the income they receive! The concentration of wealth and how it is affecting the economy is a great subject for discussion. Oh yeah, one more thing from the story: A second report that the I.R.S. will make public today shows that the number of Americans with high incomes who pay no taxes anywhere in the world has reached a record. In 2000, there were 2,022 Americans with incomes of more than $200,000 who paid no income tax anywhere in the world, up from just 37 in 1977, when the report was first issued. --- Posted at 6/26/2003 09:52:00 AM by Dave Johnson Link to this | | | | e-mail this post
6/25/2003 An E-Mail I Received I received the following e-mail, and am passing it along: As some of you already know, two weeks ago I turned in my official letter of resignation at work. Monday was my last day as a software engineer. What now, you might be asking? I have never been a Democrat and I have never supported the local members of the Democratic party. I never cast a vote for Bill Clinton. Yet I, like many others in this nation, Republican and Democrats alike, feel the right wing ideologues currently in charge of our country have gone too far. For the first time since 1929, the right wing of the Republican Party controls all three branches of the government. What have they given us? Fiscal conservativeness? A balanced budget amendment? No. They have given us the largest budget deficit in U.S. history so that the people who ran Enron can receive tax cuts. Rather than balancing the federal budget they are repealing the estate tax, which affects only the top 2% of America. When pressed to instead raise the bar for the estate tax exemption to $4 million permanently, they have instead chosen to repeal it altogether. They talk about Homeland Security, while at the same time their budget policies are forcing communities all over the country to lay off police officers and fire fighters. They talk of "No child left behind" while teachers across the country are being laid off due to lack of funding. They talk of the "Clear Skies Initiative" which allows polluters to dump more toxins into the air. They pass a "Patriot Act" that compromises the Constitution by eliminating "Due Process of the Law", gutting the 4th Amendment, and allowing the government to conduct surveillance of any U.S. citizen with reduced checks and balances. They talk about "revisionist history" while leading conservative pundit Ann Coulter releases a new book arguing that Senator Joe McCarthy was "misunderstood" and a saint! Some of you may have heard about the recent FCC vote on media ownership. FCC Chairman Michael Powell, against the wishes of over 95% of the Americans who wrote in on the issue, voted to raise the restriction on ownership limits on television and media. Republicans often argue for free markets, yet this is not just another market. Media is the fundamental vehicle for our constitutional and human right of free speech. This is why moderate Republicans led by John McCain have teamed up with Democrats to fight to overturn this decision. The Republican Party used to be the party of fiscal responsibility and patriotic duty. Although these people are members of the Republican Party, they ARE NOT REPUBLICANS. Some of you may have heard of Howard Dean, the 12 year former Governor of Vermont, who yesterday officially announced his candidacy for President of the United States. As Dr. Dean said in his speech yesterday, 'President Kennedy challenged us to "pass the torch to a new generation of Americans." And so, we must issue that challenge again.' For the next year and a half, I am going to be joining 38,000 volunteers from around the country who want our country returned to us. For too long, my generation has sat on the sidelines and not engaged in the political conversation in this country. We have avoided talking about politics with our friends, our family, and especially our parents, out of fear that they may not feel the way we do. It is time for this to end. Some of you may have heard of Dean and support his ideas, yet do not believe he can win the nomination. Well, Governor Dean recently won the Wisconsin straw poll. He is a frontrunner in all of the major polls. Last Thursday, I witnessed the Governor giving a speech to the San Francisco Bar Association that left the entire 500+ attendance audience on their feet clapping and cheering. Dean is slated to win the online MoveOn.org primary, the leading online organization of my generation, by such a wide margin that the other candidates have begun to question its legitimacy for the sole purpose of discrediting its obvious significance. And the media? Fox News reported there were 1500 people meeting up yesterday to support the Governor's declaration when there were really closer to 30,000. Newspapers around the country sought to de-legitimize our movement by reporting that "at least 2500 people" (AP) or "more than 1000" (LA Times) showed up for the declaration, when the Burlington fire marshal himself closed down the entrance to the square because the crowd had grown to over 5000. The Bush administration, sensing a growing political force, attempted to monopolized the media by holding a policy speech at precisely the same time that Governor Dean was announcing his candidacy. The media is not going to educate us. They are not interested in promoting a civic debate. They are not going to help us maintain a vibrant democracy. Yet we have a weapon far stronger than they do: the Internet. Please, read the Governor's speech and look into the issues yourselves. Get involved. Attend a local Meetup event. Make your own voice heard. If you are a member of MoveOn, vote for the Governor by the end of today. We have the power to win this battle, but we must do it ourselves. Chris ZychowskiGreat letter. (Actually no one is expected to win the MoveOn primary.) By the way - a few hundred readers are going to be asking -- just WHERE is that software engineer job opening up? --- Posted at 6/25/2003 01:08:00 PM by Dave Johnson Link to this | | | | e-mail this post
6/24/2003 Dean On Meet The Press I just watched the tape of Gov. Dean on MTP. I thought Russert was just fine, and did a good job. He was doing his job, getting answers for his viewers, asking tough questions, and nothing is wrong with that. I only wish that at least ONE reporter would have asked - or will EVER ask - Bush similarly tough questions! I think there is a scandal that they do not and the public is right to be demanding a press that does its job! To me, Russert wasn't hostile, he was tough. I think if you are going to be on Meet the Press for an hour you ought to be prepared for the questions that opponents are throwing at you in the press. As they say, this is the big leagues. I don't think you should have stock-prepared answers that you repeat over and over, but I don't think you should be trying to find words to answer questions that obviously are going to come up. It is not unfair for Russert to ask about things people are writing, and because these things are appearing in the press - fairly or unfairly - Dean should be able to respond. This is nothing compared to what's coming from the Right and I have supported Dean because he said he is going to fight back. In the military questions I think Russert asked appropriate questions and was fair. He said he was asking the questions to which people are going to want to know the answers, and he was right. I'm surprised if Dean does not have someone around him who anticipates questions like these and prepares him to answer. I think he has a great point that it is 6 months from the first Democratic primary - but on the other hand he has himself an hour on MTP to respond to the things that have been thrown at him lately, so he might have been better prepared. Bush was an ignorant guy who was finally convinced to do his homework on the campaign trail. I don't want Dean to get a rep as a smart guy who doesn't do his homework. (Also Dean missed a big opportunity to point out that Bush was aWol.) His answer to the gay marriage question was the correct legal answer, which is good. But for a minute it looked like he was trying to avoid saying something that would alienate middle America rather than leading people toward the humane position. But he recovered and recovered well. All that said, I think Dean did a good job, could have been better, and that he will learn from this. I understand the situation with his son had just occurred and that certainly cut into preparation time and threw him off balance a bit. There's 6 months before the first primary. I trust this guy, I agree with most of his positions. I feel that he is a natural leader. He even got me thinking about the death penalty with his answer on that question, so I respect his position. (I support the death penalty in only one circumstance - a person who has killed, is repeatedly violent in prison, and is obviously and seriously dangerous to the life of prison guards. I think the only ethical position there is to support the death penalty or guard that prisoner yourself. I could be convinced that I'm wrong.) --- Posted at 6/24/2003 09:37:00 PM by Dave Johnson Link to this | | | | e-mail this post
Candidates at MoveOn I've been reading all the candidates' replies to MoveOn's questions. I have to say ALL of their answers are great, and informative! (Except Lieberman - see below.) Also, their statements to MoveOn members an be found by clicking on their pictures here. There is a Lieberman statement but the page has this statement regarding his participation in the questions: "The Lieberman Campaign opted not respond to the MoveOn interview." --- Posted at 6/24/2003 08:40:00 PM by Dave Johnson Link to this | | | | e-mail this post
Byrd A speech by Senator Byrd that every American should read. Send it to your friends and family. It is in the compelling national interest to examine what we were told about the threat from Iraq. It is in the compelling national interest to know if the intelligence was faulty. It is in the compelling national interest to know if the intelligence was distorted. Mr. President, Congress must face this issue squarely. Congress should begin immediately an investigation into the intelligence that was presented to the American people about the pre-war estimates of Saddam's weapons of mass destruction and the way in which that intelligence might have been misused. This is no time for a timid Congress. We have a responsibility to act in the national interest and protect the American people. We must get to the bottom of this matter.... Well, Mr. President, this is no game. For the first time in our history, the United States has gone to war because of intelligence reports claiming that a country posed a threat to our nation. Congress should not be content to use standard operating procedures to look into this extraordinary matter. We should accept no substitute for a full, bipartisan investigation by Congress into the issue of our pre-war intelligence on the threat from Iraq and its use.And there is no possible reason an Amdinistration would not want to get to the bottom of what happened ... unless... Please read the whole speech. We're witnessing history shaping up here. Mr. President, the American people have questions that need to be answered about why we went to war with Iraq. To attempt to deny the relevance of these questions is to trivialize the people's trust. The business of intelligence is secretive by necessity, but our government is open by design. We must be straight with the American people. Congress has the obligation to investigate the use of intelligence information by the Administration, in the open, so that the American people can see that those who exercise power, especially the awesome power of preemptive war, must be held accountable. We must not go down the road of cover-up. That is the road to ruin. --- Posted at 6/24/2003 03:56:00 PM by Dave Johnson Link to this | | | | e-mail this post
Gary Hart Gary Hart has some good posts up. But the war on terrorism is now the excuse for America to assume imperial powers and to employ those powers even when our traditional allies oppose our actions. The war on terrorism is fundamentally altering our global policies. We have discarded our half-century reliance on the Atlantic Alliance for collective security. We have marginalized the United Nations at the precise time it should have been empowered to undertake peacemaking roles. And we have alienated key regional powers, including Russia, China, and India, at a time when we should be encouraging them to assume greater responsibilities for regional stability. All this has transpired in the space of a few months without congressional hearings or review, any comprehensive statement by the administration, serious editorial discussion, or public debate over this new foreign policy. Throughout American history major departures in foreign policy have been the occasion for lively, even contentious debate. This has not been the case as the war on terrorism morphed into the centerpiece of a new imperial foreign policy.And a great supplement to what I wrote the other day: Second, we've had satellite surveillance of Iraq for many years. Either destruction or movement of large quantities of weapons of mass destruction (many barrels; many trucks) would have been detected. Let's quit pretending that these weapons, at least in the quantities that we've been warned about (and not to say the delivery systems that were being urgently built, so we were told), have become part of an international shell game. No one in the intelligence community believes that, and neither should we. --- Posted at 6/24/2003 03:08:00 PM by Dave Johnson Link to this | | | | e-mail this post
Thanks to uggabuga, who got it from Roger Ailes, we find this in the Washington Post: In a U.S. News & World Report column about frivolous lawsuits, owner Mort Zuckerman serves up a couple of doozies: "A woman throws a soft drink at her boyfriend at a restaurant, then slips on the floor she wet and breaks her tailbone. She sues. Bingo -- a jury says the restaurant owes her $100,000! A woman tries to sneak through a restroom window at a nightclub to avoid paying the $3.50 cover charge. She falls, knocks out two front teeth, and sues. A jury awards her $12,000 for dental expenses." Great stuff -- and, unfortunately for Zuckerman, totally bogus. Two Web sites -- StellaAwards.com and Snopes.com -- say the cases of the soda-slipping Pennsylvania woman and the window-wriggling Delaware woman are fabricated, and no public records could be found for them. Zuckerman has plenty of company. A number of newspapers and columnists have touted the phantom cases since they surfaced in 2001 in a Canadian newspaper. Ken Frydman, Zuckerman's spokesman, did not dispute that the pair of cases in the column two weeks ago were imaginary, but would not address whether the magazine will publish a retraction. "These cases were reported in a variety of other reputable publications, such as the Fort Worth Star-Telegram and the London Telegraph, and Mr. Zuckerman could have cited dozens of other cases," Frydman says. "Few Americans would disagree with the proposition that there are far too many frivolous lawsuits filed." In a letter to the magazine, Mary Alexander, president of the Association of Trial Lawyers of America, chides Zuckerman for using "phony, nonexistent lawsuits that have been widely exposed as 'urban myths' to justify his assault on our legal system."Does anyone remember when President Clinton was accused of selling plots in Arlington Cemetery? (Especially read this.) When the story was shown to be fabricated (it was in a Moonie magazine - Insight) one pundit wrote that it was a justified story because it "sounded like something Clinton could have done." Totally fabricated "news" reports are OK, because they fit the line that someone is paying to drive into the public mind. Would it be interesting if we learned that the same people (search for "tort") who are behind the anti-Clinton efforts were also funding the tort reform movement? By the way, why is this Zuckerman story fabrication somehow different from that Blair did at the NY Times? Why are ANY of the reporters and pundits who went after Clinton still employed? --- Posted at 6/24/2003 08:30:00 AM by Dave Johnson Link to this | | | | e-mail this post
6/23/2003 Dirty Tricks & Differences I'm watching Governor Dean's declaration of candidacy on the web, and have to make one comment. I see that the Green Party is practicing Republican-style dirty tricks. They're trying to ruin his announcement by holding up a giant Vote Green sign right behind him, so it's the backdrop that everyone sees. Nasty. I think it says a lot about the Greens that they emulate the Republican model of no respect for others. Another thing I notice is that there are no goons "escorting" the sign holder away from the camera's view. We all know what would happen if someone tried this at a Republican rally. I wonder what would happen if Dean peop-le tried this at a Green rally? We don't know because they haven't - in fact they have reached out to the Greens. Update -OK, I was unfair to the Greens there. It was one or two people holding up that sign, not the Green Party. I was trying to provoke a couple of regular Green commenters I have here, but I was a little too harsh. Sorry. And the darn comments aren't even working today anyway. --- Posted at 6/23/2003 10:30:00 AM by Dave Johnson Link to this | | | | e-mail this post
How To Counter The Right Over at The Left Coaster they're continuing the discussion of how to get a moderate/progressive message out. Go have a read and leave a comment. Here's a comment I left: (EDMMLB -- Edited to make me look better.) Reply to CTDem2 - "Toss a thousand coins, and 700 come up heads; the next thousand coins will probably bring the average closer to center." Not if someone is catching the coins in the air and then placing them on the ground heads up. This is the analogy to what the right is doing to our society. Societies do not self-regulate. In fact, once the mechanisms for moderation are removed - as has happened here with the right wing takeover of the press, the courts and the media, history shows that they become more extreme. We're all going to have to donate our time, energy and money to combating the right and restoring moderating influences to our society. It isn't going to happen by itself. Reply to comment from pessimist -- I don't think the fault lies with the Democrats. Politicians respond to the public. The right changed the PUBLIC, and that is how they took over the Republican Party. They were able to do this because Scaife and a few others stepped up to the plate and provided the money. On the moderate/progressive side our philanthropists are NOT funding the kind of organization that can make a difference - except in the case of Podesta's American Majority Institute. But while that is a very necessary component of what we need to do, it is a short-term, "hot issues" Washington-focused organization. This is much needed, but without working to change the broad, general public it is only going to fight a defensive action to try to hold back the onslaught. What we need is for our philanthropists to step up to the plate and start funding organizations that work over the long term to change the public BACK to moderate/progressive principles. We need a Scaife of our own, and a few others, to start funding progressive ADVOCACY organizations, that work to change the broad, GENERAL public back to progressive principles of helping each other, supporting equality and democracy, respecting community, supporting collective bargaining, and other ways that people work together to combat the influence of money. This means things like working in the South and the Midwest and churches - advertising at auto races, football games, writing general-interest books, producing movies, etc. It's a big task, but the model is in front of us. The right has been successful and we can look at how they did it. They build their system over time using a trial-and-error approach. By following the model they have developed we can take advantage of what they have learned and get this going in a much shorter time. One thing we need to do is recognize just how broad the right-wing infrastructure is. The people you see speaking on TV are FUNDED. People like Bill Bennett are FUNDED. The organizations that promote their ideas are FUNDED. Their activists are FUNDED! And this is what WE need as well! But there is MORE money on the moderate/progressive side - and there are MORE people. The problem is that our philanthropists are funding narrow-focus environmental programs, etc. This is great, but with the right's attack going on it's almost useless - a waste of money. If they would divert 10-20% of that funding to building a broad progressive infrastructure similar to the right's, developing public support of progressive principles in general, then this public support leads to progressive candidates getting elected - and even leads to environmental organizations, etc. having a broader base of funding support - all of which leads to the accomplishment of the very goals that the original narrow-focused programs were trying to achieve! It is an INVESTMENT and it will pay results. So the philanthropic community - the foundations, etc. - need to wake up and see that their money is wasted without building broad public support for progressive principles. --- Posted at 6/23/2003 09:51:00 AM by Dave Johnson Link to this | | | | e-mail this post
6/22/2003 No Weapons of Mass Destruction in Iraq The Wurlitzer is trying out the focus-group tested "he hid them or moved them out of the country" excuse for no weapons of mass destruction (WMD) being found in Iraq. I want to remind you of something. Before the war, when the inspectors were still in Iraq, the Bush people were saying that they needed to be able to talk to scientists in private, with their families protected, so the scientists could feel safe telling them what they knew. Well, now we control Iraq (mostly), and we're not only able to protect the scientists and their families, we're certainly offering unbelievable rewards to anyone who can bail Bush out and provide evidence of WMD. So far no scientists, no technicians, not even any anthrax-lab janitors have come forward to say that there were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. We haven't found any storage locations, not even recently emptied. We haven't found any labs. No trucks for moving them to war zones. No remotely guided aircraft. No soldiers who talk about having seen stockpiles of curiously guarded bombs or shells. No anything. Nowhere. Nothing. Whatever the reason we got into this war - intelligence failure, people hearing what they want to hear, intelligence agencies ordered to manipulate information, manipulation of our entire intelligence process by Iraqi exiles, flat-out lying by fanatics intent on starting a war for geopopolitical conquest, or just an old-fashioned scam to seize the oil, loot the country and give lucrative construction contracts to cronies - we have invaded a country that did not threaten us, we're stuck there now with soldiers dying and this will go on for years, the world hates us, and the government and the administration have no credibility left. It is urgent that we remove this President from office and begin attempts to repair the damage. --- Posted at 6/22/2003 08:44:00 PM by Dave Johnson Link to this | | | | e-mail this post
Why Bush Must Be Removed -- A Comment I Left Here's a comment I left, to this post over at Daily Kos: (edited to make me look better) When a President of the United States comes to the public and says there is a threat and he needs our support to deal with it, then we gotta go along. He might be right. He might know something we don't. It's the President's job, so we gotta trust him on this. It's our security, and our lives on the line. So if a President abuses this, or even uses this incompetently, where does that leave us? Breaking down the trust between the public and Office of the President on this kind of thing it opens us up to doubt or cynicism if there is a next time. This endangers the country. There is no question that the Office of the President was misused over the Iraq issue and over national security issues. Calling for a war vote before the election was an abuse - it necessarily brought politics into the issue when it could have been avoided. Creating the Department of Homeland Security the way they did was pure politics. Saying there was an imminent threat from Iraq when, at the very least, the intelligence did not support such a claim, opens the public up to doubt the next time a President needs to protect us from an ACTUAL threat. This is why this President must be removed from office. He has broken the bond of trust between the public and the Office of the President on the most critical issue, and politicized the process, and this has placed us all in danger should there be an ACTUAL threat to our nation and our lives in the future. Update - this continues in the post above titled, "No Weapons of Mass Destruction in Iraq." --- Posted at 6/22/2003 02:01:00 PM by Dave Johnson Link to this | | | | e-mail this post
Pundits and Blogs I read the San Jose News on paper, then onto the web and read the NY Times and the Washington Post every morning. I read the professional high-paid pundits like David Broder. Usually, they are a yawn. (Krugman's never a yawn, but his day job isn't pundit.) And then I read things like this post, Dwarves and Midgets by Steve Gilliard over at Daily Kos. Compare this GREAT piece to the tired inside-the-beltway crap you read from the professionals, who are pulling in hundreds of thousands a year. There just is no comparison. That's "old media." Blogs are new media. Reading some of the great stuff I find on weblogs feels a bit like when Clinton won in 1992 and we all felt so good about a new generation taking over from the tired old politics-as-usual crowd. Blogging isn't a new generation, it's a new way of expressing opinions. New media. I think if Gilliard got a job as a pundit making hundreds of thousands he would probably become a tired boring David Broder. (Wow a number of bloggers are pissed at me now! They were hoping blogging would take them to the top-tier make-a-million level.) Anyway, good post, Steve. --- Posted at 6/22/2003 12:50:00 PM by Dave Johnson Link to this | | | | e-mail this post
He's Baaaack Digby's Back! --- Posted at 6/22/2003 10:02:00 AM by Dave Johnson Link to this | | | | e-mail this post
6/20/2003 Part 203 In The Continuing Series Titled, "A Comment I Left" Here is a comment I left, over at Atrios (edited to make me look better.) I think the full impact of two recent events are going to take some time to dawn on all of us. 1) We just went to war with a country that did not threaten us. However we got there, that is a huge change in the nature of our country, and a huge change in the world order. As the world recedes from the fog of propaganda surrounding this war the consequences will begin to appear. I think it still has only barely started to dawn on everyone how big a deal it is that this happened - never mind how we got there. 2) We are only starting to wake up to the consequences of the Bush tax cuts. Before the tax cuts the administration was assaulting everything we care about, on many fronts at once, overwhelming our ability to gather a response. But the tax cuts - they have virtually destroyed the government a few years out. Aside from the international consequences of racking up that much debt there is the effect on the ability to pay for our government -- Starting a few years from now Social Security is gone, Medicare is gone, even fixing roads is gone! As I said, the consequences of ALL the money being gone are only beginning to dawn on us. --- Posted at 6/20/2003 03:20:00 PM by Dave Johnson Link to this | | | | e-mail this post
The Pop-Up Is Gone OK, the Dean pop-up is gone. I couldn't stand it anymore, and readers were complaining. All of you who were annoyed are now ethically bound to go contribute to Dean so he can show a great quarter at the end of the money, and become the nominee, and get Bush out of the White House. I actually think there is some validity to determining the viability of a candidate by how much money the candidate can raise early in the process. It is a gauge of whether the candidate is able to generate committed support, which is necessary to sustain a campaign for the White House. BUT I think it is just as important to look at the number of donors as it is to look at the amount. If a candidate is able to inspire a lot of people to send $100 checks, that says a lot. If a candidate is mostly raising $2000 check, that's a different story - that tells you how many rich people who don't CARE about spending $2000 the candidate attracts, and could lead to absurd pro-rich positions like supporting repealing the estate tax. I think people who send $100 checks are almost always people for whom that $100 really matters. I think people who can send $2000 are more likely to be people to whom $2000 doesn't matter all that much. Now don't get me wrong, I'm not saying to send $100 if you CAN send $2000! Gov. Dean needs every penny if he's going to be able to go after Bush. I will be writing about how I think we can beat Bush's money advantage. I've been percolating an idea. --- Posted at 6/20/2003 01:57:00 PM by Dave Johnson Link to this | | | | e-mail this post
Stolen Election Coin Check out the Stolen Election Coin! --- Posted at 6/20/2003 11:14:00 AM by Dave Johnson Link to this | | | | e-mail this post
Bubbles and Disconnects Paul Krugman starts his column today with: "The big rise in the stock market is definitely telling us something. Bulls think it says the economy is about to take off. But I think it's a sign that America is still blowing bubbles ?— that a three-year bear market and the biggest corporate scandals in history haven't cured investors of irrational exuberance yet."A news story this morning, Foreclosures Hit Record High in 1st Qtr: Home loans in the process of foreclosure climbed to 1.2 percent of all mortgages in the first quarter, beating the previous high of 1.18 percent set in the fourth quarter of 2002, the Mortgage Bankers Association of America said. Mortgages entering the foreclosure process rose in the quarter to 0.37 percent from 0.35 percent in the fourth quarter. The percentage of all loans for one- to four-unit homes that were delinquent -- at least 30 days overdue -- slipped to 4.52 percent from 4.53 percent in the fourth quarter.And a little story in this morning's San Jose Mercury News, Home sellers paring prices to speed deals: "In general, homeowners are selling at lower prices, even in the lower-end ranges of homes,'' said Richard Calhoun, of Creekside Realty, who tracks Silicon Valley real estate data. "With increased inventory, buyers have more choice. And if a seller is not aggressive on pricing, the property doesn't sell.'' ... The drop in prices in May was steeper than in previous months this year, suggesting that sellers are accepting lower prices to close sales.Meanwhile, the Federal Reserve sees a need to cut interest rates further, All the debate in financial markets this week has been on exactly how much "insurance" the Fed will want to take out. Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan said recently that in the face of sluggish growth, insurance is cheap compared to the cost of disappointing growth that could eventually lead to deflation.And the trade deficit, expected to decrease as the dollar falls, is rising, U.S. trade deficit swells, The latest snapshot of trade activity reported by the Commerce Department Thursday shows that the mushrooming "current account" deficit in the first quarter was 5.8 percent larger than the previous record deficit of $128.6 billion set in the fourth quarter of 2002.OK, the Federal Reserve is concerned enough about the economy that they are using up their last interest rate cut. The housing bubble looks like it could burst very soon. The Federal budget deficit is wildly, massively, unbelievably out of control. Japan is in deflation and Germany looks like it's there as well. The dollar has dramatically fallen, but the trade deficit is UP. And the jobs picture is still declining. But the stock market is engaged in a major rally. What's up? I think we're seeing one more part of what I will call a "disconnect society." This is the disconnect between the top tier of people who are doing well and managing things, and the rest of us. I think we are seeing the effects of a widening gap between the affluent and regular people, where the affluent lifestyle depends on greater and greater isolation from reality -- a reinforced head-in-the-sand view of the world. In today's stock market rally we see a disconnect between the wealthy elite who manage the stock funds, and the real economy. They live well, they commute from the wealthy suburbs around New York into office buildings inhabited by other top tier elites, they don't know anyone who is hurting, they read the Wall Street Journal (written by other top tier elites) and they watch the world on TV. They think things are great, everyone THEY know is doing well, and we're in a "recovery" and heading for a prosperous Republican future. We see the same disconnect in news reporting. Our local paper, the San Jose News, occasionally runs stories about how people live, and invariably picks people living in four-bedroom million-dollar houses, with six-figure incomes, and tells their readers how hard things are for them because their exclusive private school tuitions have risen. It is infuriating! The paper's managers, editors and reporters are well-paid and live in that top-tier world. The news anchors and reporters on the networks make seven figure salaries. The head of the companies they glorify make hundreds of millions! The politicians make six figures and live in the Washington yuppisphere - and say that people who talk like I am talking are on the "fringe." And people in business are living this disconnect. Look what they expect people to be able to pay. Cable TV with a premium channel is $65-70 per month. A cable modem or DSL is another $40-50. (Cable modem is better.) A cell phone account for two is $65 or so. Then they show up with offers for internet or satellite radio for another $10-20 per month and think people can afford it - because THEY can. Never mind that they are moving YOUR job to India. I'm not talking about essential services here; my point is that they're trying to get customers and are pricing for a society that is living like they are. (Health insurance - $500 a month for a couple, minimum.) I'll write more about this disconnect society. Leave a comment. --- Posted at 6/20/2003 10:47:00 AM by Dave Johnson Link to this | | | | e-mail this post
6/19/2003 Building The Right I came across this interesting look at how the right developed. At the bottom of the page are links to more pages. --- Posted at 6/19/2003 03:18:00 PM by Dave Johnson Link to this | | | | e-mail this post
Former Senator Max Cleland A recent speech by former Senator Max Cleland is certainly worth reading. Here's a bit: "Since the President declared a so-called "victory," we have buried 34 young Americans killed in Iraq. We are losing young men and women every day. We are trapped in a quagmire. We have 240,000 American troops tied down in Iraq and Kuwait. We have no clear exit strategy. So far we have found no WMD. We have taken our eye off the ball. In so many ways, we have substituted a rogue regime for the true target. The real target is Osama bin Laden and his terrorist cadre around the world. This administration has not found Osama bin Laden. It has not found Saddam Hussein. And it has not yet found weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. Supposedly all of that was the rationale for losing over 200 American lives and wounding over 500 American troops so far."Sen. Cleland lost three limbs fighting in Vietnam. But the Republicans campaigned against him by saying he is "unpatriotic" because he is a Democrat. The guy who won is another Republican chickenhawk. But wait, there's more: "What then is the Bush record in fighting the so-called war on terrorism? They have not found bin Laden. They have not found Saddam Hussein and as of yet there are no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. However, we have found two trailers. Is that why we fought the war? For two trailers? Did we send our sons and daughters to spill their blood in the desert over two trailers? We are spending over $100 billion bombing and then rebuilding Iraq while giving a tax cut to America's wealthiest citizens and denying hard-working Americans making $26,000 a year or less a child tax credit in order to pay for it. That's the Bush record. It is not compassionate, and with this year's budget deficit running over $400 billion -- a record set by no other President, Republican or Democrat, it is certainly not conservative."and: "Like Colin Powell, I have served in a real war, and I know what it is like. The same cannot be said for other top administration officials, including the president, vice president, secretary of defense, deputy secretary of defense, and other top national security advisers who hatched this scheme to go to war with Iraq."Go read. Thanks to Counterspin Central. --- Posted at 6/19/2003 10:57:00 AM by Dave Johnson Link to this | | | | e-mail this post
Progressive Talk Radio BuzzFlash points to this story, asking for a progressive talk-radio network. Well, I'm listening to one right now, online. It isn't JUST online - it carries talk shows that are syndicated on radio stations - but you can listen to it anywhere online. It is so refreshing to be able to tune in for this perspective, and it is also very informative. But you gotta tune in just to hear the clip where they play Ari Fleisher saying, the job of the press secretary is to faithfully articulate what the President is thinking," and then play what the President is thinking! Right now Thom Hartmann has a libertarian on, talking about health care. He is just ripping the libertarian's arguments apart. (Not hard to do.) Thom is a more serious, intellectual host, and his show is great. Yes, the same Thom Hartmann who writes articles on Common Dreams, AlterNet, etc. Later there's Peter Werbe, out of Detroit, and he is more aggressive and funny. Go see the "Topple Bush Now" poster at his website. Tonite is Mike Malloy, who is a wild man, very, very funny, takes no prisoners. He talks about "the Bush Crime Family." To tune in, go to ieamericaradio.com on the web. Click on "Listen Live!" at the top and on the left side of the window. You will be taken to a page with instructions for how to listen. Update -I guess Peter Werbe has a substitute on today... --- Posted at 6/19/2003 09:40:00 AM by Dave Johnson Link to this | | | | e-mail this post
What Bush Said Tuesday Tuesday Bush had this to say about the Iraq invasion: "We made it clear to the dictator of Iraq that he must disarm ... and he chose not to do so. So we disarmed him," Bush said at a Virginia community college.Well, Bush has now set the marker. He has made it clear that the invasion WAS about WMD, not the post-war excuses about "liberating the people of Iraq." But there were no WMD. It was either bad intelligence or they lied. Bad intelligence certainly doesn't let Bush of the hook. Since Bush has declared that preventive invasion is U.S. policy, we need to have faith in our intelligence that the country we invade really IS a threat. Bush invaded Iraq, killed thousands, bogged down half our forces in a quagmire with no path out (and by the way, we're going to need to start drafting people into the army soon), found no WMD, and this has destroyed the credibility of our intelligence agencies and our country. --- Posted at 6/19/2003 08:23:00 AM by Dave Johnson Link to this | | | | e-mail this post
Jobs Data Remember last week, when the number of people filing first-time unemployment claims "dropped 17,000 to 430,000?" Well, this week it "dropped 13,000 to 421,000." At least this week the number is lower after "dropping." Last week it "dropped" to a higher number. Anything over 400,000 shows a still-deteriorating jobs situation. --- Posted at 6/19/2003 06:50:00 AM by Dave Johnson Link to this | | | | e-mail this post
6/18/2003 WMD Question If Bush misled the country into war, can he be prosecuted for murder? Are there any legal experts out there who want to comment? --- Posted at 6/18/2003 07:45:00 PM by Dave Johnson Link to this | | | | e-mail this post
Tax Cuts What do those tax cuts mean, besides that YOUR Social Security money is gone now? This post by Lambert over at Eschaton sums it up: Student loans? "Wiped clean." Unemployment insurance? "Wiped clean"? School lunch for your kids? "Wiped clean." National parks? "Wiped clean." Your Mom's Medicare? "Wiped clean." Your Dad's Medicaid? "Wiped clean." And so on. Well, it is certainly "bold" and "audacious."Oh yeah, don't forget paying for checking cargo containers at ports. Even the National Parks (yes, they're proposing selling them.) --- Posted at 6/18/2003 07:09:00 PM by Dave Johnson Link to this | | | | e-mail this post
Lakoff Doc Searls writes about George Lakoff's work describing why people become liberals or conservatives. As I have said before, I highly, highly recommend reading Lakoff's book Moral Politics. --- Posted at 6/18/2003 10:47:00 AM by Dave Johnson Link to this | | | | e-mail this post
6/17/2003 Investigate the Missing WMD From this story, Dean: Investigate Bush's Statements on Iraq "Yesterday, President Bush asserted that those who question the evidence he used to justify the pre-emptive war in Iraq are ‘revisionist historians.’ Yet it is President Bush who is rewriting history. “To justify the preemptive invasion of Iraq, the President claimed that the United States faced an imminent threat from Iraq's weapons of mass destruction and that the Iraqi regime had direct ties to Al Qaeda. Meanwhile, no reliable evidence has materialized to prove Iraqi support of Al Qaeda, and weapons of mass destruction have not been found. “The American people shouldn't have to wait for the history books to be written to discover the truth. Did the President receive bad intelligence, or did his administration deliberately mislead Congress, the United Nations and the American people? “An independent investigation must be held to determine what the President knew, and when he knew it. The American people deserve the truth." ... "We need a thorough look at what really happened going into Iraq," Dean said. "It appears to me that what the president did was make a decision to go into Iraq sometime in early 2002, or maybe even late 2001, and then try to get the justification afterward." ... "No one is going to trust a right-wing Congress to do this," said the former Vermont governor.Right to the point. --- Posted at 6/17/2003 07:09:00 PM by Dave Johnson Link to this | | | | e-mail this post
Taking Credit Bush takes credit: Bush, Republicans Buoyed by Stock Market Gains. So if the market does down, that will be Clinton's fault. --- Posted at 6/17/2003 05:33:00 PM by Dave Johnson Link to this | | | | e-mail this post
6/16/2003 MoveOn Primary If you are not already a MoveOn member, please consider registering for MoveOn.org's Presidential Primary and participating. I encourage you to vote for Howard Dean, but even if you don't support Dean it's great to get involved and MoveOn is an important organization to support. Voting begins June 24. You'll receive a "ballot" via e-mail. --- Posted at 6/16/2003 09:42:00 PM by Dave Johnson Link to this | | | | e-mail this post
Malpractice Awards P.L.A. brings some perspective to the cost to society of jury malpractice awards. --- Posted at 6/16/2003 04:05:00 PM by Dave Johnson Link to this | | | | e-mail this post
6/15/2003 Eschaton <<--------- Eschaton is referring to the pieces linked to in the left column, like Don't Blame the Democrats, An Amplifier Of Our Own, Some History of the Conservative Movement, and the How They Do It series. There's also We Urgently Need Our Own "Message Amplification Infrastructure". Because it's blogspot, sometimes you have to scroll down to those titles, sometimes it takes you right to them... --- Posted at 6/15/2003 10:39:00 PM by Dave Johnson Link to this | | | | e-mail this post
Tax Cuts & Revenue Revisited Let's revisit the question of whether tax cuts increase revneue. From August: Tax Cuts Don't Raise Revenue --- Posted at 6/15/2003 01:29:00 PM by Dave Johnson Link to this | | | | e-mail this post
6/14/2003 The Divide Posting by mail has limitations, so I'll keep this short. I was "tabling" for Dean at a farmer's market today, and we got talking to this guy who is a Bush supporter. I brought up the problem of there being no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. Rather than go through the entire conversation, which went on through a while and through many twists and turns, it came down to he said that we need to oil, because we all drive cars. He started by defending going into Iraq because of the terrible threat. When I pointed out that the lack of WMD means there was no threat, then it was about liberating the people of Iraq from the terrible dictator. When I asked why we needed to divert our entire military from the war on terrorism, it became about 12 years of Saddam violating the end-of-war agreement. When I pointed out that his violation was supposedly having WMD, it became about "his" shooting at our airplanes in the no-fly-zone. So then it was back to why NOW, in the middle of the war on terrorism, and he finally said it was good because we need the oil. When I asked why Bush didn't make that case, he said because we also had to end the threat. There, I just went through the conversation anyway. My point, I was left with this feeling of a vast divide based largely on the different sources of information. The guy appears to get his information from the radio. (You know what that means.) You and I get information from the Internet, which means a variety of sources. You and I represent, what, maybe 2% of the public? He represents maybe 40% if you add in Fox News. Two comments. One, this is an incredibly dangerous situation, because most people get their news from what amounts to one source - The Party. Let's assume for the moment that The Party is benevolent, and has only the best interests of the country and the world at heart. But suppose The Party were to be taken over by some malevolent force. With no other sources of information this could be a very dangerous thing. My other comment is that the guy was ready to accept lying to the public to achieve any end. There's a "wink, wink, nod, nod" mentality at work here, where they all recognize themselves as being part of a movement. It's like the old communist party - infiltrate and subvert, say anything to get what you want. I think that The Party (as I call the Republicans) has conditioned its followers to accept the necessity of deceiving the public to accomplish its unspoken goals. I say unspoken, because while they don't ever bring this in front of the public "movement conservatives" all seem to have an end in mind. When you look at their websites it does become clear that they are talking about things like getting rid of Social Security, Medicare, any assistance to the poor, public schools, worker protection, and anything they might decide is "socialistic." But they understand that it would be bad politics to bring this in front of the public, because the public would vote against doing these things, so they accept that the ends must be accomplished by subversion. That this is fundamentally opposed to democracy, or even self-government, is not an issue to them. I can't tell how this will look on the blog. When I can get back onto Blogger I'll edit this, if needed. Update - I finally was able to log in, so I'm editing this a bit. Update - I took the dogs for a walk and thought about what I'd written. I was just dashing off a thought, and now I need to clear it up. I'm not saying that because the guy at the farmer's market is a Bush supporter he's a "movement conservative" who accepts deceit as a way to eliminate Social Security, though that's what it sounded like I'm saying. I was jumping from this guy's acceptance of Bush's deceit - doesn't even bother him - to a rant about the "movement" right-wingers who are fully conscious that this is the method, and who share the goals. Does that clear anything up? This is a blog, so I can get away with this kind of writing, right? --- Posted at 6/14/2003 07:19:00 PM by Dave Johnson Link to this | | | | e-mail this post
Where's Digby So what happened to Digby? --- Posted at 6/14/2003 06:55:00 PM by Dave Johnson Link to this | | | | e-mail this post
Can Post Posting my mail worked. So I'll post. --- Posted at 6/14/2003 06:55:00 PM by Dave Johnson Link to this | | | | e-mail this post
Can't Post For some reason I can't log in to blogger. So I can't post. I'm TRYING to post this using the old "post-by-mail" address, if that still works. --- Posted at 6/14/2003 06:53:00 PM by Dave Johnson Link to this | | | | e-mail this post
6/13/2003 Annoying Pop-Up I have added an annoying pop-up ad, soliciting money for the Howard Dean campaign for President. I'll take it down at the end of the month. The end of June is a crucial reporting time for presidential campaigns. The press will determine how much coverage to give to candidates based on the amount of money they raise this quarter. So if you can give even $5, please contribute. This is about getting rid of Bush, and I think Dean is the best candidate because he has shown his willingness and ability to effectively voice a message that resonates. I will, of course, support whoever the Democratic candidate is because we need to get Bush out of the White House before he completes the damage he is doing to the country, the world and the ideals we share. --- Posted at 6/13/2003 11:03:00 AM by Dave Johnson Link to this | | | | e-mail this post
Surprise Here's a story I doubt you'll see in the American press, US Turns to Taliban. KARACHI - Such is the deteriorating security situation in Afghanistan, compounded by the return to the country of a large number of former Afghan communist refugees, that United States and Pakistani intelligence officials have met with Taliban leaders in an effort to devise a political solution to prevent the country from being further ripped apart.Go read. A somewhat different view of what is happening than you'll see from FOX News. The Bush administration in talks with the Taliban. Try telling an average American about this and they'll think you're crazy -- sort of like a few years back when it was discovered that Reagan was giving missiles to Iran. Of course, the difference is that was investigated and this will never be. --- Posted at 6/13/2003 10:34:00 AM by Dave Johnson Link to this | | | | e-mail this post
Scorecard of Evil Have you taken a look at the Scorecard of Evil lately? --- Posted at 6/13/2003 10:31:00 AM by Dave Johnson Link to this | | | | e-mail this post
6/12/2003 The Idea Of Democracy Lately I have been seeing variations of a standard right-wing anti-democracy line, "Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on what's for dinner." Here's one in a letter to the editor in this morning's San Jose Mercury News. Scroll to the letter titled Tyranny of 51 percent. Has anyone been seeing this elsewhere? Is it organized? --- Posted at 6/12/2003 04:20:00 PM by Dave Johnson Link to this | | | | e-mail this post
Some Democrats Certainly DO Get It Go read what San Francisco Mayor Willie Brown has to say about beating Bush. I don't want to hear about how "the Democrats" are cowed, silent, trembling, don't have a message, aren't speaking out, etc. Some Democrats certainly DO get it! --- Posted at 6/12/2003 03:43:00 PM by Dave Johnson Link to this | | | | e-mail this post
ePatriots Seeing the Forest has joined ePatriots. ePatriots is a way to help beat Bush by donating to help the Democratic Party, through bloggers! The Boot Bush button on the left takes you to ePatriots. Go help them out! --- Posted at 6/12/2003 09:18:00 AM by Dave Johnson Link to this | | | | e-mail this post
Jobs Data For those of you with memories, something might sound fishy about today's weekly jobless claims that "dropped 17,000 to a still-higher-than-expected 430,000, remaining above 400,000 for more than four months now." Here's why: "The previous week's data were revised to show a 22,000-claims increase to 447,000." Using this patented method, jobless claims can fall every week, boosting the stock market and Bush re-elects, and be over 500,000 soon. --- Posted at 6/12/2003 06:59:00 AM by Dave Johnson Link to this | | | | e-mail this post
6/11/2003 Savage How many of you have spent time listening to Michael Savage? The other day I suggested that it would be smart to spend some time listening to Rush, to become familiar with the thinking of the Right. I won't go so far as to suggest actually spending time listening to Savage -- he is so vile, so beyond civility and decency that it is actually a sickening experience to tune in. And I mean that I believe that listening to his show regularly would affect one's mental health. (A subject of a piece I hope to write soon - the effect on one's mental health of listening to right-wing radio.) But I do want to point this out - Michael Savage now has a show on MSNBC! I think little more needs to be said about television and the quality of the information one receives from watching television. Michael Savage is on TV and Phil Donahue is not. (Not to mention - when was the last time you saw an advocate of the labor unions on TV?) That says it all. I realized the other day that I have almost completely stopped watching TV news! Both network and cable. I think that around the time MSNBC got rid of Donahue and put Savage on that all of the cable networks seemed to change, and move violently to the right. Every time I turned on the TV I found myself disgusted and just turned it off, and soon I just stopped turning it on at all. I get my news online now, and listen to the radio. In fact, I find myself listening mostly to ieAmericaRadio.com online now during the day. Later in the day, sometimes, NPR. This has made a big difference in how I see the world. The biggest difference is that I have stopped worrying about what the smarmy Washington pundits think! Because I am not exposed to them, I have stopped thinking like them. I don't worry about the "horse race." Instead I look at issues. I don't spend endless time thinking about the strategizing. I don't spend time on gossip-style character assassination concerns. I'm still trying to put words on this difference in my outlook, but as I withdraw from the effects of the TV Nation I feel like my mind is spending time more honestly and rationally evaluating the information I get. Rather than get into that I wanted to say that I see this huge gap between people who are getting news from a variety of sources - namely online - and people who are getting news from major media - TV and radio. And the polls clearly reflect this division. Professional politicians and pundits tend to think that once the public has a belief, that settles the issue -- that spin determines the truth. It's a Gingrichian view that says what the public believes is what is true politically, so they should play the game according to what they can make the public believe, and according to what the public already believes, rather than according to truth and honesty. I think there is an opportunity here. I think that the actual truth can be very hard to argue with, so there is always a possibility of restoring the public to sanity by exposing them to the truth. Anyway, I'm in a hurry, and rambling, and I'll try to put this into better words soon. That's what a blog is about, right? --- Posted at 6/11/2003 10:47:00 AM by Dave Johnson Link to this | | | | e-mail this post
6/10/2003 New Official Dean Weblog The Howard Dean campaign has launched a new, redesigned weblog at a new address. It's called Blog for America. I have updated this in the blogroll, except there it's called Howard Dean Blog For America. --- Posted at 6/10/2003 08:43:00 PM by Dave Johnson Link to this | | | | e-mail this post
It's The Information, Stupid Please go read this poll, Many Americans Unaware WMD Have Not Been Found. It says a lot about what's going on in the country. It's the information, stupid. While 59% of those polled correctly said the US has not found Iraqi weapons of mass destruction, 41% said they believed that the US has found such weapons (34%) or were unsure (7%). ... Another widespread misperception is that Iraq actually used chemical or biological weapons in the war. Twenty-two percent held this misperception, with 9% being unsure, while 69% correctly said that Iraq had not used such weapons. ... Asked, "Thinking back to when the US government was making the case for going to war with Iraq, according to the government, what was the most important reason for going to war with Iraq?" 60% said "the evidence that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction," and 19% said "the evidence that Iraq was working with the terrorist group al'Qaeda." But 20% said the most important reason was "the fact that Saddam Hussein was an oppressive dictator." Asked for the second most important reason, another 32% chose "the fact that Saddam Hussein was an oppressive dictator," while weapons of mass destruction were chosen by 24% and links to al'Qaeda by 42%.Got that? We went to war because Iraq HAD weapons of mass destruction, and because they were working with al-Queda. They used WMD against us during the war, and those WMD have been found. It seems like we have such a struggle in front of us, when the public isn't even getting basic factual information. One thing that we CAN do at this stage is work to get people informed. I can't think of anything more important. Please write to everyone in your address book to let them know that there are places they can get honest news. Look at the way MoveOn and the Dean campaign have been able to get their message out. But we need to add more people to the "base" of people who are getting honest information. I think the most important place to tell them about is BuzzFlash, because it offers frequently updated headlines of basic news. And, of course, refer them to your favorite weblogs. --- Posted at 6/10/2003 02:46:00 PM by Dave Johnson Link to this | | | | e-mail this post
Kerry or Edwards, etc. I'm curious. Can someone please point me to some weblogs that actively support Kerry or Edwards or Gephardt or any of the Democratic presidential candidates other than Dean? Thanks! Update - I found one for Edwards, and it lists some other blogs, but none are up-to-date. One, Regular People for Edwards, requires a password. The Edwards campaign website doesn't link to any blogs. The Kerry website doesn't link to any blogs. The Gephardt website doesn't. The Bob Graham website doesn't. The Kucinich website doesn't. The Al Sharpton website doesn't. I found a weblog called "Bush Lites." Does that qualify? HEY - it links to Seeing the Forest! Oh, never mind, it's a pro-Dean blog. Should I count this? I hope this isn't really Kerry's weblog! UPDATE - OK, I found this: John Kerry's Unofficial Blog. Update - Here's an active pro-Edwards weblog. --- Posted at 6/10/2003 01:38:00 PM by Dave Johnson Link to this | | | | e-mail this post
Blog Hero A coveted Seeing the Forest Blog Hero Award goes to Billmon at Whiskey Bar. Whiskey Bar posted a list of pre-war quotes from Bush Administration officials that, it appears, many "journalists" have picked up on. But the Blog Hero Award is given for this post. Keeping track of what those in power say -- and holding them accountable for it -- is not brilliance. It is (or should be) the stuff of ordinary journalism. It's the kind of thing the American media used to do, sometimes -- before 9/11 and our endless "war" on terrorism caused it to shut down the part of its collective brain devoted to critical thinking. The fact that some dinky little blog now has to do the job does not reflect great credit on the blogger, but rather great shame on the media. Like the rest of American society, American journalism appears to have flushed some of the most important lessons of the Vietnam War down the toilet. --- Posted at 6/10/2003 11:40:00 AM by Dave Johnson Link to this | | | | e-mail this post
6/09/2003 Top 100 Well, Seeing the Forest is back in the top 100. Number 100 anyway. Today, anyway. Link slutting: If you're weblog is on the left there in my blogroll, consider linking back. (Link slutting is such an ugly thing.) Update -Well THAT sure didn't work. 104. --- Posted at 6/09/2003 09:37:00 PM by Dave Johnson Link to this | | | | e-mail this post
Electability For those who think that a Southern, conservative Democrat is more electable, I offer you this, from the Des Moines Register, about Senator Bob Graham: Republican National Committee spokesman Chad Colby said Graham's comments are "outrageous statements." "He's a conspiracy theorist," Colby said. "That's the only way he can get his name out there."Also this kind of crap, from the Republican National Committee: A Tax-And-Spend Liberal In Moderate's Clothing ... Graham's Liberal Record On School ChoiceIn other words, if you want to play the "electable" game instead of talking about what's the right thing to do on the issues, you aren't going to get anywhere. The right-wingers are going to use their character assassination on you no matter what. So you just gotta be real. I'm not criticizing Bob Graham here, and previously wrote that he also represents the Democratic Wing. --- Posted at 6/09/2003 04:59:00 PM by Dave Johnson Link to this | | | | e-mail this post
Bush, Politics and Policy A great read in the LA Times today, Bush's Scorched-Earth Campaign. From the moment of his disputed election in 2000, President Bush has been dramatically reversing the traditional relationship between politics and policy. In his administration, politics seem less a means to policy than policy is a means to politics. Its goal is not to further the conservative revolution as advertised. The presidency's real goal is to disable the Democratic opposition, once and for all. ... The difference between Rove and former political operatives like Michael Deaver in the Reagan administration and Dick Morris in Clinton's is that he doesn't just advise on the political consequences of policy; he seems to be involved in crafting policy, making him arguably the single most important advisor in the White House. Rove's hand and guiding spirit are everywhere evident. As John DiIulio, who briefly headed Bush's faith-based initiative, indiscreetly put it in an interview last year, everything in this administration is political, by which he meant that everything is the product of political calculation and everything is devised specifically for political advantage.The column goes on to say that the model for getting rid of political opposition is "defunding" in the same way that the tax cuts are really about defunding government so it just dries up and goes away. Specifically:
Rove can operate in broad daylight partly because what he is doing is perfectly legal, partly because his plan is so bold that he realizes no one in the media is likely to call him on it, and partly because demonizing and destroying Democrats is now a tenet of the party he guides. It has been said of Bush that he intends to finish the Reagan revolution by embedding conservatism so deeply into the governmental fabric that it will take generations to undo it. What he is really finishing, though, is not the Reagan revolution but the Clinton wars, which had far less to do with ideology than with politics.For Bush policy is about politics ONLY. There is no "policy" in this administration that is designed to help the citizens of the country or the interests of the nation. It is ALL politics. That is why, one suspects, Bush elicits such deep antagonism from the left — deeper perhaps than any political figure since Nixon, even though he is personally genial and charming. At some level, maybe only subliminally, liberals know what the president and Rove are up to and fear that they will succeed in dismantling an effective two-party system. The left knows that Rove and company aren't keen on debating issues, negotiating, compromising and horse-trading, the usual means of getting things done politically. On the contrary: The administration is intent on foreclosing them. As much as liberals abhor the conservative agenda, there is something far more frightening to them now — not that Republicans have an ideological grand plan but that they don't have one. Instead, the GOP plan is policy solely in the service of politics, which should terrify democrats everywhere.Maybe the clue was when Bush said during the campaign that he would work with the Democrats, and said he was "a uniter, not a divider." That was a tip-of that he wouldn't work with the Democrats and would divide the country right down the middle. This is the guy who said he doesn't look at polls and focus groups - because polls and focus groups told him to say that. The guy who was willing to say Al Gore would say anything to win. Update - Calpundit comments on the same column: [Bush is] a furious political animal who is uninterested in compromise and whose main goal is to defeat his enemies, not advance a cause. Ideology is actually secondary, and is useful mainly as a way to batter his political opposites. Although this has been evident in a number of battles, nowhere was it more striking than in the runup to the Iraq war. From the very beginning, it was clear that Bush wasn't trying to build bipartisan support, the normal course for a president embarking on a foreign war, but was using it as a partisan club and a campaign issue, a way of dividing the Democrats and making them look weak on national security. It's true that it's been a while since politics truly stopped at the water's edge, but Bush has well and truly put that particular political maxim to bed once and for all. The 2004 election is going to be one of the nastiest on record, I think. I hope the Democratic nominee is up to it. --- Posted at 6/09/2003 03:36:00 PM by Dave Johnson Link to this | | | | e-mail this post
Comments I'm working on fixing the comments, and maybe changing over to Squawkbox for comments. In the meantime I'll have both HaloScan and Squawkbox comments here. Chaos. Update - OK Sqauwkbox comments lasted about 15 minutes. I couldn't get their home page to come up so I could login and change my preferences. That's a bad enough start that I took them back off. Sorry if you left a comment - it's gone. --- Posted at 6/09/2003 01:45:00 PM by Dave Johnson Link to this | | | | e-mail this post
Out It Goes I just thought I'd post a reminder that the money going out to Bush's tax cuts today is the money that was supposed to pay our Social Security when we retire. --- Posted at 6/09/2003 01:42:00 PM by Dave Johnson Link to this | | | | e-mail this post
S&L Crisis Don't I recall that one of the causes of the S&L Crisis was long-term fixed-rate mortgages at relatively low interest rates? Wasn't another an administration intent on deregulation? --- Posted at 6/09/2003 01:00:00 PM by Dave Johnson Link to this | | | | e-mail this post
The Far Right I'm listening to Thom Hartmann's radio show. He just talked about Nelson Rockefeller's speech preceeding Barry Goldwater at the 1964 Republican Convention, warning of the takover of the party by right-wing extremists. So I looked it up. The atmosphere at the Republican convention was heated as Nelson Rockefeller stepped up to the podium to address the belligerent crowd: "During this year I have crisscrossed this nation, fighting … to keep the Republican party the party of all the people ... and warning of the extremist threat, its danger to the party, and danger to the nation," he said, taking his time as the crowd cheered "We want Barry!" "These extremists feed on fear, hate and terror, [they have] no program for America and the Republican Party... [they] operate from dark shadows of secrecy. It is essential that this convention repudiate here and now any doctrinaire, militant minority whether Communist, Ku Klux Klan or Birchers." It was, according to many, Nelson Rockefeller's finest moment -- but it did little to stop the conservative wave that was transforming the GOP.Goldwater responded with his famous line: "Let our Republicanism, so focused and dedicated, not be made fuzzy and futile by unthinking and stupid labels," he summoned the crowd. "I would remind you that extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice -- and let me remind you also, moderation in pursuit of justice is no virtue." Do you think Rockefeller was warning us of what's happening to the country today. --- Posted at 6/09/2003 11:01:00 AM by Dave Johnson Link to this | | | | e-mail this post
For Real? Is this for real, or is it more babies being thrown from incubators? --- Posted at 6/09/2003 10:40:00 AM by Dave Johnson Link to this | | | | e-mail this post
OK Kerry, Go For It OK John Kerry, here's your chance. You have been handed what potentially is the biggest presidential scandal in American history: the President, intentionally or incompetently, mislead the public and the Congress into starting a war with a nation that had not attacked or even threatened us. For the good of the country and the world, this is not the time to hold back. I was in the room when you said you had seen no secret intelligence beyond what the public had been told backing up the President's claims that Iraq was an imminent threat, so I don't think you are holding back because you know something that the public does not. You're the front-runner, so it's your responsibility as well as your opportunity to take the lead on this one -- and if you do then you might just deserve the presidency for that alone. Otherwise, perhaps you should think about getting out of the way. Update - Since writing that I came across this: IN FIERY SPEECHES Sunday to 400 Democratic activists gathered in Mount Pleasant, former Vermont Gov. Howard Dean and Rep. Dennis Kucinich of Ohio assailed President Bush. While Kucinich said the Bush administration "lied to the American people," Dean compared Bush to President Nixon during the Watergate crisis. "What did the president know and when did he know it?" Dean asked, in a reprise of the famous question posed about Nixon in 1974. "The country is facing a serious crisis," Dean told the crowd. "Our people are dying in Iraq at the rate of nine a week and the American people may not have had the full information about why we went there."Now all we have to do is get the media to actually report the facts. --- Posted at 6/09/2003 10:08:00 AM by Dave Johnson Link to this | | | | e-mail this post
This One is Worth Sending Everybody in the country should read John Dean's piece on Bush and weapons of mass destruction. This is one that is worth e-mailing to everyone you know. To put it bluntly, if Bush has taken Congress and the nation into war based on bogus information, he is cooked. Manipulation or deliberate misuse of national security intelligence data, if proven, could be "a high crime" under the Constitution's impeachment clause. It would also be a violation of federal criminal law, including the broad federal anti-conspiracy statute, which renders it a felony "to defraud the United States, or any agency thereof in any manner or for any purpose."Of course, the right controls the Justice Department, the Congress and the Courts. And the media. This is the big one. This is where we find out if we are still a nation of laws. --- Posted at 6/09/2003 09:52:00 AM by Dave Johnson Link to this | | | | e-mail this post
Books In my opinion, a key book for understanding why liberals and conservatives think the way they do is Moral Politics by George Lakoff. Lakoff's research shows that conservatives use a "strict father family" metaphor for thinking about government, and outlines the morality that follows from this. Obedience to authority, reward and punishment, things like that. The book explains why conservatives think it is immoral to help the poor. He says that liberals use a "nurturing parent" family metaphor, and follow a moral structure of helping each other. Lakoff's book gives you a good insight into why right-wingers mocked Hillary Clinton for writing a book titled It Takes a Village. A key book for understanding "movement conservatives" is Blinded by the Right, by David Brock. --- Posted at 6/09/2003 09:18:00 AM by Dave Johnson Link to this | | | | e-mail this post
"My Fight" To understand the Republican plan, read this. Then tell me if it doesn't confirm this. --- Posted at 6/09/2003 09:09:00 AM by Dave Johnson Link to this | | | | e-mail this post
6/06/2003 Wording It Well Balkinization puts the right words to the WMD problem: If the Administration did not deceive the American people about the existence of WMD in Saddam Hussein's Iraq, then the possibility that these weapons have already proliferated and spread to terrorist groups becomes much greater. And that should be troubling for any Administration that insists it is acting to make the American people safer. (Which raises an interesting question: should we be happier if it turns out that the Administration was merely dishonest because it misled the public about WMD's in Iraq or incompetent because it let the WMD's fall into the hands of terrorists?)Did he lie, or was he just incompetent? --- Posted at 6/06/2003 06:37:00 PM by Dave Johnson Link to this | | | | e-mail this post
Republican Crony Club Here's a story about more blatant Republican Crony Club corruption that will not result in any indictments or headlines. And especially no leading Democrats calling for investigations. Update - Here's another one. By the way - still no no leading Democrats calling for investigation of Bush's corruption with Harken Oil, or Cheney's corruption with Halliburton. --- Posted at 6/06/2003 11:48:00 AM by Dave Johnson Link to this | | | | e-mail this post
Listen to Rush A comment I left over at Billmon's blog, after a posting about how Americans are uninformed - or misinformed - about the WMD situation: I'm surprised by how many of "us" - progressives and moderates - don't ever listen to Rush or Sean Hannity, which happen to be where a very large fraction of America gets its news. I think it's important to understand what they are saying. You won't BELIEVE it if you turn on Rush or Sean, but it's what the public is hearing, and you'll see why Bush is so popular. Try it.I'm serious. It is a very good thing to know what your opponents are saying. It's also a good way to know what you're going to be hearing about everywhere else. Also, you'll understand just how serious the right is, and how hard they are ready to fight. --- Posted at 6/06/2003 11:14:00 AM by Dave Johnson Link to this | | | | e-mail this post
6/05/2003 Go Read Every, every, everybody should read Arianna Huffington's piece The Enronization of Public Policy! --- Posted at 6/05/2003 03:36:00 PM by Dave Johnson Link to this | | | | e-mail this post
More On Bush vs Veterans Democratic Veteran has caught Bush out on another one - involving the government pulling back the number of contracts to veteran-owned small businesses. --- Posted at 6/05/2003 02:38:00 PM by Dave Johnson Link to this | | | | e-mail this post
6/04/2003 The Democratic Wing I think pundits who think the phrase "The Democratic wing of the Democratic Party" refers to the lefties "just don't get it." In my opinion the phrase refers to Democrats willing to be an opposition party and stand up and challenge the Republicans when it is in the interest of the country. Senator Bob Graham, candidate for President certainly is no leftie, but he certainly is willing to stand up and challenge the Republicans, calling on President Bush to release information about what led up to 9/11. I respect that, even if his politics are not in line with my own. The politics of Sen. John Kerry DO line up with mine, but I feel that he does not stand up to the Republicans as necessary, and THAT is why he does not earn the "Democratic wing of the Democratic Party" label. Graham is a quiet man who is considered a long shot among Democratic contenders. But he is the only one so far to stake out an aggressive position on the basis of classified information obtained during his tenure as co-chair of a special House-Senate panel. That panel has been investigating failure by the intelligence community to anticipate the terrorist attacks on New York and Washington on Sept. 11, 2001. Not only has he complained that the administration has dragged its feet for five months on declassifying the panel's 800-page report, but he has warned that he will take his case later this month to Vice President Dick Cheney, who oversaw the inquiry. "I was raising my voice about my concern on this long before I became a candidate," said Graham, the only senator running for president who voted against congressional authorization of the war in Iraq, arguing that the terrorist threat posed by al-Qaida and Osama bin Laden should be the top priority for the administration. "The American people deserve to know what their intelligence agencies have done or not done, and Congress needs to know so that reforms can be made," Graham said in an interview.Being in the Democratic wing is about being an opposition party and standing up for the people of the country and the interests of the nation instead of cowering before the Bush intimidation machine, allowing the right to persue their radical agenda to take the country back to the 19th century. That's what it's about, not about being a leftie. And it's about getting it. Checking in with weblogs is getting it. Reading BuzzFlash is getting it. Understanding what the grassroots are talking about is getting it. THAT is why Governor Howard Dean is doing so well with the grassroots, and THAT is why Dean can use the phrase "from the Democratic wing of the Democratic Party." --- Posted at 6/04/2003 11:03:00 AM by Dave Johnson Link to this | | | | e-mail this post
Priorities U.S. Begins to Excavate Bomb Crater in Search for Hussein's Remains. A team of American military engineers began an intensive effort today to excavate the site of a bombing on April 7 that military officials still think may have killed Saddam Hussein. The operation, involving a backhoe, two bulldozers, two cranes and 17 dump trucks, appeared to be by far the largest American effort to discover whether Mr. Hussein was killed in the raid.Weapons hunters haven't examined Iraqi missile site. But no U.S. weapons hunters or intelligence officials have visited the heart of Iraq's missile programs -- the state-owned Al-Fatah company in Baghdad, which designed all the rockets Saddam Hussein's troops fired in 1991 and again this year. Not only that, it's not even on their agenda. ``We have the most sensitive documents here,'' said Marouf al-Chalabi, director-general of Al-Fatah. ``We were sure the Americans would target us, but they haven't even dropped by.'' ... Plans for rocket engines, guidance systems and even missile warheads are strewn across the dusty office floors and swirl in the parking lot outside. Some have been blown into nearby bushes. ``They're scattered everywhere,'' Chalabi said, marveling at the mess. American missile experts who have accompanied U.S. weapons teams in Iraq expressed astonishment this week when told that the design plans and engineers behind the Iraqi Scuds and other missile projects were available. The experts, who couldn't be identified for security reasons, said Al-Fatah wasn't on any target list they had seen.They sure as hell immediately secured the oil fields, and sent the troops necessary to accomplish that. But they never did put much effort into locating and securing the supposed weapons. Yes, the same weapons that were a terrible, unimaginable threat to our security. Weapons that not only Saddam could use against us, but terrorists could get their hands on. But after the war they didn't even bother to send more than a few teams out to look for them -- surely not a major effort to secure all these weapons before they could be used on us or dispersed to terrorists. It's almost like they didn't want to waste resource on something that was nothing more than a story - a pretense - an excuse. --- Posted at 6/04/2003 08:33:00 AM by Dave Johnson Link to this | | | | e-mail this post
6/03/2003 Sense of Decency Reading Krugman, and reading other news questioning whether Bush lied claiming Iraq was a threat to us, I think we might be having a "Have you no sense of decency, sir?" moment. If so, I want Al Franken to get the historical credit, for going after O'Reilly the other day. I heard about it from several blogs, and saw it on C-Span. You gotta see it, it's historic. You can watch by clicking here (scroll to where it says Franken, and click "Watch") or, if you have DSL or cable, here. (Use RealPlayer's slide bar if you want to skip to where Franken starts - about 27 or 28 minutes into it.) Franken went after Bush and Limbaugh and O'Reilly (in person - he was sitting right next to him) for lying. I mean he really went after them. At the end of his talk he said that we're tired of the lies from the right and tired of just taking it and "we're not going to sit for it anymore, we just aren't." Franken's upcoming book is titled, "LIES, And The Lying Liars Who Tell Them:A Fair and Balanced Look at the Right" and O'Reilly is on the cover. Then today Paul Krugman's column just got real and said it. It's long past time for this administration to be held accountable. Over the last two years we've become accustomed to the pattern. Each time the administration comes up with another whopper, partisan supporters — a group that includes a large segment of the news media — obediently insist that black is white and up is down. Meanwhile the "liberal" media report only that some people say that black is black and up is up. And some Democratic politicians offer the administration invaluable cover by making excuses and playing down the extent of the lies.This stuff MATTERS. We went to WAR based on their lies! Bush lied, people died. As I am hearing more and more people saying, this is a lot worse than Watergate or Iran/Contra. This might even be worse than getting a blowjob!!!!!!! So this might be a turning point, a "Have you no sense of decency, sir?" moment that crystallizes people's thinking and helps guide them back to doing the right thing. It's hard to ignore this one. Getting us into a war is serious businesses. Many people died. We were asked to trust the President, that he knew things we didn't, that there were stockpiles of dangerous chemical, biological, even nuclear weapons -- and it's hard to reconcile that with what we have found on the ground. Now we're bogged down with at least 150,000 troops stuck there, getting shot at, for years. And if we leave there is little doubt that Iraq will become a Shiite fundamentalist country and that WILL be a threat to us. So this one is going to be very hard to slip past the public, even with the extent of control of the media they have now. They just lie and lie, and look where it gets us. We're not going to sit for it anymore. We just aren't. Update - Here, from a former war supporter. I trusted Bush, and unless something big develops on the weapons front in Iraq soon, it appears as though I was fooled by him. Perhaps he himself was taken in by his intelligence and military advisers. If so, he ought to be angry as hell, because ultimately he bears the responsibility. It suggests a strain of zealotry in this White House that regards the question of war as just another political debate. It isn't. More than 100 fine Americans were killed in this conflict, dozens of British soldiers, and many thousands of Iraqis. Nobody gets killed or maimed in Capitol Hill maneuvers over spending plans, or battles over federal court appointments. War is a special case. It is the most serious step a nation can take, and it deserves the highest measure of seriousness and integrity. When a president lies or exaggerates in making an argument for war, when he spins the facts to sell his case, he betrays his public trust, and he diminishes the credibility of his office and our country. We are at war. What we lost in this may yet end up being far more important than what we gained.Afternoon Update - Let's look at Senator Byrd's May 21 speech. Truth has a way of asserting itself despite all attempts to obscure it. Distortion only serves to derail it for a time. No matter to what lengths we humans may go to obfuscate facts or delude our fellows, truth has a way of squeezing out through the cracks, eventually. But the danger is that at some point it may no longer matter. The danger is that damage is done before the truth is widely realized. The reality is that, sometimes, it is easier to ignore uncomfortable facts and go along with whatever distortion is currently in vogue. We see a lot of this today in politics. I see a lot of it -- more than I would ever have believed -- right on this Senate Floor. Regarding the situation in Iraq, it appears to this Senator that the American people may have been lured into accepting the unprovoked invasion of a sovereign nation, in violation of long-standing International law, under false premises. There is ample evidence that the horrific events of September 11 have been carefully manipulated to switch public focus from Osama Bin Laden and Al Queda who masterminded the September 11th attacks, to Saddam Hussein who did not. The run up to our invasion of Iraq featured the President and members of his cabinet invoking every frightening image they could conjure, from mushroom clouds, to buried caches of germ warfare, to drones poised to deliver germ laden death in our major cities. We were treated to a heavy dose of overstatement concerning Saddam Hussein's direct threat to our freedoms. The tactic was guaranteed to provoke a sure reaction from a nation still suffering from a combination of post traumatic stress and justifiable anger after the attacks of 911. It was the exploitation of fear. It was a placebo for the anger. ... The Administration assured the U.S. public and the world, over and over again, that an attack was necessary to protect our people and the world from terrorism. It assiduously worked to alarm the public and blur the faces of Saddam Hussein and Osama Bin Laden until they virtually became one. What has become painfully clear in the aftermath of war is that Iraq was no immediate threat to the U.S. ... But, the Bush team's extensive hype of WMD in Iraq as justification for a preemptive invasion has become more than embarrassing. It has raised serious questions about prevarication and the reckless use of power. Were our troops needlessly put at risk? Were countless Iraqi civilians killed and maimed when war was not really necessary? Was the American public deliberately misled? Was the world? ... And mark my words, the calculated intimidation which we see so often of late by the "powers that be" will only keep the loyal opposition quiet for just so long. Because eventually, like it always does, the truth will emerge. And when it does, this house of cards, built of deceit, will fall.Please go read the whole thing. As it begins to dawn on America that they were hoodwinked into war, I have a sense that we are experiencing history and this will go down as one of its great speeches. --- Posted at 6/03/2003 11:39:00 AM by Dave Johnson Link to this | | | | e-mail this post
It's Just Gone Also, read this letter from Charles Rangel. The Bush tax cuts were your Social Security and Medicare. The money is going to these tax cuts instead. No question about it. The money is just gone now, and you won't be getting Social Security or Medicare. The Social Security and Medicare trust funds — financed through the payroll tax on workers — are being rapidly funneled out to "give the money back" to wealthy taxpayers. This lays the groundwork for the end of those two programs — not reform, end — because the money will simply not be there.So when you hear someone defending these tax cuts, ask them if they understand that it means no Social Security or Medicare for them. --- Posted at 6/03/2003 11:07:00 AM by Dave Johnson Link to this | | | | e-mail this post
Lying I know you've seen this and I'm sure everyone else is putting this on their weblogs, but it is so important that I'm referring to it as well. Read Paul Krugman's column today! I'm in a "light blogging" period, but I want to write about this and will soon. You know I've been writing about the lying that is going on. --- Posted at 6/03/2003 11:03:00 AM by Dave Johnson Link to this | | | | e-mail this post
6/02/2003 Good Kerry Piece Here's a good piece about John Kerry. --- Posted at 6/02/2003 11:26:00 AM by Dave Johnson Link to this | | | | e-mail this post
Blog to Check An Old Soul --- Posted at 6/02/2003 09:16:00 AM by Dave Johnson Link to this | | | | e-mail this post
Copyright © 2002-05. |
Blogger's RSS feed 
Please help Seeing the Forest meet expenses. You can contribute using Paypal or Amazon by clicking either of the following buttons. Thanks! I took out the Amazon "donate button" because they are a red company, helping fund the right. Archives 
|
|||