This One Will Make You Just Want To Cry

Over at AlterNet, Why Ecocide Is 'Good News' for the GOP. Scroll down to "A Higher Power":

Nevertheless, beyond all these more obvious anti-environmental motivations there lies a more deep-seated inspiration. Difficult as it may be to believe, many of the conservatives who have great influence in the Bush administration and now in Congress are governed by a Higher Power.

In his book "The Carbon Wars," Greenpeace activist Jeremy Leggett tells how he stumbled upon this otherworldly agenda. During the Kyoto climate change negotiations, Leggett candidly asked Ford Motor Company executive John Schiller how opponents of the pact could believe there is no problem with "a world of a billion cars intent on burning all the oil and gas available on the planet?" The executive asserted first that scientists get it wrong when they say fossil fuels have been sequestered underground for eons. The Earth, he said, is just 10,000, not 4.5 billion years old, the age widely accepted by scientists.

Then Schiller confidently declared, "You know, the more I look, the more it is just as it says in the Bible." The Book of Daniel, he told Leggett, predicts that increased earthly devastation will mark the "End Time" and return of Christ. Paradoxically, Leggett notes, many fundamentalists see dying coral reefs, melting ice caps and other environmental destruction not as an urgent call to action, but as God's will. In the religious right worldview, the wreck of the Earth can be seen as Good News! [emphasis added - DJ]

Some true believers, interpreting biblical prophecy, are sure they will be saved from the horrific destruction brought by ecosystem collapse. They'll be raptured: rescued from Earth by God, who will then rain down seven ghastly years of misery on unbelieving humanity. Jesus' return will mark the Millennium, when the Lord restores the Earth to its green pristine condition, and the faithful enjoy a thousand years of peace and prosperity.

One powerful fringe group, the Reconstructionists, doesn't speak of the "End Time" at all, Bokaer notes. They put the onus for the Lord's return on their own political activism. Reconstructionists say that Christ will return only when a righteous nation acts to purge unrepentant sinners and applies biblical law to its populace. They want to spread the Gospel in a political context, making the Bible the foundation of U.S. jurisprudence. That includes an end to environmental regulation.
...

Such misinformed viewpoints would be of little import except that, in the 1980s, they began permeating the Republican Party. That's when Republican strategists – eager to broaden the party's narrow base of wealthy corporate supporters – partnered with religious right leaders such as Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson, who agreed to politicize their followers and bring them into the GOP, according to Bokaer.

Working through fundamentalist, Pentecostal and charismatic churches, the Christian Coalition has promoted right-wing Republican candidates by mailing voter guides at election time – 30 million in 1994; another 45 million in 1996; and 70 million in 2000 to support candidate Bush, reports the watchdog group People for the American Way.

There is so much more in this article, and it rings true because it agrees with much that I have been reading about these right wingnuts in my research. I'm a little shaken up so instead of saying anything about it I'll ask you to go read the whole article. Oh yeah, by the way, some of the wealthier Reconstructionists are buying up some of the voting machine companies. (If blogspot doesn't scroll to the right piece, search for 'CNP' and 'Ahmanson'.)

Update - While researching the right's web of anti-environmental organizations and their funding would be a lifetime career in itself, I came across this group, Interfaith Coalition for Environmental Stewardship (ICES), one more right-wing organization claiming God gave the planet to humans for "stewardship." If you want to see where they're "coming from" check out the organizations they link to. They have a subtle message that translates to the usual right-wing line: environmentalists are socialsts who are trying to destroy capitalism, which is God's law.

Dean Meetups Tomorrow

I have been through several Dean days. I'm talking about former Governor Howard Dean of Vermont, who is running for President in the 2004 election. Saturday a week ago I attended two Dean house parties, each of which involved conference calls of approximately an hour, with Governor Dean answering questions from groups in different cities. Then I saw Dean speak in San Francisco last Tuesday evening. His speech was an order of magnitude refined from the California Democratic convention speech you may have seen online and the crowd was yelling and cheering. Before the event there was a pretty good crowd of "Meetup" members gathered out front to greet him. There was such a feeling of energy and hope.

This last Saturday I went to a local Democratic Party event. In private discussions on the upcoming Democratic primaries, Dean seems to be the main subject. There were Kerry supporters present, but they are taking more of a pragmatic than an enthusiastic position – they're betting that Kerry will be the nominee and they want to be "on board" early. These Kerry supporters have nothing bad to say about Dean. Most will tell you they agree with Dean more than with Kerry on issues. (The Lieberman supporters I have met appear to be well aware of where things are going, and complain about how "liberal" the primary voters are.)

Several old-time Democrat pros have told me that they haven't seen anything like Dean in a long time. Three different individuals have said that his speech at the Cal. Dem. Convention was one of the best they have ever seen, and the way it inspired the crowd there tells them that this is a different kind of candidate. They see an energy and detect an ability to attract not just base Democrats, but to reach out to "swing voters" and even Southerners. Many mentioned a feeling that Dean will be able to draw young people back into the election process. I'm talking pragmatic jaded state-wide professionals, and you do not see this kind of enthusiasm from this crowd very often. Usually it's pragmatic and cynical talk but this time I am hearing optimistic, enthusiastic support. This is what is special about Dean's candidacy. Dean already has a large (20,000+) Meetup volunteer network operating nationwide because of this ability to inspire enthusiasm. Now this is almost year before the first primary, and we're seeing this kind of energy and numbers.

I think that after you have actually seen Dean speak, you're a believer, and this is why the numbers are growing so fast, so soon. This ability to make a personal impression through a speech is important. I was a Kerry supporter until I met Kerry, and will still support him if he gets the nomination, but I have to say that Dean is bringing out an enthusiasm in so many people I am talking to. Kerry doesn't have an enthusiastic, inspirational, energizing style. He does have credentials and can challenge Bush on National Security as well as making an issue of Bush's AWOL service record, and I hope he does this before the election even though Dean will be the nominee.

There is an energy around Dean's candidacy and I think Dean has the message and personality to win the nomination and the national center, too. I haven't seen anything like it and I've been around long enough to have gone to see Gene McCarthy in Detroit in 68.

Click here to locate a Dean Meetup in your area.

Funding The Message Amplification Infrastructure

Seeing the Forest and other weblogs have been writing about the need for a "Message Amplification Infrastructure" to counter the Wurlitzer of the right. Developing these infrastructure organizations will take a lot of money, so we need to look at how this can be done.

The core funding for the right's Wurlitzer comes from a group of philanthropic foundations controlled by right-wing zealots. These funders provide general operating funding to ideological advocacy organizations. This means the money is given to the organizations to use in any way that supports the overall efforts of "the movement." In the report The Strategic Philanthropy of Conservative Foundations, Sally Covington traces this use of funds by right-wing foundations.

There is actually more money available on the moderate/progressive side, but it is used in a different way. Moderate/progressive philanthropists have evolved a system of "program funding" -- providing money for specific programs with the intent of doing good through specific, measurable, accountable individual projects. The idea is that this program money is more results-oriented. Moderate/progressive foundation funding is rarely provided for general operations use, especially by the kind of advocacy organizations we are talking about building.

I have been researching and am going to be writing about this problem of persuading moderate/progressive philanthropic foundations to provide funding for general operating expenses for advocacy organizations – the organizations that will function as a message amplification infrastructure for our side. Stay tuned.

BuzzFlash - Daschle Resign!

BuzzFlash says Tom Daschle should resign.

Learn To Ignore Their Words

By now we should have learned that the Bush people lie. They use words to cover their actions. They use words to divert attention, to confuse and distract people so they won't see or understand what is being done.

By now we should understand that we need to look at their actions instead of their words.

Let's take a look at Iraq and see what was done and not done. Some things done: The PR for the Iraq operation began in earnest in September 2002, timed to correspond with the election and used effectively to manipulate voters and intimidate opponents. Then we invaded a country that had not attacked us, had not even threatened us, and did not even appear on the surface to have the means of doing any harm to the United States should they decide to try.

On the ground, the invasion operation immediately secured the oil fields and infrastructure -- even the oil ministry building. This was carefully planned, and the troops and equipment necessary to accomplish this were in place at the beginning of the invasion. The oil was flowing again within weeks.

This is what was done.

The Iraq operation did not secure suspected WMD sites. We did not plan for this, and did not provide the troops necessary and resources necessary to accomplish this. In fact, we still have not sent the necessary forces or equipment to secure suspected WMD sites.

The Iraq operation also did not plan for or provide the forces necessary to secure and protect the people of Iraq and their heritage. We still have not sent the necessary forces or other resources.

This is what was not done.

I read somewhere that the U.S. "Public Diplomacy" operation for the Iraq war was the largest PR operation in history. This should provide us with a clue about how to understand what is happening. We are being subject to a massive PR operation, which means that a fog of words is being laid down to obscure actions, and to "soften us up" to accept what is occurring. The very words "Public Diplomacy" and "PR" themselves are used to confuse people. The words mean "propaganda", but propaganda is a word that people understand and, to some degree, are prepared to defend against – when people hear that word they know that they are about to hear lies intended to confuse people. "Public Diplomacy" and "PR" are substituted as a way around that defense.

We KNOW the Bush people lie and we know they are very good at it. This means we should learn to step back, cover our ears, not listen to what they SAY and stop being confused and distracted by the fog of words they lay down to obscure what they DO. The WORDS are just a tactic - ANYthing the Bush people SAY - their words are just smoke and fog laid down to cover what they DO.

And we must teach others to do the same - to learn to look at what they do and not be confused by what they say.

The world has learned some lessons from past regimes that relied on deception to mask their agenda. The Stalinists/Soviets were masters of the use of propaganda, and the world learned to look at their actions not their words. The Nazis were expert liars. They mastered the art of lying – propaganda – and used it effectively to confuse and conquer all of Europe. The Nazis were finally defeated only after enough people came to understand this. People came to understand that the Nazis were liars, and that they used techniques designed to influence and confuse people. People eventually learned to ignore what the Nazis said, and to just fight them. The fight against the propaganda of these regimes is the origin of why people today understand that they must put up their defenses when they hear the term "propaganda." They learned to say, "Oh, that's just propaganda, we should ignore it and look at what they are doing instead."

Now we have another crowd that is willing to lie and use even more sophisticated psychological techniques to confuse and divert people. The people behind the words now are the same people who marketed tobacco -- they are REALLY GOOD at using words -- they managed to get much of the public to give them their money and then kill themselves! They are that good. They are better at this than we can even understand.

Again: We invaded and secured the oil fields and the oil ministry. We did not secure WMD or bring order to the country. If you look at what was DONE and ignore what was SAID I think it becomes obvious what this was all about – it becomes clear that Iraq's oil was the only goal. Everything else is just words.

Prediction

I predict that the Republicans are going to start accusing the Democrats of exploiting 9/11 for political gain. The Wurlitzer is going to be talking about nothing else all through summer 04 until the election. If they do it right, it will be the major issue in the campaign: those horrible, despicable, un-American, treasonous Democrats using 9/11 to try to win the election.

A Good Statement Of What Happened To Us

An op-ed piece in the LA Times the other day, Media Monopolies Have Muzzled Dissent, has a good quote that shows what has happened to us:

The transformation of active citizens into passive consumers was enabled by the Federal Communications Commission under Ronald Reagan's Mark Fowler, who declared "the perception of broadcasters as community trustees should be replaced by a view of broadcasters as marketplace participants."

Community replaced by market. One-citizen-one-vote replaced by one-dollar-one-vote. That kind of sums it all up.

From the piece:

TV's Fox could not get away with its shameless shilling for the White House if the Fairness Doctrine were still in place, and radio's Clear Channel monopoly would not be able to impose wall-to-wall Limbaugh, Hannity and Savage, etc., on the public if broadcasters were accountable to public opinion rather than the dictates of plutocrats.

If Republicans try to tell you that the media is liberal, ask them why they oppose the Fairness Doctrine.

Rigged Election In Florida

South Knox Bubba writes about the rigging of the 2000 election.

An IM Conversation This Morning

A conversation on IM this morning. (Exactly as typed, except where I edited it to make me look better -- and literate.)

tendentious: you're not a liberal, you're a pansy!

forest: what?

tendentious: something a caller to mike malloy said.

forest: \oh

tendentious: not about mike.
tendentious: about YOU

forest: This is the core of the conclusions of the book Moral Politics by George Lakoff, examining the metaphores that liberals and conservatives use in their internal cognitive processes of how they see the country

tendentious: that you're a pansy?

forest: Conservatives use "strick father family" metaphore for the country. Liberals use "nurturing parent family" metaphores

tendentious: right. you're a pansy!

forest: They believe this is the best kind of family and use that as a metaphore for how the country should be run

tendentious: you should post this conversation

forest: you should blow me

tendentious: shut up shut up shut up

forest: blow me blow me blow me

tendentious: liberal vs conservative!

forest: in that case it's spank me spank me spank me
forest: nurture me nurture me nurture me

tendentious: debate in 14 minutes
tendentious: on cspan

forest: I'm watching it on tape right now.
forest: I'm not happy with any of them but Dean.

tendentious: well, yeah. what about the darling of the left, kucinich?

forest: he's OK
forest: and sharpton, actualy

tendentious: i think sharpton should be the press guy for the democratic nominee!

forest: I need you to tell me if it's going to rain

tendentious: ok, i'm a liberal, "it's going to rain"

Yeah, that's where my time goes.

Quotes For Bush To Use

I'm going to write soon about Howard Dean, and the South Carolina Democratic candidate gathering last night. But my first impression is that Leiberman handed the Republicans more than a few quotes to use against the eventual Democrat candidate in the next election. For example, he complained about "big spending" programs like health care.

Update - in the debate Leiberman proudly says he's one of the Democrats who came out against Clinton. Isn't that just great.

Who Did "We" Hire?

See this story, U.S. Hires Christian Extremists to Produce Arabic News.

The U.S. government this week launched its Arabic language satellite TV news station for mostly Muslim Iraq. It is being produced in a studio – Grace Digital Media – controlled by fundamentalist Christians who are rabidly pro-Israel. That's grace as in "by the grace of God."

Grace Digital Media is controlled by a fundamentalist Christian millionaire, Cheryl Reagan, who last year wrested control of Federal News Service, a transcription news service, from its former owner, Cortes Randell. Randell says he met Reagan at a prayer meeting, brought her in as an investor in Federal News Service, and then she forced him out of his own company.

Grace Digital Media and Federal News Service are housed in a downtown Washington, D.C. office building, along with Grace News Network. When you call the number for Grace News Network, you get a person answering "Grace Digital Media/Federal News Service." According to its web site, Grace News Network is "dedicated to transmitting the evidence of God's presence in the world today."

"Grace News Network will be reporting the current secular news, along with aggressive proclamations that will 'change the news' to reflect the Kingdom of God and its purposes," GNN proclaims.
...

But Mower said she couldn't get us a copy of the contract between BBG and Grace Digital Media. Nor could she say how Grace Digital was chosen as the production studio. [emphasis mine - DJ]

Grace News Network proclaims that it will be a "unique tool in the Lord's ministry plan for the world," according to the company's mission statement. "Grace News Network provides networking links and portals to various ministries and news services that will be of benefit to every Christian believer and seeker of truth."

Just how DID they get this contract? Was this an open bidding process or more corrupt insider cronyism from the Bush gang? Funneling government money to the Christian far-right wingnuts.

Hiring this company doesn't fit at all with the WORDS the Administration is using. In fact, it contradicts those words. So many of their actions contradict their words, and so few support them. If you look at what they are DOING instead of the fog of words they are spreading around, you'll see that they appear to be following an Ann Coulter foreign policy, "We should invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity."

It's All About The WORDS

NY Times today, Taking the 'Victory' Out of City's Victory Parades

While Bush administration officials say they welcome the offer, they also say they worry about how such events may be perceived around the world and are urging a different kind of parade for a different kind of war fought in a very different era.

Rather than victory parades that might appear to be gloating, the Pentagon would prefer celebrations that emphasize the recognition of fighting forces' accomplishment in toppling a dictator.
...
The Bush administration, which has shown great discipline in preparing its public message during the campaign against terror, wants the world to see an America honoring liberation, freedom and democratic ideals, and not gloating over a fallen adversary in the Arab world.

They're not allowed to use the word "victory." And now it was about "toppling a dictator" instead of saving the United States from the imminent threat posed by Iraq's massive weapons of mass destruction programs?

It's all about the WORDS to this crowd. It's all psy-ops, here and abroad. Lean to look at what they DO, not what they say. The words are just a cloud of smoke and fog and are designed to obscure what is happening.

Since they can't use "victory" they should just use the correct word, "OIL."

Bush's Resume

tendentious found a link to Bush's resume, and it's just great!

Understand Social Security

If you want to understand the Social Security Trust Fund and the charges by Republicans that it is a sham - and how Bush's tax cuts for the rich are really paid for with your retirement money - read this over at P.L.A.

Democracy Dies Behind Closed Doors

Gary Hart's weblog has a great piece up, titled, Democracy Dies Behind Closed Doors . He asks, "Why is this administration so afraid to deal openly and honestly with the American people?"

Kerry

I received an e-mail from the Democratic Party yesterday. (No this is not a big deal secret insider getting-my-instructions thing - you can sign up at their website and get the e-mails, too.) In the e-mail they have this from Sen. John Kerry:

Massachusetts Senator John Kerry
"President Bush has made it a top priority to stack the federal court with judges that represent the far right wing of his party. He will not miss an opportunity to nominate ultra-conservative judges to the nation's highest court, putting our most precious rights at grave risk. A retreat on our freedoms will affect all Americans. Everyone must get involved now in the fight to prevent Bush from stacking the Supreme Court with ideological extremists."

This is great to hear. I heard him speak on this subject at a fundraiser in December. When asked about Bush's extreme judicial appointments he said he would NOT oppose right-wing judicial appointments based on their ideology, only on their qualifications. I don't remember the exact words but I have verified this with someone else who was in the room at the time.

In yesterday's statement Kerry still does not clearly say he will personally vote against right-wing judicial nominees. (Kerry's campaign website issues page does not list this as an issue.) It's great to hear that Sen. Kerry might be coming around and I'm not criticizing him if he is changing his position. I will, however, credit Governor Howard Dean for putting on the pressure that Kerry is (sort-of) responding to.

Sen. Kerry, think about this -- How many of the Supreme Court 5 did Gore vote for? Did you vote for far-right judges Richard Leon and Karen LeCraft Henderson who today struck down campaign finance?

I was an enthusiastic Kerry supporter until I met him. I'll still support him if he is the nominee. But...

Note - I called the Kerry campaign for clarification on his position this morning but the call was not returned as promised before 5pm EST, so I assume they went home. I've had this experience of the Kerry campaign not calling back before.

Words

In the speech last night President Bush very clearly said that the Iraq war was part of his 'pledge' to bring to justice the terrorists responsible for Sept. 11:

"The battle of Iraq is one victory in a war on terror that began on September the 11th, 2001 and still goes on.

That terrible morning, 19 evil men, the shock troops of a hateful ideology, gave America and the civilized world a glimpse of their ambitions. They imagined, in the words of one terrorist, that September the 11th would be the beginning of the end of America.
...

In the battle of Afghanistan, we destroyed the Taliban, many terrorists and the camps where they trained. We continue to help the Afghan people lay roads, restore hospitals and educate all of their children.
...

Nineteen months ago I pledged that the terrorists would not escape the patient justice of the United States. And as of tonight nearly one half of Al Qaida's senior operatives have been captured or killed.
...

The liberation of Iraq is a crucial advance in the campaign against terror. We have removed an ally of Al Qaida and cut off a source of terrorist funding.

And this much is certain: No terrorist network will gain weapons of mass destruction from the Iraqi regime, because the regime is no more.
...

In these 19 months that changed the world, our actions have been focused and deliberate and proportionate to the offense. We have not forgotten the victims of September the 11th, the last phone calls, the cold murder of children, the searches in the rubble. With those attacks, the terrorists and their supporters declared war on the United States, and war is what they got.
...

The enemies of freedom are not idle, and neither are we. Our government has taken unprecedented measures to defend the homeland and we will continue to hunt down the enemy before he can strike. "

Tom Daschle said yesterday Bush deserved "great credit" for his leadership during the war.

I have something to say to the Democratic leadership. What Bush is doing is dishonest, immoral, illegal and extremely dangerous. Please take a step back and look at what has been happening to our country and the world. Bush has made WAR on another country without provocation of any kind, using lies like those in this speech to redirect America's anger to serve his own financial and political purposes. There is no greater crime than making unprovoked war on another country. Their fog of propaganda and lies has obscured your vision. You must get past the words and look at what they did -- I'll say it again, the United States has illegally invaded another country! There is no way to get around that. All the words about liberty and freedom and our mission and good and evil are just talk. Read the transcript of the speech and look at what is really being said -- reading the words will help you get past the sophisticated psy-ops tricks that are being used. Compare what is being said to what has really occurred. If you let Bush get away with this you are allowing this precedent to stand, abdicating your responsibility to all of the people of the United States and the world. This must be about more than just your re-election.

Thom Hartmann

I hope everyone listens to Thom Hartmann's radio show, available over the internet.

Update - Now Peter Werbe's show is on. I hope everyone listens to Peter Werbe's radio show, available over the internet.

Update - Now Mike Malloy is on. I hope everyone listens to Peter Werbe's radio show, available over the internet. (Scroll to "Live Program Stream" and click.)

Okay, Okay

Okay, okay, I know you're probably already seen this, but I think it is such an important piece that I'm going to point to it, too. William Greider has a piece in The Nation titled, Rolling Back the 20th Century. Greider details the goals of the right, and I think it is worth reading the whole thing. I read it a few days ago and have been thinking about it a lot. Here's just a little bit.

The movement's grand ambition--one can no longer say grandiose--is to roll back the twentieth century, quite literally. That is, defenestrate the federal government and reduce its scale and powers to a level well below what it was before the New Deal's centralization. With that accomplished, movement conservatives envision a restored society in which the prevailing values and power relationships resemble the America that existed around 1900, when William McKinley was President. Governing authority and resources are dispersed from Washington, returned to local levels and also to individuals and private institutions, most notably corporations and religious organizations. The primacy of private property rights is re-established over the shared public priorities expressed in government regulation. Above all, private wealth--both enterprises and individuals with higher incomes--are permanently insulated from the progressive claims of the graduated income tax.

Please read this important piece. I think Greider is right-on with his analysis.

Who Will Be The First?

Quaker in a Basement asks the question, "Who Will Be First? (and When?)" As I read the posts on this site, this blogger sounds a lot like me! Must be brilliant! (You have to scroll down to that entry because blogspot links aren't working today - as usual...)

What's The Number?

The official unemployment rate measures people who are actively looking for work (about 8.5 million?). But we are in an unusual situation because so many people have been out of work for so long that they have given up (1.6 million), taken part-time jobs (another 4.7 million?), or are "underemployed" -- working at a lower level or for less pay than before -- former execs working at Wal-Mart, etc. I haven't seen a good statistic for how many people are really out of work or underemployed. And I would usually know where to look for a number like this. I think I read somewhere that 75 million people are not working now. That includes students, stay-at-home wives, elderly, etc. Plus we have 2 million in prison now. Does anyone know where to look for the real unemployment number?

More Lies?

As well as not finding and weapons of mass destruction in Iraq - or anything else except oil to justify our invasion - the Times of India asks where are all the Saddam "doubles?" The whole story is good, and funny.

OK, That's Over, So Where Were We?

A while back the press was closing in on a number of issues of corruption involving both the President and Vice President and it started looking like Bush and Cheney were in some real legal trouble. But suddenly there were a lot of great big terror alerts, everyone look over there, everyone get scared, there's a big scary dragon, glorious leader will slay the dragon that is making you all scared, run around, run around, kill Iraq, frenzy, frenzy, kill Hitler, war, war, glorious leader HOORAY, HOORAY -- whatever.

So tonite Bush is going to tell us that He has led us to Glorious Victory and the "threat to the United States from Baghdad has ended." OK. Well that's out of the way, then.

So where were we? Oh yeah, Bush and Cheney and Harken and Haliburton and conflicts of interest and SEC investigations and insider trading and tax evasion and corporate corruption, and a whole bunch of other things were starting to hit the news.

Take a look at BuzzFlash's Bush Harken insider trading collection.

Remember the stories about Harvard bailing out Bush at Harken? There's more here from The Nation.

What about Cheney's business dealings and the SEC investigation of his dealings at Haliburton?

Remember hearing about Bush and Harken setting up offshore subsidiaries to dodge paying their taxes?

I remember I had several questions.

Does it all just go away? Is that how the American system of justice works now? Or is it time to start looking at this again, pick up where we left off?

It's Privacy They Have A Problem With

Read this story in today's NY Times, Republican Lawmakers Back Senator in Gay Dispute. This is a story about Republicans standing behind Sen. Santorum's bigoted comments about gays. But toward the end is this:

Mr. Santorum, who did not speak in public today, has refused to apologize and said that his remarks were more directed at the right to privacy rather than homosexuality. He said his position was shared by a majority of the Supreme Court in upholding a Georgia antisodomy law in 1986.

Got that? They justify this by saying that they don't just have a problem with gays, they have a problem with PRIVACY! So if you thought you were safe from the Republican jihad against gays because you aren't gay, (or perhaps you're one of those right-wing gays who is well hidden in the closet), you're wrong. It's PRIVACY that Republicans have a problem with. YOUR privacy.

Virtual March May 22

Please go read the latest about the May 22 Virtual March and tell others about this!

Actually, I'll help you read it:

MAY 22: VIRTUAL MARCH TO SUPPORT THE TROOPS

Those of us on the left got accused of not supporting the troops when we questioned or opposed the war in Iraq. Now it's time we show that we support the troops.

The budget proposed by President Bush, as augmented by the Senate proposes:

"...to cut VA spending by $15 billion over 10 years, starting with $463 million slashed from next year’s budget. Legislators claim they’re cutting fraud, waste, and abuse. But Joe Fox Sr., head of Paralyzed Veterans of America, who calls the cuts “an in-your-face insult to the veterans of this country,” says the reduction will slam the poorest disabled veterans and cut GI Bill benefits for soldiers who are currently serving in Iraq. The plan could also mean the loss of 9,000 VA physicians in a shorthanded VA system, he says...

"[Bush's budget] includes a $150 million aid cut to schools attended by military dependents and support for billions in VA reductions..."

The cuts already enacted in VA funding have delayed enrollment of certain veterans in their promised health coverage. The government said last year that it would not make good on pension promises made to veterans of past wars who have now reached retirement age. And the families of the children whose education funding will be cut often make less than $10,000 per year.

On May 22nd, the last real business day for Congress before the Memorial Day weekend, an unofficial, loosely-knit "Coalition of the Worried" is encouraging a "Virtual March to Support the Troops."

We need to let our military know, to let our representatives know, that we care about the troops all the time. Whether they are on the battlefield or lying sick in a hospital. Whether they are planning for their children's future, or retiring after a long, full life.

On May 22nd, please call your representatives in Congress to repeal this cut in support for our troops. Call in favor of fully funding the VA, schooling for military kids, and fulfilling retirement promises made to veterans of past wars. If you can't get through the first time, try again later. Our goal is to flood the phonelines with polite and respectful advocates who support our troops even when we are at peace.

If you are only able to take part via fax or email, congress.org will help you find and contact your representatives and send a message either way. They will also have the phone numbers of your representatives' local offices if you can't get through to the DC office lines.

To leave a message with the DC office of your representatives, you can call the Capitol Switchboard: (202) 224-3121

Let's keep those Capitol Hill phones busy that Thursday.

Dancin to Dean

The Dean techno mix. No kidding. And it's good.

Click here to download directly.

Corporate Personhood and Silencing of Dissent

Lisa over at Ruminate This is going off about corporate personhood, and the consequences when big corporations decide they want to silence dissent, like what has happened to the Dixie Chicks. And she has some suggestions on what to do about it. Go read, and thanks to tendentious for pointing this out.

The Right's Goals

William Greider has a great piece in The Nation, Rolling Back the 20th Century talking about the goals of the right, and how they are doing in their drive to reach them.

Voting Machines in International Herald Tribune

Britain to Launch Electronic Voting Systems. From the story:

The basic problem in current electronic voting systems, the security experts say, is the lack of an audit trail that would enable all voters to verify for themselves in real time that their vote was recorded as they intended and was counted as they intended.

In addition, they say, there needs to be a publicly available electronic ballot box that can verify that the announced vote total is an accurate tabulation of all the votes cast. This must all be done in a way that maintains the secrecy of each individual's ballot.

About 500 computer technologists in the United States have signed a resolution put forward by Dr. Dill warning that no electronic voting system should be adopted that does not have these protections. A list of the signers and their affiliations is at verify.stanford.edu/EVOTE/endorsements.html.

None of the voting systems that are being used in Britain or elsewhere meet these requirements, Dr. Dill said, though it is technically possible to have such a system using advanced cryptographic techniques.

Jim Adler, the president of VoteHere, a company in Seattle that has provided the software for six of the local elections now under way in Britain, acknowledged that the security protections did not meet the highest standards. "Governments often make usability-security tradeoffs," he said, "and you can see that in the U.K."

In a separate e-mail, he elaborated: "There is no requirement for voters to be able to verify that their vote was `cast as intended' or for election observers to verify that all ballots were `counted as cast.' The technology exists, but the U.K., so far, has not required it."

Mr. Adler, who is in the business of selling electronic voting systems, said: "I applaud the Avi Rubins and Rebecca Mercuris." He said their critiques of current voting systems were correct.

Howard Dean House Parties

I attended two Howard Dean house parties yesterday. Both included conference calls with Gov. Dean. Take a look at The Dean Speech and you'll understand why people are excited about Dean's candidacy for President. He would be a great President AND he can win. I'm heading out for the day so I'll write more later.

The Disappeared

Does anyone know what's up with DailyKos?

Update - They're back.

They Lied

This post over at Daily Kos talks about Bush officials admitting they lied about weapons of mass destruction, because they wanted a war for "a global show of American power and democracy". This Daily Kos post, the stories it links to, and the comments following are not just worthy of a read, they are worthy of telling others to read as well. I just did.

No Sharon Bush Book After All

Over at skimble.

U.S. Reporter Who Protested Iraq War Fired

U.S. Reporter Who Protested Iraq War Fired

tendentious covers this. Go there.

Howard Dean House Parties Tomorrow

This is a little bit short notice, but this story in today's news prompts me to write -- GOP: Dean's Support of Gays Will Hurt Him

WASHINGTON - Supporters of Howard Dean's presidential campaign will be celebrating Saturday's third anniversary of his signing of the nation's only law giving gay partners the same legal rights as married couples.

The loudest cheering, though, might come from Republicans.

Dean, a former Vermont governor, is touting his signing of the civil unions law. His campaign is helping organize more than 50 fund-raisers at the homes of supporters across the country Saturday to celebrate the anniversary, with Dean making conference calls to the guests.

Several of Dean's rivals for the Democratic nomination also are speaking out in support of increased rights and acceptance of gays. But many Republicans say strong support for gays will backfire in the general election and help President Bush (news - web sites) win more conservative and southern states.

Richard White, a Republican state senator from Mississippi, said any candidate talking about gay rights might as well not even visit his state.

"The people down here, they are not going to put up with that kind of stuff," White said. "We're not prepared for all that in Mississippi or anywhere else in the southern states."

Ah yes, the Party of the Confederacy trying to tell us all how to live our lives. Read the article, there's more.

Tomorrow (Saturday) is National House Party Day for Howard Dean, starting several days of events to, as the campaign puts it, "Celebrate the 3rd Anniversary of Governor Dean signing the Vermont Civil Union Law and his stand as a Democratic Presidential candidate for equal rights". House parties are local events in people's houses to bring together supporters and raise funds for the campaign. There are also larger (fundraising) events in Los Angeles, San Francisco and New York during the week. I know that in San Francisco there is a "Greet Dean" rally outside before that event, Tuesday. That's at 6pm in front of the Ferry Building.

Click this to find a house party in your area. Use the pop-up menu next to "City:" to choose the city nearest you.

There is also a Dean for America Students page listing campus events. From the page:
Campus action across the country on April 26th:

Berkeley University. . .Scream for Dean and Ice Cream!
Carleton College. . .BBQ with Live Bluegrass Music
College of Charleston. . .Ben & Jerry’s Ice Cream
University of Chicago. . .Donuts for Dean
Georgia Students for Dean. . .Wild Poster Campaign!
Harvard. . .Posters! Posters! Posters!
University of Houston. . .Scream for Dean and Ice Cream
Lewis and Clark. . .Rock for Dean Concert
University of Pennsylvania. . ."Meet & Greet" with Ben & Jerry’s
Stanford. . .Dean and Ice cream!!!
SUNY Albany. . .Friendly Dinner at Friendly’s Diner
University of Tennessee, Knoxville. . .Cook-out for Dean
Tulane College. . .Liberalpalooza Promo
University of Wisconsin at Madison. . ."Party in the Park" Promo

High Taxes on the Rich are GOOD FOR a Consumer Economy

In a comment to the Gephardt Health Care piece below someone wrote something about Europe giving people health care helps their economy do well "despite" their high tax rates. That set me off. I wrote:

What do you mean Europeans do well "despite" their high taxation?

If you look at our history and compare tax rates with economic growth, you're in for a surprise.

But maybe not a surprise, if you think about us as a consumer economy, and when the tax base is shifted upward the burden of supporting the government is less on the broad mass of consumers, so they are better able to support the consumer economy.

High taxes on the rich are GOOD FOR a consumer economy. Concentration of the wealth at the top is BAD FOR a consumer economy.

AND on top of that, the way they USE the tax dollars is better for the people there. Health care, pensions, etc.

After all, who is our economy FOR?

And one more thing. Taxes don't "take money out of the economy." That's just focus-group crap that sounds good as long as you don't start thinking for yourself. Taxes on the rich put money back into the economy. Here's how: If you tax a rich person, and spend that tax money building a road, what you get is you employ a hundred people and you also get a road.

Maybe a better example is if you tax the rich and use the money build a solar power plant you employ a thousand people, get a source of renewable energy, stop importing so much damn oil from the Middle East, and also stop putting so much damn carbon into the atmosphere! (Tax the rich MORE and use LESS oil! If Bush or Cheney read THAT their heads would explode!)

It's What They DO, Not What They SAY

I left a comment in response to this post over at Daily Kos, discussing why there have been no weapons of mass destruction found in Iraq.

You gotta learn to just ignore what these guys say -- EVERYTHING they say -- and look only at what they DO.

What they SAY is only intended to obscure and confuse. Never mind what they say. If you pay attention to what they say you risk getting lost in the fog and smoke. They are really good at fog and smoke. The ONLY way to learn what these guys are about is to watch what they are doing.

What they DID was invade Iraq, seize the oil fields and the oil ministry - AND NOTHING ELSE.

Bush shows up in New York after 9/11 and promises billions of dollars for reconstruction and for the fire and police departments. It never shows up. Bush says his tax cuts won't cause deficits, as a way of getting Congress to vote to pass the tax cuts. Of course, they caused the biggest deficits in history. Bush does a photo-op at an environmental site, later they cut the funding. Bush talks about being the "Education President" and later cuts funding. Bush talks about patriotism and supporting the troops, then cuts the budget for veterans' benefits. Need I continue? The only relationship between what these guys say and what they do is they say whatever is necessary to trick the public into believing one thing while they do another thing.

Under the Soviet system, people came to realize that they could not trust government sources of news. They learned to look for what was being done. Under Saddam Iraqis learned to trust what they saw instead of what they heard.

By now the pattern is clear. By now we should all be learning not to waste our time and energy refuting their arguments. That's just getting yourself bogged down in the fog and smoke. That's just looking "over there" when they point their finger and shout, "Look over there!" Their "facts" and arguments are just trees. See the forest. The forest is this: they lie. They just lie. They say whatever their polls and focus groups tell them to say. Learn to see only what they do.

Virtual March for Veterans Update

I previously posted about a "Virtual March" to support restoring the funds cut from the Veterans' benefits budget.

The Watch has posted a more detailed piece on the subject and has reset the date to May 22. Please go read.

This is such a great way to show our support for "the troops" where it counts. The chickenhawk Republicans and their propaganda machine crow about their "patriotism" and then turn around and cut veterans' benefits. This is a chance to seize their issue, publicize their hypocrisy AND, most important, to help out the vets.

Dean Calls For Santorum To Step Down

Over at the Dean Call To Action Weblog, Dean says,

Yesterday, I called on President Bush and the Republican Party leadership to condemn Senator Rick Santorum for his deeply offensive remarks comparing homosexuality to bigamy, polygamy, incest and adultery. As additional reports have come to light, revealing a disturbing history of inflammatory, anti-gay rhetoric by Senator Santorum, the deafening silence of President Bush and his party has become inexcusable.

Sen. Santorum has refused to apologize for his repugnant remarks, calling his comments “a legitimate public policy discussion.” Gay-bashing is not a legitimate public policy discussion; it is immoral. Rick Santorum’s failure to recognize that attacking people because of who they are is morally wrong makes him unfit for a leadership position in the United States Senate. Today I call on Rick Santorum to resign from his post as Republican Conference Chairman.

Once again, I call on President Bush to repudiate Sen. Santorum’s remarks. The President of the United States must represent all Americans, regardless of race, gender, class or sexual orientation. In a nation dedicated to equality under the law, everyone must be equal under the law. By refusing to stand up for gay Americans under attack by members of his own party’s leadership, this President sends a message that intolerance and bigotry is acceptable. That is not acceptable.

The next entry below that one has Dean's remarks yesterday on the subject, including:

It is a policy that must end, and it is a policy that will end with a Dean Presidency. This Saturday, April 26th, marks the third anniversary of the signing of the Civil Unions bill in Vermont. I signed that bill because I believe no human being should be treated with less dignity than others simply because that person belongs to a different category or group. I also believe that, as Americans, it is our duty to speak up when others are treated wrongly—especially when others are treated wrongly by a member of the Senate leadership.

Gephardt - Repeal Tax Cuts, Provide Health Insurance

Washington Post: Presidential candidate Dick Gephardt called for completely repealing Bush's tax cuts, and providing a tax credit to pay for employers to provide health care for all employees. In the story is a quote from "an operative from a competing campaign":

"There isn't going to be a single candidate who disagrees with the goal that Gephardt has laid out," said an operative from a competing campaign. "However, by taking money out of the economy, which is what his plan would do, he will be criticized not only by the right, but by some Democrats, and by any economist worth his salt. The debate prior to this point has been about rolling back the unenacted portions of the tax cut, in large part because it is commonly understood by experts that taking money out of the economy in the midst of a downturn would only exacerbate that downturn."

Now let's see if we can guess which competing campaign would exactly quote Bush, saying that "taxes take money out of the economy." Could it be ... LIEBERMAN?

As a matter of fact, the tax CUTS take money out of the economy, causing layoffs of government workers as well as layoff of workers at companies that supply the government, and spending cuts by those laid-off workers in all the places they otherwise spend money, like clothing andgrocery stores, etc. and on like that through the economy while the Bush tax cuts just hand money to idle rich who then put the money in offshore accounts. On the other hand, this health care plan, paid for by repealing the tax cuts, would put $200 billion a year INTO the economy. I wonder if "any economist worth 'his' salt" -- and maybe some female economists as well -- would disagree with that?

From the story,

The Gephardt campaign asked Kenneth A. Thorpe, chairman of the health policy and management department at Emory University -- and a former Clinton White House adviser -- to do an analysis of the proposal. Thorpe concluded that the plan would cost about $214 billion a year and cover about 30 million of the nation's 41 million uninsured, resulting in about 97 percent of the population being insured.

Not quite universal health coverage, but a big step.

Virtual March To Support Veterans

The Watch is leading a "Virtual March" May 1 to restore funding for Veterans' benefits recently cut by Congress.

Tell the government that if they're going to wrap their agenda in some kind of concern for people in uniform, they better show some serious concern for people in uniform.

This is such a great idea I hope that you'll tell everyone about this, send e-mails, etc, asking people to phone their representatives on May 1, demanding restoration of full veterans' benefits!

Sweet'N Evil

pseudorandom asks if the sugar industry is evil.

Blatant Corruption

Over at Open Secrets you can see how all of the companies invited to bid on Iraq building contracts are major Republican Party donors. Companies were not even allowed to bid on projects if they were not big donors, and everything was done in secret! This is blatant corruption! This is blatant abuse of office. It is right out there in our faces, saying "you can't do anything about it so shut up!" And how come I have not heard every single Democrat screaming their lungs out about this?

I wrote about this the other day, but it is just so bad, so blatant and so corrupt that I want to write about it again. I am restraining myself from using bold and italics. Thanks to Bitter Shack of Resentment for making me angry all over again.

How Did I Miss This?

How did I miss this from April 9 when I read Ruminate This almost every day? Must have been something big going on the last few weeks... Go see for yourself what I'm talking about.

Thom Hartmann On The Radio

Thom's show starts today and I'm listening right now. You can listen over the internet! Go to ieamericaradio.com and click where it says "Listen Live" over on the left. You can also listen to Peter Werbe and Mike Malloy.

Seeing the Forest has pointed to a number of articles by Thom Hartmann.

Luntzspeak.com

Luntzspeak.com

Voting Machines

Voting Machines, at Slashdot. (Good, if you know what Slashdot is and how it works. Otherwise ... ?)

'A Chill Wind is Blowing in This Nation...'

For anyone who hasn't yet read this -- please go read it. 'A Chill Wind is Blowing in This Nation...', Transcript of the speech given by actor Tim Robbins to the National Press Club in Washington, D.C., on April 15, 2003. Here is an excerpt:

A chill wind is blowing in this nation. A message is being sent through the White House and its allies in talk radio and Clear Channel and Cooperstown. If you oppose this administration, there can and will be ramifications.

Every day, the air waves are filled with warnings, veiled and unveiled threats, spewed invective and hatred directed at any voice of dissent. And the public, like so many relatives and friends that I saw this weekend, sit in mute opposition and fear.

And look at the great photo, too.

I post this as much for you have a handy source for the speech, and can forward it to others, as for you to read it yourself. (Like The Dean Speech that I posted a source for previously.) Things that others should read. Things that can move people to think about making a difference. Things you should be passing around, as a way of making a difference yourself. As Robbins says later in his speech, "A bully can be stopped, and so can a mob. It takes one person with the courage and a resolute voice."

What I'm saying here is, Go be that voice!

Good One at Bartcop

There's a good one over at Bartcop.

An Amplifier Of Our Own

Michael Finley's weblog worldgonewrong amplifies on something I wrote recently about the need for a "left wing" Message Amplification Infrastructure to counteract the "Wurlitzer" of the right. (I wrote something here as well.) Also, the watch weblog addresses a related issue a the piece titled Framing the Message. Please read these two pieces. Ruminate This and Wealth Bondage have also written repeatedly on this subject. (Bloggers -- Please let me know if I missed you and I'll add you to this list.) (Update - Digby at Hullabaloo was writing this while I was woprking on the piece you are reading.)

I am glad to see more weblogs writing about this issue of forming an organization that works to move people toward a more progressive perspective. It is so important to spread the word, and get people talking about the need for this. If you look at why the right has become so powerful and successful you see that they have a well-coordinated and well-funded web of organizations that pump out carefully crafted, coordinated right-wing propaganda to the masses, following long-term strategies, slowly moving public attitudes to the right, thereby generating UNDERLYING SUPPORT for their overall ideology. This is not about just PR and advertising for particular current issues, this is about the long-term ever-ongoing push of their overall ideological framework -- slowly pushing the public ever onward to the right with a steady drip, drip, drip of messaging. The messages are pounded out day after day, through books, magazine articles, talking points read by talk show hosts, TV pundits, newspaper commentaries, and many other outlets. The resulting shift of general underlying public attitudes then translates into ready-to-go support for their issues, their organizations, and finally, into votes for their politicians. THIS is how they have done it, and this is how we can do it, too.

The solution - the way to win our country back - is to develop an infrastructure of our own that works to change underlying public attitudes in a general way, thereby supplying support that strengthens and reinforces progressive and moderate organizations, issues, and leaders in general.

Here's a brief description of the goal of the Commonweal Institute, that I sent to someone just this morning:

Commonweal is a think tank/communications organization that will work to bring positive progressive/moderate messages to the broad general public, working to change underlying attitudes. Think of Commonweal as a Heritage Foundation of the left.

Commonweal will generate ongoing, long-term, thing-tank-based, strategic messaging specially developed for specific target audiences using metaphorical analysis, linguistic translation, aimed at changing underlying attitudes of the general public.

Commonweal is an organization working to help the public understand and support progressive and moderate positions in general, bringing them back from the right, and thereby bringing support for our (moderates and progressives) organizations, issues and leaders. This is the component that is missing from "our side's" approach to reaching our goals. This is "infrastructure" because this general issue work, directed at moving the general public away from the right in general, will underlie and support the work of all kinds of other organizations and leaders. And these organizations and leaders will be able to use the work of Commonweal, getting talking points and other messaging that has been developed by messaging and communication experts. To put it in a simpler way - if that rumored liberal talk-radio network gets started, Commonweal will give them things to say that is put together in ways that resonate with the general public.

Take a look at the credentials of the communications specialists on Commonweal's advisory board. Specifically, people like George Lakoff, Laurie Dorfman, Efrain Fuentes, Celinda Lake, Harvey Gotliffe, Geoffrey Nunberg, Paul Ray, Brooke Warrick, David Zucker, and Joan Blades. This will help you understand the nature of what they mean by "communications organization." (The Framing the Message piece over at the watch discusses the works of George Lakoff.)

Here's the endorsement Commonweal Institute recently received from House Democratic Leader Rep. Nancy Pelosi:

"In these challenging times, we need an advocacy think tank like Commonweal Institute to communicate our principles and programs in ways that will resonate with the broad public and empower citizens to take a more active role in our democracy. Commonweal takes a strategic approach to advancing issues in a way that will help decision-makers be proactive in confronting the challenges of the future."

From Jim Hightower:

"It's always good to put your brain in gear before you put your mouth in motion. The folks at the Commonweal Institute do the heavy mental lifting so agitators like me can arm ourselves on the front lines of the ideological battles taking place every day in America. For too long progressives have walked fearful of their shadows, whimpering and whining about what's wrong and fighting amongst themselves over crumbs. With the help of the Commonweal Institute, that time is over."

Congressman Mike Honda:

"Moderate and progressive members of Congress need a substantial resource that can develop public support for our whole range of issues in a timely fashion, and defend our gains from right wing attacks. The Commonweal Institute is positioned to be that organization. I hope to see them grow quickly."

Former U.S. Secretary of Labor Robert B. Reich

"America needs a true marketplace of ideas, not a one-sided monologue by the right. At a time when airwaves and emails are filled with conservative voices, the Commonweal Institute is more important than ever."

Imagine a public environment where people trying to bring environmental or peace issues to the public's attention, or running for office, don't have to start from scratch explaining why it is good to support strengthening community, protecting the environment, helping the poor, etc.! Imagine if each of us didn't have to constantly be on the defensive, fighting the widespread ideological nonsense spouted by Rush Limbaugh, before we even get a chance to start talking about what we believe in. Wouldn't it be nice to have an organization doing that for you? Working in the background to improve the public's attitudes about progressive/moderate ideals? Wouldn't it be nice to be able to be PROUD to say you're a "liberal" or a "moderate" or a "lefty?" It isn't up to the Democrats or the Greens or moderate Republicans to change people's underlying attitudes - politicians RESPOND to the public, and it is a mistake to blame them for what is going on or rely on them to fix it.

Here is what I am trying to say today. This "infrastructure" concept is the solution that I have come to believe is the answer to the problems we face, and I think that anyone engaging in a comprehensive analysis of what is going on will also come to this conclusion. But this is a somewhat complicated issue, and it seems to take some time to understand. As more of us discuss what is going on and how the right has moved the public over time, and talk about the need for this approach, more people understand what we're saying and come to agree. And different and better ways to explain the concept will surface.

Bloggers - please write about this. People - please talk to people about this. Funders - please fund this. It may be the most worthy cause.

President Dean

Presidential Candidate Howard Dean has a piece over at Common Dreams today, Bush: It's Not Just His Doctrine That's Wrong. Here's how it begins:

When Congress approved the President’s authorization to go to war in Iraq – no matter how well-intentioned – it was giving the green light to the President to set his Doctrine of preemptive war in motion. It now appears that Iraq was just the first step. Already, the Bush Administration is apparently eyeing Syria and Iran as the next countries on its target list. The Bush Doctrine must be stopped here.

Go read more.

And here's where to find his official weblog.

Look Busy

Over at Liberal Oasis, Look Busy.

Only Donors To The Party Need Apply

The construction contracts for "rebuilding Iraq" are being awarded a special way. A company is not even allowed to bid on a project unless invited.

According to the Centre for Responsive Politics, the invited bidders together contributed almost $3.6m during the current election cycle, mostly to the Republicans. The amounts, though individually not large, are part of the process of ensuring a seat at the table, said Charles Tiefer, professor of law at Baltimore University and an expert in government contracting.

The process of ensuring a seat at the table -- money to The Party.

The Republican Crony Club. This is flat-out, blatant, in-your-face corruption -- and if you complain you are branded as a traitor to the country. And there is nothing you can do about it; there is no one but Party cronies in any kind of position to investigate this sort of thing. This should be spoken of by every single progressive elected official until every member of the public is informed! The right did that under the direction of Newt Gingrich. But look where that got them.

Redlining America

There is a good piece over at Black Commentator, exploring the possible economic consequences of Bush alienating the world.

Only a fool would not assume that last weekend's St. Petersburg summit of Germany, France and Russia was not consumed with the nuts and bolts of erecting defenses against American geopolitical aggression. And only foolish heads of state would admit it. Every actor in each emerging or mature economy is compelled to pursue alternatives to doing business with America, the rogue state that recognizes no rules but its own declarations. China's economy has surpassed Japan's and remains a command system, able to move as a body to favor or disfavor the United States if her political will is tested.

The redlining of the U.S. has begun. Like the banker who smiles broadly as he denies that such a thing as redlining exists, then offers his card and his sincerest Good Luck, the world can simply pretend that nothing hostile to U.S. interests is occurring. The effect will be as devastating as redlining the ghetto, a place that is depressed because nothing good happens there.

Was The Museum Looting Planned?

Take a look at this story in London's [Correction - Glasgow's] Sunday Herald, from April 6, US accused of plans to loot Iraqi antiques. (Hint - the museum was looted after April 6.) There is a reason that Mike Malloy, on his radio show, talks about "The Bush Crime Family". From the Sunday Herald story:

FEARS that Iraq's heritage will face widespread looting at the end of the Gulf war have been heightened after a group of wealthy art dealers secured a high-level meeting with the US administration.
It has emerged that a coalition of antiquities collectors and arts lawyers, calling itself the American Council for Cultural Policy (ACCP), met with US defence and state department officials prior to the start of military action to offer its assistance in preserving the country's invaluable archaeological collections.

The group is known to consist of a number of influential dealers who favour a relaxation of Iraq's tight restrictions on the ownership and export of antiquities. Its treasurer, William Pearlstein, has described Iraq's laws as 'retentionist' and has said he would support a post-war government that would make it easier to have antiquities dispersed to the US.
...
News of the group's meeting with the government has alarmed scientists and archaeologists who fear the ACCP is working to a hidden agenda that will see the US authorities ease restrictions on the movement of Iraqi artefacts after a coalition victory in Iraq.

Now, combine that report with this, from CNN:

They now believe, because of some of the evidence that they have found, that some of the items were taken [by art and cultural] professionals. Among other things they found were glass cutters that they said are not sold in Iraq. They are looking into that.

Keep in mind that the Pentagon was fully aware of the need to protect these treasures, and had promised to do so.

"I thought I was given assurances that sites and museums would be protected," Gibson said. Instead, even with U.S. forces firmly in control of Baghdad last week, looters breached the museum, trashed its galleries, burned its records, invaded its vaults and smashed or carried off thousands of artifacts dating from the founding of ancient Sumer around 3,500 B.C. to the end of Islam's Abbasid Caliphate in 1258 A.D.

So, they promised to protect the museum, but when the looting was happening they instead refused. Meanwhile professionals from outside Iraq were ready to enter the museum and take what they wanted.

Does this sound like the looting of the museum was planned and coordinated with Bush officials? Would this really be a surprise?

Thanks to Cursor, and especially, pfaffenBlog. Please go read pfaffenBlog's much more thorough look at this!

Thursday Update - San Jose Mercury News, Experts: Looters Had Keys to Iraqi Vaults:

"It looks as if part of the looting was a deliberate planned action," said McGuire Gibson, a University of Chicago professor and president of the American Association for Research in Baghdad. "They were able to take keys for vaults and were able to take out important Mesopotamian materials put in safes."
...
"I have a suspicion it was organized outside the country, in fact I'm pretty sure it was," said Gibson. He added that if a good police team was put together, "I think it could be cracked in no time."

It really looks like there's something to this! One problem, however, where the guy says, "if a good police team was put together" -- fat chance the Bush administration will want to investigate.

skimble

I love visiting skimble. Always good stuff there.

Who's Your Daddy?

I think "Who's Your Daddy?" is a great name for a weblog. tendentious says it's "relentlessly stupid!"

Who is right? Leave a comment.

Update - he informs me he meant that I am "relentlessly stupid!" Leave a comment.

The Wurlizter

Go read about the Wurlitzer at worldgonewrong.

SARS Deaths - Uh Oh

I have been reading this report over at The Agonist. It looks like the SARS death rate is higher than we have been thinking. To sum up -- we have ben comparing the total number of reported cases to the current number of deaths. The problem is that a SARS case shows up and is reported 1-3 weeks before death, so we really should be comparing the number of deaths with the number of cases reported 1-3 week previous. To understand this, hypothetically suppose the number of deaths is 100 and the number of reported cases is 2000. That makes it appear that the death rate is 5%. But if these 100 deaths represent 1000 SARS cases 2 weeks back, then the death rate is really 10%. Go read the report.

Update, from the report:

Close personal contact or being directly in front of a person with SARS, who is coughing or sneezing, is likely the most common way that SARS spreads. SARS can likely be transmitted by other means, and these are under investigation.

"Coronavirus, when it causes the common cold, is most commonly transmitted by hand," said Dr David Heymann, of the World Health Organisation.

Worries about airborne transmission seem unfounded. Droplet spread is more likely, with fomite spread (transfer by objects) being possible.

There is an interesting current theory about the ‘Amoy Gardens apartment complex’ cluster of cases. The speculation is that feces (containing coronavirus particles) leaked from a broken sewage pipe, causing puddles. The victims walked through the puddles, to their apartments. When they got home, they took off the shoes (contaminating their hands) and then ate or touched their eyes, noses, or mouths before washing their hands.

Wash your hands, a lot!

Wash your hands, a lot! Start making it a habit now.

Repeal the 22nd Amendment

Something else I was going to write about -- the Republicans have introduced a resolution to repeal the 22nd Amendment to the Constitution. This is the amendment that limits Presidents to two terms. (Think Clinton in 04.) But I see that Blah3 is covering this, so go take a look. (Scroll to "While you weren't looking....")

Preventative War to Prevent Just What Exactly?

I was going to write about the term "preventative war" when there really was nothing we were preventing. Iraq's military obviously was not a serious threat to anyone. (The administration knew this, saying in advance that conquering Iraq would be a "cakewalk.") Iraq obviously did not use chemical or biological weapons during the war. And so far not so much as a small canister of tear gas has been found. So what were we preventing that justifies calling this a "preventative" war?

I was going to write about this, until I came across this transcript of a Washington Post online question and answer session with Mel Goodman, Senior Fellow, Center for International Policy covering the same subject and saying so well what I have been thinking. So I suggest taking a look.

I just heard President Liar on the radio saying, "Iraq was a haven for terrorists, with an arsenal of weapons that threatened the world." Oh really?

Just an Arm of the Republican Party

From this story in today's San Jose Mercury News:

KUWAIT - To understand the philosophy of Jay Garner, the retired American general charged with rebuilding Iraq, look to Vietnam.

If the United States had fought the Vietnam War the way it fought the conflict in Iraq, Garner says, America would have won.

``They should have taken the war north . . . instead of waiting for it to come south,'' the former three-star general said Monday. ``If Bush had been president then, we'd have won Vietnam.''

I wonder about the appropriateness of such a blatant partisan political statement. (Never mind that we dropped more bombs on North VietNam than all of Europe in WWII, and never mind the threat of war with the Soviet Union...)

The Goldman Environmental Prize

I attended the Goldman Environmental Prize ceremony last night in San Francisco. I was planning to write about it when I got home last night, but it was late and I was, frankly, somewhat inebriated.

From the Goldman Prize website: "The Goldman Environmental Prize is given each year to six environmental heroes - one from each of six continental regions: Africa, Asia, Europe, Island Nations, North America and South/Central America." Think of it as the Nobel Prize for environmental achievement.

It was an impressive ceremony in San Francisco's War Memorial Opera House, followed by a reception at City Hall. (Yes, Mayor Willie Brown does wear very, very nice suits.) I have to tell you that I never before been to a reception where the people ran out before the food and bar. The smoked salmon didn't even run out!

The ceremony was hosted by a previous Goldman Prize winner, Jane Akre. If you follow that link and read some of the stories you will learn that she was an investigative reporter fired by Fox TV for refusing to read a script that contained intentional falsehoods favorable to Monsanto Corp. A Fox network attorney had placed false information in a story about bovine growth hormone, or BGH, manufactured by Monsanto. The initial report by Akre said that medical experts had found a number of potential problems from the use of this genetially-engineered product. The report that aired said that BGH was the most-tested product in history. Akre refused to read this script. Initially she was offered a six-figure payoff to keep her mouth shut. (Remember that -- reporters are offered six-figure payoffs to lie about corporations.) She refused and was fired. She sued, won, but recently lost on appeal. The appeals court ruled that it is OK for Fox to intentionally mislead their viewers. (Remember that, too.) A short video explaining what happened to her is available here, scroll down and click on her name in the 2001 video clips.

Nancy Pelosi talked for a bit. She is a very impressive and pleasant person.

Please visit the website to read about this year's six winners and why they won. (Click on each of the six photos.) Also go here to see short videos about each. They are quite an impressive group of people. I'll write a bit about the American Prize winner Julia Bonds, who is fighting to stop mountaintop removal coal mining. Mountaintop removal is just that - they take the entire top off of a mountain. The waste (all of the mountain that is not coal) fills up what had been valleys and streams, ruining the local water. All of this done by a bullying big corporation that pushes everyone around, forces them to move from their homes, and pays off local politicians. From a press release describing her achievement:

In 2001, Bonds and her family became the last residents to evacuate from her own hometown of Marfork Hollow where six generations of her family had lived. Marfork had been virtually destroyed by mountaintop removal mining, which involves completely blasting off the tops of mountains so that huge machines can mine thin seams of coal. Mountaintop removal mining completely annihilates streams and forests, and causes extensive flooding and blasting damage to homes. The pollution from mining and the toxic chemicals used in the preparation of coal for market have been linked to rising asthma rates and other serious respiratory ailments, particularly among children, including Bonds’ grandson. Residents who live near the mining blast zones also suffer from traumatic stress. Slurry dams thick with heavy metals such as arsenic, mercury and lead routinely overflow into watersheds, contaminate drinking water and drive toxic sludge into residents’ backyards. As a result, thousands of local residents have been driven out of their homes.

Mountaintop removal mining has also been catastrophic for Appalachia’s waterways. Coal companies routinely dump the tons of mountaintop debris into nearby valleys and streams. Today, more than 1,000 miles of Appalachian headwater streams have been completely buried and 300,000 acres of the world’s most diverse temperate hardwood forests have been obliterated by so-called “valley fill.”

Bonds, who previously had worked as a waitress and manager at Pizza Hut and for convenience stores, now devotes 90 hours a week to protect Appalachia and the people who live there from the ravages of mountaintop removal mining. The catalyst for her activism, she says, was the day her grandson stood in a stream in Coal River Valley with his fists full of dead fish and asked, “What’s wrong with these fish?”

Since then, her dedication and success as an activist and organizer have made her one of the nation’s leading community activists confronting an industry practice that has been called “strip mining on steroids.”

Bonds’ primary nemesis is Massey Energy, the nation’s fifth largest coal producer and the company responsible for the destruction of Marfork and many other Appalachian towns. Richmond, Virginia-based Massey, has one of the worst environmental and safety records in the country. In 2000, it was responsible for the worst environmental disaster in Southeastern history when a slurry spill released over 250 million gallons of coal sludge in Martin County, Kentucky. Massey currently runs numerous mountaintop removal strip mines throughout Appalachia and holds a number of pending permits to mine along the Coal River Valley.

Operating from a small storefront on a shoestring budget, Bonds has scored a number of important victories despite enormous industry opposition. Foremost among them is the critical partnership she forged with the United Mine Workers Union over overweight coal trucks. Coal trucks routinely bearing twice the legal load barrel down narrow, steep highways and through towns, endangering drivers, beating up the roads and cracking house foundations. The monster trucks have been responsible for fourteen deaths in the past two years, including a brother and sister who were crushed to death when a coal truck forced their vehicle into another oncoming truck. Thanks to the mineworkers’ union and community pressure, Bonds and other activists filled a lawsuit against coal operators that will force companies to haul safe and legal loads. Bonds is currently working with activists to launch a national grassroots campaign that asks people to write postcards to the governor of West Virginia pledging that they will not visit the state until outsized coal trucks are banned.

In a testament to her vigilant monitoring of mining-related violations and advocacy efforts, Bonds has also been instrumental in winning important concessions from the State Mining Board, which recently imposed a 30-day suspension on a polluting Massey mine and set tougher protections for local communities against mine blasting.

These victories have come at a price to her personal safety. Bonds routinely receives threatening, anonymous phone calls that intensify whenever she plans a protest. She and other activists have been threatened by armed security guards on Massey’s payroll when they show visitors, including journalists, sites that have been devastated by mining.

As Massey pours hundreds of thousands of dollars into an ad campaign to whitewash its image in mining country, Bonds is organizing faith groups and local activists to picket Massey’s annual stockholders meeting set for mid-April. In an attempt to avoid the public outcry about their operations, Massey refuses to divulge the location or date of their shareholder meeting until the last moment. Bonds is also pushing for public hearings about the Bush Administration’s final Environmental Impact Statement on mountaintop removal mining. Because of the involvement of Steven Griles, a former mining industry lobbyist turned second in command at the Department of Interior, activists doubt the statement will paint an accurate portrait of the real threats and costs of mountaintop removal.

Bonds is also galvanizing grassroots response to the Fourth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruling on mountaintop removal, which was issued on January 29, 2003. The ruling, based on an appeal brought by the Bush Administration, overturned a landmark federal court ruling that banned mountaintop removal mining on the grounds that it violates the Clean Water Act. Since the new ruling, West Virginia has been bombarded with new mountaintop removal mining permits. Bonds and other local citizens are fighting these permits in the courts.

Bonds is fighting the Bush administration on a number of fronts as President Bush continues to support a national energy plan that is far too reliant on continued coal production. His victory in the presidential elections was due in part to his upset in West Virginia, which has been credited to the efforts of James H. Harless, a local timber and coal magnate who was awarded a spot on Bush’s transition task force on energy and who now sits on Massey’s board of directors.

"Julia is lifting up a region of the U.S. often forgotten by the rest of the country," said Carolyn Johnson, staff director of the Citizens Coal Council. "Julia has figured out a way to communicate the message of what's happening to this area. She brings in politicians and other activists to see the effects of mountaintop removal mining. Julia knows the risks of doing this work; she's constantly threatened. But she knows that she is giving people living in the coalfields voice and power nationwide."

“When powerful people pursue profits at the expense of human rights and our environment, they have failed as leaders,” Bonds has said. “Responsible citizens must step forward, not just to point the way, but to lead he way to a better world.”

Julia Bonds gave a powerful acceptance speech. She is an excellent speaker. I hope that she runs for the Senate. Sen. Byrd is very old and is likely to retire. She was a waitress and she should be a Senator. Julia Bonds is clearly the right person for that job!

The Liar President II

Just came across this, U.S. Cold Shoulder Likely for Iraq War Opponents, which contains this:

A day after the younger Bush and Canadian Prime Minister Jean Chretien put off a planned May 5 meeting in Canada -- citing the demands of Iraq and denying tensions over Canada's opposition to the war -- the White House said the president would host "strong ally and close friend" Prime Minister John Howard of Australia at his Texas ranch May 2-3.

The liar.

The Liar President

Liar, Liar, over at The American Prospect. Excerpt:

It is no exaggeration to say that lying has become Bush's signature as president.

The pattern is now well established. Soothing rhetoric -- about compassionate conservatism, about how much money the "average" American worker will get through the White House tax program, about prescription-drug benefits -- is simply at odds with what Bush's policies actually do. Last month Bush promised to enhance Medicaid; his actual policy would effectively end it as a federal entitlement program.

More distressing even than the president's lies, though, is the public's apparent passivity. Bush just seems to get away with it. The post-September 11 effect and the Iraq war distract attention, but there's more to it. Are we finally paying the price for three decades of steadily eroding democracy? Is Bush benefiting from the echo chamber of a right-wing press that repeats the White House line until it starts sounding like the truth? Or does the complicity of the press help to lull the public and reinforce the president's lies?

One thing is clear: If a Democrat, say, Bill Clinton, engaged in Bush-scale dishonesty, the press would be all over him. In the spirit of rekindling public outrage, here are just some of the president's lies.

Gotta go read it to see what they say about the particulars.

Nation As Person Metaphore

Please read Metaphor and War, Again, By George Lakoff

Syria Next

Yes, Syria really does appear to be next.

The Secret Cheney Energy Task Force

A question -- was the secret Cheney Energy Task Force a planning session for the invasion of Iraq? Were the invited corporations placing orders for particular buildings,bridges, etc. to be destroyed by bombing, and was Cheney parceling out rebuilding contracts in exchange for campaign donations or other compensation?

Badges?

From this NY Times story (for the next 30 days, then you're on your own) U.S. May Have to Allow Others to Inspect Iraqi Arms:

But they added that the White House, which has resisted help from the United Nations in the search for weapons, may decide to ignore such legalities.

The Bush Doctrine, stated simply: "Badges? We ain't got no badges. We don't need no badges. I don't have to show you any stinking badges!"

Tikrit

How many of you have been following Back-in-Iraq 2.0? I've been reading about Tikrit:

The fact of the matter is that Tikrit is “hot” as the journos here say. It is not “fine” as I thought it might be from CNN’s early footage. A Kurdish journalist and his crew that I’ve become friendly with were chased by men in black in black sedans later in the afternoon when they got within a few kilometers of the entrance of the city. Fedayeen. From Mustafa’s description of his pursuers, they sound like James Bond villains.

James Bond villains.

Keep In Mind

Keep in mind that Iran attacked Iraq with gas during their war, and Iraq borders Iran and they remain hostile. Because of this gas masks and decontamination gear would necessarily be standard equipment for Iraq's military. When you read about discoveries of Iraqi gas masks, decontamination facilities and other precautions it does not necessarily follow that Iraq was preparing to use gas.

I am not saying that Iraq did or did not have these weapons, I am pointing out that discoveries of chemical weapons gear does not necessarily mean they had or were going to use these weapons. Our forces also had gas masks and protective gear.