connecting*the*dots

(brilliance uploaded by xylonets)

Remember, indeed.

(originally uploaded by squacco)

Steve Gilliard:

[…]

“The torture bill is a cruel joke, so riddle with flaws, so unconstitutional, it won’t survive the District Court — which is the calculation Dems in tight races made.

[…]

We cannot give them a pass. We cannot just say that’s the GOP. Because if some Democrats played politics, it is the Republicans who betrayed the constitution. It is far too easy to write off their duty to the nation based on politics. Oh, well, they’re wingnuts. No, they are elected to defend the constitution, not the Republican party. And in that, they have betrayed this country and it’s ideals.”

[…]

And Republicans, somehow, will find a way to use those very same Democratic votes in campaign ads next month against Democrats.

Politics is a no win game; the dice are always loaded.

With that being reality, here’s a clue for Democrats: as the opposition party, your role is to oppose (especially in this case), not to straddle the line of insanity in order to gather the just-right-of-moderate votes.

God forbid if the Judiciary is rigged and this unconstitutional, un-American garbage goes through…

the show with zefrank

Another milestone in Iraq has come and gone. As of yesterday, America’s occupation in Iraq has officially eclipsed the length of time America spent in World War II.

No matter your personal view on the potential of terrorist tactics, we’re not at war to stop an advancing fascist or an existing genocide dead in its tracks (such as modern-day fascist Kim Jong-il of North Korea or the current genocide in Darfur).

There’s only one similarity between WWII and the occupation of Iraq; in both cases, it took an attack on US soil to rally and motivate the American public to back entering an armed conflict. Of course, the attack on Pearl Harbor directly emanated from the ongoing conflict of WWII, whereas the emotional ties between the events of 9/11 and the perception of Iraqi leadership remain simply that — emotional.

Iraq has never been an immediate threat to our nation; no weapons of mass destruction ever threatened our safety from afar. Could that situation have changed for the worse over time? Sure, but so could any number of scenarios in the world, which is exactly why the tactic of preventive war is considered state-sponsored terrorism in many people’s eyes.

Fact: The combined death toll from all major, classically defined terrorist activities over the past twenty years pales in comparison to the loss of life at the hands of the Nazi fascist state.

This administration twisted false stories of Iraq hunting for yellow cake in Niger into a narrative that fit our administration’s desire to go to war in Iraq and delivered this false case to Congress to justify an invasion.

In a post-9/11 America still freshly licking its wounds, we all should have known what would happen within our political arena:

Who Lied To Whom?: …”Two days later, Secretary of State Colin Powell, appearing before a closed hearing of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, also cited Iraq’s attempt to obtain uranium from Niger as evidence of its persistent nuclear ambitions. The testimony from Tenet and Powell helped to mollify the Democrats, and two weeks later the resolution passed overwhelmingly, giving the President a congressional mandate for a military assault on Iraq.”…

When that cover was blown by, well, reality, our government simply began to whisper false ties to 9/11 to go after a client-state that refused to play nice anymore, all beginning with its 1991 invasion of Kuwait.

What we have “accomplished” in Iraq since the occupation began in 2003 is quite amazing, actually. A Shi’ite majority has now been voted into power — something that no US planner would have hoped for, but constitutes a perfect example of what democracy at the end of the barrel of a M-16 will get you.

Essentially, we’ve backed the formation of a government and a constitution that leans in the opposite direction from modernity and strengthened the potential for a collaborative, radical mid-east region, at the cost of more than 2 billion dollars per week, while losing close to 3,000 US patriots and killing at least 50,000 Iraqi civilians.

One can only imagine how that loss of life is going to be avenged.

Red state / blue state political maps now have a behavioral map to further support the simplistic notions of a two-party system!

Don’t get me wrong, I find the visceral imprint of this study from the school of information at the University of Michigan at Ann Arbor fascinating, but I’m hoping that as we further our attempts to understand one another through similar human behavior studies using our interactions on the web, we’ll look to use less obvious attributes than political party affiliations as a control.

The time to resign would be right now.

Pelosi move triggers revolt
by Josephine Hearn

[…]

Jefferson has been the subject of a wide-ranging bribery investigation by the Department of Justice. Pelosi’s call for his ouster came several days after a newly filed court document offered more details on Jefferson’s alleged acceptance of $100,000 from an FBI informant in a sting operation. Days after that purported exchange, the document said, the FBI found $90,000 in Jefferson’s freezer.

The search of his Capitol Hill office has prompted a storm of criticism from congressional leaders from both parties, including Pelosi, who charged that the executive branch had overstepped the constitutional doctrine of separation of powers.

Yesterday’s CBC meeting with Jefferson was well-attended, drawing nearly all of the caucus’s heavyweights — Ways and Means ranking Democrat Charles Rangel (N.Y.), Judiciary Committee ranking Democrat John Conyers (Mich.) and Democratic Caucus Chairman James Clyburn (S.C.).

Most lawmakers would not comment afterwards, but a CBC aide summed up some members’ frustration, saying, “Congresswoman Pelosi, by preemption without any legal justification, has now created a new precedent for how members are going to be treated. Unfortunately, she’s chosen to single out an African-American for this honor.�

Then the aide added an electoral threat, saying, “The African-American community, which overwhelmingly backs the Democratic Party, will not take this lightly. I hope she enjoys being minority leader.�

[…]

Dude got caught on tape accepting a bribe, the feds then found $90k in his freezer and the numbers on the bills exactly matched the bribe money.

What’s he trying to pull, an Eddie Murphy, “It wasn’t me” act?

The CBC’s reputation has never been good. Whether such a rep is deserving or not, their position in this matter isn’t going to help them at all. What a bunch of schmucks.

UPDATE: zefrank’s position on this mess is actually quite enlightening. Yes, he does think, so I don’t have to.

Chickenhawk bitch

Peter Beinart
‘NY Times’ Sunday Preview:
Democrats Need a Shot of ‘Cold War Liberalism’

NEW YORK Democrats may feel they are riding high, heading into the midterm elections with President Bush’s approval rating at an all-time low, but Peter Beinart offers a warning, and a new direction, for the party in a feature piece upcoming this Sunday in The New York Times Magazine. It’s titled provocatively, “The Rehabilitation of the Cold-War Liberal.�

The article is adapted from his forthcoming book, “The Good Fight.� Beinart is currently editor-at-large for The New Republic.

Beinart warns that it is not enough for the Democrats to simply run on “competence� this year, rather than telling Americans “what their vision is.� For better or worse, the Republicans have such a vision, which voters understand: “America represents good in an epic struggle against evil.�

Democrats have some good foreign-policy minds and even some worthy foreign-policy proposals but no “coherent story about the post-9/11 world….Before Democrats can conquer their ideological weakness, they must first conquer their ideological amnesia,â€? he declares.

The problem is, “Liberals don’t have a script because they don’t have a Reagan.� Their most recent presidents: Jimmy Çarter, considered a “failure� in the international field, and Bill Clinton, who allegedly didn’t have to do much because foreign policy was “peripheral� when he was in charge. (Beinart does not mention that Clinton at least ignored pleas to invade and occupy Iraq.)

While conservatives have “at least told a coherent political story, with deep historical roots, about what keeps America safe and what makes it great,” liberals “have offered adjectives drawn from focus groups and policy proposals linked by no larger theme.”

So what are the Dems to do? According to Beinart, they should look back to the late 1940s and 1950s and embrace the cold war liberalism of the time, best represented by Reinhold Niebuhr and George F. Kennan.

Besides being tough and anti-isolationist, this is defined by “a struggle not merely for democracy but for economic opportunity as well, in the belief that the former required the latter to survived.â€? It also requires admitting that even in fighting evil America must admit that we are not “inherently good.” He also calls for “generosity at homeâ€? as well as “generosity abroad.â€?

But how all this differs from current Democratic philosophy is hard to discern.

Themes? Stories? Vision?

I’m sorry, but I don’t want any of that politics-as-usual crap from the Democratic Party. I want agile leadership, stocked with backbone and the ability to shift on the fly.

And for this guy to wax poetic about the Republicans owning the concept, “America represents good in an epic struggle against evilâ€? shows how out of touch he is with the American voters, because ever since the Bush administration took office, even Republicans have been questioning this… narrative.

Keep on telling stories, bitches.

In the meantime, I’ll take a leader who listens to his/her constituency, will pull out a mirror and ask the tough questions of us as a republic and is willing to make sacrifices for the benefit of our already impoverished unborn grandchildren any day of the week.

Make that “Bush Lied, People Died Again“…

I knew this fucker was lying the moment he opened his mouth. Now that there is fucking evidence, the only question remaining is what bullshit line are we going to swallow so that more people — whether here or around the world — are going to become D-E-A-D because of this motherfucking slimeball?

I apologize for the profanity, but I’m beyond words…

If you care *one iota* about your neighbors — from the family living next door, to the families under the scope in Iraq, to the families who faithfully serve our nation, to the families who might be next somewhere around the world — go to the polls and vote Democratic in this year’s mid-term Congressional elections.

For those of you who are frustrated with politics and think it won’t matter or that you don’t have a voice, I have one thing to tell you: you’re *wrong*. The only way Bush will be impeached is if the Democrats regain a majority in one branch of the government. If they do, his ass is as good as gone.

I’m *not* a Democrat, but this is a means to an end.

Vote or Die! For real.

(via blather through The Village Voice)

This “Boycott MSNBC” meme being promoted by the “Open Letter To Chris Matthews” blog and pushed by big-time, left bloggers is disingenuous at best, and a horrible strategy… period. Forget for a moment that Chris Matthews compared Osama bin Laden’s recent choice of language to Michael Moore’s, the facts regarding Moore are just not being represented correctly. The “Open Letter…” blog states:

What’s this all about? Chris Matthews has repeatedly compared Osama bin Laden to Democrats…

Wrong.

1. Michael Moore is not a registered Democrat
2. Michael Moore does not hold office
3. Michael Moore is an independent documentary filmmaker, one who goes after both corrupt corporations and government administrations

1992 was the last time Moore was registered as a Democrat. In the past, I’ve had my own problems wrestling with how he has been positioned by both the media and the RNM as a “Liberal Democrat” due to his hardcore stance against the Bush administration. And then I experienced F9/11 on opening night and my eyes opened even wider regarding the actions of this administration, realizing that Moore wasn’t being partisan, he was being as direct and honest as humanly possible.

I’m sure Democrats feel a rush when an independent, creative voice rips apart the opposition party — especially one as corrupt as the Bush administration — but these actions don’t exclusively subscribe a voice such as Moore to the Democratic Party’s brand of progress or politics, nor should the Democrats want such to be the case.

As an independent (or non-affiliated here in North Carolina), I respect Moore’s perspective because he doesn’t belong to a political party. Michael Moore will reach more people to act and/or vote against corruption as an independent filmmaker, than a labeled “Liberal Democratic” filmmaker. The sheer amount of bloggers that are blindly supporting this meme is poor strategy.

Stop feeding the machine their propaganda. This is a short-term tactical reaction, one that will negatively affect Moore’s long-term output of truth if he’s pigeon holed as a Democrat.

UPDATE: The blog has changed its intro to now read:

What’s this all about? Chris Matthews has repeatedly compared Americans who are concerned about the war in Iraq to Osama bin Liden…

Well, at least they got the Democratic issue corrected, but Matthews only compared Moore’s language. This boycott is retarded. Shit, I’m watching Keith Olberman no matter what Chris Matthews says.

Let me be very clear.

When a political party loses all form of power to the opposition party in a democratic government, one cannot equate the nuances of that situation with a plantation system.

I don’t care how many times the Dems have been shutdown, squashed or run out of the halls of Congress; for one reason or another, the Dems lost their power.

What type of power did black folk have before the plantation system? How about within the plantation system? The analogy is stupid and offensive, especially when presented in Harlem with a majority black audience on MLK day.

As for Clinton’s perspective on this Republican administration, I couldn’t agree more. I just hope the retarded aspects of her rhetoric doesn’t negatively affect the 2006 mid-term election.

Note to aspiring politicians: Keep it real, hound effortlessly for the truth and you will have a lasting place in American politics. The people are now involved in the process.

Harry Reid’s actions were completely justified and just caught the attention of a ton of Independent voters. A reporter asked Reid, "Why didn’t you consult with Senate Majority Leader Frist first?" Reid responded that he followed Senate policy after too much feet dragging; there’s no need to consult.

Consider me first on line to shake his hand. It’s about damn time.

(.mov via Think Progress)

The longer we drag forward within a partisan run government, the more the Republican Party proves to be vile and full of power mongers.

This particular administration spins faster than a dreidel on Hanukkah and smears more often than a left-hander writing in a rainstorm, but if one can remain objective when studying their tactics, one cannot discount the fact that they’re a well oiled machine, running their party with business-like effectiveness. They’re so organized, they remind me of a hive of worker bees, humming to the whim of the queen, existing only for the future of the hive and a taste of the honey they produce.

This is how they roll — deep and in-tune.

So how do the Democrats stack up?

Bill Bradley recently wrote an opinion of the state-of-the-party in the New York Times, describing political organization in explicit detail; how the Elephants have created a thirty-year strong infrastructure — with defined roles, responsibilities and financing — to further their agenda, while the Jackasses get lost in the tactical arguments of the moment and eat their own in a fight to reach an elected seat. More specifically, the Republican Party has mastered the pyramid organizational structure. They’ve created a template for a replaceable leader at the top of a sustainable ecosystem, built to pro-actively defend their ideologies via responses in a moments notice from any type of Democratic Party or citizen retort.

Democrats, on the other hand, are renowned for tearing each other up during the primary season, unwittingly exposing each candidate to the Republican propaganda machine; a media machine that instills doubt in the minds of the casual electing public with repetitive rhetoric. So without the head-on-a-swivel organization of the GOP, each potential Democratic leader has to build his/her own pyramid of a strategic platform on the fly, sans the years of networking, research and coordination.

The results of such a non-strategy should be obvious. I mean, imagine how well an upside-down Egyptian pyramid would’ve worked out?

The Democratic Party claims to be the party for the common man, but through their actions they actually project the appearance of being selfish and petty. Individually, they don’t seem willing to barter for their place in a sustainable, Democratic Party structure, as they far too often seem overly anxious to take the weight of the world on their individual shoulders.

This me first perception can be illustrated in numerous tangible forms; their website is a classic example:

In the topical, global navigation, one category (People) reads as an attempt to describe the make-up of the Party. Rolling over the navigation nomenclature speaks volumes to their organization as a Party. What the Dems seem to want to do is show people that they have a broad set of programs and focus geared to numerous types of people.

What it says to me is that the Democrats cut the population into discrete targets, placing ethnic groups next to the disabled community; farmers next to Gays, Lesbians, Bisexual and Transgenders, etc. Sprinkle in each religion, old people, small businesses, unions, families, women and students and you have the American mixing pot.

Yeah, right.

Which groups did the Democrats leave out? How about Caucasian, middle-aged men?

By creating this hodge-podge of American faces on a single level labeled People, such a representation in the navigation screams, “Us white guys can help you needy and poor minority slobs out… Vote for us.”

What kind of an inclusive message is that? How does that message leverage the very diversity they’re trying to represent through their party? It fails miserably.

Imagine an African-American, bi-sexual woman coming to the site to find out more about the Party. Wouldn’t she feel a bit more like a cattle poster — with dotted lines drawn on her psyche, trying to leverage her leanest and most tasty parts — than as a partner in a political movement?

What about an atheist, homophobic, union member? Or a young, white metrosexual? Would this unspoken classification of European ethnicity as the default power representation model made someone feel uncomfortable?

Don’t get me wrong, compared to this current administration and the spin cycle of the right, the Democrats are still a beacon of hope… but an asteroid hitting the White House right about now would get the same props from me.

If the Democrats want to expand their reach into the Independent voter arena, they’ll have to start off by throwing their egos out the window, begin working together with a purpose, show some sack by speaking with conviction on topical issues and begin to create some form of a strategic plan to combat those evil, memory laden, pachyderms.

And fix the damn website.

I’m a registered Independent, so everyone is fair game for me to criticize. And that’s my only beef with Michael Moore’s approach to his work. While I agree with his stance on about everything he’s dropped, he practically disappeared from the theatre-going public eye for eight years while Clinton was in office. Okay, he made “Big One,” but that doesn’t quite count.

If you’re a documentary filmmaker, attempting to represent the best interests of the people in this country, specifically the under-privilaged, don’t be partisan. There’s more than enough bullshit on Capitol Hill to sift through during any administration in the White House.

Greed, shadyness and stupidity don’t hold political cards.

I realize that Moore didn’t vote for Clinton or Gore in the last two elections, but his films projects a perception of a hardcore anti-Republican stance, instead of one that just supports doing the right thing, first and foremost. The government of this country—including the media—operates with the smoke and mirrors of a two-party system, meaning that Moore’s output can then be manipulated to work against the Democratic party, as he is presented as a strong supporter of “the other side.”

There’s nothing wrong with choosing a party to support per se, but when his agenda is to open the eyes of the fringe to sway votes (with Fahrenheit 9/11), middle-ground needs to be served in the midst of the sniper fire as a peace offering.

No matter! I’m counting the days for the release of “Fahrenheit 9/11.” I’m hoping he can put to celluloid at least a chunk of emotions that I’ve been struggling with for the past 3+ years. Call him what you may, but Moore does have a knack for capturing the poignancy of a particular issue.