It's Hard!

Governing, as always, is hard work. Too hard, in fact, for neocons. The hard-pressed GAO, an arm of Congress tasked with identifying the millions of holes which represent the sponge-like texture of neocon governance, has gotten around to looking at our efforts to curb terrorist financing in other countries. Specifically, they looked at all the things we're not doing - like curbing terrorist financing in other countries.

The reasons are generally the same as the reasons the Junta fails in everything they do. First, a complete void in leadership. State and Treasury department officials can't get their act together. They seem to require some "direction" or "leadership" from some,one like, I don't know, maybe an executive? Maybe, if the departments were led by people with any qualifications other than Junta loyalty, something might get done.

"Investigators found clear tensions between officials at State, Treasury, Justice
and other departments.

One unidentified Treasury official quoted anonymously in the report said that the intergovernmental process for deterring terrorist financing abroad is "broken" and that the State Department "creates obstacles rather than coordinates effort." A State Department official countered that the real problem lies in the Treasury
Department's reluctance to accept the State Department's leadership in the process."

Of course, where there's a Junta initiative, there's private industry taking cash and making a hash out of the whole thing:

"In another problem area, private contractors used by the Treasury Department and other agencies have been allowed to draft proposed laws in foreign countries for curbing terrorist financing, even though Justice Department officials voiced strong concerns that contractors should not be allowed to play such an active role in the legislative process.

The contractors' work at times produced legislative proposals that had "substantial deficiencies," the report said."

Hey - the only real "deficiency" would be if their checks didn't clear!

What's the solution? Get together? Make the process work? Consult experts? Don't be insulting. The only solution that the Junta ever uses is the one that fits all cases: deny.

"No interagency process is without flaws," the State Department said in its official response. But it said "there is much evidence" that the working group set up by the administration to combat terrorist financing "is one of the most successful examples of interagency cooperation."

Hey, guy! We're doing great! Why would you think, just because an audit shows that we're a dismal failure, that we're not an outstanding success? We're bringing terrorists out of their hiding places by making sure they have lots of money.

Here we are, more than four years after 9/11, and our terror president can't even get this part right. Is there something these guys can do right? Maybe Georgie should build a model airplane at the podium for the next State of the Union. If he could fly it over Congress, Americans could go to be sure, for the first time, that there is something he can do.

But that's asking way too much.

Preparation

Get out your chequebooks! Brownie, Inc., is here to take your cash. Yes, our favorite disaster of a disaster planner has put up a shingle to act as an Emergency Management consultant. Brownie, as Georgie called him before the Katrina response dropped an anchor into Georgie's dinghy, was the head of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) who was steadfastly clueless about thousands of stranded people who were suffering prematurely meeting their maker.

And he really believes that somebody's going to give him money to do their emergency planning?

Maybe he's right. Not about the emergency stuff - I'd rather have Chicken Little (who would at least notice something was terribly, terribly wrong) in charge. No, Brownie's got it right about neocon America.

In this Bizarro America, people like Brownie can get top emergency leadership jobs based on their loyalty to the Junta. Being dogged in fund-raising and willingness to suspend disbelief about the policies that make no sense (of just the severely limited intelligence that would make the lies too hard to understand) are all that's needed to succeed.

A lot of "experience" or "training" or, G-d forbid, "education" are in no way needed, and are an active impediment. People with those kinds of things would have seen through all the lies and put them (not the Junta) in one of those 'Emperor has no clothing' situations where it's important to discredit and fire the truth-teller immediately.

So Brownie, having completed his task as a colossal and (until the Junta took over) unprecedented failure, has every expectation of grabbing some sweet corporate moola. Already, he's been given $150,000 as a 'consultant' to FEMA to help figure out what went wrong (that's an expensive mirror).

Of course, Congress could have gotten the same information with a subpoena, but that's not how the Junta congress works. "Oversight" is a dirty word, never to be used in Washington again. It smacks of "responsibility" and "accountability."

And if the business world works like the cartel capitalists in Washington do, Brownie will be working in no time. Georgie, Chicanery, et al, have proven time and again that their business experience prepared them to do nothing but tear the country to pieces through fierce and aggressively destructive incompetence and stupidity. Hell - they hired Brownie!

Maybe I'll put out my own shingle as a disaster manager. I was never head of FEMA, but then again I never let a storm kill thousands and do billions in damage while I was at supper, either.

Infiltration

Good gravy! The New York Times has been infiltrated - hacked! It seems to happen every now and again to various media bastions of the status quo. They chug along, happily reporting bald-faced whopping fabrications as he-said-she-said. "Man claims power of flight as he plummets from building. Others, including Primary Deity, disagree."

But them there comes a Paul Krugman moment from an unexpected direction. Krugman has been a voice in the wilderness during the entire run of the Junta. He's been the clearest voice calling the Emperor naked.

But along comes the innocuous headline: Sometimes, a Tax Cut for the Wealthy Can Hurt the Wealthy. Huh. More stuff about how tough it is to be rolling in it, no doubt.

But read it. Cornell economics prof Robert H. Frank makes a succinct and compelling case that tax cuts haven't even helped those who they were intended to help.

WHEN market forces cause income inequality to grow, public policy in most
countries tends to push in the opposite direction. In the United
States, however, we enact tax cuts for the wealthy and cut public services
for the needy. Cynics explain this curious inversion by saying that the wealthy
have captured the political process in Washington and are exploiting it to their
own advantage.

This explanation makes sense, however, only if those in power have
an extremely naïve understanding of their own interests. A careful reading
of the evidence suggests that even the wealthy have been made worse off, on
balance, by recent tax cuts. The private benefits of these cuts have been much
smaller, and their indirect costs much larger, than many recipients appear to
have anticipated. [emphasis added]

So it's not just Iraq anymore. People with brains are dissecting the whole program. When did they find their voice? And aside from voice (because I have no doubt that good Prof. Frank has been saying these things for five years), when did they get column inches in the front page of the Times?

And not just any edition. Today is Thanksgiving - a day when every American will probably finds the time to read a newspaper. Even for the Times this is a big day - their readership must triple.

We're just starting to see the other side of the mountain of lies that have twisted our Republic into something unrecognizable. It's shocking that it's taken this long for simple truths to assert themselves.

When future historians look at this period in American history, their top question will be: "how did the Bush cabal get away with so much for so long?"

Thanksgiving

Today is indeed Thanksgiving. As an expatriate, I always take the day off and relax. I cook a turkey and I watch football. For reasons which have everything to do with the deep flaws in my own character, my family long ago stopped calling my on Thanksgiving or birthdays or any other time. I don't blame them. I've decided that if I'm going to be a Black Sheep, I'll embrace it and complete my Northern isolation. It will make things a lot less complicated for my family in America.

Sorry, I'm usually not so personal in this spot. Mustt be the turkey.

Remember September?

With the recent unprecedented spate of officials and media darlings waking up to the malevolence and corruption of the Junta, there has been little news of the less sexy aspects of federal responsibility. Disaster reconstruction has shown the Junta to be - as usual - all talk.

Where once Dear Leader's popularity plummeted along with the barometric reading and presidential visits to the devastated Gulf Coast became as numerous as the dollars pocketed by carpetbagger corporations in Iraq, other things have taken the spotlight from that disaster. And, of course, without a spotlight there is no political pressure, and therefore no action from the Junta.

For all the billions promised, results are scant. Less than two months after the worst natural disaster in the nation's history, Georgie's forgotten all about it.

The primary reason for this is that it's a project that's both expensive and no fun. It calls for an army of not only construction professionals but help for people as well. Businesses need loans and relief. People need housing and jobs. To get these things in place, there needs to be solid levees and healthy wetlands restored, so that insurers and capital markets can trust that their investments are safe from storm and flood.

But the Junta doesn't do people and wetlands. The Junta's good for whistling in the dark, and for talking tough and invading the weak and pleasuring the rich and for impoverishing the poor. Taking on a complex project and seeing it through - that's for grown-ups.

So promised money is stuck in Congress. Georgie is off doing G-d knows what in Asia. The topic has turned from lies and mismanagement in the Gulf to lies and mismanagement in Iraq. That's more fun, because the Junta gets to call names and throw dirt, instead of sit on dull appropriations committees talking about boring old reconstruction all day. Yay!

Just look and Vice Angry Toddler Cheney. He says that politicians who say Americans were sent into battle based on a lie are engaging in "revisionism of the most corrupt and shameless variety." Shameless? Sure, we expect that from the lizard-brained Vice Toddler. But "corrupt?"

I won't be the first to point out that most of his attacks against Iraq War critics are reflections of his own guilty psyche. What's new is the charge of 'corruption.' Normally, when you make that charge, there is something criminal involved, some money changing hands.

Oxford on-line defines 'corrupt' as:

"willing to act dishonestly in return for money or personal gain."

Certainly the Junta money machine is no stranger to the collection of money for personal gain. It's practically their motto. GOP fixer Michael Scanlon pleaded guilty, and he's only the first domino to fall in the growing Abrahamoff scandal. He was ordered to repay $19.6 million to the First Nations clients he bilked.

The first Americans into Iraq were Cheney's old employer, Halliburton. Their no-bid contracts are the stuff of legend.

But what personal gain could war critics be looking for? How was Rep. Murtha looking for personal gain in his painful and heartfelt call for a withdrawal from Iraq?

Reptiles like Cheney see their own motivations in the actions of others. Since taking a moral stand and telling the truth are concepts that don't exist in Dick's being, he has to fill ion with the things that motivate him.

Cowardice. Shamelessness. Revisionism. Corruption.

First Reptile

"Dishonest and reprehensible." Dick Cheney said that, and he was not talking about himself. That's funny, really, because when you think of those two words together, he's the first Cat that comes to mind. Then you get a cascading torrent of images - Georgie, Rove, rummy, Scooter, the list goers on - and then you realize that these reptiles are in charge and then you go back into your normal depressed funk.

People who say Georgie and his pals in the Junta lied their way to the Iraq invasion are "dishonest and reprehensible." Also, patriots like decorated combat veteran Rep. Murtha lack "backbone." My question is this: does Cheney catch his own flies with his tongue, or are they fed to him by federal entomologists?

Because you really can't make the claim that Cheney is one of us. It's not that he's physically insectoid. Clearly, he has no antennae or pincers. It's that his reptile brain is so overdeveloped that it drives not only his word and behaviours, but those of the federal government as well.

In the human brain, there is a region in the brain stem that is pure reptile - hearkening back to our lizard ancestors. Yes, that means we evolved from reptilian amphibians. If you don't agree, please return to Kansas where they're establishing a Creationist Land of Oz.

In your lizard brain reside your most base instincts. When presented with external stimuli, you are driven to eat it, use it for procreation, kill it, of flee it. The rest of our brain is devoted to higher functions that modify these reactions, leading to things like civilization and society.

Not so for Cheney and the Junta. They are controlled completely by the direct, unaltered instructions from their lizard brains. So when the prospect of fighting in Vietnam confronted them, the lizard said: "run!" When the big oil money cane calling, the lizard said: "procreate!" When pushing for an easy self-serving invasion of Iraq came - and there was no prospect of personal harm - the lizard said: "fight!"

No part of the brain stem said "plan," or "evaluate," or "consider," or "discuss." Those are higher brain functions that don't have a voice in neocon schemes.

Everything the Rove/Cheney Junta has done (or attempted to do) has its root motivation in simple lizard thinking. Their ideology is grown from the basest animal (pre-mammalian) instinct.

So if you really want to understand your neocon masters, call a herpetologist.

Score

It's really more of an IQ test than anything else. The military is reporting a huge drop-off in filling key roles. That's the land military, not counting the Navy. I'm sure lots of bright kids are flocking to serve at sea, where al Qaida has yet to perfect the floating IED. They did blow up the USS Cole in Yemen, but that was a lot of bodies ago.

The military is falling far behind in its effort to recruit and re-enlist soldiers for some of the most vital combat positions in Iraq and Afghanistan, according to a new government report. The report, completed by the Government Accountability Office, shows that the Army, National Guard and Marines signed up as few as a third of the Special Forces soldiers, intelligence specialists and translators that they had aimed for over the last year.

Both the Army and the Marines, for instance, fell short of their goals for hiring roadside bomb defusers by about 20 percent in each of the last two years. The Army Reserve, meanwhile, failed to fill about a third of its more than 1,500 intelligence analysts jobs. And in the National Guard, there have been consistent shortages filling positions involving tanks, field artillery and intelligence.

Here's the formal test - see if you pass:

1) I want to serve as a Special Forces soldier and fight in Iraq.

Yes.
No.
Are you kidding?

2) I want to serve as a roadside bomb diffuser in Iraq.

No.
Forget it.
I am extremely stupid - please sign me up.

3) I want to join the National Guard to serve a weekend a month and two weeks in the Summer and unlimited combat duty in al-Armpyut Iraq.

No.
Just no, okay?
You wouldn't believe how stupid I am, please shoot me now.

None of us are shocked that, since most Americans now realize that Georgie lied them into the war, it's not something that their kids should die for. Increasingly, they're also realizing that it's not something other people's kids should die for either.

How many headlines have there been about double-digit killings in Iraq? Just today, at least 65 are dead in a suicide attack. Worse, how long will it be before 65 more corpses in Iraq is no longer front page news? I know it's been a while since I read the whole story of such a bombing. How about you? When did you last read that whole story?

I know what you're thinking: "where's the lie?" And you're right - there can't be any news that emerges from the Junta without having been protected by an outer layer, like an eggshell, in its infancy. Okay, here's your lie:

Officials with the accountability office, the independent investigative arm of Congress, found that some of the critical shortfalls had been masked by the overfilling of other positions in an effort to reach overall recruiting goals. As a result, the G.A.O. report questioned whether Congress had been given
an accurate picture by the Pentagon of the military's ability to maintain the force it needs for Iraq and Afghanistan.

"The aggregate recruiting numbers are rather meaningless," said Derek B. Stewart, the G.A.O.'s director of military personnel. "For Congress and this nation to truly understand what's happening with the all-volunteer force and its ability to recruit and retain highly qualified people, you have to drill down into occupational specialties. And when you do, it's very revealing."

Happy now? Of course they tried to cover it up. It's like they've de-criminalized coverups by constantly covering up everything they do. So, okay you got Scooter. But you didn't get all the Pentagon lies and you didn't get Darth Rove. They can shed one Dark Prince every now and then in the common goal of destroying America - that's just the cost of doing business.

Sorry, Scooter.

Truth

As they've been doing for a number of years now, Knight-Ridder continues to be the voice of truth barely heard above a din of lies. They break down the Junta's efforts to cover their tracks over the lies they told to bring us to war with Iraq. And they're willing to call a lie a lie.

Dick Cheney continues to disgrace himself (as if the stain could get any darker) by saying Iraq War opponents lack backbone. Backbone! To Cheney, bravery is the willingness to believe enough lies to get our soldiers killed. It's the willingness to follow Dear Leader unquestioningly to ruin.

Deep shame on him, and on this Junta. The lie machine has been turned up to "11" in the face of crumbling support and serious indictments.

What frightens me is what the Junta will surely do next. Their MO has been to lie and tarnish their accusers, and then add compounding error on top of existing errors. So, to silence critics of one mess (tax breaks for example), they passed their giveaway to Big Pharma in the drug 'benefit.' To cover their failure to protect America from al-Qaida, they lied about Iraq.

And when the bill came due the first time, the SWIFT Boated and changed the topic to Kerry's medals.

What will they do now that their backs are against the wall? What will be the next crisis? Georgie's in Asia - who will he pick a fight with? Surely not China - neocons are nothing if not cowardly. And North Korea has nukes. Also, the whole of the US military is being wasted in Iraq.

Georgie's tried to scare us with Avian Flu, but that won't really scare anyone until we can see some piles decomposing bodies somewhere. You know, like the ones they have in Iraq.

Hold on to something - it gets bumpy from here. The Junta didn't mind sacrificing your future and the honor of an honorable nation to attain power. Who knows what lengths they'll go to to keep it.

Cahoots

One of the levers that the Junta has used to impose their alien will on Americans over the past five years has been a dominance of the media. At first, Big Media was used like a box of Kleenex at a peep show (eww - forget you read that). They were not prepared to deal with a federal government that lied to them about crucial life and death issues. They were used to governments that told the truth - even when that truth was embarrassing to them.

When the Junta stole the 2000 election, they had no such standards. Not only would they hide embarrassing truths, they would hide their intentions and actions by the use of active falsehoods and base obfuscation. Requests for any information that would be politically uncomfortable was stonewalled. The only straight answers offered were straight up lies.

Wolf Blitzer and the rest went along with it. They had no experience in fact-checking the White House. Sure, Press Secretaries mess with you and dance around, but they don't tell straight-up lies about crucial matters of state. But, oh, yes they do.

And when the press is that badly confused and professionally incurious, the people they report to are as well. After all, when the president says there's proof of nukuler weapons, who's to argue? Certainly nobody reading the paper over the morning coffee. That's been the job of the media, and they've failed.

The Junta has them talking spin. When there's a story to be told, Junta operatives make it crystal clear that truth-tellers will be punished. Johnny Go-Along gets straight scoops from the powers. Sure, the 'scoops' might be pure drivel, but it's what they're saying at the White House. As a reporter, that's gold.

So the American people have had their heads turned by a media operation that was glad to turn itself into the propaganda arm of the Junta. So much so that Judy Miller of the NYT allowed herself to become part of the story. Good reporting became defined as 'telling the party storyline.'

It seems nobody outside of Knight-Ridder was immune. Not even the guy who broke up the Nixon Junta.

Bob Woodward was in on the Plame identity a month before Scooter squealed. He just told Pat Fitz - on Nov. 3 - and still refuses to report who told him and what they said.

Bob Woodward is no longer a journalist. A journalist reports to the people. A journalist keeps important sources secret to further the gathering of information to report. Gathering and squelching incriminating information is not supposed to be their job. And it certainly doesn't merit our protection under the law.

For not reporting to the prosecutor until now, Woodward should go to jail. He can't claim a not-yet-legally-defensible journalistic privilege because he never reported.

Should the mere fact of employment as a journalist shield someone? Woodward had two duties, and he failed them both.

First, as a journalist he had a duty to the people to report what he knew, to the extent that it was legal (eg not reporting the name of a covert CIA operative). Short of being the one to improperly 'out' Plame, once the leak investigation itself became news, Woodward needed to bring out his role in it.

Second, as a citizen he had the obligation to report a crime he'd been witness to. Once he knew that the revelation from his source (likely Karl Rove) was possibly a federal crime, he needed to come forward.

In his zeal to be a presidential insider, Woodward has lost his way as a news professional and as an American.

Half Wrong

In the run-up to the Iraq War, the lies were flowing from the White House as fast as Dick Cheney could mumble them. Allies in the effort were being paid off, enemies were effectively disenfranchised by accusations of treachery. The Religious Whackos were tied up with stories of an impending Rapture. Greed conservatives were counting all the federal cash from the no-bid contracts they'd been promised under the table. And the Hawks were ready to kick some ass on an opposing military that hadn't bought a new tank in a decade.

Good times.

I was a pro-war liberal. My stance at the time - which Mr. Goldenberg can attest to - was that the Bush Junta was completely lying about everything they said, but wouldn't it be great if we could get rid of Saddam? I also recall saying "if they don't find any WMD they better damn well plant some" which shows the limitations of even committee professional liars like the Junta.

My contention was that Iraq could be toppled and a democracy built there if the occupation were handled properly, like we did in Japan and Germany after WWII (the big one).

And as I watch, with more than a little satisfaction, as Georgie sweats under the klieg lights, it occurs to me that none of the questions he's being pressed on (and continues to lie about) would be asked if he'd handled the occupation with the managerial skill or insight of a David Brent.

The State Department had a guide to the occupation and rebuilding of Iraq that was thicker than Ariel Sharon's waistline. They had experts - smart people paid to produce smart, workable plans - spend year creating and updating the plan. But the Rummy neocons chucked in the dumper. They got their easy victory over a dilapidated, disheartened, and outgunned Iraqi army. And then they let their ideology take over.

Now, since their particular set of beliefs entail never reading, researching, discussing, or in any way finding out any "facts," the management of post-conflict Iraq was doomed.

My vision for this wrong-headed conflict was that we'd beat Saddam (no contest) and immediately put Iraqis to work rebuilding their country. We'd have 500,000 pair of boots on the ground (that's a million boots!) and we'd provide security to all. We'd, of course, take all the munitions and nuclear sites (which have provided unlimited arms to the insurgents). We'd realize that the post-conflict power vacuum would spawn revenge-taking, looting, and religious authority.

We'd know all this because we're smart. We're not the idiots who have trundled across the region making one obvious mistake after the next. Aside from the deeply immoral acts that have been done in our name, I really reject the acts of sheer stupidity. I mean, okay you look bad for torturing people, yes. But you also look like a complete moron for doing outlandishly unintelligent things all over the place and denying it to people who've watched you do it.

Which brings us back to Georgie. I know it is a flaw inherent in the neocon that prevented allowing smart people to do the occupation after dumb people started the war, but if he'd been able to make that leap he'd be out of the woods now. It was possible to remake Iraq in the immediate post-occupation period. But the same neocons who have failed to govern America also failed to set Iraq straight.

So there's my confession. I thought a democratic Iraq with free speech could be a magnet for the next generation of Osama's coming out of the other oppressive Arab regimes. Smart young Arab men have only one outlet for expression: radical Islam. Every other means of expression is denied them. I'd thought that a functioning free-speech Iraqi democracy would be the place where an Arab moderate intelligentsia could grow and eventually make the region more free and more safe.

I was wrong.

Where's the Body?

Ahh, the conscience of the conservative. So difficult to spot, so small and so mean. It's best to try and see it out of the corner of your eye - if you stare directly at it, it darts away like a frightened squirrel. Sometimes, when difficult decisions are to be made, a conscience is called on - by others. People like Americans and, more broadly, civilized humans, must make difficult calls and base them on things like ethics and the rule of law.

Conservatives have no such qualms. They wonder "is it profitable?" If it is, than it's always a 'go.' "Is it ideological? Will the Biblical goofballs like it?" If so, it must then meet the first test. Usually, you just have to make sure it doesn't cost anything before giving it the green light. When faced with the challenges of governing, the question becomes: "is it hard?" Because, as we've seen time and again, nothing that's difficult to do will be done by this Junta. The easy way - or whatever appears easy - will always be the road of the conservative.

Case in point is the so-called War on Terror. The easy part for the fat politicians was to order the military into the Middle East to wage war. That was fun like a pants-less roller-coaster ride. Then came the occupation: yuck. Boo-ring. And the State Department had like a zillion-page book on how to do a reconstruction and occupation. Wo could read that much?

Way too hard. Much easier to simply use your ideology as a guide and let the whole thing play out as proof that your ideas are right. If it all goes to hell, remember that it's the traitors who oppose you and not your beliefs that have caused the failure.

And when you round up the 'usual suspects' in downtown Baghdad, or pay a bounty hunter a few grand for some top Al Qaida floorsweepers, it's fun to bang them up in secret prisons and torture them like they just stole your kid's bike.

You can play make-believe and treat every one of them like they're Mohammed Atta, but sooner or later you're going to end up with a whole slew of Muslims that you got no use for. What are you supposed to do with them?

The hard thing to do - which Bubba did so successfully - is prosecute them. If they're really terrorists, they've committed crimes (even going to Al Qaida training camp is a criminal offense) and if you're diligent and hardworking, you'll nail them.

Of course, Georgie's boys are neither. Laziness and sloppiness are the watchwords of our neoconservative masters. It's way too hard to get convictions - so why try? Plus, you've allowed them to be tortured for four years - a real trial will expose your own criminality. Can't have that. Just bury them in Cuba, outside American law.

But a bunch of those smart-ass lawyers have started taking their cases to federal court. The Supreme Court even said these guys had rights - rights! They're terrorists! Okay, well some of them are just bystanders that got scooped up under a SALA charge (Standing Around Looking Arab).

Still - isn't it the basis of our system of justice that a person is presumed guilty until proven innocent?

Exactly, so the supreme Court said: "Hey! Habeas Corpus, you morons!"

But, to Junta members, that ruling somehow makes us less free. And how can we address this abridgment of our freedom to abuse others? Exactly.

The Senate, where Bill Frist stalks the halls with a rubber chicken and a loaded magnum, passed a bill revoking - and here I'm not kidding - the ancient right of habeas corpus from the 500 detainees at Gitmo. Yep - you though that the 'don't torture them' thing was a no-brainer, right? You thought that surely anyone understanding any of our ideals would be against torture and indefinite imprisonment without charge.

You were wrong.

Under the provision, proposed by Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., suspected terrorists held at Guantanamo no longer would be allowed to challenge their detentions in federal court. Most of the detainees were captured in Afghanistan or Pakistan, and many have been held for almost four years without charges.

The provision would reverse a 2004 Supreme Court decision that held that the detainees have the right to sue. Almost 300 detainees have filed petitions in U.S. district court in Washington since.

The Graham proposal also likely would block Monday's Supreme Court decision to hear some detainees' challenges to military trials set to be held at Guantanamo. It also could stop a case now being considered by the U.S. Court of Appeals on how habeas corpus cases should be handled.

Good thing he got it in now, before the Court found that human beings have certain 'inalienable rights.' Graham's bill passed 49-42, which means there were 49 Senators who were too hung over to uphold America's tradition of freedom, and 9 who were still drunk and couldn't be coaxed to the Senate chamber to cast a vote.

Of course, anything that will deny non-rich humans their rights is okay by Georgie.

The White House, which previously has opposed oversight of Guantanamo by Congress and the courts, supports the Senate action, spokeswoman Jeanie Mamo said Friday.

Wow. Day after day it's worse. This Junta has succeeded in something I've never thought possible: they've turned America into Mexico. We're a one-party state which routinely tortures and imprisons people for no reason. We are Franz Khafka's worst nightmare (and that's saying something). We're at the point where simply righting the ship back course isn't enough. Our standing in the world is lower than Egypt - at least they admit to being a constitutional dictatorship.

At least we are working toward a more enlightened view of our fellow citizen's rights. Right? Right?

The Justice Department's Civil Rights Division, which has enforced the nation's anti-discrimination laws for nearly half a century, is in the midst of an upheaval that has driven away dozens of veteran lawyers and has damaged morale for many of those who remain, according to former and current career employees.

Nearly 20 percent of the division's lawyers left in fiscal 2005, in part because of a buyout program that some lawyers believe was aimed at pushing out those who did not share the administration's conservative views on civil rights laws. Longtime litigators complain that political appointees have cut them out of hiring and major policy decisions, including approvals of controversial GOP redistricting plans in Mississippi and Texas.

At the same time, prosecutions for the kinds of racial and gender discrimination crimes traditionally handled by the division have declined 40 percent over the past five years, according to department statistics. Dozens of lawyers find themselves handling appeals of deportation orders and other immigration matters instead of civil rights cases.

Yep. Under the Junta, Civil Rights means the right to be civil while the fire hoses are knocking over a grammar school class. Don't think this is some sort of soft country where you can sue for discrimination and have any government lawyers on your side. In this Junta, when our Shysters open their brief cases, it's on the same table with the Wal Mart lawyers.

Of course, the department spokes-robots disputes it. The Junta must govern by lies, remember. They can't come out and say: "we don't believe in enforcing race discrimination cases." They have to come out and say" "Hey, we're doing a great job! Look at the made-up numbers! Made-up numbers don't lie!"

Remember: at no time can the governed be told what the government is doing.

And don't think because you're frozen out of Republican-controlled redisticting you have anybody to complain to. That's the whole point of redistricting, dummy. The Congress needs to stay as white as the NHL. Don't try to fight it.

And G-d help you if you end up at Gitmo, because nobody else will.

Unglued

As the Junta continues to fall apart, Georgie's becoming increasingly irrational in his lies. Sure, with all the lies he tells on a continuous basis, it's an incremental increase to be sure. It takes a trained eye to even notice it - that's just part of the service I provide to you, the reader.

One whopper that's been told repeatedly over a long period of time is the canard that when congress voted to invade Iraq in 2002, they had seen the same intelligence that the White House had seen. There's a word for that assertion, and it's not a pretty word, but it's the only word that can really capture the essence of the veracity of the statement: bullshit.

The Junta hand-picked the intel, choosing to believe the aluminum tubes story (which, of course, they knew was completely stupid) and all the jetsom that 'Curveball' spewed at them. Their hero, Achmad Chilabi, is in the US right now and has offered to testify to the Senate. Senators like Intel Committee Chair Roberts want nothing to do with him - there's always the remote chance he'll start telling the truth.

And the truth is the noose that will hang this Junta. From day one, they've known that their ideological lunacy was a losing proposition. No sane or remotely educated person could go along with it. But by offering material rewards and convenient lies, they induced people to take the carrot and pretend to believe. Even today, I'll bet that most conservatives can't tell you who's followed them because of belief and who's gone along because of the easy money and corrupt access to tasty power.

Aside from the truth, there's Georgie's speech on Veteran's Day. Of course he was in front of troops at an army base - where else? And he gave his rousing 'let's kill lots more Iraqis to free them' speech. But his time he threw in, and a 'curveball' if you will, the canard about prewar intelligence.

What's amazing about it is the coverage from the Washington Post. Georgie gets three paragraphs and 96 words before the paper quotes Ted Kennedy's reaction. Teddy gets to react before the Georgie quotes go in. Check it out:

Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (D-Mass.) accused Bush of exploiting Veterans Day in
"a campaign-like attempt to rebuild his own credibility by tearing down those
who seek the truth about the clear manipulation of intelligence in the run-up to
the Iraq war." In a statement, Kennedy added, "Instead of providing open and
honest answers about how we will achieve success in Iraq and allow our troops to
begin to come home, the president reverted to the same manipulation of facts to
justify a war we never should have fought."

Kennedy charged that Bush's speech "only further tarnished this White House
and further damaged his presidency."

I won't quote Georgie. What would be the point?

Truly it's a brave new world.

Neo Gonzo

Neo-Journalist Judy Miller has finaly left the New York Times. After what appears to be a stormy 28 years as a maverick reporter, her behaviour and appalling lack of journalistic ethics finally caught up with her. It was Judy who decided to go to bed with the neocons, and like their Keystone Kops method of governing, her reporting became a very damaging and grotesque joke.

Throughout the lead-up to and then the course of the Iraq War, Judy was the cheerleader for the hawks. They passed their faulty intel and bad guesses along to her, and she published them as insider information. Every lie whispered to her at the White House was a 'scoop.' By the time everybody had given up on the WMD fiction, Judy was a wholly-owned subsidiary of the propaganda arm. She was completely their girl.

So it came as no surprise that when Scooter and the guys decided to smear Joe Wilson by outing his CIA spouse, they hit speed-dial #1 for Miller. Scooter whispered his venom to her, even though she reportedly wasn't writing a story on it (and never did write the story).

When prosecutor Pat Fitzgerald came calling, she was already on the outs at the Times, and her colleagues were calling her out for her ethical transgressions. Fitz wanted her to testify about the Scooter conversations.

But Judy needed cover. She was already part of the Junta, and she knew it. Loyalty was prized by the clownish cabal, and she also needed to rebuild some journalistic cred. So she went to jail, helping to put her friend Georgie back into the White House.

See, Fitz has stated publicly that if Judy had talked instead of needlessly going to jail, he would have handed down his indictment of Libby in Fall of 2004 - before the presidential election. By stonewalling Fitz, Just kept that indictment from torpedoing Georgie's election.

And why exactly did she go to jail? She says it was to protect a source as a journalist. But she never wrote a story. Aside from the other questions that arise from the incident, can a journalist claim source confidentiality for a story they never write? Can a journalist, simply by dint of being employed by a media company, protect a source? Or should that protection only apply when they produce a product of journalism to the people? If somebody tells national security secrets to a journalist on background, can the journalist claim privilege if the information is never used in a story? In that case, isn't the journalist just another citizen? After all, the idea is to protect people who are furthering our right to be informed as citizens, not the right of reports to help government cover their lies.

In the end, Judy took a half page out of Hunter S. Thompson's book on Gonzo journalism by becoming part of the story. But she never had the Doctor's guts to actually stand by it. Dr. Duke never backed away from anything, and he never lied for the bastards.

Judy Miller joined the Junta and applied their ethics and efficiency to her own profession. It's made her a pariah among her peers and cost her her job and reputation.

Such are the wages of conservatism.

Batman vs. Superman

There are super heroes and then there are super heroes. There are the bouncing rubber ball dudes who appear as a backup story on one issue of a throwaway book, and then there are the legends. All of the truly iconic characters in comic books represent some sort of ideal, much in the way the Karl Jung describes certain eternal characters in our lives (the hero, the sage, the damsel, etc.). It doesn't take much to see the ideal in a character like Captain America. Cap represents the best aspirations of Americans, and the 'American Dream' that they cling to (poor Cap must be having a hard time these days).

Two of the more interesting characters are DC Comics' Batman and Superman. Like Captain America, they've been around for over 60 years. Why? When the cartoon roadside is littered with the bodies of heroes who sold well in their day, had a some appeal, and even reappeared a few times in the modern era. Sure, these lesser characters might be fan-favorites of the Geek Nation, but they have zero mass-market appeal next to Batman and Supes (even Cap can't claim their mainstream cred).

Why?

Certainly both characters are iconic, but of what? An ideal of revenge or of purity or strength? Of fearlessness in the face of danger? Nope.

They're political. Batman represents the American conservative. He's a Republican super hero in every way. Superman is the American liberal. He's a Democrat. And it's the identification of the traits of these ideologies that has made these two real American icons. Whether or not you're cognizant of the parallels, you are responding to them in the part of your brain that recognizes stuff when you don't realize you're doing it.

Too scientific?

Batman is a do-it-yourself loner. Sure, he pals around with Robin a bit, but most of his adventures are solo. Even when Robin is there he's not much help (and in one case got himself killed). The lone vigilante is how Republicans see themselves and their place in the world. Nobody's going to help you when you walk those dark streets but yourself. Everyone needs to look out for number one.

Superman belongs to everybody - he's everybody's hero. There are no policemen after his hide. Nobody thinks he's a vigilante. He works with the JLA, the JSA, anybody who will have him. He has family and friends who he is close to. If he's alone it's by choice at his Fortress of Solitude. What makes him sad are the people who refuse to live up to his high standards of behavior.

Batman has no interest in such common pursuits. He's been part of there JLA, but makes it clear he doesn't like working with others and only does it to sell more JLA books. Batman has no family or friends - only an acerbic butler who he pays to serve his needs. The only relationship a conservative can trust is a paid relationship.

Batman never worked a day in his life. He's rich - which supports his unhealthy obsessiveness - from money that he inherited. Bruce Wayne never held a job. Like the wealthy Americans for whom the GOP can never seem to do enough, money earned as interest on capital is more valuable than money earned from work.

Superman has a job. As Clark Kent, he hauls his tired Super-ass out of bed each morning to earn his rent. He's part of the working world, while Bruce Wayne is not part of any world, even shunning the jet-setters in his income class.

And Batman takes no responsibility for the community; if you get mugged, that's your lookout. Everybody knows that Batman's not everywhere; he's only around when someone worthy of his attention catches his eye, or maybe he just happens to be around. Catch him on an off-day and you're cooked.

Super man doesn't get to have any off days. He's everywhere. He can hear who's in trouble, and get there super-fast to help. If someone falls out of a window in Metropolis, and Superman doesn't get there to save them before they hit the pavement, he's sure to get some ticked off glances and maybe a few "where the hell were you" mumbles.

Because, like liberals, Superman wants what's best for the community. He does his hero act because he wants to help people. Batman acts out of a personal sense of revenge. If Superman had his way there would be no hunger or want in the world. Batman could care less.

And Superman is mighty. He is the greatest power on the planet, representing its loftiest goals. Batman is the weakest hero in DC's pantheon. Sure, he's a tough guy, but he's just a guy. He has weapons and vehicles which he's paid to surround himself with.

But as a character, and an ideal, he's weak. His sort of paranoid self-reliance is a limiting psychosis; even his friends would admit that Batman has mental problems.

American conservatism is all about personal paranoia - get yours while you can and stick it to anyone who can't get theirs. The court system is there to avenge crime, not to rehabilitate criminals. Who cares if the streets are safe as long as I have an armored limo to drive in and as much personal protection as I can afford. Is it tough in murder alley? It's tough all over.

Conservatism is based on the same narrow concepts that the British believed 150 years ago when they watched a million Irish die in the potato famine. 'If we help them they will become weak and dependent.' Better to let a million starve to death for your ideology, right?

Liberals are willing to take on a whole community as their problem. If someone falls on hard times across town, it's the whole town's problem. Liberals want everyone to have food and shelter and health care and a job. Like Superman, they want thing for the community because it's what the community needs.

Batman and his conservative ilk are happy to let the streets go to hell as long as they're the tough guys on the block. Someone's hungry? Not their beat. Do you think Gotham's "Suicide Slum" would exist in Metropolis? Right.

Hey, I like the Dark Knight as much as the next guy. In Batman Begins, we see the young Batman fighting his intensely personal crusade to save the city be making it more self-reliant. His noble purpose is to show Gothamites that they can demand more from the city.

But he's not opening a chapter of Habitat for Humanity, is he?

While Superman is not a human creature with most human failings, he is an idealist. He fights for "truth, justice, and the American way."

That's three things conservatives - and Batman - have no time for.

Champs

So much for the three-peat. The Patriots and their consecutive Super Bowl championships are officially finished for the year. That's not to say they're finished for good. As long as Bill Belichick is coaching and Tom Brady is starting at quarterback, this team will compete. But not this year.

There are five basic elements to football, and the Patriots have gone from excelling at all five to only doing well at one. Those elements are: passing offense, rushing offense, passing defense, rushing defense, and special teams.

There are two reasons for this fall from grace. The first in injuries. While they've overcome more harm than any other champion in league history - or the history of team sports I'd wager - this year the back-ups aren't cutting it. Perhaps that's because the guys who were the great back-ups over the past couple of years are now the starters and their back-ups are the tertiary guys who really can't play.

The other reason is coaching. The team's biggest problem is their defense - and the defense is being run by a first-year coordinator. Eric Mangini was widely credited with keeping the defensive secondary together in the face of injuries over the past two years. Last year in particular, he lost his two starting corners and won a Super Bowl with street guys and WR Troy Brown - even shutting down the Colts' record-setting offense in the playoffs.

On the strength of that performance, young (under 40) Mangini was given the Defensive Coordinator job - and he deigned to take it over some other, more lucrative offers from other teams.

But for all his service in past seasons, the defense is just dreadful this year. They have been decimated by injuries, but were not that great before the loss of key guys like Rodney Harrison. Is it Mangini's fault, or were the players set for a let-down no matter what?

Ultimately, it is the responsibility of the Head Coach, and Belichick has allowed himself to be distracted from his defense by coaching the offense himself. Instead of even having a caretaker coordinator, he's taken the role himself, with the help of a few key assistants - who are also young coaches. That's a lot of responsibility for anyone - even Bill Belichick.

For the first time in many years, the Patriots defense is bad. They can't get off the field on 3rd down. They can't plug anyone in short yardage. They can't stop the run. They can't cover the pass. The Colts hung 40 on them last night - and it was a solid 40. There were no big special teams plays, no defensive returns - no excuses. The defense was pushed around all night. Every time Manning went back to pass, somebody was wide open.

It didn't help that CB Randall Gay was playing Harrison's position. Gay can cover, but he'll never be mistaken for Ty Law or Lawyer Milloy. Dwayne Starks has completely lost his game - he can't cover leftover salad. Colts' receivers beat these guys on-on-one, and the beat the Pats' zone, finding huge holes and standing in them until Manning got the ball to them.

Eggerin James looked like he could have run for 200 - if the passing game hadn't been working so well.

In their current state, the Patriots passing offense remains outstanding - Brady and his receivers are more dangerous than ever. But the rushing offense is no longer a threat. Belichick didn't bring enough RB's into the season, and is suffering for it now. Feature back Corey Dillon has been hurt all year, and the injuries on the offensive line have taken the legs from the running game.

Matt Light was the key to the quality of the OL. As long as he was anchoring at LT, the rest of the guys could work around him. Without Light, Brady is savvy enough to get rid of the ball, but there's no amount of savvy that will save Dillon.

With Patrick Pass injured, the Pats signed Amos Zeroue - only to release him. They also got Mike Cloud off the street this week, and even played him a bit, but he was predictably ineffective. When Dillon was out of the lineup last night, the offense went with no back most of the time. That's a tough position to be in repeatedly.

Basic changes to the defense - the kind that the Pats need - can only happen in training camp. No team can turn around a bad defense in mid-season. There was some hope that they could improve after their bye week, but obviously that didn't make a whole lot of difference. What we have now is what we have for the season.

So what does the rest of the season hold for this flawed team? They've only played one division game (they beat Buffalo) in the first half of their schedule (which finished last night at 4-4). The final 8 games feature an away game at Buffalo, home and away at NY and Miami, and games against KC, Tampa Bay, and New Orleans.

Buffalo and Tampa Bay will be real challenges. Miami and the Jets will be less so, as both teams are sufficiently flawed. A 10-6 or 9-7 final record will win this division, but the playoffs don't look so good this morning. A rematch in Indy won't be much of a treat this year.

The best case scenario would be getting Cory healthy again and getting the OL to run block better, and then winning some shoot-outs. The Bills, Jets, Dolphins, Bucs, and Saints all have serious issues at QB, so it's not inconceivable that they could survive the second half and get to the playoffs as a high-scoring team, and maybe even win a playoff game like that.

But our likely opponents have already taken our best shot and knocked us down - Indy and Denver.

The last time we missed the playoffs it was because the defense got old and Belichick hadn't recognized it in the offseason. The 2002 teams was similar to this one - except their offense wasn't as good. They were beaten repeatedly by the run and the pass on defense, and couldn't run on offense.

It was their failure to win the division that saved a lot of Brady and Belichick's post-season records. After all, Brady wouldn't be undefeated in the payoffs if they'd squeaked in in 2002.

But if any team has earned its fan's patience, it's this one.

Go Pats! We're still behind you!

No Fun

As every card-carrying neocon knows, certain parts of governmenting are just no fun. And when you get to these parts, the best bet is just to just ignore it and hope it goes away. That's what our Founding Fathers did, after all. When the King came to collect taxes, they just ignored him. When the Redcoats came to suppress the fledgling republic, patriots like Patrick Henry simply shrugged and said: "there's no evidence that British influences have controlled the colonial government. And pass the scones - there's a good chap."

And so it is with our adventures in Afghanistan and Iraq. While it was a hoot to bomb the locals with 'smart' munitions and then to roll our awesome tanks against them and then take their oil, it's a lot less fun to try and rebuild them and establish democratic governments. That's like studying and taking tests - best to avoid the whole thing.

So in Afghanistan, all our promises to build schools and hospitals are just a bunch of hooey. In four years of less-than-glamorous occupation and rebuilding, we've built pretty much nothing.

Four years after American-led forces ousted the Taliban, the United States has spent $1.3 billion on reconstruction in Afghanistan, intending to win over Afghans with tangible signs of progress. And indeed, there are some. But to Afghans, the Turmai clinic is emblematic of what they see as a wasteful, slow-moving effort that benefits foreigners far more than themselves. "The aid that comes from other countries for the Afghan people, it's not going to the Afghan people," said Mr. Ahmadiyar. "It's being wasted."

Of course. Administrating is hard. It doesn't have cool catch-phrases like "shock and awe." It's a big snooze.

But grownups realize that it's the most important part. If you screw it up as badly as the Junta has, you are absolutely guaranteeing that you'll be back. Already, the Taliban is recovering their strength. The 'central government' is just an American base - the countryside belongs to the drug lords.

When you try to avoid your grownup responsibilities, you suffer. If you don't pay your rent, you get tossed out. When you lie to everybody, everybody treats you like a liar. There are no two ways - you are your actions. The out of control teenaged septuagenarians running the ruling Junta are just figuring this out.

...the Bush administration's effort to win quickly and cheaply in Afghanistan and then Iraq has boomeranged. Now a new military and political strategy is in place in both theaters that calls for making the long-term investments and fighting the battles that administration strategists -- above all, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld -- disastrously tried to dodge.

As a grownup, you can't even get your friends to lie for you. Sure, you can get some family retainers to hide your coke convictions, but as a grownup, your failures are part of the public record. Having your bestest buddy tell people you didn't get busted doesn't take the arrest off your record.

So when family retainer Pat Roberts says there's "no evidence of "political manipulation or pressure" in the use of such [prewar] intelligence," you know he's just covering for Georgie. But this is a far more serious matter than the sort of drink driving trouble Georgie's used to getting into. This is the matter of treason against the people of the United States.

And like other parts of the Junta's propaganda machine, Roberts has discovered a new way to lie to the public. Just as the non-answers to the Niger-uranium questions get deflected, Roberts is not addressing the question of manipulative lies by simply not answering.

The game is to make up a question that you want to answer, and then answer it. Pretend all the people who are asking you about the real matter are complete idiots - let's face it, they probably are. If they weren't certified card-carrying morons, you couldn't have gotten away with five yours of treason under their collective noses.

So when Roberts makes his big press announcement about there being 'no manipulation of intelligence' by the White House, he deliberately asks the wrong question:

As part of a report released last year by his committee that found widespread intelligence failures on Iraq's weapons capabilities, "we interviewed over 250 analysts and we specifically asked them: 'Was there any political manipulation or pressure?' Answer: 'No,' " Mr. Roberts said on "Face the Nation" on CBS.

Of course, the Times lets him get away with this nonsense. The problem was not pressure from the White House to reach certain conclusions (though I'm sure there was such pressure - let someone outside the Junta ask and we'll see what the real answer is), but the selective use of intel by Dickie and Rummy.

Because when the 250 analysts gave their information to the Junta, the Junta used about 1% of it - the part that seemed helpful. The rest of it they discarded. They set up an Iraq intel group in the White House and a special department in the Pentagon to work the bad intel themselves. So it was their manipulation - their willingness to believe serial liars and to discard anything that would disprove their ugly theories - that sent our children to kill and die.

When disgraces like Dickie Cheney - who's still fighting Congress for the right to torture - go to trial, hopefully they'll be able to scoop up scum like Roberts as well.

Can you believe that Cheney's still using all of his waning clout to put a provision in the McCain amendment to allow the CIA to torture prisoners? Where was he raised? Siberia?

Seriously, what kind of parents could raise a sociopath like Cheney? This guy has done nothing but push for unjust war, torture of defenseless people, and fast-track the rape the environment since he's come to office.

Speaking of what's left of the environment, there's an interesting new angle being discussed by the rightists. For the 'money right,' the environment is there to be cut, dug, and drilled for profit. To get a go-ahead from the religious types, they appeal to the Rapture right. The Rapture people are very useful to the money people; they say that since an End of Days is coming, you can be as destructive and short-sighted as you like. So go ahead and take all the short cash you can grab - you'll be in heaven before anything runs out.

Which is a particularly dangerous way to think, because it prevents any conservation. If you try to conserve anything, you're not showing faith in the Rapture.

But now a large group of rightists are calling for environental protection based on their reading of the Bible.

The National Association of Evangelicals, a nonprofit organization that includes 45,000 churches serving 30 million people across the country, is circulating among its leaders the draft of a policy statement that would encourage lawmakers to pass legislation creating mandatory controls for carbon emissions.

Environmentalists rely on empirical evidence as their rationale for Congressional action, and many evangelicals further believe that protecting the planet from human activities that cause global warming is a values issue that fulfills Biblical teachings asking humans to be good stewards of the earth.

"Genesis 2:15," said Richard Cizik, the association's vice president for governmental affairs, citing a passage that serves as the justification for the effort: "The Lord God took the man and put him in the Garden of Eden to work it and take care of it."

Yes, "empirical evidence" doesn't cut it anymore. We live in a world where the religious nuts have to find a passage in their book of faith in order to do anything, right or wrong. This is a lot like living under a monarchy. When you get a good king, thing go okay and people wonder what al the democracy talk is about. When you get bad king - or just a stupid one - things go quickly to hell.

But apparently we need a Protestant fundamentalist seal of approval on our environmental policies in order to not obliterate the land, air, and water before the return of the narrow saviour.

Dueling Headlines

It seemed funny the other day, when Harry Reid courageously shut down the Senate to press the case for patriots against neocons, that the headlines in the 'mainstream media' were bizarrely diverse.

The wonderful Knight-Ridder had: "Democrats force Senate into rare closed session." Pretty factual. It was Democratic leader Harry Reid that called for the session, and it was both closed and rare.

The New York Times had: "Partisan Quarrel Forces Senators to Bar the Doors." Sure - it was partisan, in the sense that one party has tried to hide a vital truth and the other side has taken measures to expose that truth. One side is pushing for American democratic freedoms, and the other is trying to drown them in the brackish water of fascism. Still, the doors were barred and there was partisanship. Fine.

Reuters had: "Democrats close Senate doors in Iraq protest." Key words: Democrats, doors, closed. Plus, Reuters actually gave the cause for the kerfuffle: the Republican cover-up of the Iraq War lies. Of course, they don't say "lies" in the headline. It's sort of implied.

Which brings us to the Washington Post. Their headline read: "GOP Angered by Closed Senate Session." Huh? Where are the Democrats? Who closed the session? Elves? So the Republicans threw a hissey-fit - is that the news? I must be getting old faster than I thought - I can remember back to when a paper like the WaPo would report what happened, not who got their nose out of joint about it.

And it wasn't until today that it really struck home, because the same thing happened on a different story. See, Ken Tomlinson - the homunculus neocon who's been trying to destroy public television as the chair of the Corporation for Public Broadcasting - got investigated and tossed out on his keister. Yes - I said 'keister.'

But there seems to be some disagreement on the method of his departure.

Washington Post: "Kenneth Tomlinson Quits Public Broadcasting Board." Okay. New York Times? "Broadcasting Ex-Chairman Is Removed From Board." Once again: Huh? Quit or removed? There's a big difference.

What is the WaPo's interest in all this? Isn't the Times Judy Miller's paper? Shouldn't they be carrying the water for the Junta these days?

What's the truth in all this? Apparently, Tomlinson was investigated for his duplicitious and overty political leadership of the CPB.

Kenneth Y. Tomlinson, the former head of the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, was forced to step down as a member of its board on Thursday evening.

The move came after the board began reviewing a confidential report by the inspector general of the corporation into accusations about Mr. Tomlinson's use of corporation money to promote more conservative programming.

They included Mr. Tomlinson's decision to hire a researcher to monitor the political leanings of guests on the public policy program "Now" with Bill Moyers; his use of a White House official to set up an ombudsman's office to scrutinize programs for political balance; and secret payments approved by Mr. Tomlinson to two Republican lobbyists.

That's pretty clear: "forced to resign." So where does the WaPo get "quits?"

Kenneth Y. Tomlinson, who sparked controversy by asserting that programs carried by public broadcasters have a liberal bias, resigned yesterday from the board of the Corporation for Public Broadcasting a day after the agency's inspector general delivered a report apparently critical of his leadership.

Resigned after being nailed by an inspector generals report. One could argue whether that equals "forced to resign" (but it would be no stretch - what else does "forced to resign" mean?).

But how does it equal "quits?"

Georgie Exits Country in Disgrace

The Junta's on a road show to South America - just one of the many regions in the world where he is entirely unwelcome. In his wake, he leaves not only scandal, death, and ruin, but his worst ever polling numbers.

The new Washington Post-ABC News poll shows that other than the stone illiterate rednecks and the corporate fatcats who have had to buy new tophats and spats to stuff the big heads and feet into, nobody likes this guy.

Approval: 39% (other polls have shown an approval rating as low as 35%)
disapproval: 60%
Honest and Trustworthy: 40% (down 13%)
Doubts Honesty: 58%
rove to Resign: 60%
Bad Ethics: 67%
Ethics have risen under Bush: 17%
Ethics have fallen: 43%
Country on the Wrong Course: 68%
Optimistic for the Country: 30%
High Level of Confidence in Bush: 30%

Once again, this is a president who was purportedly re-elected one year ago exactly. It says two things about our broken democracy. First, that the media hype machine can be so manipulated by bad political actors that the entire news apparatus can be turned into a political advocate for a party of liars. But you knew that.

These numbers indicate, second, that it wears off. The Darth Rove approach over the last four years has been to be in constant campaign mode. At the time, the approach was questioned: 'you won, so stop campaigning.'

But this is what happens when the campaigning stops. The lies and the liars become exposed. People go to jail (hopefully). Without Rove's voice whispering in their ears, people start to trust the official message less and their 'own lying eyes' more.

It's up to the Democrats to do something with this. I think there are good strong messages coming out of the party, but whatever they say is constantly denigrated by the media. The neocon spin machine is so integrated into media the conscience, their talking points drown out any positive Democratic message.

I can't wait until the US is a democracy again!

Competence

It was supposed to be a selling point. They were supposed to know what they were doing. This was not going to be a government of bureaucrats and policy wonks who worried over every Spotted Owl. This was going to be a "government of experts." This was going to be the showcase for cartel capitalist management savvy.

Dickie and Georgie were former corporate figureheads who could 'get things done." Sure, most of those things were about padding their pockets with taxpayer loot. And, okay, everything Georgie ever ran was a failure. But some people learn from failure, right?

Unfortunately, the Junta's corporate/political leadership has proven to be a Harvard Business School case of how cartel capitalist corporations thrive not because of their leadership, but despite it. These giant companies are vast consumers of resources and wealth. They use dopes like Dickie to keep their connection with government treasury payouts. Others use dopes like Dickie to get away with labour infractions and avoiding health care costs (Wal Mart) with no penalty.

They are designed to screw whoever needs screwing to keep the money coming in and pay off the top execs and shareholders. They don't know how not to make money. The only time money becomes an issue is when dopes like Dickie start to think they're really in charge. "Kenny Boy" Lay thought he had something to do with the profitability of Enron. It was only when he started actually doing things that the company nosedived into bankruptcy. Similarly, Halliburton changed its accounting practices under Dickie, which got them into hot water after he fled to become Veep.

Similarly, the federal government was doing quite well, running a surplus, generally telling the truth (at least reporting the science), and not needlessly invading countries on the other side of the world. Then the cartel capitalists got their hands on the controls.

Instead of imposing reasonable, businesslike procedures on an out-of-control bureaucracy, they took out all the stops. They proved to have less control or restraint than any government career employee. Their radical ideology called for bankrupting the ship of state, and they were going to do it. Kenny Boy had taken the same tack with Enron, and was exactly as successful in running Enron as the Junta has been in running the federal government.

Cartel leadership called for not only telling lies to the shareholders (the so-called "American people"), but also giving no-bid contracts to their friends. After all, what's a cartel for if you can't direct billions of dollars to your undeserving cronies?

As this is an experiment with neoconservative ideology, we must measure the results: utter failure. Failure by government to spend wisely and to audit what was spent. Failure by industry to provide services without fraud and mismanagement. Utter, total, complete failure.

So, of course, when billions more need to be spent to rebuild the Gulf Coast, who do you turn to? Exactly. And based on never fixing the utter failures of the past (or even acknowledging them), what new results do we expect now?

Exactly.

According to testimony in the Senate, this government has not the first clue how much it's spent or where the Gulf Coast money's gone. Their reconstruction Dudes could have blown it at the track for all they know.

And, just like the Iraqis who have no electricity, infrastructure, or even electrical power, it's the people who need the help who are suffering the most. The out-of-state cartels are Hoovering the cash as fast as they can, and the hurricane/flood victims are huddling in tents.

Officials responsible for doling out billions in Hurricane Katrina relief
contracts told lawmakers yesterday that they still don't have answers to central
questions about why certain recovery efforts have stalled, whether money is
being wasted and what's keeping Gulf Coast firms from getting a bigger share of
the work.

In nearly three hours of questioning by the House committee
investigating the government's sluggish response to one of the worst natural
disasters in the nation's history, top procurement officials with the Department
of Homeland Security, the Federal Emergency Management Agency and the Army Corps
of Engineers repeatedly said they would need to do more research into exactly
how government money is being spent.

Lawmakers from Mississippi, meanwhile, said thousands of hurricane victims are still living in two-person tents without running water or adequate heat because government contractors haven't finished mobile home parks.

"It's getting cold," said Republican Rep. Charles W. "Chip" Pickering Jr., who asked the government to provide contractors with more incentives to finish their work quickly.
"At today's rate, we're going to have people in Mississippi [waiting for trailers] until January 1st," said Democratic Rep. Gene Taylor.

Of course, the use of trailers is in itself an offramp to incompetent-city. In the past, housing vouchers have allowed people to find lodging in populated areas with amenities like food and water and gas stations. By creating hundreds of new trailer homes in new trailer parks, they've created and underclass of people stuck in the wilderness. And how is that helping the economy?

But - whatever Halliburton wants, Halliburton gets. If they want to build a couple hundred thousand trailers - only to get a contract to tear them up in a year - they get it. Never mind that the government is overpayment dreadfully. And never mind that Gulf Coast businesses are being frozen out of the contracts. Hey - we're not hiring Iraqis, either.

The kids you went to school with who had tutors but still couldn't get higher than a C+ - but never worried because they had rich parents - are now in charge. And it shows.

One more thing: they're debating in the White House (a rare thing in itself) whether Karl Rove should resign because he's a distraction. It would be better if they wanted him to resign because he's a traitor, but whatever. Personally, I hope he stays on. There are a lot of us who fear his dark powers, and okay, I agree he's the Sith Lord of election fraud. But as a policy leader, he's been a joke.

The only thing they've been able to do since stealing the election is pass a bill to absolutely screw people in bankruptcy. But the Social Security elimination fiasco speaks for itself. The Iraqi debacle tragically isn't getting any better - and while I mourn the loss of life, I also know who to blame for it.

I'm more afraid of Rove latching on to his next Georgie Bush and making him the Dummy Leader than I am of anything he's going to do with this lame duck president.

Big Day

It's a big day in politics both north and south of the border. Two nations' governments were kicked in the goodies like the guy in the padded suit at a women's "Don't Let the Bastard Touch You" self-defense class.

Canada

We'll start in reality - Canada. For all you self-interested Southerners, Canada has had a simmering scandal that almost brought an election last Spring. The current minority Liberal government under PM Paul Martin is the successor of a majority Liberal government led by Jean Chretien (Martin was Chretien's Finance Minister). There was some tomfoolery with a few million Canadian bucks (just good natured fun), and some high ranking politicos were made to look bad.

See, after the 1995 Quebec referendum on separation - where a dangerously slim majority voted to stay in Canada - old Jean thought it would be a swell idea to spend a few bucks on some federal PR to shore up support among Quebecers. As often happens in these cases, a goodly chunk of the money ended up in the hands of Liberal politicians and Liberal-affiliated PR businesses.

The program was run from the PM's own office, so the stink of the scandal lingered around both the former and current PM. Justice Gomery was charged with investigating, which he's done very publicly over the past year.

While the investigation was happening, suspiciously deranged-looking Conservative Leader Stephen Harper tried repeatedly and somewhat feverishly to force an election. Through various parliamentary tricks, Martin was able to thwart Harper's efforts. It also helped that Canadians overwhelmingly didn't want a new election. There were no results from the Gomery probe, and polls showed that the results would be pretty similar to the existing situation - so why bother?

The angle taken by Canadians is that they don't see this as a big deal. When word of the enquiry first broke, polls showed a strong level of outrage. But when Harper and his odious Conservatives looked like they were going to get ahead in an election, the polls did a 180. Voters said clearly: "we're not that mad." Given the choice of a Conservative government or a somewhat scandal-tainted Liberal government, there was no choice.

Martin, for his part, promised to call an election within 30 days if the final report, expected in February.

The initial report is out today: PM Martin is off the hook. Former PM Chretien is on the hook - even though there is no evidence of any kind showing that he knew anything about it.

Public reactions are pretty steady on this. Most think Martin was suspiciously lucky to come away unscathed. And most thing this whole thing should be over.

Harper, of course, is trying to make it into The Unbearable Crime that Has Never Happened Before! We Must Call An Election Before the Matrix Becomes Real and Others Take Money That... You get the point.

Harper said he can't understand why Prime Minister Paul Martin doesn't resign in the face of a damning report which spoke of a Liberal culture of entitlement and which said the party was involved in kickbacks.

Hmmm. Resign after being exonerated by an official enquiry. I'm sure he'll run right out and do that.

USA

Harry Reid shut down the Senate! In a surprise move, he used one of the Senate's many quirky rules to force the doors to be locked, observers and staffers to be expelled, and the cameras shut off. Why? Because the Junta has refused to look into the pre-war misuse of intel by the White House. Sen. Roberts was supposed to get into it a year ago, but it's been mysteriously slipping his mind. I'm sure he still has suits at the dry cleaners, too.

The last think the Bush Junta can afford is an investigation into their treasonous lies that sucked us into this bloody and bankrupting conflict. So far, Roberts has been their man; he's stonewalled all attempts to make him act like an American.

So Harry Reid pulled a fast one and hijacked the chamber for a couple of hours. With the indictment of Scooter Libby, it's time to make a power move (okay, well past time, but still).

The Libby/Plame affair is all about the purposeful lies told to the American people to turn them to war. War is the most serious action a nation can take. It defines a people. It kills their sons and daughters, and many sons and daughters of the enemy.

But the Junta made it a picnic. They went ion a lark, destroying our national credibility and our alliances on an ideological whim. And then to compound their blind stupidity, they botched the occupation, treating it as a free lunch for their corporate sponsors.

This much is known. How much more will we know when a real investigation is done? The Congress is supposed to police the executive, but the Junta has seen to it that the sacred duty of oversight has been dropped.

Senate Majority Leader Dr. StrangeFrist said: "This is an affront to me personally," an angry Mr. Frist said. He said would find it difficult to trust Mr. Reid any longer. "It's an affront to our leadership," Mr. Frist said. "It's an affront to the United States of America. And it is wrong."

But for all the huffing and puffing, three Democratic and three Republican Senators will report back on the progress of the hearings by November 14. And the Senate is on notice: they can't keep protecting this president. And they can't keep protecting themselves.

Give 'em Hell, Harry!

Eat It

According to the Washington Post:

On Friday, as the Agriculture Committee was drafting budget-cutting legislation that could knock 295,000 people off food stamps, the Agriculture Department released findings that 529,000 more Americans went hungry last year than in 2003.

And what does this fine media outlet call that?

"Unfortunate political timing for House Republicans."

Seems more like the act of cowards and scoundrels to me. That's the problem we're facing these days: a government run by insane bloodthirsty narcissists, and a media that thinks making people hungry counts as no more than "unfortunate political timing." We are well past any branch of government having - or showing - any modicum of shame, but isn't this a bit over the top?

One might think, if one were American, that the government should work to mitigate - or prevent - hunger and starvation in, you know, America. But apparently that's old news. In the new neocommie political order, hunger is not an issue. If you can't kill enough people to eat, you starve. If you don't work three jobs, you can't feed your family. It's simple mathematics.

Unless you're a draft-dodger or an outright deserter; even better if you never worked a day in your life. Then you're a hero and free to take the proceeds of other's labour. This is not just pie-in-the-sky utopian talk. It's being implemented by your government today in order to transform our world into that Star Trek episode where the cloud people party all day while the grunts work the mines (oh, don't pretend you don't know what I'm talking about).

Take a look at the deal your Labor Department cut with Wal Mart. Even without the over mind control of an otherwise-occupied Karl Rove, the department reached a wonderful settlement with the evil chain all by itself. Who needs Labor Department lawyers, after all, when Wal Mart lawyers are willing to do all the work in writing the agreement? Sure, give them 15 days notice before you do an inspection. That will let them clean everything up and have it neat - until you leave. Just because underage kids are working too many hours and operating heavy machinery and chainsaws - what's the big deal?

After all, if a kid has to work that hard, it means they need the money, which means they're not part of the blessed minority of wealthy kids. So let them haul the wood. And if they're part of the poor but religiously stupid rightists that make up the favoured 'social conservative bloc,' it's even better. See, when they mangle themselves and dir in occupational accidents, they go right to heaven. It's win-win!

The Labor Department's inspector general strongly criticized department officials yesterday for "serious breakdowns" in procedures involving an agreement promising Wal-Mart Stores 15 days' notice before labor investigators would inspect its stores for child labor violations.

The report by the inspector general faulted department officials for making "significant concessions" to Wal-Mart, the nation's largest retailer, without obtaining anything in return. The report also criticized department officials for letting Wal-Mart lawyers write substantial parts of the settlement and for leaving the department's own legal division out of the settlement process.

The report said that in granting Wal-Mart the 15-day notice, the Wage and Hour Division violated its own handbook. It added that agreeing to let Wal-Mart jointly develop news releases about the settlement with the department violated Labor Department policies.

If not for the damned Inspector General, this would never have come to light anyway. Just because Wal Mart got to write the announcement, and no other business got the zero-penalty approach like Wal Mart, that only means that Wal Mart has gone to the approved church and ponied up the right political donations.

So all you freeloading poor kids out there: stop trying to imitate your betters by studying and eating and doing other luxury activities like not chopping your hands off with a chainsaw. You're putting on airs and we don't like it.

Keep your place and try not to get your blood all over the merchandise.