BottleOfBlog

More Liberal Hollywood Bias!

An angry Republican God turns entire world white in response to Hollywood's moral relativism with regard to miscegenation and fossil fuels.

So, tonight, I'm watching "The Day After Tomorrow".  For those of you who are as lazy and disinterested as me, that's a brand new movie that came out like a couple of years ago and it supposedly involves end of the world like climate changes due to--and here's the incredible Hollywood liberal bias part--greenhouse gasses and fossil fuels.

You watch the movie, like I did, about five years after it came out, while doing other things, and really only catching about twenty minutes of a some amount of hours and a bunch of unknown minutes long movie, and you never hear one single unbiased argument for why North America gets turned into a popsickle.

Not one.

Even worse than that, apparently, and correct me if I'm wrong--because I was drinking beer and talking on the phone, and totally not watching what was going on--but the movie prominently featured a "scientist" who, incredibly, was portrayed as knowing more about the climate than the Vice President, himself!

Fucking Hollywood.

And virtually no one--and I say that as a person who barely watched the movie and has never spoken to anyone who has seen the whole thing and I also have never read anything at all about it;  so I'm at least as much of an expert on the movie as your run of the mill conservative pundit or talk show host--no one mentions the elephant in the living room!

Like five minutes into the movie, when I was almost still paying attention, there's a black meteorologist kissing his white wife!

And no where in the movie, nor in any of the reviews, or any of the scientific Hollywood journals is there any discussion at all that the giant big cold thingies that wreck civilization are, in fact, caused not by fossil fuels, but by the wrath of God at the mongrelization of the pure white race.

I'm sure Nick Kristoff or Daniel Okrent would have been appalled if such a one sided story--even a fictional one--had appeared in the New York Times.  It's just one more affront to good evangelicals, and the Preznit, who supposedly represents them.

If Hollywood would like to be taken more seriously by more Americans, if Hollywood would like to regain some of it's credibility, which was so badly tarnished by it's wrongheaded opposition to the Iraq War(which as we now know, was well worth it and completely justified), it could look to, again, the New York Times--hire some evangelicals to write your scripts and represent the conservative, right wing point of view!

You don't have to make a whole movie about God covering the world in ice because some heathen black devil ravaged and defiled a pure, Christian white girl. 

But you could at least mention it.

Liberal Media Surprisingly Surprised At Usual Bush Bankruptcy

Two days after winning reelection last fall, President Bush declared that he had earned plenty of "political capital, and now I intend to spend it." Six months later, according to Republicans and Democrats alike, his bank account has been significantly drained…

Well, why wouldn't he recklessly blow all his political capital?  He's bankrupted nearly every business he's ever been involved with.  And he's bankrupted the United States.  Did anyone really expect him to be responsible with any kind of capital?

Through more than four years in the White House, the signature of Bush's leadership has been that he does not panic in the face of bad poll numbers…

Wow!  That is brave leadership!  When you’re the president whose party controls the House, the Senate, and the Supreme Court, it takes a lot of guts not to panic in the face of dismal poll numbers…

Gosh, where he finds his political courage, I’ll never know!

Many experienced Washington hands believe that Bush has the opportunity to reestablish his clout if he focuses his efforts. "Every president goes through patches like this," Newt Gingrich, the Republican former House speaker, said in an interview. "Reagan had a difficult patch in August '81, but he came back and was strongly successful. Clinton, if you'll remember, in June or July of '95 looked like he couldn't get anything done and then won reelection. These things come and go."

Yeah, Reagan had a difficult patch in ’81.  And Clinton struggled in ’95.  Anyone—or everyone—get the difference?

Those were presidents in their first terms.  Those were presidents learning how to govern.

The Monkey, who’s in his second term, who’s supposed to have figured this stuff out by now, is still learning.

Christ, what an idiot.

Bush has had a hard time persuading Congress to go along with his agenda, in part because surveys show that much of the public has soured on him and his priorities. In the most recent Washington Post poll, taken last month, 47 percent of Americans approved of Bush's performance, tying the lowest marks he ever received in that survey, back in mid-2004, when Democrats were airing tens of millions of dollars' worth of campaign attack ads.

Similarly, just 31 percent approved of his handling of Social Security, an all-time low in the Post poll, while only 40 percent gave him good marks for his stewardship of the economy and 42 percent for his management of Iraq, both ratings close to the lowest ever recorded in those areas. Other surveys have recorded similar findings, with Bush's approval rating as low as 43 percent.

Christ, when is your "liberal" media ever going to admit that Bush never had any political "capital"?  He came into office, unelected, his approval ratings steadily declined from that unimpressive start, and then...

Two thousand Americans got killed on live television.

And that was it.

Americans rallied behind the president.

And his approval ratings have continued their steady decline since then.

Americans never approved of Bush's policies.  Never.  And his teensy, alleged margin of victory in 2004 had nothing to do with his policies.  Jesus, barely a couple of weeks after Bush was sworn in for a second term of mindless destructive behavior, sixty percent of Americans--including 25% of Republicans--wanted Democrats to stop Bush and his out of control Republican party.

He didn't spend his capital.  He never had any.  At all.  He was just a big mouth, with a megaphone, a smoking pile of rubble and God's own amount of money at a time when Americans wanted to kill everyone and everything in sight.

And when the small, prehistoric, reptillion part of our national brain jumped to our frontal lobes, well, apparently, we wanted a like-minded individual in the big house.

And if there was ever a joker with a fucking lizard brain in the White House, it was The Disaster Monkey.

But, again, he never had any political capital.  And this has nothing to do with being a "lame duck" or anything.  There has never been one single poll that shows that Americans favor Bush's agenda.  Never.  Ever.

It's frankly shocking, with such an incredibly biased, liberal media, no one ever points that out.

You Have Got To Be Kidding Me!

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The insurgency in Iraq is "in the last throes," Vice President Dick Cheney says, and he predicts that the fighting will end before the Bush administration leaves office…

The vice president said he expected the war would end during President Bush's second term, which ends in 2009.

"I think we may well have some kind of presence there over a period of time," Cheney said. "The level of activity that we see today from a military standpoint, I think, will clearly decline. I think they're in the last throes, if you will, of the insurgency…"

The insurgency is in its last throes?  Well, that's good news!  I thought this thing might go on and on!  Though, you know, if you go back, and read what this administration has being saying since the war started, you get a weird familiar feeling.

I mean, in March of 2003, while "major combat operations" were still ongoing, Rumsfeld was claiming that a bunch of "deadenders" were in the last throes of their resistance.

In the summer of 2003, when the violence continued and actually started to grow, the Bush administration told us again that there were some isolated pockets of "deadenders" who were in their last throes.

In the late fall of 2003, when violence exploded in some of the deadliest months in Iraq, the Bush administration told us that this was just representative of the desperation of a bunch of deadenders who were in their last throes.

When Saddam's sons were killed, we were told this was an event that surely heralded the last throes of the insurgency.

When Saddam was captured, that was it!  It was over for the insurgency.

When the violence escalated in the Spring of 2004 with killings of American contractors and Iraqi civilians and police officers, this was a clear sign of the growing desperation of the insurgency.

When "sovereignty" was handed over to the Iraqis last summer, clearly the insurgency was doomed.

When we levelled Fallujah, we could rest assured that the insurgency was now in its final, last desperate throes.

When the Iraqis turned out to vote in January of 2005, this clearly signalled to the world that the Iraqi insurgency was over.  Finished.  Done.

And now, with a new Iraqi government in place and Iraqi troops taking increased responsibility for the security of Iraq, Dick Cheney tells us the insurgency is really, really, honestly, no kidding in its last desperate throes.

Except, apparently, no one is bothering to tell the insurgents.

BAGHDAD, Iraq, May 28 - The surge of violence that has swept Iraq since its first elected government took office nearly a month ago continued Saturday, with at least 30 new deaths reported across the country, some of them in what appeared to be sectarian killings.

The latest attacks raised the total number of Iraqis killed this month to about 650, in addition to at least 63 American troops who have been killed, the highest American toll since January.

And, apparently, no one bothered to tell the American generals in Iraq:

BAGHDAD -- American military commanders in Baghdad and Washington gave a sobering new assessment on Wednesday of the war in Iraq, adding to the mood of anxiety that prompted Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice to come to Baghdad last weekend to consult with the new government.

In interviews and briefings this week, some of the generals pulled back from recent suggestions, some by the same officers, that positive trends in Iraq could allow a major drawdown in the 138,000 American troops late this year or early in 2006. One officer suggested Wednesday that American military involvement could last "many years."

In Baghdad, a senior officer said Wednesday in a background briefing that the 21 car bombings in Baghdad so far this month almost matched the total of 25 in all of last year…

"I think that this could still fail," the officer said at the briefing, referring to the American enterprise in Iraq. "It's much more likely to succeed, but it could still fail…"

"I think it's going to succeed in the long run, even if it takes years, many years," he said.

Many, many years.  Which is exactly what the Bush administration expected going into this crazy thing.  It's just ridiculous for ignorant, naive liberals to think that we could invade Iraq, achieve a quick victory, instill democracy and be out the door in a couple of months.

Get a grip on reality, you whiney liberal idiots!  These things take time--we're talking about building a democracy in a country which has absolutely no cultural or political history of western styled democracy.  You need to have some patience, for God's sake! 

Again, did you just expect full blown Jeffersonian democracy to spring up in the wake of Saddam?  Did you just expect that we could withdraw our troops in a couple of months?  Wake up!  We're spreading democracy!  Only a bunch of full blown morons would think that this noble enterprise wouldn't take years and years!

...Huddling in a drawing room with his top commanders, General Franks told them it was time to make plans to leave. Combat forces should be prepared to start pulling out within 60 days if all went as expected, he said. By September, the more than 140,000 troops in Iraq could be down to little more than a division, about 30,000 troops…

...(former Enron exec) Thomas E. White, then the secretary of the Army, said he had received similar guidance from Mr. Rumsfeld's office. "Our working budgetary assumption was that 90 days after completion of the operation, we would withdraw the first 50,000 and then every 30 days we'd take out another 50,000 until everybody was back," he recalled. "The view was that whatever was left in Iraq would be de minimis."

Yeah, the people who are now urging patience, the people who are claiming that liberals--who thought this thing was going to be an incredibly expensive, time consuming, bloody fiasco--expectations have not been realistic are the same people who expected American troops out of Iraq in about ninety days.

And now they're chiding liberals for not realistically being prepared for the long, hard struggle of many, many years.

Good God.  Would any Americans have supported this dumbass fiasco if the Bush administration had honestly told us that Iraq had no weapons of mass destruction, no terrorist ties, and that securing Iraq might take until 2009???  At least.

It would almost be funny if these clowns were characters in a book, say by John Kennedy Toole or Joe Heller.  It's brain exploding that these people are running our government.

Nevertheless, Cheney said he was "absolutely convinced we did the right thing in Iraq." He said the United States was making "major progress" in Iraq, where a transitional government took power in April and was working on drafting a new constitution.

"America will be safer in the long run when Iraq, and Afghanistan as well, are no longer safe havens for terrorists or places where people can gather and plan and organize attacks against the United States," he said.

And no where in the article does it mention that there were no---none, zero--terrorists in Iraq prior to the American invasion.  There were no terrorists using Iraq as a safe haven or gathering to plan attacks against the United States.  None.

Well, that's not true.  There was one maniac who was ignored by the Bush administration and protected by the "no fly zone" maintained by the RAF and the United States Air Force in Northern Iraq.  His name? 

Abu Musab Zarqawi.

But other than that guy, who again, the Bush administration intentionally ignored, there weren't any terrorists in Iraq.  But there are now.

Much of the discussion has focused on how to deal with the rise of a new generation of terrorists, schooled in Iraq over the past couple years. Top government officials are increasingly turning their attention to anticipate what one called "the bleed out" of hundreds or thousands of Iraq-trained jihadists back to their home countries throughout the Middle East and Western Europe. "It's a new piece of a new equation," a former senior Bush administration official said. "If you don't know who they are in Iraq, how are you going to locate them in Istanbul or London?"

A whole new generation of terrorists!  Trained in Iraq!  And they may be coming to a city near you!

Oh, and that's not silly liberals saying that this time--that's the Bush administration, finally catching up to what silly liberals were saying nearly two years ago.

I, of course, am eagerly waiting the furious denunciation of the Bush administration by all those same right wing lunatic pundits and bloggers who scathingly denounced anyone who suggested that this Iraqi catastrophe would make America less safe.

If anyone hears any of it, please let me know.  Last time I checked, I think Glen Reynolds was talking about the dangers of the flu. 

But I'm sure he and Rush, and Sean Hannity, and the rest of the barking mad right wing nuts will, any second now, get down to setting the Bush administration straight about their absurd claims that the Iraq war has created terrorists, rather than eliminated them.

And after you've let me know about that, please let me know: how does a guy like Dick Cheney get anywhere near the White House?  How does a determined and shameless liar like Dick Cheney get on television?  How do his hysterical, nonsensical, jaw dropping comments pass without universal public ridicule and scorn?

How does the man ever appear in public without being covered in rotten vegtables?  Or being forced to run naked through the streets with a jackass hat and tail on, while enraged citizens beat him with sticks?

And how did the dumbest, most irresponsible, most wrong-headed, most incompetent people in our country wind up running the world?

Army Rewards...Oh, Shit, Just Read The Damn Post

Two Army analysts whose work has been cited as part of a key intelligence failure on Iraq -- the claim that aluminum tubes sought by the Baghdad government were most likely meant for a nuclear weapons program rather than for rockets -- have received job performance awards in each of the past three years, officials said.

The civilian analysts, former military men considered experts on foreign and U.S. weaponry, work at the Army's National Ground Intelligence Center (NGIC), one of three U.S. agencies singled out for particular criticism by President Bush's commission that investigated U.S. intelligence…

Pentagon spokesmen said the awards for the analysts were to recognize their overall contributions on the job over the course of each year. But some current and former officials, including those who called attention to the awards, said the episode shows how the administration has failed to hold people accountable for mistakes on prewar intelligence.

Wait a minute!  Wait a minute!

George W. Bush, the man who restored dignity and integrity to the White House, the leader--nay--hero of the Party Of Personal Responsibility, the straight shootin', nuthin' if not honest, says what he means, means what he says, honorable and God a-fearin' Preznit failed to hold people accountable for mistakes???

I find that hard to believe.

This smacks me of some more of that Bernie Goldberg type bias that's gotten so many people killed. 

Let's try looking at the facts, you beret wearing, French wine swilling, man on dog lap pounding, pinkos.

For instance:

Paul Wolfowitz, who told the American people that Iraq had no history of civil strife and, therefore large numbers of American troops would not be needed to secure the country, who told the American people that the Iraqis would welcome Americans as liberators, was pretty soundly disciplined for being so amazingly wrong and stupid by being appointed to head the World Bank.

Condi Rice, who was the National Security Advisor, who lied to Congress, who lied to the American people on national television, she claimed her incredible public dishonesty was not due to any bad motive but was, rather, understandable due to her incredible incompetence and laziness--in making a case for war, she couldn't be bothered to read footnotes.

And, of course, as we all know, Condi's feet were not only held to the fire, but they were deeply immersed in the flames as she was appointed Secretary of State.  How she's ever going to live that down, you got me.

Then there was Donald Rumsfeld, who ridiculed and berated American generals who told him that it would take more than 40,000 troops to seize and secure Iraq.  There was Rumsfeld who presided over a military that tortured, humiliated, and killed prisoners in their custody.

And, of course, Rumsfeld was duly punished by being forced to serve another four years as Secretary of Defense.  Even though he wanted to resign.

You're not getting off that easy, buster!

Then there was George Tenet, the head of the CIA who presided over two of the worst--what am I saying--the two worst intelligence failures in the history of the United States.  And, of course, he was forced to resign.  Though, the Bush administration and George Tenet denied that as a bunch of crazy liberal biased irresponsible media bull hooey.

Tenet simply wanted to spend more time with his family.  Also, Bush awarded him the Medal of Freedom.

Then there was Ahmad Chalabi, who apparently sold American secrets to the Iranians and who lied to American intelligence about Saddam's awesome stockpile of Weapons of Mass Destruction.

To hold him responsible, Bush and his insane clown posse are forcing Chalabi to be Iraq's new Minister of Oil.  It's a pretty crummy job in a country like Iraq.  You know, where there's not too much oil.  Your basic dead end job.

Let's see...who else got torched by Bush's nearly fanatical, Old Testament styled lust for holding people personally responsible for their actions?

Well, there was George Bush, himself!  Never one to shy away from personal responsibility, Bush, who, as Commander In Chief, presided over, again, the two worst intelligence failures in the history of the country, who was the War Preznit who failed to tighten the noose on al Qaeda, who mired America in a war with no end in sight, who turned a budget surplus into record setting, nation bankrupting deficits, when asked if he could think of a single mistake he had ever made, was quick--well, after he sponged the twenty pounds of sweat off his twitchy face--to point out that maybe he made some mistakes in the people he appointed to some jobs.

He stepped right up there and took full responsibility for the fact that other people were to blame.

Who else?  Well, there was Larry Lindsey, who estimated, before the Iraq War, that the war would cost about $200 billion and who was promptly fired.

And there was Eric Shinseki, who estimated that the United States would need about 360,000 troops to adequately secure the country after Saddam's defeat.  He was also promptly fired.  After a bit of public ridiculing.

There was Paul O'Neil, who felt that Bush's incredibly irresponsible tax cuts in the face of wildly increased spending were, well, irresponsible.  He got fired.

Then there was that Wilson fella, who tried to warn the White House that the whole African uranium thing that Condi Rice and George Tenet, and Colin Powell all signed off on was a bunch of hooey.  They didn't fire him.  They just exposed his wife as a covert CIA agent.

Also, they let him know he'd never work in Washington again.

And then, finally, there was that Richard Clarke guy, who apparently had been throwing a hissy fit about al Qaeda prior to September 11th.  They didn't fire him, either.  But when he turned out to be right, and when he tried to do something as crazy as take personal responsibility for 2000 Americans getting exploded, live, on morning television, the Bush administration smeared him as a disgruntled employee--read here:  crazy postman!--and a fag, to boot!

Well, I could go on all night.  But I won't.  If I forgot any Profiles In Personal Responsibility, please feel free to let me know.

It would be fitting to hear them this weekend, as we remember the 1600 Americans who gave the last full measure of devotion in Iraq.  As we remember the over ten thousand who were blinded, crippled, burned, and brain damaged in Iraq,  it would be altogether fitting that we remember and celebrate the good fortune, the pay raises, the promotions, the choice jobs, and the medals that have been generously heaped on the people who sent our sons and daughters, and fathers and mothers there.

On a horseshit story.

After all, we couldn't honor our wounded and our dead without the people who put them in harm's way in the first place.

So, again, to Condi, and Rummy, and Wolfy, and Colin, and Big Time Dick Cheney, and Ahmad Chalabi and all the little people in the Bush administration--hey, don't bother breaking your arms patting yourselves on the back this weekend for all you've done to bring us to Iraq.  Don't think we won't remember you.

Without you, none of this would have been possible.

Krugman Responds To Okrent's Cheap Parting Shot

Dear Sir:

Fuck you.

Paul Krugman
Princeton, New Jersey

(P.S. Strong letter to follow.)

I can hardly wait.

Anti-American Anger And Violence Erupts Throughout Muslim World; Bush Administration Rifles Through Latest Newsweek For Reasons Why

ISLAMABAD, Pakistan - Thousands of Muslims marched Friday in Islamic countries from Asia to the Middle East, burning symbols of America to protest the alleged desecration of the Quran by military personnel at a U.S. prison in Guantanamo, Bay, Cuba.

The rallies in Pakistan, Egypt, Lebanon, Indonesia, Malaysia and elsewhere followed an admission Thursday by U.S. investigators that Islam’s holy book was mishandled at Guantanamo. But American officials claimed it was often inadvertent and denied that any Qurans were flushed down a toilet, as Newsweek magazine had reported in a now-retracted article…

Women in black veils marched through Kashmir, where schools and businesses were closed as part of the protest, and set American flags and copies of the U.S. Constitution ablaze…

More than 15,000 people took to the streets of Pakistan’s largest cities…

In Pakistan’s southwestern city of Quetta, 5,000 demonstrators chanted slogans against the United States and Britain. Another 5,000 gathered in the southern city of Karachi, demanding the expulsion of the U.S. ambassador. Protests also were held in Lahore, near the Indian border…

About 12,000 people, many of them supporters of the outlawed Muslim Brotherhood group, gathered in Alexandria, Egypt, filling a three-story building and spilling into surrounding streets, listening to preachers who demanded an apology from U.S. officials…

In Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, protesters shouted “Go to hell, America!” and waved placards reading “Long Live Islam,” as they burned U.S. and Israeli flags outside the U.S. Embassy…

In Bangladesh’s capital of Dhaka, about 5,000 people rallied after Friday prayers, spitting on U.S. flags, kicking them and then burning them. They shouted “Death to America!” and “Destroy America!” Many carried copies of the Quran, held over their heads.

The protesters used shoes to beat a Bush dummy and burned an effigy of the president, chanting “Bush — the killer!” Riot police watched the demonstrators, who dispersed peacefully…

Nice, huh?  Can you believe that just two weeks ago the Bush administration, which was well aware of what American investigators knew about Guantanamo Bay, said shit like this??? 

McClellan said the magazine now has a responsibility to spread the word to the Muslim world that U.S. interrogators "treat the Quran with great care and respect."

Another official said it will take a sustained effort by Newsweek to "mitigate the fallout," also calling on the magazine to take steps to spread the word about its retraction to Muslims worldwide…

Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld said the flap was a reminder that people "need to be very careful about what they say."

"People are dead, and that's unfortunate," Rumsfeld told reporters. "People need to be very careful about what they say just as people need to be careful about what they do."

Can you believe that these gutless, sadistic, incompetent bastards blamed Newsweek for the damage to our image in the Muslim world?  Can you believe, knowing what they knew, that high ranking members of the Bush administration said shit like this???

Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, traveling home from Iraq, said, "It's appalling that this story got out there.

"I do think it's done a lot of harm," Rice said. "Of course, 16 people died but it's also done a lot of harm to America's efforts" to demonstrate tolerance and breed goodwill in the Muslim world.

"The sad thing was that there was a lot of anger that got stirred by a story that was not very well founded," Rice said…

"We've not found any wrongdoing on the part of U.S. service members," said Gen. Richard Myers, chairman of Joint Chiefs. He said the Pentagon has investigated the claims, but he did not indicate whether the investigation was complete.

Yeah, that's your chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, who has got to be the most reflexively dishonest man since Joe Isuzu, just blatantly lying.  That's your Secretary of Defense, under whose appalling handling of the military these shamefull things occured, cautioning people to watch what they say, watch what they do.  That's your Secretary of State and former National Security Advisor claiming to be appalled by an "unfounded" story that she must have known was founded on the truth.

Unless she didn't read the footnotes again.  Which she's pretty well known for.

And that's your Press Secretary for your White House saying, idiotically, that a magazine has the responsibility to show the world that American interrogators treated the Koran with respect when, in fact, he knows they didn't.

When, in fact, it's the administration's responsibility to not only show the world that Americans respect the Koran--but that they respect real live Muslim human beings.

And all of these clowns, who were complicit from either stupidity, sadism, or just gross negligence or incompetence in shaming America in a way that will be with us for at least the rest of our lives, had the nerve, knowing what they had to have known, to chide and lecture journalists for damaging the image of the United States???

A lot of people say that Bush is the worst president we have ever had.  But I think that's a wildly inaccurate remark.

Bush is, by any stretch of the imagination, the worst president we will ever have.

Two Hundred Billion Dollar History Lesson

BAGHDAD, Iraq, May 26 - No one knows who tortured and killed Hassan al-Nuaimi, a Sunni Arab cleric whose body was found in an empty lot here last week, with a hole drilled in his head and both eyes missing. But the various theories have a distinctly sectarian tinge…

A hole drilled in his head and both eyes missing? Jesus. A sectarian tinge?  What do you think a tinge of sadistic, thrill killing in Iraq looks like?

Their deaths, amid violence that has taken more than 550 lives across Iraq this month, renewed concern that the bloodshed may be shifting ever more toward crudely sectarian killings.

Hard-line Sunni leaders have pressed the case. "The killing in Iraq now is according to religious identity," said Sheik Abdel Nasir al-Janabi, a religious Sunni and a hard-line member of the National Dialogue Council, a Sunni political group that claims to have ties to the insurgency. "Now you're killed because you're a Sunni Arab…”

"We are drifting into a sectarian society," said Ghassan al-Atiyya, a secular Shiite and the director of the Iraqi Foundation for Development and Democracy, a Baghdad research institute. "The Americans, instead of strengthening liberal and secular, they are now hostage of Sciri," he said, referring to a religious Shiite political group, "and Kurds."

"They let the genie out of the bottle," Mr. Atiyya said.

Wonder what that genie looks like?  I'll show you!

Horrifying, isn't it?

Yes, it is.  But, gosh, what I wonder is who could have seen that coming?  Hmmmm...

I guess that would be people like Molly Ivins and Eric Alterman, and, oh yeah, nearly all the people who opposed this stupid, stupid war.

Wow, when they weren't being a bunch of naive, treasonous, American hating, troop betraying, fifth column seditionists, they were actually, well, pretty much on the money, huh?

You know who didn't see it coming?

In his testimony, Mr. Wolfowitz ticked off several reasons why he believed a much smaller coalition peacekeeping force than General Shinseki envisioned would be sufficient to police and rebuild postwar Iraq. He said there was no history of ethnic strife in Iraq, as there was in Bosnia or Kosovo. He said Iraqi civilians would welcome an American-led liberation force that "stayed as long as necessary but left as soon as possible," but would oppose a long-term occupation force. And he said that nations that oppose war with Iraq would likely sign up to help rebuild it. "I would expect that even countries like France will have a strong interest in assisting Iraq in reconstruction," Mr. Wolfowitz said. He added that many Iraqi expatriates would likely return home to help.

Yeah, that's right.  The neo-conservative, Bush administration architect of this fiasco.  The intellectual one--Wolfowitz was the smart one.

Don't even think about the fact that, right now, running our government, we've only got the dumb ones left.

Don't.

Just don't do it.

The Incredible "Credibles"

Condi Rice, revealing the source of "credible" Bush administration information.

WASHINGTON - U.S. officials have substantiated five cases in which military guards or interrogators mishandled the Quran of Muslim prisoners at Guantanamo Bay but found "no credible evidence" to confirm a prisoner's report that a holy book was flushed in a toilet, the prison's commander said Thursday.,,

"I'd like you to know that we have found no credible evidence that a member of the Joint Task Force at Guantanamo Bay ever flushed a Quran down a toilet," Hood said. "We did identify 13 incidents of alleged mishandling of the Quran by Joint Task Force personnel. Ten of those were by a guard and three by interrogators."

Of the 13 alleged incidents, five were substantiated, he said. Four were by guards and one was by an interrogator. Hood said the five cases "could be broadly defined as mishandling" of the holy book, but he refused to discuss details.

In three of the five cases, the mishandling appears to have been deliberate. In the other two, it apparently was accidental.

So there's evidence that guards and interrogators intentionally mishandled Korans, but no "credible" evidence that a Koran was flushed down the toilet.

Well, that's good enough for me!

As long as nothing was "credible".

Unlike those "credible" reports that Saddam had an awesome, mindblowing stockpile of Weapons of Mass Destruction.  Unlike those reports, repeated again and again by the Vice Preznit on national television, that there was "credible" evidence that Saddam had terrorist ties.  Unlike all that "credible" evidence repeated by Condi, and Wolfy, and Cheney, and Bush about African yellowcake and aluminum tubes, and Saddam's mighty airwing of unmanned, transatlantic cropdusters of death.

Unlike the four hundred "credible" alerts from Tom Ridge about increased "terrorist chatter", that "credibly" seemed to pick up during the Democratic primaries, or during particularly embarrassing revelations about the War Preznit--you know the ones!  The ones that "credibly" told us that every shopping mall in America was likely to be exploded during the Christmas of 2003, that "credibly" told us that American elections would be disrupted by terrorists, that "credibly" elevated our terrorist danger level to "orange plus" for an entire election year and then vanished on the first Friday in November--along with our terrorism Czar, who was so "credibly" worried about terrorism that he needed to go back to the private sector where he could make more money.

So when someone from the Bush administration tells you something, you can believe it.  Not just because the Bush administration restored "character" to the White House, not just because these Bush fellas are nuthin' if not honest, but because when these Bush guys tell you something, they go the extra distance and let you know it's "credible".

That lets you know that, unlike the rest of the horseshit that regularly flies out of their mouths, this is something you can actually believe!

Credible scientific theory.

Nobody, except a bunch of nearly habitual liars, has to use the word "credible" as much as the Bush administration has.

Not credible conspiracy theory.

What these bullshitting jokers have done to the word "credible" is almost as bad as what they've done to the words "freedom", "democracy", "terrorism" and "coalition".

I mean, they've rendered these words meaningless.

So Condi, and Rummy, and McClellan, and all them right wing "pundits" and bloggers have all flogged Newsweek for publishing an irresponsible article that said a Pentagon source had confirmed that American guards and interrogators had disrespected the Koran at Guantanamo Bay.  They told us that Newsweek had gotten people killed.  Newsweek had damaged our image in the region.

And today we're told that Pentagon sources have confirmed that guards and interrogators at Guantanamo Bay did disrespect the Koran.

I haven't been following the news.  Anyone know about any retractions from the Bush administration?  Any outrage from the right wing "pundits" and bloggers?

Yeah, I didn't think so.

Fucking bullshitters.

Democrats Sell Out Entire Democratic Party, You Gutless, Brainless Bastards

WASHINGTON, May 24 - The Senate voted today to close its debate over one of President Bush's appeals court nominees, clearing the way for a vote on her confirmation as early as Wednesday.

The 81-to-18 vote ended efforts by Democrats to prevent the Senate from approving the nominee, Priscilla R. Owen, by threatening a filibuster. It came after a compromise was reached Monday night by a bipartisan group of 14 senators that defused a potentially explosive parliamentary showdown over eliminating Senate filibusters against judicial nominees.

Wow, that was such a good deal Democrats made there.  Preserving the filibuster, by allowing people like Priscilla Owen to get a lifetime appointment to the federal bench.  That's just great.  And what kind of a judge is Priscilla Owen?

More than $500,000 (37 percent) of the $1.4 million that Owen raised for her two Supreme Court campaigns came from lawyers and litigants who had cases in her courtroom.

Owen ranks No. 2 on the court in the share of campaign money that she took from these docket donors.

Owen’s 11 biggest litigant-donors (including Enron Corp., Farmers Insurance and Dow Chemical) appeared in her courtroom 26 times.

While these big docket donors prevailed an enviable 77 percent of the time before the court as a whole, Owen was even kinder—favoring them 85 percent of the time.

She's for sale.  She's a hooker in a black robe.  And that's who George W. Bush and the modern Republican party just put on your bench, for the rest of her life--a judge who takes money from litigants appearing in her court room and, in return, favors the biggest spenders.

Judges like that, by the way, are one of the reasons we fought the American Revolution.

But at least we still have the filibuster!  We'll have to endure a lifetime of Priscella Owens selling "justice" on the federal bench, but we'll have the filibuster! 

For who???

And for what?  For a worthless guarantee that Republicans will not try to shove completely objectionable judges down our throats?  Har!  Puh-lease! 

This is the Republican party that shoved an unwanted and unwarranted impeachment of Bill Clinton down our throats.  It shoved an unelected Preznit down our throats.  It shoved a foolish and unneccessary tax giveaway to millionaires down our throats.  It shoved a stupid Medicare Act down our throats.  And, if our throats weren't raw enough from all that, well, yeah, they shoved a two hundred billion dollar war that was based on lies down our throats.

What do you think?  They're going to appoint a bunch of moderates to the bench from now on?

Har!

You know, all these guys in the modern Republican party, they all consider themselves to be Reagan Republicans.  They consider themselves to be the Reagan Republican party.  Well, here's a good story I heard from Joe Biden, who I can't stand, about how the real Reagan Republicans did bidness:

Back in 1987, Justice Powell announced his retirement from the Supreme Court, and Reagan had the opportunity to fill that vacancy.  Back then, the federal government was still almost working in the way it used to work--you know, the two parties compromised and respected each other, and tried to work together. 

Course, under Reagan, and the nutty wing of the Republican party that was already starting to unravel.

So, anyway, the Reagan administration gave a list of about a dozen judges they were considering for the Supreme Court nomination to the Senate Judiciary Committee.  Which at that time was chaired by the Democrats.  And the Democrats looked over these twelve judges and they told the White House, "Hey, most of these guys are fine.  They'll pass.  There's only two or three that we absolutely would have a problem with. They're just too extreme."

And the White House thanked the Judiciary Committee for their advice and their future consent.  And the Democrats went to bed that night expecting to wake up in the morning to the news that any one of the nine or ten judges they'd already said were acceptable--that the White House had suggested--would be nominated.

Suckers!

When Joe Biden got up the next morning, as he was reading the Washington Post over his cornflakes, he learned that Ronald Reagan had nominated Robert Bork to the Supreme Court.  And guess what?  Out of the dozen possible nominees the White House had submitted to the Senate Judiciary Committee, the number one objectionable one, the most objectionable one, had been Robert Bork.

There were two or three Democrats said they couldn't live with.  But there was only one who they said was absolutely out of the question.

And it was Bork.

And Reagan, in the spirit of the kind of bipartisan cooperation we've come to associate with the modern Republican party, made Bork his nominee.

Why was Bork so objectionable?  Never mind Bork's appalling illegal behavior during the Nixon years.  Bork is a judge who doesn't believe the Supreme Court has the power or authority to interpret the Constitution.

That's the guy the Reagan Republicans wanted to put on the Supreme Court. A guy who doesn't believe in it!

How's that for a big "Fuck You, America"?

These are the kind of people Democrats are going to trust to not appoint any more objectionable judges to the Federal bench?

Think again.  Yeah, that took--what?  Three hours?

What a bunch of suckers.  What a bunch of clowns and sell outs.  Christ, Joe Biden's still in the Senate and that joker, who should well know what this Republican party is all about, didn't jump up and down and scream that their word is worthless?

How stupid is that fucking guy???  I mean, it's one thing to get out foxed by someone crafty.  It's another thing all together to get played by a bunch of dunderheads like Bill Frist or Trent Lott.

It's like sixth graders getting their lunch money stolen by first graders, for God's sake.

Democrats should have made Republicans get rid of the filibuster.  They should have laid all this at the feet of the modern Republican party--getting rid of the blue slip rule, getting rid of the filibuster--basically getting rid of the autonomy of the Senate to advise and consent, and the power of the Senate to enact its own rules for how it conducts bidness.

This modern Republican party is endlessly corrupt.  And it's just going to keep on doing whatever it feels like, to the detriment of democracy, to the detriment of our country.  And the minority Democrats can't stop them.

But, at the very least, Democrats should make Republicans own their own Republican stupidity.  Without question.  Like the Iraq War.  Like these dumbass tax cuts.  Like this horrendous bankruptcy bill.

This crap is theirs.  Don't give it a stamp of approval.  Stop playing along!

If they want it, they can force it down our throats--but they should have to be the ones, the only ones, who have to answer for what a fucked up mess they've made.  Period.

Bedfellows Of Politics

Cots and mattresses in the Capitol?  Bush can't be giving a speech, can he?  It's way too early for the State of the Union.  Congress can't be getting briefed on intelligence again, can they?

What the heck are they planning on sleeping through this week?