There's more to come

Please note: Morialekafa will not appear again until November 6th.

Finally! Something! Libby indicted on 5 counts. Rove escapes at least for the moment. I confess to feeling excited now that at least one indictment has occurred. But then, as I listened to some of the comments, mostly by lawyers, that seemed to indicate that this would be all there was to it, I became temporarily depressed. Then I realized that I was watching CNN. There is no way this is going to be the end of it all. Indeed, this is merely the beginning. If Libby is indicted that means Cheney is also vulnerable. Libby would not have even gone to the bathroom without Cheney's knowledge. And it is clear that Libby got Plame's name from Cheney long before she was outed by Novak. They keep insisting there was nothing wrong about Cheney, Libby and others in the administration discussing Wilson and Plame. But they have not offered any explanation as to why they were doing this. Do they just sit around discussing CIA operatives and their husbands as part of their daily routine? Why were they interested in Wilson and his wife at this time?

Rove is not off the hook either. Might he be "person A" that was mentioned by Fitzgerald? And what about possible charges of conspiracy? There is no doubt there was in fact a White House Iraq Group that was involved in selling the war on Iraq. The people involved are well known. It is alwo well known that lies were told to lead us into this dreadful and unnecessary "war." Is all this simply to be dismissed? I don't think so. I don't believe that like the Gannon/Guckert business they will just be able to ignore this until everyone forgets about it. We are talking major war crimes here, not just homosexual hanky-panky in the White House.

They tried to distract us with the Miers business. And they will no doubt try to do the same by naming another controversial candidate for the Supreme Court. And, of course they will attempt to roviate Fitzgerald:

Morialekafa - Sunday, September 18, 2005
How about a new word?
Most, if not all of those who sometimes read this blog are probably unfamiliar with the name Vidkun Quisling. He was a Norwegian traitor who collaborated with the Nazis in Norway and became part of a puppet Norwegian government. Thus a new word was added to the English language - quisling. I suggest we add another new word to our language:

roviate v. to smear, slime, malign, denigrate, and attempt to destroy an opponent through the use of innuendo, rumor, slander, outright lies and any other despicable means available. Roviation works more effectively when done in collaboration with the major media.

They have already started on this but so far have had no success. Fitzgerald is 44 years old, unmarried, and no doubt fair game for their slanderous and outrageous attacks. Most say he is so clean they can't possibly get away with this. Frankly, I can't see why it would matter. If the bastards are guilty as hell (which I am personally sure they are) what difference does it make what Fitzgerald is or does? I think roviating has peaked and will no longer be as effective as it has in the past. The jig is up for Rove and the neocons. It just remains to be seen and Fitzgerald seems to be the right man for the job.

Downhill from now on

The Bush/Cheney administration is finished, over, kaput. Oh, it might linger on for a time, struggling against one scandal after another, and then another, and another, but it is all downhill from now on. There is just no way they can ever possibly recover from the depths to which they have now sunk. This will be true no matter what Fitzgerald does tomorrow. There is a point of diminishing returns and Bush/Cheney have now more than passed it. I suggested in last night's blog that if the Republican party knew what was good for it, it would itself lead impeachment proceedings against Bush/Cheney. It is very doubtful they would accept any advice from the likes of me but that is their problem, not mine. The only way the United States can ever recover from what has happened in the last five years (if, indeed, we can recover even in the next 50 years) is if Bush/Cheney are impeached and then tried for war crimes. We would have to make clear to the rest of the world that we did not, and do not, sanction this criminal behavior. Of course this is not likely to happen.

Failing that scenario (impeachment) there is one other possibility, an even more unlikely happening. Bush/Cheney should resign. Immediately. Spare us all the legal and other hassles that are inevitably going to ensue. The country is going to be effectively paralyzed for the remainder of the Bush/Cheney presidency (and this is true no matter what Fitzgerald does tomorrow or in the future). Of course we can wait until the 2006 elections, and even until 2008, but what would be the point? Just three more years of utter chaos. The obvious solution, short of impeachment, would be for Bush/Cheney to resign. If they had any sense of either decency or shame they would do this for the good of the country. But, of course, they have neither decency nor shame, and could care less about the good of the country. They have already demonstrated their contempt for the country and its people by their every action since being in office. They have mercilessly attacked the middle and lower classes, the unions, the environment, the constitution, and, indeed, virtually everything our country has traditionally tried to honor. They have dishonored us on the world stage, plunged us into endless debt, and robbed our treasury to put more obscene wealth into the hands of those who have so much already they can't possibly use any more. They are determined to destroy the very fabric of our society and turn things back to the 18th century when the filthy wealthy few lorded it over their peasants and serfs. Make no mistake about it, this is what they are doing. So in the future explain to your hungry children they are hungry because they are protecting us from abortion and homosexuals.

The Bush/Cheney administration is a national disgrace. The "war" in Iraq is the saddest and worst mistake ever made in American history. The United States at the moment is best described as pathetic. Truly something sent by the gods to humiliate the animals.

End of the party?

Somewhere today I read a piece that claimed Bush was unimpeachable. The author based this claim on the fact that the House is controlled by Republicans and therefore it can be assumed they would not impeach the President. I might suggest another scenario, based upon reality.

It is quite likely the case that if nothing is done soon the Republican party is simply going to implode and may well be rendered totally irrelevant for a very long time. They are in very deep trouble. There is the almost unsolvable problem of Iraq where the killing just continues endlessly. There is the CIA leak scandal. DeLay is in trouble. Frist is in trouble. The economy is in trouble (in spite of their claims to the contrary). New Orleans and Florida are in trouble. Bush's poll ratings are plummeting day by day. Abramhoff may bring down many in the administration. The torture business won't go away and Cheney is trying to insure that torture can continue. Cheney is potentially in big trouble himself over the Plame case and where that seems to be leading. The Miers nomination is splitting the party. In short, the Republicans are about to self-destruct. How might they avoid this?

Well, they could try to start another war, with Syria or Iran. But given the nature of our armed forces at the moment that would not seem prudent. Of course they could just start dropping bombs again but at this point I don't think that would be well received by the rest of the world. Whatever positive steps they might take, like curbing Israel's greedy land grab and demanding a viable Palestinian state seems to be, for them, unthinkable.

In my opinion (I must warn you that my opinions are not worth very much) the only real possibility they have to remain a major player in the American scene is to jettison Bush/Cheney. They should themselves cleanse their party of this cancer, make it clear that the Bush/Cheney administration is leading them to disaster, and take steps to save themselves before it is too late. They should begin impeachment proceedings forthwith and hope that the Bush/Cheney sacrifice will be enough to save the rest of them (it shouldn't be, but it might work). I see no other reasonable option for them at the moment. If they think that somehow Bush's ratings are going to go back up they are clearly deluding themselves. And while it is true that the Democrats are giving them every conceivable break and benefit of the doubt this cannot continue indefinitely.

I think the choice is quite clear for Republicans: either abandon Bush/Cheney or enter the dustbin of history for a long, long time.

The Cabal

There was no Morialekafa last night because our server was down. Not that it matters much.

I hate to tell you that I told you so. But I told you so. I have said from the very beginning that this CIA leak scandal would lead to Dick the Slimy. And it has/is. Can there be any doubt at this point that there was in fact a cabal (the WHIG) that conspired to lie and deceive the Congress and the American people into an illegal, immoral, unconstitutional, and unnecessary "war" against Iraq? It seems to me this is perfectly obvious and there is no dearth of facts to support this conclusion. There is also no doubt about who the major players were: Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rice, Hughes, Matalan, Hannah, and others, probably including Bolton. Judy Miller seems to have been used by them to their advantage, if she was not, in fact, in it up to her eyeballs. Whether Bush was aware of this is questionable. As he has so little interest in foreign relations (or anything else as near as I can tell) perhaps he was out of the loop. If he was not, then obviously he should be in as much or more trouble than all the rest. While this seems perfectly obvious to me it remains to be seen what Fitzgerald can do with it. I have seen some who say there will be no indictments at all (John Dean, for example) and others who claim thre will be multiple indictments, and still others who seem to think it will only be Libby, and still others who think both Rove and Libby. Rumors, rumors, rumors, that's all we have at the moment. The latest rumor is that Fitzgerald will announce tomorrow what he is going to do. I certainly hope so as I don't think I can stand the suspense much longer.

Brent Scowcroft has written a blistering critique of the present administration's foreign policy, in spite of the fact that he is a long term close friend of Bush Sr. It seems to me this is long overdue. Where was Scowcroft and others who are now coming out against this criminal administration when it could have made a difference a long time ago? But better late than never I guess. The one thing that puzzles me is Scowcroft's statement about Cheney. They have been close friends for years and now Scowcroft says "I don't know Cheney now." What does this mean? Does it mean he never truly knew him in the first place or does it mean Cheney has somehow changed? And if he has changed, why, and in what way? I find this not only mysterious but also vaguely frightening.

Please Mr. Fitzgerald, do something soon. Save us from this absoluely dreadful nightmarish situation.

Bathrooms - essay

Still waiting for something, anything, to happen. In the meanwhile let us consider the question of bathrooms.


I do not wish to be indelicate; however, there is a serious problem with American bathrooms. No, I do not mean the absence of bidets. It's the absence of urinals that I find distressing. Why is it that in the vast majority of public bathrooms men are provided not only with standard toilets but also with urinals, whereas in their homes they are not? I have never seen a bathroom in an ordinary American home with a urinal. Never. And I'll bet you haven't either. Not only is this a blatant example of sexism it is also awkward, unhygienic, inefficient, and undesireable.
The sorry details of this problem must be known by every wife and cleaning lady in the country. Think of it: if a man raises the toilet seat and stands to do his duty it splashes around and eventually has to be cleaned up by someone (I'll wager most men don't do the cleaning). If, on the other hand, he puts the seat down he then has to take down his trousers and underwear. Most men I am sure do not do this unless they have the more serious business in mind.
I realize that most wives, and even people in general, do not want one of those full-length old-fashioned standing urinals which can easily become messy and smelly and in general undesireable. But what about the newer models that are small, well-designed, and just hang there on the wall, certainly requiring no more care than an ordinary toilet? Some may argue that such a device is too unsightly for a home bathroom. But what is sightly about a toilet? Others may argue that home bathrooms are too small to accomodate both a toilet and a urinal. Build them bigger I'd say (actually many bathrooms are plenty big enough to begin with). A few people have argued for years for the use of bidets in America, a movement that has gone nowhere, due no doubt in large measure to their questionable association with prostitution, an idea brought back by our fighting men from the two World Wars. Also because many Americans have no idea what a bidet is. I submit that a bidet is far less necessary than a good urinal in the typical American bathroom. And who would argue that a bidet is more aesthically appealing than a modest wall-mounted urinal? Besides, everyone knows what a urinal is, and that it is usually separated from sinks and toilets by a discreet screen of some kind. It doesn't just sit there on the floor in all its porcelain majesty like a bidet.
How might one explain this curious cultural tradition and historical oversight? I conclude that it is women, bless them, who perpetuate this strange custom. As they don't use urinals, and as they are the primary architects and buyers of bathrooms, they apparently see no need for such a male convenience. I resist the temptation to dwell on the concept of "penis envy" although I have no doubt it plays some role in this shameful situation. Just because women have to adjust their attire to perform their bodily functions is no reason men should be penalized and discriminated against. Indeed, I would argue that it would be in a woman's best interest to provide her mate with an attractive well-kept urinal. What better way to keep floors and toilet seats clean and free of germs? Besides, it would give husbands more time to babysit and do the dishes. Come to think of it, why don't we have separate facilities for men and women in our homes, bathrooms designed specifically for men and women, just as we do in train depots, airports, offices, and most everywhere else? You notice you rarely if ever see matching toilets in a bathroom, we just don't have two-holers anymore like we used to. Something needs to be done about this.

Waiting for what?

I have no real idea of what may happen next week. It does appear that Libby, at least, will probably go down. If he does, will he go quietly and take the blame for the Plame scandal, or will he spill the beans on others? It does seem pretty obvious that although Libby was very vocal about wanting to take down Wilson he must have had help. And there are many who probably helped: Miller, Rove, and perhaps even the vice president himself (this is probably true even if Fitzgerald decides he can't prove it). I have said all along that this scandal would ultimately lead to Cheney, and it has, even if it turns out it cannot be actually proven. This two year investigation could end with a whimper, but it could also prove to be the biggest thing since the invention of fire.

Condi "The Pathetic," continues mouthing the Bush line and threatening Syria, Iran, and, of course, the truth. Bush has called for an immediate U.N. meeting about Syria - anything to distract from the monumental failures of the Bush/Cheney administration. Could they possibly be stupid enough, or desperate enough, to start another war?

There are now rumors that Miers will withdraw her name from consideration for the Supreme Court. Actually, that's all there are at the moment about everything - rumors. Frankly, I can't wait for next week. Something has to happen. Either Fitzgerald will bring forth some indictments, or close up shop without them, or continue his investigation longer (if, that is, Bush doesn't fire him which apparently he could do although the fallout might be disastrous). In any case, something is going to happen. So stay tuned and hope for the best (justice might be served and war criminals might have to pay a price for their crimes). Don't bet on it.

A lesson from the Gila monster - essay

Well...John Dean seems to think there will be no indictments. Some guy from the Wall Street Journal apparently agrees (remember, he's from the Wall Street Journal). But many others think there will be indictments, anywhere from one to eight or more. No one knows. Fitzerald hasn't leaked. Everything is up in the air. We all hold our breath waiting to see what will happen next week. So, in the meanwhile, here is another essay:


I don’t know about you but I find Gila monsters to be very unattractive, even ugly, and as they are also poisonous, not something I am keen to have around. One of only two species of poisonous lizards (the Mexican beaded lizard is the other), they are found in the southwestern United States and in northern Mexico. They grow to about 20 inches, are sort of fat, with tails that store fat that they use for sustenance during the winter months. They have bead-like scales and pink and black blotches or bands, and some kind of plates on their undersides. They are rather sluggish creatures, mostly nocturnal, and during the summer months they feed on eggs, small mammals and birds. They have a strong bite and some of their teeth are grooved to conduct the venom while they are chewing on their prey. Their bite is rarely fatal to humans. I once knew a man who kept one as a pet in the drawer of his desk.
Although Gila monsters are not extinct (I don’t know precisely what their status is at the moment) they are certainly the kind of creature that could easily be allowed to completely disappear what with development, off-road vehicles, conversion of land use, and so on. Fortunately, however, they have not been allowed to follow many other species into extinction yet – because, of all things, it has been discovered recently that their saliva has medicinal properties very useful in the treatment of diabetes! Don’t ask me who thought up the idea of fooling around with their saliva in the first place. It is hard for me to imagine someone waking up in the middle of the night exclaiming, Eureka!, what we need is Gila monster saliva!.
That Gila monster saliva is useful does bring up some food for thought. The skin of frogs has been found to be useful for fighting microbes. Penicillin is derived from mold. Quinine is made from Chinchona bark. Many kinds of little known beans are presumed to have medicinal and other valuable qualities. And, of course, there are still species that have not been discovered by the west, and hundreds that have been, have not yet been thoroughly investigated.
No one likes mold. It ruins food. But what if people had discovered a way to prevent mold? We obviously would not have penicillin. What if all the frogs had disappeared (and some apparently are, for as yet unknown reasons)? What if all the Chinchona trees had been allowed to have been harvested? Far-fetched? I don’t think so, given how so many other plants, insects, and animals have been allowed to go extinct, and many more on the brink. We need rattlesnake venom in order to manufacture the antidote for it. I suppose, in the case of rattlesnakes, one might argue that if we killed all of them we wouldn’t need the antidote. But that seems impractical and besides, how do we know they may not hold other secrets of use? I hope the Gila monster example may act as a wake-up call so that our own species will actually get the message that virtually all plants, insects, and animals may well have important qualities and uses and therefore should not be treated as casually as they have in the past.
What potential secrets might the Passenger Pigeon have taken to the grave? The many species of birds that have disappeared from Hawaii and elsewhere? What might perish with the California Condor or the Whooping Crane if they don’t make it? Remember, we tried but failed to destroy the estimated 50 million American bison that were here when the first Europeans arrived. Happily, we have not as yet managed to destroy the Grizzly Bear or the Wolves. Prudence would seem to dictate that we not allow these things to happen. And what about the Tasmanians? The American Indian tribes that were completely decimated? Actually, we have been and continue to be so foolhardy and short-sighted we may even make ourselves extinct, in which case the whole point is moot and the joke will be on us.

It isn't fun anymore

It was said, if I recall it correctly, that when George Sanders committed suicide at age 65 he left a note that said: "life just isn't fun anymore." Perhaps you don't remember George Sanders, who was a suave, handsome, cynical actor who starred as "The Saint" (you might not remember that character either), in movies like The Moon and Sixpence and The Picture of Dorian Gray. In any case, that is how I feel about politics at the moment.

I know it doesn't really make sense to say that politics used to be fun. But in a strange sort of way it was, at least it was a hell of lot more fun than it is now. When Dewey ran against Roosevelt people on both sides felt strongly about their candidate, but no one worried that if Dewey won American democracy might fail, or that he would destroy the environment or the economy. Nor was global warming a problem to worry about. Similarly, even when Kennedy ran against Nixon, no one thought the winner would destroy our country. In those days, in a kind of perverse way, we all knew that both parties were more or less the same and that neither one of them had in mind the destruction of our country and democracy. That, unfortunately, is no longer true.

Probably starting with Goldwater who announced that "extremism in the pursuit of freedom (or something or other) is no vice," and then with Reagan who convinced many that government per se was evil, and certainly during the Clinton administration, the Republican party changed our politics from good clean fun into a struggle of life and death. Witness the absolutely unprincipled and illegal ways they employed to attack Clinton (which really had little to do with Monica). Witness the kinds of dirty tricks they have attempted since then (McCain's black child, his mental problems as a result of having been a prisoner of war, the totally false accusation against Kerry and his war record, and many, many more such below the belt tactics). They actually take pride in this and boast about the cleverness of Rove in thinking up these despicable tactics. And Republicans have apparently come to accept these tactics as legitimate (remember McCain commenting on what they did to him, "politics isn't beanbags."

Politics isn't a game of beanbags. But it shouldn't be a battle of life and death. It would be nice to know that both parties had the best interest of the citizens in mind, rather than simply corporate profits at any cost. It apparently has been completely forgotten, or at least overlooked by Republicans, that there is more to life than business and profits. Margaret Halsey wrote a book many years ago called The Pseudo Ethic in which she argued that the U.S. was a one institution society and that institution was business. She could not have imagined how true (and bad) it has finally become. Just today the Senate turned down a bill that would have raised the minimum wage from $5.15 an hour ($5.15!!). Ted Kennedy pointed out that a single parent with two children working full time would make $10,700 a year. This would leave them $4,500 below the poverty line!! The Republican controlled Senate turned the request for $6.25 an hour spread over an 18 month period. They cited their usual objection: it might hurt small business's. I guess it wouldn't hurt some small business's like Wal Mart, Halliburton, etc. Furthermore it could well be argued that if business's can't afford to pay living wages perhaps they shouldn't be in business. This is simply outrageous. A majority of our elected officials in Washington D.C. are no more than toadies for bloodsucking corporations and business interests in general. They are determined to take us back to the 1800's when a few had everything and the rest were simply peasants and serfs. They seem to be equally determined to force us into the streets as they did in the 1920's and 30's. When land and labor are considered merely commodities to be traded on the market just like potatoes and pork chops you can be sure there will be neither a healthy environment or a comfortable and content populace.

Meltdown

It appears that the meltdown of the Bush/Cheney administration has finally and truly begun. Everyday now brings forth new information and more questions that need to be answered. It is claimed that in 2003 Bush admonished Rove because of his participation in leaking Plame's name. He was said to be quite upset, not over the leak, but because of the clumsy way Rove and others went about it. If this is true it means that not only McClellan lied, but Bush himself lied when he said he did not know who was involved.

It has now also been claimed by someone in the White House that the story that Rove did not come clean with Bush is not true and was floated merely as an initial attempt to protect Bush (this seems to me quite plausible).

I read somewhere today that Fitzgerald has already made a deal with one of the White House insiders to help him with his investigation. Apparently he sent a letter to Hannah, second in command to Libby, I believe, threatening indictment if Hannah did not cooperate, and Hannah has agreed to cooperate. There is no telling where this may lead.

DeLay's lawyers have no case against the prosecutor and DeLay has been ordered to appear in Texas to be booked and fingerprinted, precisely what he was desperately trying to avoid. Perhaps it will turn out there is justice after all.

Miers, it turns out, has a record of being opposed to abortion, except to save a mother's life. But she insists no one knows how she would vote on Roe vs Wade. Yeah, I believe it, just like I believe Bush/Cheney who have never told the truth about anything, ever.

Hilary claims she talks tough on the "war" in Iraq and the necessity for more troops because no woman could possibly become president without looking tough. I guess she expects the insiders to believe this. I don't believe it. And I won't support any pro-war candidate. Hilary is just another Republican lite, sitting on the Board of Directors of Wal Mart. It's early yet but at the moment it looks to me that we may have to draft Gore who is the only viable candidate who has been against the war and the Bush/Cheny disaster from the beginning, and also by far the most well informed and experienced candidate for president one could even imagine. Of course he'd be a fool to take it on unless he could get every democrat in the country to swear in blood they would support him (because the mess left by Bush/Cheney can't be cleaned up with anything less).

By the way, things are going real well in Iraq, aside from the civil war and the predictable complaints about the "election."

Rumors and speculations

First of all don't forget to order The Cham Stones from Publish America. It will make a great Christmas present for all of your literate friends. And it will also help me put food in my mouth and such things.

Rumors are now flying all over the place. Cheney is rumored to be going to resign. Rumors say that Bush will replace Cheney with Condi Rice. Rumors say there are lots of people in the administration very upset about this who will not want Condi Rice. Of course there have already been rumors that Condi might run for president, opposing Hilary. Rumors. I love them. There are rumors that we have been visited by visitors from outer space. Rumors that bigfoot has been sighted once again. Rumors that the Loch Ness Monster is about to be found. Rumors this and rumors that. One rumor that might possibly have something behind it is that Fitzgerald may be trying to negotiate some deals with people who may be indicted, offering them easier terms than they might get after they are indicted if they agree to cooperate and testify against others. That is a rumor I might actually accept as having some credence. I suspect Cheney is far too egomaniacal and arrogant to resign - but what do I know?

What I do know is that these are exciting times and we are all waiting to see what is about to unfold. It seems pretty clear that Fitzgerald is going to seek some indictments although we don't really know how high up he is likely to go. It does seem that Cheney's office has been the center of a conspiracy to "get Wilson." As Cheney is probably the single most evil person on earth it is difficult to think otherwise. And you can be certain that Libby would not have acted without the approval of Cheney.

It was great that the Iraqis managed to get to the polls and vote in apparently large numbers in spite of their ongoing civil war. Was it not entirely predictable that the election would be challenged? But perhaps there is nothing unusual about one precinct (or whatever they are called in Iraq) voting 99% for something. After all, they voted 100% for Sadam. I fear this election is not going to solve anything and will just encourage the civil war that is already in place. Bush, of course, will no doubt claim a great success with democracy about to take over the entire Middle East.

Stand by and watch the Bush/Cheney administration implode. It couldn't happen to a better bunch of war criminals.

National injustice is the surest road to national downfall.
William E. Gladstone 1878

The Flame Plame Blame Game Dame

Can you believe it? A veteran reporter, Pulitzer Prize winner, on the track of one of the biggest stories in the news for weeks, can't remember who leaked Plame's name to her. The name Valerie Flame occurs in her notes, the very notes she took when interviewing Libby, but she doesn't think he was the source of the leak. She apparently wants us to believe she accidentally encountered Libby at a rodeo a few miles from Cheney's Wyoming home. I gather he was dressed like a cowboy and she hardly recognized him. Folks, it just gets curioser and curiouser. It is now being said by some that she is still trying to protect Libby. That is probably true. But I'll bet she is really protecting Cheney. She went to jail she claims to protect her source but Libby gave her permission to speak freely a long time ago. She didn't until she got Fitzgerald to agree to let her restrict her testimony only to Libby. So she couldn't be questioned about any of her other sources - and I'll bet one of them was Cheney himself.I don't know what Fitzgerald is going to come out with, or if he will be able to prove it, but there is no doubt whatsoever in my mind that there was a conspiracy involving Cheney, Rice, Libby, Rove, and others to bring about an illegal, immoral, unconstitional and unnecessary "war" with Iraq. And it appears they may be doing the same thing with Iran (heaven help us).

I don't know if you watched the Daily Show tonight. He showed clips of our troops being coached on what to say in their "spontaneous" interview with Bush. Bush comes across as the most pathetic creature you can imagine. It was actually revolting it was so bad. And McClellan, who was apparently "out of the loop" tried to defend it as not being rehearsed. How much longer are we supposed to put up with this crap?

There are rumors now that Bush may be back on the booze. What I want to know is how could anyone tell the difference? His speech and behavior have been so absurd ever since he was "chosen" that it would be difficult to conclude that he is much different now. Perhaps those close to him might be able to perceive the difference. As far as I am concerned he has always been so bizarre I have always just assumed he was borderline retarded. Of course now that I know Miers thinks he is the most brilliant man she has ever known I guess I may have to change my impression. If she gets confirmed I suggest you head for the hills as fast as possible, expecially if you are pregnant and don't want to be.

I keep seeing articles and interviews in which people are saying things like: if the constitution passes we can bring the troops home, or the Iraqi army is getting better so we'll be able to bring the troops home, or we should bring the troops home by the end of 2006, or bring the troops home, bring the troops home, etc., etc. Doesn't anyone understand the obvious? The Bush/Cheney administration has no intention of bringing the troops home (unless Iraq eventually has no more oil). We are building large permanent bases in Iraq. The purpose of this is to insure that the puppet government we are installing is not going to do anything we do not want them to do. This is precisely what we have done in other areas of the globe and there is no doubt this is the same strategy for Iraq. Sure, we might eventually bring some troops home, but our 51st state will remain firmly under out control. Except, of course, for the years of constant attacks that will occur just as in Israel. The Iraqis will never completely accept an American occupation of their country.

I pray to the Great Mystery that Fitzgerald will deliver us from this evil, or I would if I had a buffalo skull. Can you believe there are still people who support this totally incompetent buffoon?

Jerry Brady

We had the pleasure this morning to host a Meet the Candidate/Fund Raiser for the Democratic candidate for Governor, Jerry Brady. Although it was not a large crowd (it would have been much larger had it not been scheduled during church) it was an active, interested, and receptive group, virtually all of whom donated money for his campaign. I must report that Brady is bright, articulate, serious-minded, and on what I regard as the right side of all the important issues that face the state and the nation. I recommend him wholeheartedly and will work towards his election next year. I should add that his wife is charming, knowledgeable, and could probably run herself for office. As you can see, I was much impressed with both of them. So take up the slogan, BRADY FOR IDAHO, and stick with it until we see a Democratic Governor.
With this in mind you might want to review the last few years under the current Republican administration.

As invariably happens when there is a scandal brewing it just keeps getting worse and worse as they try to cover it up. The Judy Miller saga is coming to be a classical example. The more she and the New York Times try to explain what happened (or didn't happen) the deeper and more confused it gets. It appears now that she was given a security clearance that effectively muzzled her from telling her readers (the public) what was obviously going on. This was something that no reporter should have ever agreed to - but she apparently did. So not only was she forced to not report everything to her public, she also did not report everything to her editors. And of course her claim that she can't remember who told her Valerie Plame's name has the same credibility that Rove's claim he can't remember his emails. If Fitzgerald can't get indictments out of this obvious scandal he's clearly in the wrong profession.

Larry Craig, who is part of the most corrupt administration in American history, is apparently refusing to apologize for his racist, stupid, insensitive, and ignorant remarks about New Orleans and Louisiana. Personally, I think Craig is so detached from reality he doesn't know what is happening in the world. He is, and has always been, simply the Senator from Boise Cascade and Potlatch. Why should he have to burden himself with anything else in the world?

Are we getting anywhere?

Is it the Valerie Plame problem that is going to emerge as the focus of the Fitzgerald investigation or will it be the White House Iraqi Group? Some are suggesting the latter. The WHIG, if you are unfamiliar with it, was a group that included Cheney, Rice, Libby, Rove, I assume Wolfowitz, Rumsfeld and several others, and met (conspired?) specifically to decide how to bring about a "war" with Iraq. Judy Miller was, I gather, not a memeber of this group, per se, but was used by them for their purposes. This whole business is beginning to become much clearer as Fitzgerald is moving closer to the end of his investigation. Whether this is really the focus of his work I do not know as he has been extremely close-mouthed about what he is doing and thinking. Nor do I know if he might be able to actually prove such a conspiracy. I personally have no doubt that this is precisely what happened. Indeed, Wolfowitz (at least I remember it being him) actually admitted that they settled on the issue of WMD's as they felt that was the one issue that would work the best to bring about the result they wanted, namely, starting a "war" with Iraq. I insist on the quotation marks because in fact no real war was ever declared. Bush's claim of a "war on terror" is no more than meaningless nonsense and has been from the beginning. A "war on terror" simply allows the Bush/Cheney administration to permanently engage in military endeavors everywhere in the world at their whim and thus keep pouring more and more dollars into the hands of their corporate friends such as Halliburton, General Electric, Lockeed Martin, Boeing, and etc. The national defense budget of the U.S. now exceeds the entire national budgets of most of the rest of the world. It is totally absurd that we should be spending so much money for more and more and more armaments, planes, submarines, carriers, tanks, and whatever when realistically there is no need for such total overkill. This is precisely what Eisenhower warned against - a military-industrial complex that would take food out of the mouths of babes (and everyone else). Our military budget can only be realistically described as OBSCENE.

Bush/Cheney are also trying to maneuver us into a situation where they might be able to declare martial law. Remember we now have a purely volunteer army, an army that did not come about because of a bunch of noble American patriots who wanted to defend their country. It is composed of a bunch of poor people who enlisted for the money and the opportunity to get more out of life. As they are interested in their paychecks and priviledges their loyalty may (I emphasize "may" because it remains to be seen) lie with those who pay them rather than with their defense of the constitution and their country. Bush Cheney have already tried to do away with Posse Commitas and are now suggesting that in case of a pandemic of some kind the army should be put in charge. And don't forget they have also been using paid mercenaries in Iraq and in New Orleans. This is exceedingly dangerous business. But it does raise the question as to what would happen in the U.S. (where the public is already armed to the teeth and we have such a huge country) if they actually attempted to establish martial law. I suspect that terrorists in Iraq and Afghanistan would pale into insignificance when compared to what might well happen here.

Do not allow yourselves to be lulled into believing it can't happen here. The Bush/Cheney administration is evil, rotten to the core, corrupt and unprincipled, greedy and mercilous. And they are not going to willingly give up power, especially as they fear what would (rightly) happen to them. Be prepared, something very serious is about to happen.

Senator Craig and the dinosaurs - and an essay

Our beloved Senator Craig has now been denounced for his "arrogant and ignorant" comments about Louisiana and New Orleans. He has reportedly said that fraud in Louisiana is as bad as in Iraq. Not content with that he also suggested that the 9th ward in New Orleans should be converted back into the wetlands it originally was. Still not content he charges that Louisiana and New Orleans represent the most corrupt governments in the country. He is apparently unaware that he, himself, as a member of the current Bush/Cheney administration, belongs to what is surely the most corrupt administration in the history of the United States. If fraud is as bad in Louisiana and New Orleans as it is in Iraq who might we thank for that. The Bush/Cheney administration beyond any reasonable doubt. They have fed no-bid contracts and cost-plus to their cronies to the point where it would be a national scandal if the MSM would even bother to report it.

This reminds me of an essay on dinosaurs I wrote some time ago. As we are still waiting for something (hopefully "big") to happen here it is.

At this very moment I have a banty hen setting. She has been setting for many days, trying to hatch two golf balls (do I have a moral obligation to stop her, I wonder). Having mistakenly told a neighbor I wanted a rooster and five hens I now have, two months later, approximately forty-eight banties of various sizes, configurations, and dispositions. If not completely wild they are at least half wild. It is impossible to keep them in the chicken yard (without an inordinate amount of work and expense to completely enclose it). They wander everywhere, waking the neighbors too early in the morning, tearing up the yards, devouring everything (bless them) except the vegetables (although they are hard on lettuce and melons). They squabble amongst themselves endlessly to say nothing of attracting coyotes. And they are incredibly stupid. Every morning at eight o'clock I emerge from my house, go to the chicken coop and spread chicken scratch for them. I also make sure they have fresh water. Having done this routinely for weeks the chickens still do not understand there is a relationship between my appearance and the chicken feed and water. They are never there and even if they are nearby and can easily see me they still don't make the association. I find this hard to believe but true. I suspect the bugs and worms they eat are far more intelligent. But this is not really about the banties. It is, rather, about dinosaurs.
It is well known of course that dinosaurs existed millions of years ago and then for whatever mysterious reason disappeared. There are many theories, or, I should say more accurately, hypotheses, as to why they disappeared. Some speculate that a giant meteor hit the earth, blocking out the sun for long enough to kill the dinosaurs. Others believe dramatic climactic changes occurred either freezing or burning them to extinction, depending upon which view you prefer. And of course there are some who just don't believe dinosaurs existed in the first place, especially those who believe the earth was created only in the year 4004 B.C. (at some very specific time in the morning). I guess it is possible that still others believe they just didn't make it onto the ark.
In any case, recent scientific breakthroughs have made it possible to lay this question to rest once and for all. It has now been concluded by those "in the know" (so to speak) that dinosaurs still exist. That, indeed, birds, including chickens, are the only remaining dinosaurs. Now, if this is true, and if it is also true that evolution, survival, if you will, is correlated however crudely with intelligence or adaptability or some such "higher" capacity, and if chickens are in fact the only dinosaurs that survived over all this time, the disappearance of the other dinosaurs is easily explained. They were just plain and simply too stupid to make it.
Chickens will at least sit on their eggs until they hatch (in the absence, that is, of jerks like me who dupe them with golf balls). No one ever found a chicken nest full of rocks no matter how round and smooth they might appear. Dinosaur eggs indeed! How do we know they didn't try to hatch river stones, sitting on them endlessly until they wore them smooth? How do we know that those furtive clever little mammals the scientists believe existed contemporaneously with the dinosaurs didn't sneak around substituting rocks for their eggs in some deliberate scheme to win out in the brutal race for survival? How indeed?
I submit that Senator Craig is himself a dinosaur and not much above the chickens when it comes to intellect. He wrote to me on June 22, 2005:
"...Although we have not yet discovered weapons of mass destruction, I have no doubt that Saddam had chemical and biological weapons and was aggressively pursuing a nuclear weapons program..."
This was after even Bush himself had acknowledged there were no weapons of mass destruction. Given the fact that Craig, as far as I know, has never once voted against the Republican line, and given the fact that he seems to be totally out of touch with reality, I suggest that when his time comes, like the dinosaurs, he should simply disappear (unless, perhaps, he wants to continue to stay around as a bird-brain). Actually, the state of Idaho would be better off with a robot.

Ho-hum, still waiting

Do not overlook my latest book, The Cham Stones, which is now available from Publish America, P.O. Box 151, Frederick, Maryland, 21705, or from their web site.

Unfortunately nothing much happens, at least not that we are hearing about. Bush's ratings continue to fall virtually daily but the Bush/Cheney administration manages to overlook the obvious (they are not so slowly dying).

I hope you are aware that the Vatican, for the second year, is offering a course in exorcism. That is, EXORCISM. Apparently they have some 100 priests and maybe others enrolled in this 14th century class. I mean, really, can there be anything more medieval than the Catholic Church? Old men strolling around in weird clothing, carrying weird staffs, speaking Latin, and keeping women from being ordained, etc., etc. Oh, I forgot, they just agreed to having homosexual priests as long as they are celibate. I guess that is real progress. But at least the Catholic Church recognizes evolution (I think) which is certainly a cut above the nonsensical Evangelicals that are trying to turn the clock back several centuries. Catholics seem to appear to be living in the middle ages but at least their positions on some things are somewhat more up to date (remember, I said some things).

Then there is Scott McClellan who assured us that Karl Rove absolutely had nothing to do with outing Valerie Plame. And Rove apparently assured Bush that he had nothing to do with it. As it turns out, he did. So what happens? Nothing. Bush would probably rather give up an arm and a leg than give up Rove. And he is apparently not going to give up on Miers, insisting that her nomination will not be withdrawn. If we had any real Senators they would simply send Bush a note saying her nomination under the circumstances is so inappropriate they will not even consider it. But don't bet she won't get confirmed. Just what we need, a rabid Evangelical Christian who worships Bush on the Supreme Court. Tell me this is not just a horrible nightmare. Please. McClellan has also now announced that Helen Thomas is against the war on Terrorism (whatever that is). Poor Helen, after all these years she just can't get it right. Just ask Scott, the worst nitwit liar ever to serve as Press Secretary (he probably consults nightly with his friend Gannon/Guckert who seems to have conveniently disappeared from the scene).

I can't stand the suspense. What will Fitzgerald do? Will he indict? Who will he indict? What will be the charges? When is it going to happen? Could he have spent two years investigating this and then claim to have found nothing? Unlikely, but how do we know until he comes out with something? Something big I hope. You have to admit, however bad things are, it is exciting.

Let me leave you with this haiku:
How appropriate,
when the Great Mystery calls,
to leave in autumn.

Pinch me

Please be advised that my fiction/adventure book, The Cham Stones, is now available. If you are interested it can be ordered from PublishAmerica, P.O. Box 151, Frederick, Maryland, 21705, or from their web site.

Pinch me. Please. I would like to know if I am in the midst of the most surrealistic dream/nightmare of all time.

Please consider that the House of Representatives has a rule that if someone is indicted they can no longer serve in a leadership position. DeLay has been indicted but he continues to serve as if he is still the leader, and the House lets him get away with it. So what is the point of the rule? If he can't serve in a leadership position why is he still doing so? Not only is he doing so he is boasting about it. So much for rules in the House. So much for Republican power-mad jerks who continue to put party above country.

Now we have Bush who admitted that he considered Miers religion as one of the factors in his choice of her to be nominated for the Supreme Court. This is a blatant violation of the Constitution which says plainly that religion cannot be used as a criterion. Will anything happen about this? Unlikely.

Of course we continue to wait for a shoe to drop - or at least something to happen. Will Fitzgerald actually bring charges against anyone. If so, who? Will it really perhaps go all the way to Cheney which, of course, it should. Can there really be any doubt there was a conspiracy to start a "war" with Iraq and similarly a conspiracy to destroy Wilson and his wife? I assure you that in my mind there is no doubt whatsoever but whether it can be proven or not I don't know.

I don't remember where this came from or who said it or in what circumstances but I think it sums up the current American ethos:

Get rich, sleep 'til noon and screw 'em all.

Delightful anticipation

It looks now as if things are rapidly coming to a head. Bush's favorable ratings have now plummeted to a mere 37% and are not very likely to go back up in any foreseeable future. There is also a new poll that indicates that 50% of the public would like to see Bush Impeached if he lied about taking us to war with Iraq (and there is absolutely no doubt that he did, in fact, lie, along with Slimy Dick and the rest of the neocons). The Miers nomination appears to be in trouble, at least with the nutcakes of the ultra-right. It seems increasingly likely that Fitzgerald is going to seek some indictments, possibly all the way to Dick the Slimy (which I predicted from the beginning). The Senate is overwhelmingly opposed to torture but Bush continues to insist on it. Rove looks to be in big trouble. Judith Miller likewise. Frist is probably finished as a politician. DeLay is not going to be able to wiggle out of his predicament (at least it seems to me it would take a miracle). In short, things would seem to be looking up.

However, there remains the problem of the lack of a Democratic party. I suspect they are not too keen on jumping on the anti-Bush bandwagon because they know they might be found just as guilty as the Republicans. They obviously feed from the same corporate trough and have sheepishly gone along with most everything the Republicans have done - including their illegal, immoral, unconstitutional, and unnecessary "war." No one seems to be serious about a strategy for getting out of Iraq as soon as possible. Why is that so? Because there has never been any intent to ever get out of Iraq (until, perhaps, the oil is exhausted). Until the U.S. agrees to abandon their intent to occupy Iraq more or less permanently there is no way there can be any kind of a solution. And until the U.S. demands that Israel agree to a viable and realistic Palestianian nation there is no hope for peace in the Middle East - ever. The Bush administration has nothing to offer except eternal war and we know who benefits from eternal war - don't we?

How much longer can this disgusting state of affairs continue? Who is going to step forward and save us from what is surely an impending disaster? It is not going to be Hilary, nor Biden, nor Kerry, and probably not Feingold. Edwards? Perhaps? Is there no other viable democrat on the horizon? I keep coming back to Gore. He may be too smart to take on the impossible job of cleaning up after the Bush/Cheney mess. In fact, it may not even be possible to clean up after this bunch of absolute monstrous thugs that are intent on destroying our used-to-be marvelous country.

Columbus Day

The famous voyages of Christopher Columbus that we celebrate today:
On his very first encounter with the Arawak Indians in the Bahamas Columbus captured some of them by force. As they wore small earrings of gold he wanted them to show him the source of that much desired treasure. Then, on another encounter, when the Indians refused to do what he wished, two of them were run through with swords and left to bleed to death. Then on Haiti, where Columbus believed there would be gold fields, he ordered everyone older than fourteen to collect so much gold every three months. If they brought it in they were given a copper token. As there were no gold fields as such, merely bits of gold dust, the Indians could not comply. No matter, when they did not have a copper Columbus had their hands cut off and let them bleed to death. If they tried to run away they were hunted down with dogs and killed. Failing to find the gold he wanted Columbus loaded his ships with slaves to be sold in Spain (Zinn 1980:2-4).
The cutting off of hands was widespread under the Spanish, as was the cutting off of ears, the deliberate slicing of Indian flesh to test the Spanish blades, the brutal flogging of Indian slaves, rape, the killing of helpless infants, burning people alive, and brutality of all kinds too outrageous to believe (de las Casas 1971).
Columbus gave such a glowing account of the islands he had discovered that on his second voyage he was in charge of seventeen ships and twelve hundred men. Their mission was to acquire gold and slaves. Columbus had left 39 men on Hispaniola (the island that is now Haiti and the Dominican Republic) to find and store gold. Upon his return he learned they had been killed by the natives, murdered because they had roamed the island taking slaves for labor and sex. Columbus sent many expeditions around the islands searching for gold. When they did not find it they filled the ships with slaves, picking the best 500 from the 1500 they had rounded up and penned. Two hundred died on the voyage to Spain. The Arawaks tried to resist but they were no match for the muskets and swords and horses of the Spanish. When the Spanish took prisoners they either burned them alive or hanged them. The Indians began mass suicides using poison made from the cassava plant. They killed their infants to save them from the Invaders. Within two years half of the original population of Haiti, 250,000 individuals, were dead. Then, when it was known there was no more gold to be taken the Indians were taken as slaves and forced to work on huge estates which became known as encomiendas. They were forced to work so hard that many thousands died. By 1515 there were perhaps 50,000 Indians left, in 1550 there were only five hundred. By 1650 there were none.
“The Spaniards found pleasure in inventing all kinds of odd cruelties, the more cruel the better, with which to spill human blood. They built a long gibbet, low enough for the toes to touch the ground and prevent strangling, and hanged thirteen of them at a time in honor of Christ Our Saviour and the twelve Apostles. When the Indians were thus still alive and hanging, the Spaniards tested their strength and their blades against them, ripping chests open with one blow and exposing entrails, and there were those who did worse. Then straw was wrapped around their torn bodies and they were burned alive…My eyes have seen these acts so foreign to human nature, and now I tremble as I write, not believing them myself, afraid that perhaps I was dreaming. But truly, this sort of thing has happened all over the Indies, and more cruelly too sometimes, and I am quite sure that I have not forgotten” (de las Casas 1971:121).

Happy Columbus Day!

The right reverend(?) Dobson of the family whoosit something or other claimed the other day that he had knowledge of Miers that perhaps he shouldn't have had and that is why he would support her nomination to the Supreme Court. This led Arnold Specter, who is supposed to be in charge of things, to say something to the effect that if any promises were made or deals were cut in advance that would be enough to sink the nomination. And, of course, he was going to find out if any such thing transpired. If any assurances were given about how she might vote that would in effect kill the nomination. But what in hell does he think Bush has already done? Bush already said he knows what she thinks, knows her character, knows whe will not change, and that she will be a fine candidate and will be confirmed. Now, if he knows all that about her, do you think he means she will vote against his wishes (she has stated already she believes he is the most brilliant man she ever knew). Of all the words I can think of to describe George W. Bush, brilliant is not among them. Not even last. Not at all. Bush has basically assured his base that she will vote the way they want her to but they are still not satisfied. Interesting that even his base no longer believes him (how could anyone believe him). I guess they think Miers can be moved to the left, in spite of her switch from Catholicism to Evangelical Christian. If someone had written this as a screenplay it would have been considered so absurd as to be immediately tossed in the garbage. If Bush can pull this off he deserves to be described as brilliant and the rest of us can be described as stupid beyond belief.

To think, I used to believe in reality.

The king of babble

There will be no Morialekafa until monday the 10th. Try to hold down the fort. Probably you should load your guns, lock your doors, and hope Bush doesn't sick the military on you for failing to take your flu shot.

Bush made a speech this morning. I did not listen to it. Quite frankly, I cannot bear to either look at him or listen to him. It makes me sick to my stomach. I did hear indirectly that he still claims we are making progress in Iraq and he also said that we will never give up and continue the fight until we achieve complete victory. I thought it was already agreed upon that when fighting terrorists there is no way one could ever finally "win." But I guess Bush knows better than everyone else. Of course he does, he speaks with God. It was said that he would go into details about what is going on in Iraq and the world. The only detail anyone reported was that he claimed we have aborted a number of purported attacks on us and our allies in recent years. Of course he could not reveal what these actually were, we are just supposed to trust him. Just as we are supposed to trust him on the Miers appointment. Does this absolute clown of a fake President believe that anyone at this point in time would believe him about anything? I know, I know, there are still somewhere between 35 and 40% that supposedly do. Just don't forget that on the IQ scale half the population is below the 100% mark.

If he believed that by nominating Miers he would somehow avoid a fight or a filibuster I think he is going to be proved very wrong. This is such an outrageous nomination that everyone is going to be upset, Republicans as well as Democrats. Who in the world could have advised him to nominate one of his closest friends and advisors? This is cronyism of the most blatant kind, precisely at a time when he is already under fire for appointing cronies. It is claimed that Reid suggested Miers as a candidate. If he did, he is a really clever guy. He could scarcely have suggested a more disastrous candidate and actually helped get Bush make such a terrible choice. Miers, I think, will not get confirmed. Then we'll have to deal with the next terrible choice. The ultra-right never gives up. Once they have their hands in your pockets they never stop. And once they have Jaysus they might as well dwell on the planet Krypton or wherever. Can you believe that our once noble and wonderful nation has fallen so far? I'm beginning to believe I am actually lucky to be so damn old.

What are they bitching about?

The ultra right conservatives who think they now own the presidency are upset over the nomination of Miers. As they wanted someone who would help to overturn Roe vs Wade they should have got their wish. Miers is an Evangelical Christian known to be anti-abortion. And she must certainly also be anti-gay. So what are they complaining about? She isn't conservative enough? How much more conservative could she be? Of course it is true that compared to probably hundreds of other possibles she is not very qualified. Bush insists she is the best qualified person he could find (Bush also claims to speak directly with God). Some think Bush acted out of weakness, not wanting to provoke a genuine filibuster and more trouble at a time when he is in enough trouble. I can't see that as he could hardly have nominated anyone that might be more controversial, given the fact that the only reason she could have been picked is because she is a Bush loyalist. That is hardly a reason to nominate someone to the highest court in the land. If the Senate goes along with this (because they think he could have done worse) they have taken leave completely of whatever senses they may still have (I find it doubtful that they have any senses at all anymore). Miers should not even be considered. The Senate should simply reject the nomination on the grounds that it is totally inappropriate for a President to nominate someone who has few credentials other than being a toady. But apparently the odds favor her breezing through the confirmation process. Figure.

I contine to believe that one of the greatest American tragedies ever was the failure of Al Gore to be rewarded the Presidency which he obviously won in 2000. No one could possibly believe that had Gore been given his due the country would be mired in the unbelievable mess it is in now. How can you explain that a man who was obviously the most superior candidate for President probably ever lost out to an opponent who was probably one of the least prepared candidates ever? I mean, I know how to explain it, given the corporate control of our country and especially the media, but why did the public agree to it? The answer is because they are uninformed, uninterested, wedded to the corporate media that feeds them nothing but pap all day and all night all year. Gore gave a speech about this which you can read on Buzzflash. It is absolutely on target and get right to the heart of the matter. It should be required reading for everyone. Oh, I forgot, we don't read anymore. We have the boob tube. Perhaps someone should invent a way to convert a brilliant and important speech or message into a serum that could be injected into people, and the injection could be made mandatory. No, I guess when Bush/Cheney succeed in putting the military in charge of domestic matters that probably wouldn't be a good idea. Do not look for whom the Fascists want to control, look in the mirror.

Miers nomination

Harriet Miers is known to be a Bush loyalist (indeed, a complete toady who thinks Bush is the most brilliant man she ever met). She is also known to belong to an Evangelical church and to be quite religious (if, in fact, there is anything truly religious about Evangelicals). In any case, do you believe that a known Bush loyalist who is also an Evangelical Christian is going to be in favor of abortion or gay rights? What on earth would anyone (Senators included) have to know beyond these simple facts to know what Bush is up to? Not only is he packing the court with anti-abortion, anti-gay rights people, he is also writing himself an insurance policy against future indictments. If the Senate can't see through this blatant attempt to tip the court towards the extreme right they are even more incompetent and stupid than I believe they are (which would be pretty hard to accomplish). As Reid has already endorsed her I guess we know where the Democrats stand (actually Democrats don't stand, they simply lie down).

A meeting today to discuss the grizzly bear. It was suggested that the grizzly bear problem should probably be considered in the broader context of biodiversity. As no one here could possibly understand a concept as abstract as biodiversity it was presented as animal diversity. Even this was too complicated. People here want to consider the grizzly problem as purely a local issue and also as a single issue. Thus there is perceived to be no relationship between the grizzly population in our county and grizzly bears anywhere else. Similarly, there is perceived to be no relationship between grizzly bears and the environment and other species. This takes us back to the so-called "wise-use movement," when our county locals thought they should be in charge of the forests and rivers and fish and etc. They apparently believed, and I guess still believe, that the forests and rivers, grizzly bear and other populations of animals, begin and end at the county boundaries and also have no relationship with each other. Such is life here in our little community still struggling to enter the 20th century.

If you think that's bad, consider our government at higher levels. One of the generals the other day testified there was only one (1) battalion of Iraqi troops ready to act independently, down from three (3) that had been previously claimed. Bush, however, said today (or maybe yesterday) that there are 80 battalions of Iraqi troops, thirty of which are prepared to act independently. Still other military persons say there is no way we can ever win the "war" in Iraq while Bush/Cheney keep insisting we are making progress. Iraq has already erupted into a civil war that no one is willing as yet to acknowledge. American troops are embarked on two or three major offensives that will serve no purpose whatsoever other than killing more Iraqis and American troops. This continuing "war" is nothing but an absolute obscenity that is leading nowhere. NOWHERE! BRING OUR TROOPS HOME NOW!

Bush/Cheney and their neocon murderous thugs are going to have to admit they made the worst foreign policy and military blunder in the history of the United States and give up their absurd ideas about controlling all of the rest of the planet. I would like to think this might happen but I know it won't, not without an opposition party that seems not to exist. Miers will no doubt be confirmed. Reid has already given the Democratic blessing to this unfortunate crony appointment. I used to laugh when I saw the slogan, "Stop the World, I want to get off." I don't laugh anymore.

The laughable appointment

George W. Bush has now outdone himself with the most outrageous, laughable, ridiculous Supreme Court appointee ever. I have nothing against Harriet Miers whatsoever, but only Bush could have come up with something like this. He is trying to appoint someone who is plain and simply a Bush loyalist. She was his personal attorney in Texas, he brought her to the White House and made her chief counsel, she is on record as having said to someone, "George Bush is the most brilliant man I have ever known." If that in and of itself is not enough to disqualify her what would or could? She is widely known to be a Republican loyalist, donates money to the Republican cause, probably was involved in whitewashing Bush's military service, and is known to be a firm friend of the Bush family for many years. In spite of this the Senate seems to consider this a serious nomination. They should have said plain and simply this is so inappropriate as to be utterly ridiculous so don't even bother. Not only that, she has no particular qualities that would make her a serious nominee. Granted she is actually a lawyer, and granted she is a woman, and granted she has a record of being active in various lawyerly doings, she is certainly not particularly distinguished. There must be dozens if not hundreds of other candidates far better qualified. Someone remarked that "this is Bush's ticket out of jail." Given her complete loyalty to Bush, along with Robert's similar loyalty, this may ultimately prove to be true. If the Democrats allow this they have gone completely bonkers (actually, I think they already have).

But let us consider for the moment another question. The U.S. is refusing to extradite Posada, a known terroritst, to either Venezuela or Cuba on the grounds that he could be tortured there. This from an administration that has knowingly been surreptitiously shipping prisoners to other countries known to be torturers. If this is not another example of hypocrisy it is difficult to know what would be. Is it any wonder why the reputation of the U.S. is a shambles and getting worse day by day?

And of course there is the DeLay issue. Now he is the subject of a second indictment within the same week, and by a different Grand Jury. I guess these grand juries just have it in for poor old DeLay. Just because he is doubtless the single most sleazy, dishonest, ruthless, arrogant, narrow-minded, bible-thumping, unpleasant, without-any-redeeming qualities whatsoever, Republican Congressperson ever shouldn't give any grand jury the right to indict him - should it? Republicans still support him. Does that tell you something about Republicans? If not, try to get a brain transplant.

The Kurds are about to take their oil fields and go home. The Shiites are about to take their oil fields and go home. The Sunnis are going to be left in the middle with nothing (unless we can murder them all first). There is only one (1) count it, battalion of Iraqi troops ready to act independently after all these years of training and billions of dollars expended. Bush/Cheney insist this is progress. If so, progress is no longer "our most important product."

The situation of the U.S. at the moment is so totally absurd as to be truly laughable. This is true both domestically and internationally. The Bush/Cheney administration carries on as if everything is going well. Leading Democrats go along with the gag. Bush is going to appoint a known not very well qualified crony and loyalist to one of the single most important positions in the U.S. government, and the Senate is taking this seriously. If the U.S. public stands for this they truly deserve what they are getting.

Is anyone really surprised?

If you have been following the news (the real news on the internet, that is) instead of wasting your time watching the main stream media, you will know that the Plame scandal is now reaching into the White House itself. Personally, I knew the first time I heard Skooter Libby's name mentioned it would lead directly to Cheney. Libby would not have done anything like that without Slimy Dick's approval. It is by now perfectly obvious that Rove and Libby were clearly involved in one way or another (in spite of McClelland's blatant lies to the contrary) and Judith Miller's role will no doubt become clearer in the immediate future. It has been suggested that both Bush and Cheney may have been present at meetings where the question of Wilson was discussed. I might be surprised about Bush's presence as I'm not sure I think they would trust him to be involved in anything so important. Fitzgerald may be trying to get a conspiracy conviction but no one seems to know for certain. Conspiracy is very difficult to prove, especially criminal conspiracy because you have to prove criminal intent. As far as I am concerned whether Fitzgerald can prove it or not it is almost certainly true. High level members of the administration were certainly discussing the issue of Wilson, and this must have included Cheney if not Bush, and one has to assume they were not discussing giving him the medal of honor. Of course this will also prove to have something to do with Miller's dishonest articles promoting the lies of the administration with respect to WMD's and etc. In fact, there is no telling where this may lead.

I am not so sure the Plame scandal, by itself, will do much to undermine the corrupt Bush/Cheney administration. Perhaps it doesn't matter much as by now there are so many problems and scandals beginning to surface it is virtually impossible to even keep track of them. And if you think things are going well in Iraq, that progress is being made, that American soldiers are seen as liberators, you had better think more carefully about the facts. Sunnis are killing Shiites, Shiites are killing Sunnis, the Kurds are now claiming the Shiites have not lived up to their obligations, U.S. troops are clearly caught up in a civil war (which no one seems to be willing to admit to) and, in fact, after all this time and effort there is only one (1) Iraqi battalion prepared to act on its own! Ah, yes, as they stand up we will stand down. Sorry, we are going to stand down big time and not very far in the future. Even the Generals acknowledge that our troops are much of the problem (those that don't blatantly lie, that is).

I saw somewhere today that only one third of the American public believes Bush is doing a good job in Iraq (or I guess anywhere else for that matter). So how much lower does it have to go before something actually changes? I also find myself unbelievably frustrated trying to figure out have even one third could possibly continue to support these lying war criminals. Is mental retardation that rampant in the American population?

Condi and Karen: Babes in Fantasyland

Condi Rice, in a speech at Princeton, apparently claimed, among other things, that terrorism is caused by repressive regimes (and that is why we should attempt to make the world democratic). I guess that explains why Saudi Arabians, who suffer from a repressive regime, decided to attack New York City. Similarly al Quaida, who were more or less in charge of Afghanistan, decided to do the same. She went on to claim that what was happening in Iraq was not actually national resistance but, rather, a bunch of "merciless killers." I guess the Iraqi people themselves are perfectly content with being occupied by a murderous bunch of American troops who seem to be in fact, "merciless killers." As this is the same Condi that said she had no idea Osama bin Laden wanted to attack the U.S., even though she had memos that stated that precisely, and also the same Condi that said no one imagined they would fly airplanes into buildings, even though that possibility had been known for months, and, in fact, for years. So I guess it is not surprising that she apparently is unaware of foreign policy. After all, she is just Secretary of State. Do you suppose someone could point out to her that terrorism is mostly created when a nation is occupied by foreigners trying to take over their country and resources? And that Muslim terrorists are angry because of the U.S. non-stop support for Israel rather than the Palestinians? They are also angry because the U.S. has tried to control the Middle East by establishing military bases there for years, bases the local people do not want there? I guess foreign policy is not very important as these poor uninformed and ignorant Middle Easterners just resent our way of life, our freedoms and liberties, just like our noble leader keeps telling us.

Then there is Karen Hughes, unbelievably uninformed about any peoples or cultures outside of Texas. Appointed as Undersecretary of State in charge of trying to improve the image of America around the world (granted at the moment an impossible task), and every bit as unqualified as Brown was to be in charge of FEMA. So Karen, who is apparently deeply religious, travels to the Middle East peddling the idea that America is a really religious nation and everyone everywhere whould look up to us, only to learn the hard way that not everyone in the world aspires to being an American or even like America. It will be interesting to see how she explains this embarrassing episode. According to Condi, "Karen can preach." I don't think the Arabs and others in the Middle East are really interested in listening.

It is comforting to know that Bush has put our foreign policy and image in the hands of a couple of know-nothing bimbos, just as he has put most of our other institutions in the hands of bumbling incompetent political appointees. The Bush/Cheney administration is rapidly bringing down what was once the greatest nation on earth. We have entered the 21st century with blood on our hands and debts as far as the eye can see. Yipee! Let's hear it for the neocons, stupidity, crime, torture, murder, arson, rape, and ultimate disaster.