ThinkingLiberal

Spot The Difference: More White House Deception

The Iraq war is very unpopular. George Bush is perceived as intractable and inflexible. Republicans are about to lose Congress and, possibly, the Senate. Does this account for the following?

"A free Iraq will mean a peaceful world. And it's very important for us to stay the course, and we will stay the course." – George Bush, Statement – July 2003

“And, yet, we must stay the course, because the end result is in our nation's interest.” – George Bush, Address to the Nation – April 2004

“We will stay the course, we will complete the job in Iraq.” – George Bush, Crawford TX – August 2005

“We will stay the course, we will help this young Iraqi democracy succeed, and victory in Iraq will be a major ideological triumph in the struggle of the 21st century.” – George Bush, Salt Lake City – August 2006

"It's never been a stay the course strategy.” – White House Statement, October 22nd 2006

Bush's Arrogance Reaches New Heights - Literally

Someone needs to point out to George Bush that we don’t live in the eighteenth century. You see, back then, it was pretty much permissible to plant your flag in any piece of turf you figured your military could defend, and claim it in the name of France.

However, the age of empire is over. Britain has divested itself of a quarter of the planet’s land in the last sixty years, and the other imperial powers – such as France, the Netherlands, Belgium and so on – have relinquished their grip on Africa and the tropics.

Now, however, George Bush wants to reverse this historical trend. Today he announced that the USA (read: George Bush) has the power to deny other countries access to space.

Now space, as you may appreciate, is probably going to be a better piece of business in the future than the Congo was for Belgium. It’s literally the future of mankind.

And all of mankind has a right to explore, develop and utilize the unclaimed territory beyond our atmosphere. Or at least, it did.

George Bush’s assertion that the USA can block space access is the ultimate arrogance. It will make it even clearer to the rest of the world that we now consider ourselves an imperial power, with an absolute monarch at our head. And a second provision that allows for the militarization of space will cause other nations to become still more angry towards us.

Space doesn’t belong to the USA, and the notion that George Bush should approve who can, and who cannot seek to explore it is abhorrent.

Please, someone, stick this guy in a cowboy outfit and put him on display in a museum; that’s where he belongs.

It Begins

A month or so ago, the President signed into law a bill that made it illegal to provide ‘material comfort’ to terrorists. Those accused would be thrown in jail, denied access to a lawyer, and have no right to Habeas Corpus. (Wikipedia defines habeas corpus as “a court order addressed to a prison official (or other custodian) ordering that a detainee be brought to the court so it can be determined whether or not that person is imprisoned lawfully and whether or not he or she should be released from custody. The writ of habeas corpus in common law countries is an important instrument for the safeguarding of individual freedom against arbitrary state action.”)

Note that last sentence, and remember it well. Because now, our government has given itself the power to ignore the conventions of a free society, and can lock you up without evidence, in a secret prison where nobody will find you. In other words, Bush has usurped the authority to imprison anyone – from an unfortunate Arab with the wrong colored skin, to a political opponent – without fear of retribution.

Of course, that could never happen… right?

Actually, it could.

Steve Howards was walking around Beaver Creek, Colorado, with his eight-year-old son when he saw Dick Cheney shaking hands with some people over the street. He crossed over, and said to Cheney “Your policies in Iraq are reprehensible.”

Then Howards walked away.

Ten minutes later, he was accosted by the Secret Service, who accused him of assaulting the Vice President. He was handcuffed, and his boy was threatened with being taken into protective care. Luckily Howards’ wife returned in time to take his son away, by which time Howards was being driven to jail.

At the jail, the charge against him was reduced to harassment and he was released on $500 bond. The Eagle County DA’s office eventually dropped the charge, and Howards is suing for being deprived of his First Amendment right of free speech and his Fourth Amendment right to be protected from illegal seizure.

Howards was lucky. He was arrested before the new law came into effect, and his rights, while violated, still existed. Otherwise we might never have seen him again.

Will you be so lucky, next time you tell our leaders how you feel?

Fear, Toyota Corollas, And Flipping The Bird

Driving to work this morning I got stuck behind a beaten-up '84 Toyota Corolla. It was in pretty bad shape - smoke belched from the exhaust pipe every time the poor sucker driving it changed gear, and it was covered in dents and dings.

That's not what I noticed.

What I spent a lot of time thinking about, was the Bush campaign sticker on the back.

Ken Lay voting Republican, I can understand. Corruption is, after all, very much a Republican issue. People who take home hefty paychecks voting Republican, this I can also understand. After all, wealthy people get richer under Republican governments. People whose friends and families are employed in the defense industry voting Republican, this makes sense to me because there are more defense jobs under Bush than there have ever been before.

But people who drive crappy mid-eighties Corollas? What was this guy getting out of a Bush government? Economically, the person he helped elect is basically screwing him. Regressive taxes such as the price of gas and heating oil, cuts in social programs, education, healthcare - every way you look, this poor bastard in his $600 car is getting the shaft.

But then I remembered. Fear. The Republicans' only real weapon against the middle class and those living near or below the poverty line. Fear.

The Republicans are masters at manipulating fear, at striking terror into the hearts of those who would otherwise not dream of voting for them. They stoke the flames of fear with stories of how we're going to be attacked again any minute, of how Islam poses a threat to us all, of how the Democrats will ask Osama bin Laden to ride on a VP ticket with Hillary Clinton as the lead. They prey on the under-educated, the everyday folk who believe the 'news' they see on Fox and whose sons and daughters are being killed in Iraq.

Fear is stronger than almost any motivation when the voter gets to the polls. So what if Bush has presided over the most appalling economic years since the late 'twenties? So what if our civil liberties have been snatched from us by an ever-expanding government? So what if our leaders recklessly took us into a war that was unjust to begin with, and unwinnable now?

This poor Joe Schmoe in his tatty car voted for George Bush out of fear. Economically, socially, environmentally, there was no gain to be had in voting Republican. His job security was lower than it was five years ago. His salary had probably remained almost frozen. His family had less access to healthcare than at any time in the recent past.

But when he went to the polls, he was scared. And that's all the Republicans need to do to win again.

It's the ultimate irony - the family that can least afford to vote Republican, has been terrorized into doing exactly that. What skilful, crafty people these really are. What dangerous, sly individuals.

I flipped the guy in the Toyota the bird, anyway.

Why Do Republicans Divorce More Often Than Democrats?

Republicans are the party of family values.

They’re the party that protects the sanctity of marriage. Their morality is stronger than their opposition.

So say the Republicans. But the statistics say differently.

Of the top 15 states for divorce rates in 2005, all 15 voted for Bush in 2004. All fifteen.

Of the 12 lowest states for divorce rates, 10 voted for Kerry.

Massachusetts, where gay marriage is allowed (and where, according to Republicans, civilization would fall apart), has the lowest divorce rate in the country.

This cannot be a coincidence. So what are the reasons behind the fact that Republicans are significantly more likely to divorce than Democrats? And why do the former claim the high ground on marriage, when it is patently clear that their marriages don’t last as long as their political opponents?

Well, Republicans will answer that married couples are more likely to vote for them – and they’re right about that. Republicans control 49 of the 50 [congressional] districts with the highest rates of married people, while Democrats represent all 50 districts that have the highest rates of adults who have never married.

But that doesn’t explain the RATE of divorce, only the actual numbers. Why is it that in Massachusetts the rate of divorce is a third of the Arkansas figure?

I’m no sociologist, so the following is pure speculation. But… what if Republicans are simple greedier? In their economic policies, they tend to favor their own wealth over any kind of taxation that benefits society. In their foreign policy, they prefer protectionism and unilateralism. In their social policy, they cut education and welfare and pass the savings on to big business.

Is it so far-fetched to think that the reason that Republicans divorce more often, is that they’re more selfish – that they’re not generous partners, that they have more affairs that lead to divorce, that they abandon their spouses for younger models?

Other theories gladly entertained…

In case you want to check the statistics for yourself, along with other demographic data, please download the Excel file below. By default it is sorted by divorce rate (scroll all the way to the right), with a few unavailable states at the top. But you can also sort it by education, per capita income, obesity rate, property crime etc. Go to 'Data' at the top, then 'Sort By' and choose a category. Interesting to note that the top 19 states for obesity are also all Republican!

If you use this data, please do link back to this blog. Thanks!

Download 2004_election_demographics_v2.xls

Goddamned Liars – Rice, Ashcroft And Rumsfeld ALL Knew 9/11 Was Coming

“I don’t remember,” said Rice. “I don’t recall,” said Rumsfeld. “My client has no recollection,” said Ashcroft’s spokesperson.

But today, Condoleezza Rice was proved a liar. As were the other two.

Rice's spokesman Sean McCormack issued a statement on Monday confirming that she'd received a CIA briefing "on or around July 10" on a forthcoming attack and had asked that it be given to Ashcroft and Rumsfeld.

"The information presented in this meeting was not new, rather it was a good summary from the threat reporting from the previous several weeks," McCormack said. "After this meeting, Dr. Rice asked that this same information be briefed to Secretary Rumsfeld and Attorney General Ashcroft. That briefing took place by July 17."

What information?

That on a scale of 1-10, the likelihood of an imminent attack by al-Qaeda against the United States was 10.

Who gave this briefing? The head of the CIA, George Tenet. It was delivered at a White House meeting by Tenet, Cofer Black, then the agency's chief of top counterterrorism, and a third CIA official whose identity remains protected.

In the briefing, Tenet warned in very strong terms that intelligence from a variety of sources indicated that bin Laden's terrorist network was planning an attack on a U.S. target in the near future, said one of the officials. "The briefing was intended to `connect the dots' contained in other intelligence reports and paint a very clear picture of the threat posed by bin Laden," said the official, who described the tone of the report as "scary."

Rice “doesn’t remember”. Nor do Ashcroft and Rumsfeld.

But they are liars. You see, “I don’t remember…” is just a politician’s way of saying “Someone out there can prove this, and I just hope they don’t. So I’m not going to let them catch me in a blatant lie… I’ll just pretend I can’t recall.”

Our government knew that an attack was coming. They were told in no uncertain terms by the CIA that bin Laden was going to attack us. And they did absolutely nothing.

And of course, they lied afterwards.

One word: impeachment.

(Extensive quotes from the San Jose Mercury News used in this posting