Democratic Planks

Bush: "We've never been 'stay the course'"

2006-10-24T16:29:00.000-04:00

Learn More about the Republican Candidates!

2006-10-24T14:19:00.000-04:00

-AZ-Sen: Jon Kyl

--AZ-01: Rick Renzi

--AZ-05: J.D. Hayworth

--CA-04: John Doolittle

--CA-11: Richard Pombo

--CA-50: Brian Bilbray

--CO-04: Marilyn Musgrave

--CO-05: Doug Lamborn

--CO-07: Rick O'Donnell

--CT-04: Christopher Shays

--FL-13: Vernon Buchanan

--FL-16: Joe Negron

--FL-22: Clay Shaw

--ID-01: Bill Sali

--IL-06: Peter Roskam

--IL-10: Mark Kirk

--IL-14: Dennis Hastert

--IN-02: Chris Chocola

--IN-08: John Hostettler

--IA-01: Mike Whalen

--KS-02: Jim Ryun

--KY-03: Anne Northup

--KY-04: Geoff Davis

--MD-Sen: Michael Steele

--MN-01: Gil Gutknecht

--MN-06: Michele Bachmann

--MO-Sen: Jim Talent

--MT-Sen: Conrad Burns

--NV-03: Jon Porter

--NH-02: Charlie Bass

--NJ-07: Mike Ferguson

--NM-01: Heather Wilson

--NY-03: Peter King

--NY-20: John Sweeney

--NY-26: Tom Reynolds

--NY-29: Randy Kuhl

--NC-08: Robin Hayes

--NC-11: Charles Taylor

--OH-01: Steve Chabot

--OH-02: Jean Schmidt

--OH-15: Deborah Pryce

--OH-18: Joy Padgett

--PA-04: Melissa Hart

--PA-07: Curt Weldon

--PA-08: Mike Fitzpatrick

--PA-10: Don Sherwood

--RI-Sen: Lincoln Chafee

--TN-Sen: Bob Corker

--VA-Sen: George Allen

--VA-10: Frank Wolf

--WA-Sen: Mike McGavick

--WA-08: Dave Reichert

CNN Publishes Misleading Diatribe by James Dobson as Uncountered 'Commentary'

2006-06-28T17:37:00.000-04:00

The headline on CNN's homepage read: Commentary: Media shows bias for gay marriage, but the more insideous headline of the article itself read "Media provides cover for assault on traditional marriage."

Once again James Dobson of Focus on the Family is attacking queer families while hiding behind the Bible and misconstrued statistics.

Dobson unabashedly argues for a religious belief to be written into the US Consitution. The only reason he provides for gay marriage being 'bad' is his belief that marriage was defined by 'the Creator'--by which he clearly intends the Christian God. Lacking facts*, Dobson and his ilk use statistics to intentionally confuse 'bad' with 'unpopular.'

In a 2003 Pew Forum Survey, the most popular two reasons for opposing gay marriage were both religious. Are we really going to let religion be written into the Constitution?

Dobson's only non-religious argument is that gay marriage is an attack on 'traditional marriage.'

This argument is so preposterous that he doesn't even bother to back it up with a single statistic. I challenge Mr. Dobson to demonstrate a single case where an existing or potential straight marriage has been harmed by giving the 1049 rights allowed only to married couples to loving same-sex couples as well.

*If you consider the Bible to be fact, look at how marriage is protrayed in virtually every instance; most married men in the bible have multiple wives. Is this the 'traditional marriage' Dobson is advocating?

When the Democrats Control the House

2006-05-08T11:36:00.000-04:00

It's not looking good for Republicans in congress, with an approval rating of only 25%. Democratic house leaders have a clear plan for their first week in control. Spread the word!

...a Democratic House would quickly vote to raise the minimum wage for the first time since 1997. It would roll back a provision in the Republicans' Medicare prescription drug benefit that prohibits the Department of Health and Human Services from negotiating prices for drugs offered under the program.
It would vote to fully implement the recommendations of the bipartisan panel convened to shore up homeland security after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, Democratic leaders said.
And it would reinstate lapsed rules that say any tax cuts or spending increases have to be offset by spending cuts or tax increases to prevent the federal deficit from growing.

Senator Feingold Sums Up Warrantless Wiretaps

2006-02-07T17:28:00.000-05:00

...I don’t want to hear again that this Administration has shown it can be trusted. It hasn’t...We held a hearing on the domestic spying program in the Judiciary Committee yesterday, where Attorney General Gonzales was a witness. We expect there will be other hearings. That is a start, but it will take more than just hearings to get the job done.

We know that in part because the President’s Attorney General has already shown a willingness to mislead the Congress.

At the hearing yesterday, I reminded the Attorney General about his testimony during his confirmation hearings in January 2005, when I asked him whether the President had the power to authorize warrantless wiretaps in violation of the criminal law. We didn’t know it then, but the President had authorized the NSA program three years before, when the Attorney General was White House Counsel. At his confirmation hearing, the Attorney General first tried to dismiss my question as “hypothetical.” He then testified that “it’s not the policy or the agenda of this President to authorize actions that would be in contravention of our criminal statutes.”

Right on. He also points out that we ALL agree that wiretaps are absolutely necessary. And they can be done legally with warrants. These warrants can be even be issued retroactively! Without a warrant, wiretaps are illegal. The President has effectively said "I'm the President and there are mean people out there, so I can do whatever I want." Unfortunately for him, that's not true. The Executive branch is subject to the laws passed by congress, and the FISA law passed decades ago is clear: President Bush is breaking the law.

Liberals: Supporting Our Troops

2006-02-07T16:34:00.000-05:00

I've already posted about how Bush told troops in training that they would have the equipment they need. I also described how that was a lie: military families are buying body armour to protect their sons and daughters when the military fails to do so.

Now the Bush administration is charging injured troops for body armor lost in the injuring event. Classy.

Liberal blogger John Aravosis of AMERICABlog was so apalled by this treatment of our troops that he put a button on his website to raise money for a soldier forced to pay the government $700 for the body armor torn off his bloodied body by rescuers as they rushed him to medical help. The readership of AMERICABlog, it should be noted, is rather rabidly anti-war. Nonetheless, in just two hours, these liberal readers donated over $5,000 to reimburse the wounded soldier.

Liberals support our troops. The Neocon administration, by contrast:

Recalls soldiers who have completed their active duty requirements and returned to civilian life to active duty - a backdoor draft of those who have already sacrificed for their country.
Makes veterans pay increased fees for health care.

Practice Free Speech - And Get Arrested

2006-02-01T11:08:00.000-05:00

Cindy Sheehan, who was given a guest pass to the State of the Union by Rep. Lynn Woolsey (D-CA), was arrested shortly before the President's address for wearing a T-shirt reading "2,245 Dead. How many More?" According to CNN,

"She was asked to cover it up. She did not," said Sgt. Kimberly Schneider, U.S. Capitol Police spokeswoman.
Schneider said Sheehan was arrested around 8:30 p.m. on charges of unlawful conduct, a misdemeanor that carries a maximum penalty of a year in jail.

What unlawful conduct? It sounds to me like she was exercising her right to freedom of speech. Sheehan has since written about how she had no intention of causing problems.

I didn't feel comfortable going. I knew George Bush would say things that would hurt me and anger me and I knew that I couldn't disrupt the address because Lynn had given me the ticket and I didn't want to be disruptive out of respect for her. I, in fact, had given the ticket to John Bruhns who is in Iraq Veterans Against the War. However, Lynn's office had already called the media and everyone knew I was going to be there so I sucked it up and went...I was never told that I couldn't wear that shirt into the Congress. I was never asked to take it off or zip my jacket back up. If I had been asked to do any of those things...I would have, and written about the suppression of my freedom of speech later.

I don't necessarily agree with Cindy Sheehan on many topics, but the horrible truth of this incident is unavoidable: Cindy Sheehan was arrested and imprisoned last night for wearing a T-shirt that read "2,245 Dead. How many More?"

This was not hate speech. This was not disruptive. This was T-shirt that asked a very valid question. And for this very small act of personal expression, a mother whose son died protecting our "freedom" was imprisoned.

The Attorney General Lied Under Oath

2006-01-31T12:12:00.000-05:00

During his confirmation hearings, Alberto Gonzales lied to a senator and denied that the Bush Administration would ever illegally spy on Americans without a warrant.

In other words, he broke the law to cover up the administration breaking the law.

I covered that last week.

2005-12-22T13:53:00.000-05:00

Q Scott, would the President veto a three-month extension of the Patriot Act? Is that something you can accept?

MR. McCLELLAN: Well, I think we need to talk about what's going on here. What's going on here is pure obstructionist politics. A minority in the Senate, led by Senate Democrats, are putting politics above our nation's security. This bill has been thoroughly debated. It enjoys majority support. They need to give it an up or down vote and quit playing politics with our nation's security.

Q So would the President veto a three-month extension?

MR. McCLELLAN: Well, the President has already made his views known on that -- I expressed his views last week -- and nothing has changed in terms of our views. That's why it's important for them to go ahead and get this passed now.

Q So you would veto a three-month extension?

MR. McCLELLAN: I expressed our view last week; nothing has changed.

Q Can you tell me what that was again?

MR. McCLELLAN: You can see what I expressed last week. You know very well what it was.

Q Sounds like you're backing down from that.

MR. McCLELLAN: No, nothing has changed in terms of what I said last week.

Q So just say it. Just say --

Q Will you use the word "veto"? Why are you not using the word "veto"?

MR. McCLELLAN: I expressed our views on that last week --

Q But if you still stand by them, why won't you reiterate it?

MR. McCLELLAN: Well, again, what I said last week still stands.

Q Which is what?

Clarity

2005-12-20T14:31:00.000-05:00

A bit of clarification on what section of the law was broken by Bush in spying on Americans.

US Code, Title 50, Chapter 36, Subchapter I, § 1809

(a) Prohibited activities

A person is guilty of an offense if he intentionally—

(1) engages in electronic surveillance under color of law except as authorized by statute; or

(2) discloses or uses information obtained under color of law by electronic surveillance, knowing or having reason to know that the information was obtained through electronic surveillance not authorized by statute.

(b) Defense

It is a defense to a prosecution under subsection (a) of this section that the defendant was a law enforcement or investigative officer engaged in the course of his official duties and the electronic surveillance was authorized by and conducted pursuant to a search warrant or court order of a court of competent jurisdiction.

An offense described in this section is punishable by a fine of not more than $10,000 or imprisonment for not more than five years, or both.

(d) Federal jurisdiction

There is Federal jurisdiction over an offense under this section if the person committing the offense was an officer or employee of the United States at the time the offense was committed.

Bush Succeeds in Installing Religious, Pro-Iran Rule in Iraq?

2005-12-20T09:42:00.000-05:00

As Bush's poll number jump, many are citing the recent election in Iraq as a significant accomplishment for this administration. While democratic elections in Iraq are certainly historic, we need to pause and see what the outcome of those elections is going to be. According to the Washington Post:

The preliminary returns pointed toward an Iraqi government that would be led for the next four years by a conservative Shiite religious alliance that has close ties to Iran... In the south -- where nearly all ballots had been counted in most of the provinces -- the United Iraqi Alliance, the main Shiite electoral grouping, swept the voting, outpolling second-place Allawi by a margin of 10 to 1.

Oh dear; that's not good! The article goes on to say that the secular group led by Allawi is claiming massive fraud in the election. This leaves, as W would say, only two options. Either the US has just installed a conservative religious government with ties to Iran, or the election was rigged by that group, demonstrating that the US has been unsuccessful in its goal of fair elections. Neither of these options is particularly appealing.

Continuing the Trend, Bush Says: Yeah, I did it, Yeah, it was illegal... so what?

2005-12-17T10:50:00.000-05:00

Yes, your President is actually angry that people are questioning his illegal surveillance of US Citizens without a warrant.

Today Bush admitted to personally authorizing illegal domestic spying over thirty times.

Where is the outrage?

Bush Secret Order Illegal, Punishable Under Patriot Act

2005-12-16T12:47:00.000-05:00

The recent disclosure that "President Bush signed a secret order in 2002 authorizing the National Security Agency to eavesdrop on U.S. citizens" is a bombshell. If true, the President authorized criminal eavesdropping on US citizens, punishable by up to $10,000 per aggrieved person, or the total of any loss incurred by that person as a result, whichever is greater.

According to the New York Times, the NSA has acted upon this secret order consistently over the past three years, spying on the e-mail, phone conversations, and other electronic communications of "hundreds, perhaps thousands" of people in America.

This is illegal under several sections of US Code, defined by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, which very clearly sets out the conditions under which electronic surveilance can be carried out.

The following breaks down the many ways in which President Bush broke US law (including the Patriot Act) by signing this secret order. I invite feedback and criticism in the comments section!

In English: Why What Bush Did Is Illegal
(distilled largely from this document on the laws involved)

"Electronic surveillance" is defined as targeted surveillance of any usually-private electronic communication to or from a specific person in the US. (e.g., a phone conversation, which usually cannot be intercepted without a court-ordered wiretap)
50 U.S.C. § 1801(f)(2)

The President can authorize such surveillance without a court order in only two situations. Surveillance can be authorized...

...for one year if the Attorney General certifies in writing that it is unlikely to intercept the communications of any "United States person" AND that steps will be taken to further minimize any such unlikely interception (these steps must be reported to congress by the AG).
50 U.S.C. § 1802
..for 15 days following a declaration of war by Congress.
50 U.S.C. § 1802

If these criteria are not met, people who have been spied upon can:

Sue for actual or punitive damages, plus legal costs, if the information was disclosed.
50 U.S.C. § 1827
Under the Patriot Act, sue for actual damages or $10,000, whichever is greater, plus legal costs.
Patriot Act section 223, 18 U.S.C. § 2712

So let's review:

Did the President authorize the NSA to conduct Electronic Sureveillance?

Yes. The NSA has intercepted phone calls and emails of hundreds of people in the US.

Did the President violate US Law with such authorization?

With the information currently available, yes. The NSA says it still seeks warrants for 'entirely domestic' communications, but does not say it does so when intercepting communications of US persons. Of course, there also has been no declaration of war.

CBS Poll: Americans Have No Idea Why We're in Iraq

2005-12-07T19:34:00.000-05:00

While 61% percent of Americans agree they have no idea why Bush actually thought it was a good plan to invade Iraq, they have some ideas of their own:

WHY DID BUSH ADMIN. DECIDE TO GO TO WAR?

U.S. Oil interests
17%

Fight terrorism
15%

Finish what his father started
13%

To depose Saddam Hussein
10%

Find/stop WMDs
9%

Because of 9/11
8%

Protect U.S. generally
4%

Promote democracy in Mideast
2%

Cheney/Rumsfeld wanted to
2%

Newsies Agree with Dean: Iraq a Lost War

2005-12-07T09:02:00.000-05:00

The vast majority of those participating in CNN.com's totally unscientific poll believe that the United States will lose the War in Iraq. While this obviously cannot be construed to represent all Americans, it is at least somewhat indicative of those who keep up with current news. Only 13 % (at the time of the screen cap above - just before 9:00 this morning) think victory can be achieved in two years. Is that the "new victory" where we leave Iraqis in charge of the mess we have created?

Is talking about a criminally mismanaged and poorly planned invasion of a sovereign country "unpatriotic?" I don't think so. The alternative is what?

Does this kind of talk lower troop morale? Probably. Does it lower it as much as being ill-equipped to the point that their boots are falling apart? Frankly, I doubt it.

Does it lower it as much watching their coalition buddies sent home (where there are new boots) as the coalition crumbles?

Finally, does talk of bringing out troops home lower their morale as much as the horrible realization that they are fighting on the same side as those who advocate torture?

Bush Played Guitar while New Orleans Drowned

2005-09-06T16:49:00.000-04:00

This picture was taken the day after Katrina hit the Gulf Coast, after the levees suffering from Bush administration budget cuts had given way, flooding New Orleans. Read the sickening timeline here.

That same day, this picture was taken:

President Bush's Photo-Op

2005-09-02T14:20:00.000-04:00

Four days after Katrina, Bush decides to make a photo-op appearance in Mississippi.

With Coast Guard helicopters as a backdrop.

While people are dying on rooftops.

Really. Nice caption too.

Pat Robertson is a Terrorist

2005-08-24T14:27:00.000-04:00

What do you call a fundamentalist, religious leader who calls for the assassination of a democratically elected president? A terrorist. Monday, Pat Robertson said of the President of Venezuela

"If he thinks we're trying to assassinate him, I think we really ought to go ahead and do it...We have the ability to take him out, and I think the time has come that we exercise that ability."

Having thus revealed himself as a terrorist, and realizing that fact, today Robertson says his comments were misinterpreted.

"I didn't say 'assassination.' I said our special forces should 'take him out.' And 'take him out' can be a number of things, including kidnapping"

Actually, Pat, you did say assassination. And as the leader of the Christian Coalition, a major component of W's base, you represent your people well. With statements like this, it's no wonder the U.S. only has one true foreign ally.

Update: Of course, this is the talk of the net right now, and some people are making excellent points. I think both of the following comments from fark.com are dead on. Perhaps I shouldn't link W and Robertson...

Farker 1: I'm sorry, I don't care what you think of Bush, but he doesn't need to apologize for every whack job that knows him.

Farker 2: I agree! I mean, the President would have to take a whole month off just to make that many apologies, surely he doesn't have time for that during war time...
oh.. wait a min..
nevermind.

In Their Own Words

2005-08-17T14:54:00.000-04:00

Excerpts from Daily Kos' amazing list of quotes on the topic of Clinton sending troops to Bosnia (where not one was KIA):

Victory means exit strategy, and it's important for the President to explain to us what the exit strategy is.
- Governor George W. Bush

If we are going to commit American troops, we must be certain they have a clear mission, an achievable goal and an exit strategy.
- Karen Hughes, speaking on behalf of George W. Bush

I honestly don't understand why when I write the same thing, people claim I'm some sort of unpatriotic heretic.

Yes, this is one of the few times I agree with W, but he's absolutely right: Victory means exit strategy. No exit strategy means quagmire. Quagmire means our troops die, and we fail to accomplish democracy in Iraq.

New Language: Honor our Fallen Heroes by Making this Country Better

2005-08-16T10:29:00.000-04:00

Regardless of what you think of Cindy Sheehan, it is despicable that the neocons who oppose her would stoop to mowing down the memorials she erected in memory of our fallen heroes.

Through their actions, the Bush administration and its supporters have very clearly taken an anti-troop position.

They do not properly equip our troops.
They go to war with fatally-low troop levels.
They underfund the VA.
They lie about the reasons for war.
They offer no plan for ending this war and bringing our troops home.

Now, they are defiling memorials?

It's time that Americans stand up for our troops! Democrats will Honor our Fallen Heroes by Making this Country Better--not by blindly following incompetent "patriotic" leaders.

What are our troops fighting for? Their great country. How disillusioned our men and women must be, returning to find memorials to their fallen friends desecrated by a supporter of the man who put them in harm's way.

Democratic Planks AWOL

2005-08-16T10:28:00.000-04:00

Sorry for the radio silence. Things just kind of got busy. We're back.

2005 Job Cuts Pass Half-Million Mark

2005-07-06T11:34:00.000-04:00

Last month I noted with alarm the number of mass job cuts. Turns out there was a 35% jump in job cuts in the month of June. Forecasters say that cuts for the remainder of 2005 are likely to continue at a similar rate, exceeding the numbers for 2004.

Well over half a million American jobs have been lost in 2005, yet the Bush administration touts the "strong economy" as one its greatest achievements.

I suppose it's true that job cuts do, generally, improve a company's stock prices. But that seems to miss the point. No matter how well American companies perform, if they continue to be rewarded for downsizing and outsourcing, it is American citizens who suffer.

Just another example of how Bush is selling out American citizens while catering to corporate greed.

Bush: Bother Me Not With "Facts"

2005-07-04T15:51:00.000-04:00

In an interview with ITV1:

Interviewer: But pollution in this country has increased amazingly since 1992.

W: That is a totally inaccurate statement.

Interviewer: It's a UN figure.
W: Well, I just beg to differ with every figure you've got.

Bush Administration Restricts Censors Internet Porn

2005-06-23T16:50:00.000-04:00

Today the Bush DOJ began censoring websites containing explicit content. (SFW)

Although the 10th Circuit Court has called the policy unconstitutional, from now on all websites with 'explicit' (lascivious' is OK) content will have to keep records about the individual portrayed. Even if the image is originally from another source. These records must be very extensive.

Because of that, personals websites will no longer be able to post explicit images of members. Gay.com has already removed all adult images from their site.

This is supposed to protect children (I guess) but instead will have the effect of closing MANY sites that do not have records of the original models. EVERY image must be accompanied by such records.

As one adult-oriented website put it (SFW) "We are not deviants. We have no interest in the sexual exploitation of children. That's what record companies are for."

This is just Bush administration prudishness.

New Language: Playing Petty Politics with the 9/11 Tragedy

2005-06-23T16:12:00.000-04:00

Use it. In every other sentence. Rinse, repeat.

As in "The adminsitration is playing petty politics with the 9/11 tragedy to distract from their failure to plan any exit strategy from Iraq."

and

"Karl Rove must be fired for playing petty politics with the 9/11 tragedy."

Administration Backpedals on "Last Throes"

2005-06-23T15:13:00.000-04:00

The head American Commander in the Persian Gulf today told congress:

"I believe there are more foreign fighters coming into Iraq than there were six months ago." As to the overall strength of the insurgency, Abizaid said it was "about the same" as six months ago. - AP

Then in today's White House Press Briefing: spokesperson Scott McClellan tried to spin this to somehow not coflict with the Vice President's delusional "last throes" comment. I love this reporter, who ever she/he is.

Q Does the President agree with the Vice President that the Iraqi insurgents are in their last throes?

MR. McCLELLAN: He agrees with -- I think you should put his comments in context, because the President agrees that there is significant progress being made by the Iraqi people on the political front. And that's what the Vice President was talking about in his remarks.

[snip]

...you have to look at the context of the Vice President's comments.

Q I did, I looked.

MR. McCLELLAN: And you don't point them out. What did he talk about?

Q He said there are more foreign fighters coming into Iraq than there were six months ago.

[snip]

MR. McCLELLAN: It doesn't appear that you've looked at the context of his comments, and I would encourage you to do that. And I just addressed this question when you asked it.

Q I was there in this -- when he said, "in the throes of," --

MR. McCLELLAN: You were in the interview?

Q He did not mean political, he meant the whole situation in Iraq.

MR. McCLELLAN: You were in the interview? I think you should look --

Q You can't change his meaning. You guys are trying to step back now, and I don't blame you.

MR. McCLELLAN: No, I disagree with you.

From a Sinking Ship...

2005-06-23T14:08:00.000-04:00

Republican Candidate Calls Bush Administration "Nazis," Quits Party

It's funny, I know a lot of people doing this recently.

Rove Plays Petty Politics with 9/11 Attacks to Distract from Bush Administration's Utter All-Encompassing Failure

2005-06-23T11:59:00.000-04:00

This is slander.

"Liberals saw the savagery of the 9/11 attacks and wanted to prepare indictments and offer therapy and understanding for our attackers" -Karl Rove, June 22 2005 (video)

How dare he say that as I sat terrified in my New York apartment and watched the twin towers crumble, my thoughts were "let's give therapy to these people... these poor people are just misunderstood."

No, Karl, you are totally fucking wrong.
How dare you play petty politics with the tragedy of 9/11?
And isn't it convenient that you are raking up the mud at the point when your brainchild administration's poll numbers are in the toilet?

My first thought was for my friends who live and work in Manhattan, and my second thought (and I'm not proud of this, though it's certainly understandable) was "nuke 'em."

Rove's statement is simply gross, and right now I want to kick him in the head. What he ~~suggested~~ said out loud at a ballroom event held only a few miles from ground zero is reprehensible, despicable and totally characteristic of the entire Bush administration. While I worried about my friends, Rove's eyes lit up with the dollar signs of new-found political capital.

I feel sick.

UPDATE: Chuck Schumer (D-NY) and other democrats are demanding a retraction.

The one thing New York has had since Sept. 11 is unity...To inject politics into this and to defame a large number of people [is outrageous] It's not what New York and America is all about.

If Rove does not retract with a full apology, he must step down in disgrace. If he does not retract with a full apology, he is standing beside remarks that purposefully demonize, defame, and injure those who disagree with him. Moreover, he would be saying that his remarks do characterize "what America is all about." Maybe in his fantasies.

UPDATE: Took a breather. While Rove must be made to pay, this must not distract from the grater issue at hand: the Democrats are winning, and the NeoCons are using barbed language to disguise this fact as everyday partisanship. I think it's clear, as Nancy Pelosi so nicely put it, that "The President is on the ropes." Why else would Rove (who is a genius--an evil genius) take one for the team like this? It's a trap!

6,000 US Soldiers Desert from Iraq

2005-06-22T22:16:00.000-04:00

Oh shit. That's not good.

W: Make America More Vulnerable to Radiological Attack

2005-06-22T11:50:00.000-04:00

Today, Bush pushed for the construction of new nuclear power plants on US soil. With the track record of current US nuclear facilities (see below), this is like planning to leave a basket full of grenades at a daycare center and walking away. Three Mile Island and Chernobyl both happened without the help of terrorists--just imagine the horror that an intentional attack could bring! New Democrat Language: Bush is planning to make the US more vulnerable to domestic radiological attacks.

This is not fearmongering. This is fact.
We have known since 2003 that Al Qaeda has specifically targeted US nuclear energy plants for attack. Were they to succeed, it would be worse than a nuclear bomb:

Considering the fact that a nuclear plant houses more than a thousand times the radiation as released in an atomic bomb blast,the magnitude of a single attack could reach beyond 100,000 deaths and the immediate loss of tens of billions of dollars.

Such an attack would probably not result in a Chernobylesque meltdown, but rather a much more devastating release of radiation from the spent fuel rods that sit in relatively-unprotected pools next to the concrete-domed reactor. Said Bob Alvarez, a former senior advisor to the Department of Energy who worked on emergency preparedness:

This is the most consequential vulnerability of nuclear power in the country, and that is not a secret. They could release 5 to 10 times more radioactivity than a nuclear reactor meltdown.

10 Times More Radiation Than a Meltdown? But There's Security, Right?
Astoundingly, no. There isn't. Earlier this month, Massachusetts Democratic congressman Edward Markey described his recent investigation of the Seabrook Nuclear facility:

The fence is broken [and has been for months], the security cameras don't work, and some required security analysis hasn't even been performed. It seems the plant motto is 'see no evil, hear no evil, maybe no evil exists.'

Think that's an isolated incident?
It's not. There have been over 120 documented incidents of intentional, internal sabotage at US nuclear power plants. As for external threats (i.e., terrorists):

In exercises conducted by the NRC between 1992 and 1998, guards at 27 of 57 nuclear plants failed to keep mock intruders from inflicting simulated damage sufficient to put the nuclear core in jeopardy-this despite the fact that reactor owners got 6 to 12 months' advance notice of the visits, and until recently were allowed to beef up their security staffs to respond to the attacks. (One intruder bypassed the detection system seven times simply by crawling or jumping past a checkpoint.)

Read that again. They were told a year in advance when to be ready--a courtesy I doubt terrorists are likely to extend--and were allowed to hire temps for the mock attack, and they still failed!

So perhaps we should store the spent fuel in a safe place? Unfortunately there isn't one--this stuff stays radioactive for millennia--longer than any man-made structure on the planet has existed. The current idea (and by current, I mean 1978) is to build a storage facility at Yucca Mountain in Nevada, but to this day construction hasn't even started. And how does the government plan to get this incredibly dangerous material to Nevada? By highway, on trucks. (In 2000, there were 5,275 fatal truck accidents in the US - PDF).

Do you live within 50 miles of a nuclear reactor (or within 50 miles of a major highway)? If so, you should already be concerned. If not, you might find yourself with a new nuclear neighbor if Bush's plan for plant construction is successful.

Update: Please don't tell me we NEED to use nuclear technology. Over two-thirds of US oil consumption is for transporation. I've not seen many nuclear-powered cars lately. (Thanks, Anna)

June Jobs Massacre

2005-06-21T20:06:00.000-04:00

I told you already how in May planned job cuts soared 42% over April, for a total of 82,283 pink slips during the month.

Then, in early June, I told you how GM was planning on cutting 25,000 jobs (30% of May's total).

Today, the massive supermarket chain Winn-Dixie announced plans to cut 20,000 jobs.

These two cuts alone total 45,000 jobs cuts planned in June. In other words, these two cuts alone are equivalent to over 77% of April's total US job cuts.

I hope nobody else loses their job, or it's going to be a massacre. And there's another week to go in the month!

...and as I type that, Ford announces 1,750 US job cuts.

Bush Caves on Social Security!

2005-06-21T19:35:00.000-04:00

...supports version without private accounts.

Frist: Between a Rock and Hard Place

2005-06-21T16:09:00.000-04:00

Frist this morning before a meeting with W on the Bolton nomination:

bringing up another vote's not going to change anything

...then again before lunch, but after his meeting:

We'll continue to get an up or down vote for John Bolton over the coming days, possibly weeks.

Photo above is Frist standing in the White House driveway, immediately following the meeting. Is it just me, or does he have the look of a man just realizing he's shat himself?

See my previous video posting: John Bolton is a Raving Lunatic

I Support our Men and Women in Uniform

2005-06-17T19:13:00.000-04:00

...and I most certainly support them dancing. (Funny! Worth the click or your money back!!!)

God Bless America, Land That I Love, Stand Beside Her, and Guide Her...

2005-06-16T15:32:00.000-04:00

George Bush's America:

From a FOIA-attained FBI email:

On a couple of occasions, I entered interview rooms to find a detainee chained hand and foot in a fetal position to the floor, with no chair, food, or water. Most times they had urinated or defecated on themselves and had been left there for 18-24 hours or more. On one occasion, the air conditioning had been turned down so far and the temperature was so cold in the room, that the barefooted detainee was shaking with cold. . . . On another occasion, the A/C had been turned off, making the temperature in the unventilated room probably well over 100 degrees. The detainee was almost unconscious on the floor with a pile of hair next to him. He had apparently been literally pulling his own hair out throughout the night...

VP Cheney (6/14/05) on detainee treatment:

Our policy is the correct one....[They do not qualify for Geneva Convention protection but] in spite of that they are still treated with respect and dignity.

Update: Jeff Sessions, R- Ala., "expressed impatience at Democrats who called for more legal rights for detainees. He said the newly constructed facility at Guantanamo was on 'a beautiful site' and 'would make a magnificent resort.'" - MSNBC, hat tip Wonkette

Democrats Win on Abusive Patriot Act

2005-06-16T11:51:00.000-04:00

The House voted yesterday to allow us to read library books and buy tomes from bookstores without Big Brother watching. In a surprise turn, many Republicans joined with Democrats to repeal this worrisome section of the Patriot Act.

This is a clear message that the Democrats are on the side of the American People, and that the American People have spoken up with such volume that even lockstep NeoCons broke party ranks.

Perhaps they suddenly remembered the true meaning of "freedom." Not freedom to express hate for others, as is so commonly advocated by this administration, but freedom to learn, to educate ourselves, and to make informed decisions. Hunh, maybe that's exactly what they are afraid of. If Americans started educating themselves instead of just being ~~idiots~~ "dittoheads," they would understand how corrupt this administration has become. In the words of Congressman Bernie Sanders, this is an "administration intent on chipping away at the very civil liberties that define us as a nation."

Of course, it would be important to know if someone being watched as a terror suspect were learning how to build bombs. But our constitution provides for that. As noted in the Fox News coverage of the story:

"If the government suspects someone is looking up how to make atom bombs, go to a court and get a search warrant," said Jerold Nadler, D-N.Y.

That the government would want the right to look at what it's citizens are reading, without their permission, or even any clear record of such investigation is frankly alarming. Under the old Patriot Act, the government did not even have to specify why it was looking into such records; pre-greasing the slippery slope if I've ever seen it.

Bush said before the vote that he would veto the measure. I wonder why?

What to do About Gitmo?

2005-06-15T12:33:00.000-04:00

While I think this is ridiculous:

Asked how long [Gitmo detainees] could be held, [Air Force Brig. Gen. Thomas L.] Hemingway said: "I think we can hold them as long as the conflict endures."

Leahy questioned the administration's assertion that the prison camp was an essential part of the U.S.-led war on terror. "All of us know this war will not end in our lifetime," Leahy said. - AP

I also can see why this is unacceptable:

A dozen prisoners released from Guantanamo Bay have returned to "the battlefield" to fight against the United States, U.S. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales said on Wednesday.
"There are several people that we have released that we know have come back and fought against America because they have been recaptured or killed on the battlefield," he said after meetings in Brussels with European Union officials. - Reuters

What to do?

Terri Was Blind, Could Not Have Been Hand-Fed

2005-06-15T12:05:00.000-04:00

Despite Bill Frist's diagnosis via video, in which he claimed that Terri was responsive to visual stimuli, today her autopsy revealed that she was blind, and would not have been able to swallow.

In essence, the autopsy revealed that Terri was terminally ill in 1990, and her organs had been kept "alive" by machines for almost 15 years.

For this abomination, this husk of a human, the Senate passed special legislation and W returned from vacation. This from a man who took the month off after receiving a memo entitled Bin Laden Determined to Strike in US.

This was clearly a straightforward, personal issue, in which the Bush administration interfered. For all their talk about "freedom," this administration exerts control over even the most intimate of personal interactions. It's time to tell the NeoCons to stay out of our personal business.

Calling conservative Republicans! Where are you? Please take back your party!

Image from amptoons.com

America Under Bush: Dead Last

2005-06-14T17:16:00.000-04:00

Surely we can do better than dead last in all these categories, including foreign aid as compared to military spending, deaths by starvation???

For 1st Time Since 80's, Americans with HIV Tops 1,000,000

2005-06-14T13:21:00.000-04:00

While I am happy to see that Bush has advocated funding in Africa for AIDS treatment (less obvious on how he will prevent HIV transmission), it is very discouraging that this month, for the first time since the 1980's, the CDC claims there are over one million Americans living with HIV.

This is bittersweet news. While it points to the fact that people with HIV/AIDS are living longer, it is also a clarion call for better prevention of HIV transmission.

The fact is, in the US alone, 1/4 of those with HIV don't even know they are infected.

Why is it not policy to simply stamp out AIDS? From 1981 to 2003, 20 Million human beings, each someone's child, have died of AIDS.

The WHO thinks it will stamp out Polio worldwide by the end of this year. Surely we can do the same for HIV and AIDS.

Old but Great News: Bush to Dines Tonight with Star of "Lesbian Big Boob Bangeroo"

2005-06-14T13:10:00.000-04:00

In one of the first things he's ever done that I can actually understand, W will dine tonight with Porn Star Mary Carey. At least he's thinking with one of his heads.

Hopefully, this will free up Laura to go back to Chippendale's with Lynne "Dollar Bill" Cheney.

Set your TiVo Now!

2005-06-08T13:07:00.000-04:00

As CNN fights to reinvent itself in the face of its worst ratings in years (FOX News is beating the pants off them), they've added a show from CNNI (their international channel) to the regular lineup.

As CJR puts it "CNN Stuns US with Actual News" and as Atrios put it

One is reminded what "news" is when it isn't the politics-as-gossip and missing white women we've become accustomed too.

When leading news stories on CNN's homepage include "Gross! Exhibit teaches science of body functions" it's time for us to use our remotes to speak to the CEOs and Programming Directors.

Please, everybody, set your TiVo to record Your World Today, at noon ET on CNN. Maybe they'll get the message that we are looking for actual news.

Majority of Americans Say Bush is Doing a Bad Job

2005-06-07T17:54:00.000-04:00

The same poll I mention in my previous post on GM's job cuts shows that Bush is now, officially, an unpopular president. His approval rating is 20 points lower than Clinton's at the time of the impeachment. His approval rating is lower than Nixon's just a month before the one of the largest and most-recognized protests in American history: Operation Dewey Canyon III.

Tell your friends (new language): Bush is unpopular. The majority of Americans think he is doing a bad job. Forget "mandate," and start thinking about how Bush betrayed his followers, and has done even worse than predicted by critics like myself. Bush is unpopular at home, and dangerously so in other countries (who, unlike us, have not forgotten about the Downing Street Memo).

GM to Cut 25,000 Jobs: Over 30% of May's TOTAL

2005-06-07T17:28:00.000-04:00

Yesterday it was just too damned hot to blog. Sorry.

Today, GM announced it is cutting 25,000 jobs--over 30% of last month's already-distressing total.

Ironically, the economy is one of the few areas that Bush hasn't taken a pummeling lately. A new Washington Post/ABC News Poll shows that the percentage of people who think the economy is doing well astonishingly increased, from 37% in April to 44% in May. The news from GM is likely to change that, as are the numbers from May's planned job cuts (below).

Job Cuts Skyrocket in May

2005-06-02T13:52:00.000-04:00

And why do we not care for unilateralists like Bolton (see below)? Because they are completely divorced from reality!

Last month, planned job cuts leapt 42% overall, and EIGHT TIMES April's level within the computer industry.

Why the huge cuts?

The weak European economy. As international businesses struggle in Europe, Americans lose their jobs.

Anybody who fails to see that we can no longer "go it alone," fails to realize that the American way of life is inextricably connected to other countries' economies, politics, and the day-to-day life of their citizens.

Bolton says he's just watching out for America's own interests. He doesn't get it. The interests of others are now our interests--whether we want them to be or not.

John Bolton is a Raving Lunatic

2005-06-02T13:07:00.000-04:00

Watch him explain his view of the UN in this clip from before his nomination (i.e., being honest outside the constraints of a job interview). The best part is near the end when he flips out Khrushchev-style.

He is clearly an unabashed unilateralist, in a time when the US is in great need of its allies. Is this really who we want at the UN, representing us in the global community? (Hint: No.)

Hat tip: Metafilter

Wildly Off-Topic

2005-06-02T12:40:00.000-04:00

Tomorrow, in celebration of National Donut Day, Krispy Kreme will be giving away free donuts.

Hat tip: Fark

Gay Army Sgt. Awarded Purple Heart, Kicked Out of Service

2005-06-01T17:29:00.000-04:00

This is completely asinine!

[Sgt. Robert] Stout, of Utica, Ohio, was awarded the Purple Heart after a grenade sent pieces of shrapnel into his arm, face and legs while he was operating a machine gun on an armored Humvee last May.

Yet, he has been discharged because he is openly gay. With Army recruiting falling desperately short of target (42% in April), how is this helping?

UPDATE: I wish Andrew Sullivan had a least hat tipped me after I sent him this story and he posted the exact same links I emailed him. Note timestamp.

Action Alert: Call Ethics Committee Leaders

2005-06-01T15:24:00.000-04:00

The Daily Delay is urging people to call the Majority and Minority leaders of the Ethics Commitee and urge them to appoint an outside counsel to investigate Tom Delay, aka the most corrupt politician in the District (and that's saying something).

I've pasted the numbers below. Once you've called, leave a comment at Daily Delay to let them know how it went. They already have almost a hundred confirmed calls in the last couple hours.

Ethics Chairman Doc Hastings (R-WA)
WA Office: 509-543-9396
DC Office: 202-225-5816.

Ranking Democratic Rep. Alan Mollohan (D-WV)
WV Office: 304-232-5390
DC Office: 202-225-4172

Don't worry, they won't want to actually talk to you, they'll just take your name and state.

Reappropriated Language: "Give SS Privatization Plan a Fair Up or Down Vote"

2005-06-01T15:13:00.000-04:00

Not my idea, but I love it!

Lies? They Can't Even Keep Their "Truths" Straight!

2005-06-01T14:37:00.000-04:00

I've already thanked Daily Kos for pointing out the administration's Flip-Flop on Amnesty International.

In 2003 Donald Rumsfeld suggested that "a careful reading of Amnesty International" would be convincing cause to go to war in Iraq. Today, Rumsfeld called the Amnesty indictments of Gitmo "outrageous charges," and went on to say that any organization making such statements clearly has no "claim to objectivity or seriousness."

What I can't take seriously is anyone still in power who claimed in 2002 (of US military action in Iraq):

"It could last six days, six weeks. I doubt six months."
Feb. 7, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, to U.S. troops in Aviano, Italy USA Today

P.S. That photo above is a violation of the Geneva convention... just sayin'

Demand Bush Respond to the Downing Street Memo

2005-05-31T17:19:00.000-04:00

Sign Congressman Conyers' letter to President Bush demanding an official response and full inquiry into the validity of the Downing Street Memo, which states that the administration knowingly shaped intelligence to construct a justification for invading Iraq, then 'sold' the war to the American public based on this distortion of intel.

If true, the Downing Street Memo--an official memo of our closest ally--is proof that President Bush is guilty of high crimes and misdemeanors; the definition of an impeachable offense. If true, W lied to Congress in his 2002 State of the Union speech; a report that he is constitutionally required to give from time to time. I doubt the framers thought it necessary to include admonishments not to lie in such a report.

Big Words

2005-05-31T15:46:00.000-04:00

OK, I know the following defies the ground rules (beware, polysyllabic discourse ahead), but I think it's fair to talk a little more about why we're doing what we're doing (creating a new language for democratic politics). Since such discussion is going to be pretty darn meta anyway, I'm pulling out the stops and using the big words. Fair warning given.

"Every education system is a political means of maintaining or of modifying the appropriation of discourse, with the knowledge and the powers it carries with it"
Foucault, The Discourse on Language

Today, the true "Public Education" is, tragically, the mass media, which has increasing manifested a predilection for the reified neospeak of the far right, modifying the appropriation of discourse in their favor.

A leftwards lexical shift could remodify Americans' mental taxonomies in a similar manner.

Until then, the vox populi will continue to speak (and think!) in the language of the right, even when critiquing it--thus weakening any such critique at the semiotic level.

...And while I truly believe that, I don't think I can sell it to America in such packaging.

Back to small words.

W Uses "Up or Down Vote" Four Times in Three Sentences

2005-05-31T14:21:00.000-04:00

As opposed to a side-to-side vote? An in or out vote? Listen, this is intentional brainwashing! Today, from the Rose Garden:

"You know, I thought -- I thought John Bolton was going to get an up or down vote on the Senate floor, just like he deserves an up or down vote on the Senate floor, and clearly he's got the votes to get confirmed. And so I was disappointed that once again, the leadership there in the Senate didn't give him an up or down vote. And the reason it's important to have an up or down vote is because we need to get our ambassador to the United Nations to help start reforming that important organization."
W's Rose Garden Press Conference - White House Transcript

Less intentional was probably the end of his response to a question about the damning Amnesty International Report which was, according to the official white house transcript (above):

"And, you know..."

Well, no, I don't know! Daily Kos details how Cheney has said that Amnesty can't be taken seriously, while Rumsfeld used Amnesty to justify war in Iraq! Which is it?

New Language: "Stop Lying to Our Troops"

2005-05-31T11:20:00.000-04:00

The more positive spin the Administration puts on the outlook for the future that is being built (torn apart) by its own policies, the less I believe them. I didn't believe Cheney when he said, prior to the Iraq invasion that

"We will, in fact, be greeted as liberators."
Interview with Vice-President Dick Cheney, NBC, "Meet the Press," Transcript for March 16, 2003

The trick is, sometimes we wish we could believe them, as when Bush declared

"Major combat operations in Iraq have ended."
Aboard the USS Abraham Lincoln, May 2, 2003

At that point, there had been about 160 American fatalities. Today, there are ten times that many.

We wish we could believe Cheney when he told Larry King yesterday that the war in Iraq will be over by 2009. But we can't. We wish we could, but we can't.

We stand with our troops as proud Americans, fighting to protect our country from threats, both foreign and domestic! We will fight to ensure our troops are NOT irresponsibly put in harm's way, and NOT LIED TO. We fully support our men and women in uniform and will continue to work for smart use of the world's best military.

New Language: "Stop Lying to Our Troops"

Bush Tells Naval Academy Grads a Whopper

2005-05-27T10:33:00.000-04:00

Watching W address the Anapolis graduating class on CNN right now. There was tepid applause for this load of smoke up their ass:

So long as I'm your President, you will have the very best equipment and the resources you need to get the job done.

I suppose that's sort of true. They will have the best equipment if their families buy it for them before they ship out.

Deaths in "Newsweek Riot" were a LIE

2005-05-26T17:13:00.000-04:00

Not only is there no evidence that anybody died in the Great Newsweek Massacre, it is also coming to light that the riots were planned months in advance by anti-western forces, who merely seized upon the story as a good excuse to rally the troops.

In other news, I just updated the header to be less generic and more on-topic. The statistics it cites are up-to-date as of today.

$7,780,229,236,305 in National Debt (*cough* surplus? what surplus?)

That's $26,268 per US citizen!

Over 21,795 Dead Iraqi Civilians
Over 1,800 Coalition deaths

I don't have my $26,268 share of the national debt stuffed in my mattress (my mattress isn't that big), so I hope W doesn't come looking for it anytime soon.

Let me know what you think of the new graphic, plus any other comments are more than welcome.

Democrats Win on Social Security

2005-05-26T14:21:00.000-04:00

With an approval rating of ~30% on Social Security, Bush has lost this one. The Democrats win (hunh? wah?). As Josh points out on Kos, now's a good time to spread the word.

New Language: Education Lowers the Abortion Rate, Abstinence-Only Programs Increase It

2005-05-26T12:27:00.000-04:00

As Clinton said, abortion should be legal and rare.

To me, it is incomprehensible that the same people who want to outlaw abortion because it is so wrong (and it is a worst-case scenario, no matter which side you are on), also prevent our clearly sexually-active youth from learning how to prevent pregnancy. The United States has the highest teen pregnancy rate of any industrialized country--twice that of the UK.

People who promote abstinence-only "education" are actively harming our teenage population!

It has been shown through years of research that teenagers exposed only to "abstinence education" acquire STDs at a higher rate than others. (Kirby D, Emerging Answers: Research Findings on Programs to Reduce Teen Pregnancy, Washington, DC: National Campaign to Prevent Teen Pregnancy, 2001.)

Moreover, abstinence-only education has never been proven to have any significant effect on the rate at which teens become sexually active. In contrast, according to the Surgeon General, sex-ed that includes instruction in the proper use of contraception HAS been proven to:

delay the onset of sexual activity in teenagers
reduce their number of sexual partners
increase contraceptive use when they become sexually active

(Call to Action to Promote Sexual Health and Responsible Sexual Behavior, former Surgeon General David Satcher, June 2001)

Thankfully, teenage pregnancy is declining, and studies have shown that 25% of this decrease is due to "delayed onset of sexual intercourse" and the remaining 75% of the decline can be attributed to "the increased use of highly effective and long-acting contraceptive methods among sexually experienced teenagers." (AGI, Why is Teenage Pregnancy Declining? The Roles of Abstinence, Sexual Activity and Contraceptive Use, New York, AGI, 1999.) Note that 0% of the decline in teen pregnancy can be traced to abstinence. Perhaps this is because abstinence education has not been proven to in any way increase the actual practice of abstinence (see above)!

This data, as noted, has been available for the great majority of the current administration, yet they continue to try to remove comprehensive sex education and install completely ineffective abstinence messages.

This ~~irresponsible~~ criminally negligent neocon policy can only lead to:

increased teen pregnancy
increased rates of STD infection
ultimately, increased abortions

Abstinence should be advocated, but clearly, that is not enough. Abstinence-only education is like leaving a teenager with a loaded weapon, but not teaching them gun safety. It is criminally negligent, and it is our own teenagers who we are putting in harm's way.

We know what works and what doesn't.

We know that simply leaving to parents to decide has caused a nation-wide epidemic of teen pregnancy that is costing taxpayers millions of dollars and putting a tremendous stress on our medical and childcare systems.

We must reduce teenage pregnancy. And this will have the effect of reducing the number of abortions performed, which we all think is a good thing (Just trying to be clear. There are those that think pro-choicers somehow "like" abortion. Ew! Fuck you!). According to the CDC, 50% of all abortions are performed on teens(18%) and those in their very early 20's. It is shown that education lowers pregnancy rates in this critical demographic, thus...

New Language: Education lowers abortion rates.

Big hat tip to The Alan Guttmacher Institute for much of the data cited above.

New Language: "Identical Human Rights for All Humans"

2005-05-25T13:33:00.000-04:00

Today, Amnesty International blasted the US, saying that its increased disregard for international law has led to a sharp decline in civil and human rights across the globe.

The Secretary General for this organization that seeks to prevent torture and inhumane treatment of captives (as well as wrongful captivity) rightly pointed out how the neocons currently in control of our great nation have hijacked our language and have twisted the meaning of such words as "freedom" and "justice."

"Governments are betraying their promises on human rights. A new agenda is in the making with the language of freedom and justice being used to pursue policies of fear and insecurity. This includes cynical attempts to redefine and sanitize torture...

Governments are failing to confront their lack of success in addressing terrorism, persisting with failed but politically-convenient strategies. Four years after 9/11, the promise to make the world a safer place remains hollow...

When the most powerful country in the world thumbs its nose at the rule of law and human rights, it grants a license to others to commit abuse with impunity."

I suppose that I'm un-American to agree with her.

I propose that we work on refining the new language: "Identical Human Rights for All Humans."

Alarmingly, the neocons have managed to transform the essential human rights of such "outcast" groups as Queers, Muslims, and prisoners into "special rights." This is because to a neocon, human rights = rights conferred under ultra-conservative Christian values.

In so thinking, they are as wrong as the Wiccan, Satanist, or Amish who think their religious beliefs should be used to define human rights. Just because there are more neocons (in power, anyway) than members of these groups, does not give them the "special right" to define human rights for the rest of the world.

Human rights are not up for redefinition. Human rights cannot be lost; even criminals have human rights. Certainly then, human rights cannot be denied to groups based only upon their sexual orientation, skin color, etc!

We must have a single, universal application of human rights--and we already do. It's the neocons who have granted themselves the special right to disregard the rights of others. It's just one of the many ways in which the word "neocon" may rightly be substituted with "nascent fascist."

Think I'm going to far? Check out the 14 Characteristics of Fascism, and the specifics of how the Bush Administration meets and surpasses them all.

And just because I'm pissed at the moment, I'm going to Godwin my own post. Sorry:

Why Bother Helping the Democrats?

2005-05-25T13:13:00.000-04:00

Why is this blog called democratic planks? Wouldn't it be better to have a third party?

Well, yes. It would be better--as a global leader, this country needs a political discourse that goes beyond the mutual masturbation of Blue vs Red.

However, the Neocons have successfully taken over the Republican party, and in only five years transformed it from the party of small government and fiscal responsibility into the party of the largest government expansion seen by any living American, with the possible exception of the WPA. It has expanded not only in physical size, but into the areas of controlling the press, and invading our privacy (which really flies in the face of conservatism, does it not?).

We already have the infrastructure to fight them with: the tattered remains of the Democratic Party. People are already registered to vote Democrat, for instance. Building a new party will take too long to combat the imminent threat, and besides, we already have a model for how to proceed: do exactly what the neocons did--redefine the discourse through lexical shift (that is, a new language).

We are going to do nothing less than rebuild the Democratic Party by redefining it and the language it uses.

Prolegomenon to Any Future Metalanguage

2005-05-24T14:39:00.000-04:00

or, "Why Build a New Democratic Language? The FAQ"

What are we doing here?

We are creating a new Democratic language. With this language, we will state our position as liberal democrats.

Why?

Because people "think" in words.

If we think in the words of the neocon movement, facts become distorted. It becomes "up and down votes" instead of "good or bad judges."

That's sort of a weak point, isn't it?

Not at all. How we talk changes how we understand and gerenally think about the world around us. If America continues it's ever increasing usage of theocratic social conservatives' "neospeak," liberal thought will be exterminated at the level of ganglia.

There's a lot of academic work to back this up. Benjamin Lee Whorf wrote in 1956 that, "users of markedly different grammars are pointed by their grammars toward different types of observations and different evaluations of externally similar acts of observation, and hence are not equivalent as observers but must arrive at somewhat different views of the world."

A valuable nugget, but hard to understand (sort of like today's Democrats). Basically, it says "Two people with different languages will comprehend given evidence differently from one another."

What on earth do we do with this knowledge?

We teach people to speak our language, by rebuilding it to be as clear, concise, irrefutable and self-evident as possible. We carefully introduce this new language to ensure maximal absorption.

Will you please rant a little?

John Kerry was incomprehensible, and [thus] completely unclear as to where he stood. That was bad.

Most politicians are like that, however, so it's not just Kerry.

W. speaks like an advanced fourth grader, so everybody understands him, even if his actual arrangement of words rivals Yoda on a martini binge.

OK, enough ranting!

Sorry. Last thought: Dean was much more clear, but not careful enough. If he had spoken a consistent language, that would have structured his approach at such a fundamental level that it would have been harder to flip out so often in public. (Note: "Aiiargh!" is not to be included in any future metalanguage).

New Language: "Smart Use of the World's Best Military"

2005-05-24T12:45:00.000-04:00

Perhaps we should use the phrase "~~Intelligent~~ Smart use of the world's best military."

Where best implies:

best equipped
best trained
most effectively sized

I stress implies, so that when questioned, we only then pull out the big guns of specifics: equipment, training, and size, as if to say "what are you, a moron who knows nothing about the military?" Citing these too soon can lead to MEGO (My Eyes Glaze Over).

Where ~~intelligent~~ smart means:

Having a soup-to-nuts strategy, and the equipment and manpower to carry it out
Looking to military history and learning from it
Using technology where possible to save lives

Small phrases are the lead!

When someone disagrees with us, we say:

"You don't believe in the military? Continued rebuttal here."

or

"Not smart. Continued rebuttal here."

This way, even if we get cut off (a la Ann Coulter, or worse, Bill O'Reilley), our soundbite gets through, converying our point while simultaneously highlighting the ignorance of the questioner.

It sounds petty, I know, but it has clearly allowed the neocons to consolidate power.

On another note, is terrorism trendy? From the outline below, one might initally think that our military is primarily concerned with defeating terrorism.

I think this misses the point entirely. The role of the military is to protect America and its citizens. Period. As we move forward in creating solid, non-trendy planks, we should be careful about our language, and set larger, more straightforward goals.

The Current Outline

2005-05-23T11:52:00.000-04:00

Here's the Table of Contents from the current Democratic Platform. Let's use this as a starting point. Does this represent our position? Does it leave anything out?

A STRONG, RESPECTED AMERICA

DEFEATING TERRORISM
KEEPING WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION OUT OF THE HANDS OF TERRORISTS
PROMOTING DEMOCRACY, PEACE, AND SECURITY
STRENGTHENING OUR MILITARY
ACHIEVING ENERGY INDEPENDENCE
STRENGTHENING HOMELAND SECURITY

A STRONG, GROWING ECONOMY

CREATING GOOD JOBS
STANDING UP FOR THE GREAT AMERICAN MIDDLE CLASS

STRONG, HEALTHY FAMILIES

REFORMING HEALTH CARE
IMPROVING EDUCATION
PROTECTING OUR ENVIRONMENT
A STRONG AMERICAN COMMUNITY

OK, to begin with, folks, while repetition works, just saying the word "strong" a lot does not strengthen your postion. And it certainly doesn't define it, which is what this document is supposed to be about. I think it's fairly obvious we dont want WEAK America (though, actually, this is how we are painted, as so afraid and unwilling to be strong that we are, in fact, unamerican).

I'm a little bummed out that Civil Rights isn't on this list. Some of the most important groups that support Democrats do so because of our history of advancing civil rights, yet it's not to be found on this list.

I'm a little distressed that the environment is filed under "Family Issues." It's also a very important economic issue, and a homeland security issue (e.g., nuclear plant companies that point to economic reasons that they can't tighten their security protecting potientially devastating enviromental hazards). Environmentalism is not about pretty trees, though I like pretty trees as much as the next guy.

A PDF? Are You Shitting Me?

2005-05-23T11:44:00.000-04:00

No wonder nobody knows what the hell Democrats want! You have to download the platform in PDF format! I mean, come on.

And then once you get this hard-to-work-with file downloaded, it is not until page 8 out of forty-three that we actually get solid position statements. Pages 1-7 are just a bunch of smoke up your ass.

WTF?

How about this: Our specific propositions can be put forth in plain language in 10 pages or less.

Think we can do it?

Speaking Our Own Language

2005-05-22T10:37:00.000-04:00

I'm not brain dead.

NYT:

"The only reason he's still up there in the 40's is that the Democrats are really brain dead and have nothing positive to put on the table," said one veteran Republican who has close ties to the White House, referring to approval ratings in polls that are at or near Mr. Bush's low points.

What's this guy talking about? Bush has done such wonderful things for this country, like years of peace, no deficit, scientific advancements, and a renewed biparitsan spirit.

Oh.

I'm going to try to make that one of the last times I talk about Bush, or his cronies for that matter. Once we start phrasing our arguments in terms of the opposition, the oppsition has already won. Plus, we are just handing over our air time by explaining how we are against A, B, or C.

We must come up with our own language. Instead of talking about "up or down votes," we must talk about the OBVIOUS and GLARING incompetence of judicial nominees that we oppose.

We must start talking about the SPECIFIC and SIMPLE steps that we will take to repair our country and its foreign relations after going into a war on faulty intelligence and without any plan WHATSOEVER for how to fix what we have broken (the violence in Iraq is increasing, not decreasing).

Most of all, we must start planning for the next round of elections, and be sure that no one in America can say that they didn't know exactly what we stand for!