First, from “moderate” blog Obsidian Wings, here’s Eric Martin:

You know you’re setting a new standard for shameless dishonesty when even Fox News and Karl Rove call you out. Karl Freakin Rove! The man who took the baton from Lee Atwater and [deleted] it up a rat’s [deleted]. I apologize for the vulgar imagery, but John McCain refused to do a series of town hall appearances with me, so I had no choice.
Read more »

3 CommentsEmail Post Toggle Meta

U.K. paper The Telegraph has a piece on Palin and the neocons, if you weren’t alarmed enough:

In 1988, Mr Kristol became a leading adviser of another inexperienced Republican vice presidential pick, Dan Quayle, tutoring him in foreign affairs. Last week he praised Mrs Palin as “a spectre of a young, attractive, unapologetic conservatism” that “is haunting the liberal elites”.

Now many believe that the “neocons”, whose standard bearer in government, Vice President Dick Cheney, lost out in Washington power struggles to the more moderate defence secretary Robert Gates and secretary of state Condoleezza Rice, last year are seeking to mould Mrs Palin to renew their influence.

A former Republican White House official, who now works at the American Enterprise Institute, a bastion of Washington neoconservatism, admitted: “She’s bright and she’s a blank page. She’s going places and it’s worth going there with her.”
Read more »

1 CommentEmail Post Toggle Meta

(Graphic by Tengrain. Thanks to Blue Gal for spreading the word again this year.)

Last year, in “8-6-01: A Date That Should Live in Infamy,” I opened by writing:

While the Bush administration rattles sabers once again and insists on more unchecked surveillance power and fewer civil rights for Americans, and Democrats seem set to capitulate for no good reason, it’s worth taking stock of the Bush administration’s actual record on terrorism.

Boy, plus ça change, plus c’est la même chose and all that. But let’s look at what we knew and some new developments.
Read more »

5 CommentsEmail Post Toggle Meta

Congressman John Hostettler R-IN discussed his book “Nothing for the Nation: Who Got What Out of Iraq” Congressman Hostettler names Paul Wolfowitz, Richard Perle, Douglas Fieth, David Wurmser, and others who were in positions to implement this War. He also speaks of the Clean Break: Strategy for Securing the Realm where it states clearly that “removal of Saddam Hussein from power is an Israeli objective in its own right.

This interview is done by Hesham Tillawi.

Leave a ReplyEmail Post Toggle Meta

Continuing our recent discussions of those brave cowboys of the junior high lunch room and other bold hawks, it turns out Atrios declared last Friday Thomas Friedman’s Happy A-Suck On This Day!- in honor of the fifth anniversary of that infamous bit of appalling pundit bravado. John Amato of C&L has a good post rounding up many of the reactions.

Don the mustache of understanding, and all shall be revealed! You can relive all the excitement here:
Read more »

1 CommentEmail Post Toggle Meta

(This post is the first of a few in honor of Memorial Day, and part of an ongoing series on war.)

With the arrival of another Memorial Day, it seems only appropriate to re-examine notions of war and military action. We’re supposed to remember the fallen, but part of that entails remembering why they died. Most of all, since life witnesses enough suffering as it is, it’s essential to remember and question whether certain deaths were unnecessary and avoidable, and work to prevent any repetition of those mistakes. To that end, it’s important to examine the mentality that lead to unnecessary deaths in the first place. All the recent accusations of “appeasement” from the Bush administration, the neocons, and other right-wingers gives us a perfect case study of these brave cowboys of the junior high lunch room.

The Worst are Full of Obstinate Belligerency

If you read the liberal blogosphere, it’d be hard to have missed Chris Matthews’ smackdown of Kevin James, but it’s an excellent starting point. It’s sorta funny, but also sorta disgusting. If you can bear to, watch at least part of it again:
Read more »

3 CommentsEmail Post Toggle Meta

Over at The Non Sequitur a short while ago, jcasey dissected the tortured logic of a 10/4/07 Roger Cohen op-ed for the The New York Times. Cohen’s agenda? Bashing liberals for criticizing the neocons, and creating a false equivalency about how both sides engage in unfair name-calling, yadda yadda yadda. Of course, Cohen doesn’t go after actual liberal positions, just the evil phantoms he’s conjured. What’s all the more laughable is one of the few liberals he actually cites is Matthew Yglesias, one of many “liberal hawks” who advocated for invading Iraq (although at least Yglesias has apologized for it).

I’ve previously described Cohen’s sort of assertion as “a straw man argument with an ad hominem attack nestled inside.” (It’s a GOP favorite.) Jcasey uses similar terms, but also observes that Cohen employs “the basic bait and switch typical of all fallacies of relevance.” Over at Gin and Tacos, Ed delves into the same article and considers its other “false or misleading analogies.” Check out both their takes.

Of course, as Jonathan Schwarz points out, “America’s conservatives either cannot or will not construct accurate analogies.” Cohen may not be an official conservative, but like Richard Cohen (more on him in a subsequent post), Roger Cohen offers a ridiculous, unfounded and poorly argued attack on liberals. He and other “liberal hawks” often achieve the same goals as their more conservative brethren, and with the same means to boot. As Ed notes:
Read more »

Leave a ReplyEmail Post Toggle Meta

I know, I know. You’ve been reading where republican candidates for president are shying away from all things Bush out of fear of having the stink of failure rub off on them.

Who Has His Ear? Giuliani’s foreign-policy team is heavy on neocons

But not our boy, Giuliani! Rudy’s planned path to success is to closely imitate the current presidential disappointment. And he’s doing it by procuring the aid of well-known neocons into his campaign efforts.

From MSNBC.com:

My advice to Rudy: Pull a ‘Lieberman’, and have Bush give you a big, wet, sloppy one right there in the public spotlight. It’ll more than guarantee the vote of those thirty’something-percenters of America’s most ignorant crowd!

3 CommentsEmail Post Toggle Meta

By Joe Conason
Salon.com

Freedom’s Watch, the former press secretary’s new pro-Iraq war group, has little to do with veterans and everything to do with politics.

If you happen to reside in the district of a Republican member of Congress whose support of the Iraq war is wavering, or in a state where a Republican senator is facing reelection next year, you may soon see a moving commercial. Featuring the voice and image of a veteran who lost both legs in Iraq, it delivers a familiar message: “They attacked us before” — on 9/11 — “and they will attack us again” if we don’t fight on until “victory.”

Nobody would want to argue with John Kriesel, the veteran who appears in this ad and whose sacrifices are all too obvious. When he gazes out from the screen to admonish us that “it’s no time for politics,” he is surely sincere. So are the other veterans and family members of deceased vets who are appearing in similar ads urging Congress to stay the course (although that phrase is no longer operative). They too tell us, no doubt believing every word, that we are winning the war, that we invaded Iraq to fight the terrorists who attacked us on 9/11 and that to withdraw now would dishonor those who have been killed and wounded there — and they insist that anyone who disagrees is motivated by “politics.” But the same degree of misguided sincerity should not necessarily be attributed Freedom’s Watch, the new right-wing organization financing those ads.

1 CommentEmail Post Toggle Meta

by Ted Rall

NEW YORK–On Iraq, the right was wrong. It’s a slam dunk. So why do the wrong righties keep raking in big media cash? And why aren’t lefties taking a victory lap?

It’s a Back to the Future moment: back in 2002, polls found most Americans opposed to war with Iraq at roughly the same two-to-one ration as they do now. What changed Americans’ minds between 2002 and 2003, supplemented by Bush Administration lies about fictional WMDs and liberation flowers, were millions of words published in major national magazines and regurgitated on television news programs by serious-looking, soft’spoken men boasting impressive journalistic and academic credentials. Pretend experts wove fantastic tales of wonderful geopolitical benefits that would derive from taking out Saddam. Invading Iraq was going to democratize the Middle East, force the Palestinians to sign a peace deal with Israel, and bring Elvis back to life.

Fareed Zakaria used his column at Newsweek to promote the now-discredited neoconservative democratization-via-regime-change thesis. William Kristol, editor of The Weekly Standard and another neocon, sang the same bellicose tune at Time. David Brooks and Thomas Friedman beat the war drum for the influential opinion page of The New York Times. Then, against the evidence and common sense, they declared Mission Accomplished.

“The only people who think this wasn’t a victory,” wrote Time’s Charles Krauthammer after the fall of Baghdad and the toppling of Saddam’s statue, “are Upper West Side liberals, and a few people here in Washington.” Like the phony Jessica Lynch and Pat Tillman stories, the statue story was fake. We “Upper West Side liberals” were right. But no one cares.

read more at YAHOO! OPINION

Comments OffEmail Post Toggle Meta

by Eleanor Clift
from Newsweek

A longtime confidant of the Bush and Cheney families describes the dangerous influence of the vice president.

June 29, 2007 - Dick Cheney is like “Zelig,” the Woody Allen character with the uncanny ability to turn up everywhere. We always suspected his dark influence throughout the government, and now it’s been documented chapter and verse in an exhaustive series in The Washington Post. Cheney operates largely in secret, and because he is such a skilled bureaucratic infighter, he’s able to do end runs around everybody, including President Bush, who does nothing to rein in his evil twin.

Under the guise of national security, Cheney has gotten away with curbing civil liberties, condoning torture and launching an unnecessary war. He’s also chipped away at environmental regulations and done myriad favors for his friends in the business world. His stealthy intervention undermined former EPA administrator Christine Todd Whitman and led to her resignation. He shapes tax policy and energy policy and whatever else strikes his fancy, installing himself as president of Corporate America.

Cheney’s above-the-law arrogance finally met its match this week, when he declined to give national archivists who oversee the handling of classified data in the executive branch access to his papers. Cheney’s argument: that he’s not part of the executive branch because he also serves as president of the Senate. The claim was ludicrous on its face and opened up Cheney to ridicule. Democrats can-t muster the votes to cut off funding for the war, but when House leader Rahm Emanuel threatened to cut off funds for the vice president’s operation, Cheney backed down.

I had lunch with Vic Gold, an old friend of the Cheney’s, on the third day of the Post series. I asked him how he felt reading about Dick’s dark adventures. “A tremendous feeling of validation,” he said. In a recent book, Gold described Cheney as a “mega-maniacal paranoid” whose secret empire within the government had captured the Bush presidency and helped bring the Republican Party to the brink of ruin. Gold’s book, published in April, is titled: “Invasion of the Party Snatchers: How the Holy-Rollers and the Neo-Cons Destroyed the GOP.” (It was originally titled “How the Neo-Cons Took Over the GOP,” but midway through the process, Gold got so angry he changed the verb to “Destroyed.” )

read more at NEWSWEEK through MSNBC

Comments OffEmail Post Toggle Meta

By MATT APUZZO, Associated Press Writer
from YAHOO! NEWS

Oh, Oh! Look at the picture. Libby has that evil little smirk on his little neo-con face again! - JS

WASHINGTON - Former White House aide I. Lewis “Scooter” Libby, who faces an imminent prison term in the CIA leak case, asked a federal appeals court Tuesday to step in and delay the sentence.

The former chief of staff to Vice President Dick Cheney, Libby was sentenced to 2 1/2 years in prison for lying and obstructing an investigation into the leak of a CIA operative’s identity. A federal judge has denied a request to stay the sentence while Libby appeals his conviction.

In a motion to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, Libby argued that that ruling was inappropriate. He said he has a good chance of having his conviction overturned on appeal and should not have to serve jail time while the court challenge plays out.

“The Bureau of Prisons will shortly designate a prison facility and direct Libby to report within a period of two to three weeks after designation,” his attorneys wrote. “Accordingly, we respectfully ask that the court expedite action on this application.”

The request will be considered by a three-judge panel of the court. By policy, the court does not disclose which judges are on the panel until a decision is made.

Comments OffEmail Post Toggle Meta

Crossposted from AdBusters.com

By Matt Taibbi

Call it the Leslie Nielsen effect. Your first attempt at a show-biz career fizzles out and dies, but your failure is so quirky and charming that it wins you a whole second career. Think Robert Goulet, Bill Shatner, even John Travolta. America loves a brave second act, particularly one that doesn-t mind doing a take or two with egg still on his face.

What the Zucker brothers did for actors, the neocons are now doing for politics. In the first six years of the Bush presidency the administration’s ideological nucleus - a tribe of humorless conservative revolutionaries led by Dick Cheney and including the likes of Paul Wolfowitz, Richard Perle, Doug Feith and Elliott Abrams - racked up a startling record in matters of official policy. From their juking of the case for the Iraq War to their Jacobin-esque purges within the government’s intelligence apparatus to their paranoid and sometimes criminal fragging of political enemies great and minor, the neoconservatives working for George Bush botched virtually every important move they made in the last six years.

Moreover, each time they used the presidency’s bully pulpit to make a prediction, be it about the post-invasion spread of democracy in the Middle East, the utility of Iraqi oil revenues in financing the occupation, or the chilling effect our presence in Iraq would have on Palestinian resolve, more or less exactly the opposite ended up taking place.

And yet, despite the walloping defeat of the Republicans in the 2006 midterm elections that seemed to spell the end of neocon rule in Washington, the clowns are once again spilling out of the Volkswagen. Lately the neocons seem to be all over the public airwaves, and not as the targets of purgative public flogging or tarring ceremonies, but as the subjects of serious interviews, with respected journalists treating them like real human beings with real opinions. Even worse, a few are still in office, and appear to be cooking up a last-minute encore before the curtain finally comes down in -08.

Read more »

Comments OffEmail Post Toggle Meta

By Matthew Rothschild
from “The Progressive”

Monday, June 4, was supposed to be Maxwell Corydon Wheat’s big day. The 80-year-old poet, who lives in Nassau County, New York, was to be announced as the county’s first poet laureate.

But the announcement never came. Instead, he saw his name sullied, and then his nomination shot down.

All because he’s written some poems critical of Bush and the Iraq War.

In Wheat’s book, “Iraq and Other Killing Fields: Poetry for Peace,” he has a powerful poem entitled “Coming Home.” The poem, which I-m including at the end, recounts the biographical details of several soldiers killed in the war, with the refrain:

“All lidded down inside casket

carefully, caringly covered with the American flag.”

In his poem “Iraq,” he writes about the “Less-than-Elected-Vice-President Cheney” and the “Less-than-Elected-President Bush” who are contemplating the best time to launch a strike against Iraq to further their imperial desires.

He also minces no words in his poem about the desecration of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, “Oilman George W. Bush’s Hollow Eye Sockets.” (Those eye sockets “vent black liquid.”)

A birdwatcher and nature lover, Wheat writes most of his poems on more bucolic topics that have nothing to do with politics.

But it’s his political poems that got him into trouble.

A year ago, the Nassau County board voted to have a poet laureate.

Wheat says he was one of 14 who applied. He was among six finalists, and he interviewed before the selection committee the county had appointed. “I felt I did a good job,” he says. “I enjoyed it.”

A couple of weeks later, Wheat received the good news. “I got the word that they had made their choice and the choice was I,” he says. “Get that grammar right. I-m an old English teacher.”

He was told to show up on June 4 for the announcement, and he had prepared a statement of acceptance. “I-m going to make Nassau County an open classroom for poetry,” the statement said.

But he never was able to deliver it.

“I got a call from a legislative aide who told me it had been taken off the calendar,” he says. The aide explained that a couple of legislators had complained about his book “Iraq and Other Killing Fields,” though Wheat believes they only saw it that morning.

read more at The Progressive

Comments OffEmail Post Toggle Meta

By MATT APUZZO, Associated Press Writer
from YAHOO! NEWS

WASHINGTON - Lawyers, politicians and pundits have had their say for years. Now, as former White House aide I. Lewis “Scooter” Libby faces sentencing in the
CIA leak trial, the world may hear from someone new: Libby himself.

Libby has not spoken publicly about the case since his 2005 indictment on perjury and obstruction of justice charges. Throughout his month-long trial, and following his conviction in March, he always let his lawyers do the talking.

On Tuesday, however, before U.S. District Judge Reggie B. Walton hands down a sentence, he will ask the former vice presidential chief of staff whether he has anything to say.

Defense attorneys, who argue that Libby should not have to serve any jail time, have not said how Libby will respond. It’s a delicate decision, one made more difficult because Libby has maintained his innocence and is appealing his conviction.

“The only thing any sentencing judge wants to hear is remorse, and if they don’t think it comes from the heart or they think they’re only sorry for getting caught, for losing their job, or for going to jail, it doesn’t count,” said Hugh Keefe, a Connecticut defense attorney who teaches trial advocacy at Yale University.

read more at YAHOO! NEWS

Comments OffEmail Post Toggle Meta