Iraq Constitution? Trouble.

Iraq Constitution? Trouble.

Juan Cole, a trusted and well-informed source for information on what's happening with the progress of a new Iraq constitution, holds out little hope for a reaching of the August 15th deadline. He comments that the approval of a constitution would not have halted the guerrilla war, "because the guerrillas reject what they see as a colonially imposed government."

"..now even the facade of progress is peeling away. Thirty more bodies of police or police recruits were found in Baghdad Sunday; most of these are probably Shiites killed by Sunni Arab guerillas in an unconventional civil war already begun.

So this is the time Bush chooses, as he is mired in an intractable conflict in Iraq in which its Shiites are moving close to Iran, to intimate that he could take military action against Iran over its nuclear program -- in an interview broadcast from Israel (which rejected the nuclear nonproliferation treaty and made hundreds of atomic bombs with British help). The Rove theory of looking active and carrying the fight to the enemy isn't working as well in the Middle East as it did against poor John Kerry."

- Juan Cole

SEARCH GOOOGLE FOR UPDATES

Looking back at a Colonel's mission in Iraq

Colonel Dana Pittard - a loyal American

Looking back at a Colonel's mission in Iraq

Colonel Pittard has a confusing mission, and my heart goes out to him for his loyalty to our country

This is a reprint from May 5, 2004 - well over a year ago. You can see how Iraq has deteriorated since then - and how I was so right in saying that it was bound to happen. It's not the fault of our American soldiers. It's the fault of the war-planners. Why - and how could we have risked so much in blood and treasure while going headlong into certain chaos?


*An update on Colonel Pittard can be seen at this post and this post.
It's no wonder that military families, especially mothers, are concerned and confused.

_________________

May 5, 2004:

Allow me to begin by saying I do not know Colonel Dana Pittard. From what I do know of the Colonel, I believe he is a loyal and good American. I've read a lot about him, he's captured my attention and my heart in many ways. I want to make some comments in his support and in the support of all the men and women in the U.S. armed services in Iraq today.

Compare the two following stories/statements from/about Colonel Pittard.

The first is from just a month ago (April 2004):

"The support of the population is key to everything we do. From the commander down to the squad leader, we must touch, engage the Iraqis,'' says Pittard, who commands the 1st Infantry Division's 3rd Brigade, which arrived in the country less than a month ago.
..The unit's predecessor in the province, the 4th Infantry Division, focused on fighting, which has claimed the lives of 34 U.S. soldiers and left nearly 200 others wounded. There have been a few accidental killings of Iraqis and frequent detentions of civilians. Now, while still trying to kill or capture as many insurgents as possible, the brigade is getting involved with everything from attempting dialogue with Islamic college radicals to combating an insect plague ruining date palm plantations.

And now....(this was from May 2004):

"My intent is to destroy Sadr's militia, absolutely destroy it," said Col. Dana Pittard, commander of the 3rd Brigade Combat Team of the 1st Infantry Division, which is leading the operation dubbed Operation Duke Fortitude. "And then to capture or kill Sadr. That is our mission. We're just waiting to be unleashed."
...Acknowledging that invading Najaf could offend Muslims worldwide, he added: "It's that sensitive. If we do this wrong, it will be felt from Morocco to Indonesia."

Colonel Pittard has been placed, by this Pentagon, in a completely confusing position. They want him to be a social worker one day and a trained soldier with a fighting mission (which is what he trains for) the next.

This is where the mission falls apart. It's not up to Colonel Pittard to pretend to care about the hearts and minds of the Iraqis. His mission is to destroy anything that gets in the way of his nation's goal.

Pentagon/Rumsfeld/Bush--you'd best shit or get off the pot. Get a new U.N. resolution. Get your social workers from the U.N. if you need them. Let Colonel Pittard do his job. Give General Abizaid an exit strategy. Get our troops home where they're loved, appreciated, and needed. I'm so ashamed of this administration's pie-in-the-sky lunacy about today's military. They've tried to be some kind of heroes, and they've wound up revealing themselves to be megalomaniacs endangering American security at home and throughout the world. Our President, I fear, is a theo-megalomaniac who, in his public relations, creates a crusade-style mission attitude. This bodes terribly for our armed forces' mission.

I'm speaking out for those in our military who, because of the rules, cannot speak for themselves. I say to the Bush administration: Get on the stick. You're using our military carelessly. General Sanchez is doing his best with the most chillingly horrendous Commander-in-Chief in American history. Colonel Pittard and General Sanchez cannot and would not tell you this. I can...and I will.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

At Defenselink, Lt. John R. Vines is quoted to have said that mastering information operations will go a long way toward influencing people "to lay down their weapons and quit fighting and rebuild their country." But for now, he said, "We don't do that nearly as well as we could."

It's crystal-clear we aren't doing it well. It's an opportunity-area the size of an elephant, yet the Bush administration continues to stubbornly insist pro-American P.R. in Iraq is working. It's not working.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

"Being steadfast in defense of carefully considered convictions is a virtue. Being blankly incapable of distinguishing cherished hopes from disappointing facts, or of reassessing comforting doctrines in face of contrary evidence, is a crippling political vice."

--George Will [LINK]

______________________

Since this writing, al Sadr is in the mainstream again - being accepted and invited into the fold of Iraqi politics. After we destroyed Sadr city. How things have changed.

Since this writing, General Sanchez is the highest-ranking scapegoat to date in the Abu Graib scandal, while the war planners and Bush administration attorneys who approved forms of torture go on with no consequence. Some have even been rewarded.

So many mistakes have been made. No one will be accounatble for them. The buck stops no where. The President doesn't believe in the buck - unless it's the bucks he can shell out to Big Oil while we pay $2.60 per gallon at the pumps.

And the President drives right by a grieving mother begging to have him look her in the eye.

Long Train's Journey

Long Train's Journey



Martisco Station
by Jude Nagurney Camwell

"Train travel gives one time to think without the stress of making plane connections, weather and equipment delays.."

-Frank Romano, professor-emeritus of Rochester Institute of Technology

_________________________________



Long Train's Journey into Night

"Journeys are the midwives of thought"

-Alain de Botton

The India Times' Bachi Karkaria writes a personally erotic accounting of a communal experience.

Want an experience both intensely erotic and serenely impersonal? Tantrics, Sufi mystics and the incorrigibly enlightened can find their own paths to such bliss. Those still in the lowly shunt-yard of the Superconscious will have to settle for a night train.

- Bachi Karkaria

______________________________________


Food for thought:

"If only we could apply a travelling mind-set to our own locales, we might find these places becoming no less interesting than, say, the high mountain passes and butterfly-filled jungles of [Alexander von] Humboldt's South America."

-Alain de Botton

One can leave the self through the senses. It is through the senses (though not exclusively) that one perceives what is outside the self--and then these perceptions confirm something within the self, of which one was previously unaware. This confirmation is mysterious--it's one of the sources of the human sense of mystery. The whole world is mysteriously within us."

-John Berger

A US Paratrooper Is Disgusted w/Right Smears of Sheehan

A US Paratrooper Is Disgusted w/Right Smears of Sheehan

This comment appeared on my recent BlogCritics.org column, and I hope you will take a moment to see how this soldier feels about the smearing of Cindy Sheehan: (Some of the people he mentions are other Commenters at the link.)

You know, I'm not so much of a blogger but I was interested in hearing public opinion regarding this case because as I stated earlier, I am a US Paratrooper and I am curious as to how Mr. Bush would treat my mom and what all of you people would say about me and my mother if I was killed as was Casey and if my mom wanted answers as does Miss Sheehan.

I am SHOCKED and ASHAMED at what I am hearing here, What the HELL is wrong with you people, suggesting that Casey was a deserter and not even Killed? How DARE you even type such words? I have read through all of this and although I do not agree with some of what Dave Nalle suggests, he at least seems to be honest in his desire for the best interest of the American people even if he doesn't seem to have his priorities straight.

I can respect a difference of opinion if presented in a respectful manor however when people bring this Bullsh*t Partisan hackery into the mix, Are we all AMERICANS here or Not Dammit?

This suggestion that those of us who want and DESERVE a Logical explanation are somehow Anti-American or simply bush Haters is ABSURD.

Here's the real crux for all you arm chair warriors out there, How do WE, The actual foot soldiers on the ground set our minds to complete a task when we read some of you people calling US and our Mothers Traitors because we ask why we are dying. I am ALL ABOUT defending America as necessary But I do NOT believe in No Win Scenarios. This situation in Iraq is a NO WIN SCENARIO. I don't think I will continue reading blogs like this one so much because the disrespect shown here by the chicken-hawk right makes me want to lock and load all right...

Do you think we are STUPID, do you think we don't read your suggestion that our mothers are Anti-American, do you think we don't read your suggestion that an AMERICAN HERO like CASEY SHEEHAN was a deserter? Listen to me John H, you had better watch what you type when you type it. I do Not care WHAT your agenda is and I do NOT care how much you love mr. bush and are willing to wear out a keyboard for him. You had better remember one thing John H, we are YOU, we are your fathers and brothers and neighbors, and Cindy Sheehan is MY MOTHER A**hole!!

Maybe you are just writing inflammatory statements to get a rise out of the "other side" well I got news for you man, I seriously doubt there are Any MUSLIMS OR IRAQI'S posting here. Your disrespect for MCH and rebelyell and other American Service members posting on this blog is starting to really get under my skin.

I am going to post my E-mail Address and I EXPECT you to write me and explain to me why you have chosen to write such lies about Cindy and Casey Sheehan. It would be much better if you were to write it publicly here but if you want to go private we can. I will NOT Tolerate ONE MORE WORD of disrespect for this fallen hero or his poor mother. Your tax dollars have trained me to be a dangerous man, you have made enemies of EVERYONE else in the world you don't want disrespect my fellows or my family and turn your very last friend on you....

Think before you type!!

-Effendi (screen name)

Cindy Sheehan's Vacation

The vacation-destination of Crawford, TX was probably the farthest from Cindy Sheehan's mind - until this summer.

Cindy Sheehan's Vacation

"For seven days, Cindy Sheehan has been camped down the road from George Bush's Crawford ranch where the President is on a five-week vacation. Cindy says she will never enjoy a vacation again."

- One of the most effective opening lines I've seen in a long time. By Marjorie Cohn, contributing editor to Truthout

_ _ _ _

Lew Rockwell says,

"...if she can be continues to be the catalyst for the peace movement, she may signal his political Waterloo. God bless her for that."

Yesterday, President Bush said he'd heard Cindy Sheehan's alleged "Get out of Iraq" agenda "from others". At the Huffington Post, Bob Cesca has some sharp satire about President Bush, including:

...thank goodness he finally addressed Sheehan's chief concern: the "get out of Iraq" talking point she's been beating to death all this time. Off the record, you'd think she'd instead want the president to address the false and purely political justifications for the war which ultimately aborted her son in the 96th trimester. But hey, bully-bully to her for not putting the memory of her child first.

Karen Kwiatkowsi has an observation in a piece called "The Rise of the Stupid":

"..The meta-insulation is peeling off as Republicans realize this Bush is even more toxic for the GOP than his father was. Even the sweet favors of Diebold won’t be enough next time, and they know it."

Greg Mitchell has written a column for Editor and Publisher, in which he begins:

Reading some of the ample coverage of the Cindy Sheehan protest at the Bush ranch this week, I was shocked to discover that a man I know, who also lost a son in Iraq, had flown to her side. But that wasn't the only surprise.

In the meantime, the wounded soldiers are talking about the reality of this war in Iraq.

- - - -

"By the time Cindy Sheehan leaves her station at the pig farm, Bush will know that he was wrong. He will know, because "Mother" is not just half a word, as Bush and his Texas buddies, his Skull and Bones cohorts, his PNAC perps were raised to believe. "Mother" is an invincible, protective force that, if awakened and sufficiently outraged, will sweep the entire murderous bunch from their seats of evil power. Ultimately, "Mother" will bring our troops home."

- Lew Rockwell

Plamegate Update

Plamegate Update

Armando [Daily Kos] points us to Walter Pincus' most recent Plamegate article [WaPo] and believes that no other conclusion can be drawn other than this: Karl Rove and "Scooter" Libby's information on Valerie Plame came from the now-infamous State department memo that was passed around Air Force One in July of 2003.

Swopa agrees.

Mahablog, who has some great coverage of the story today, has this astute quote :

Think of it as finding pollution in a river and tracing it back to its source. In this case, according to Pincus, all the tributaries can be traced back to one source-- the June 10 State Department memo.

Mahablog also comments on speculation that the State Dept memo was possibly written specifically for the leak to take place. Laura Rozen wrote, in July, 2005:

About this classified State INR memo, we note not just its timing being written in the days after apparently Cheney's office became focused on Wilson's contention via Kristof's column that his office should have known about the findings of Wilson's Niger trip, and that its information about Wilson's wife's role in his trip is apparently fraudulent, but that it was apparently circulated or summarized to conservative news outlets, including the Wall Street Journal and Talon News' Jeff Gannon, in the days and weeks after the Justice Department announced its investigation into who leaked Plame's identity. Check out this WSJ article on the classified memo on how Wilson got the trip -- and how closely it seems to track with what Gannon was told too.

David Corn has talked about an NSC staffer (and CIA veteran) named David Shedd who had worked with Valerie (Plame) Wilson at the CIA. Since Shedd would have had the inside scoop on Plame, Corn wonders: Did he tell?

Think Progess has a list of the 21 with known connections to the Plamegate scandal.

Drudge gets down & dirty - airs Sheehan family sorrow

"Going on from there, he saw two other brothers, James the son of Zebedee, and John his brother, in the boat with Zebedee their father, mending their nets. He called them...and immediately they left the boat and their father and followed him."
- the Gospel of Matthew 4:21-22

Drudge gets down & dirty - airs Sheehan family sorrow

Cindy Sheehan and her huband have separated as a result of the stress over Casey's death. Cindy's passionate conviction has carried her to where she stands today - and the stress of it all broke a family in two.

Instead of the empathy and sorrow one might have for a family in crisis over the death of their soldier-son, Matt Drudgehas decided to take a family-squabble letter, and go for the jugular by putting Grandmother and Grandfather and all the cousins' pain up for us to see. (They are her in-laws, I'll wager. Although we don't know yet. We know it's not Casey's maternal grandparents.) [edited]


Leave it to Drudge to get the dirty scoop.

A word or two about Cindy's husband from David Pastor/May 2005:

Cindy's husband, Patrick Sheehan, supports his wife in her activism, he participates in some events and drives with Cindy when he is not working as a sales representative. He spoke about the toll this work is taking in the family. “If she is not away traveling or speaking, she is home with her laptop, watching news, or talking on the phone…This is important, we try to continue to support her.”

But he also understands that it is hard for her to be around the memories all the time. “Some times I am not sure if it is helping [the grief process] It might be delaying some of her grief, but it’s also a very good reason to get out of bed, get up and get moving.”

There was a change between May and the present, as Cindy says, in this interview:

"I have lost almost every friend that I had before Casey died. My husband and I are separated, because he doesn't support my activities, although he knows the war is a lie."

Sometimes passion for a righteous cause will take you far from your friends and family. If you're a Christian, you've been told that yourself, I can gurantee it. Get between a mother and a cause that involves her child, and one thing I could NOT guarantee would be your safety in trashing her passion - and having someone believe you.

Lew Rockwell brings faith into the picture as well, in his criticism of O'Reilly (among others):

O’Reilly, who claims to be Catholic, should know that people have changes of heart, going from confusion to clarity. Perhaps someone should remind him of St. Paul of Tarsus, or my favorite, St. Augustine of Hippo, both of which were on the wrong path, but ultimately became two of the Church’s most venerated saints.

Meanwhile, a mother in Crawford, TX is still asking questions. She still waits for President Bush, whose administration thinks it's a better idea to create a divide mothers of America who have lost their children and trash Cindy Sheehan than it is to have a straightforward meeting with the woman.

So much for "family values."

President Bush - when on earth will you do the right thing?

Denounce this madness and meet with her.

______________

Update: These were in-laws, as I suspected, and they hardly knew Cindy or Casey.
Cindy Sheehan says:

"...my in-laws sent out a press statement disagreeing with me in strong terms; which is totally okay with me, because they barely knew Casey. We have always been on separate sides of the fence politically and I have not spoken to them since the election when they supported the man who is responsible for Casey's death. The thing that matters to me is that our family -- Casey's dad and my other 3 kids are on the same side of the fence that I am.

November 2, 2004 was not George Bush's accountability moment: today is. We are finished allowing him to get away with deceiving the American public and abusing his power.

We are mad as hell and we're not taking it anymore."[Huffington Post]

Headlines

Headlines

Barbara O'Brien has a summary surrounding the "fiction that Joe Wilson's Niger trip was arranged by his wife." [Mahablog]

The discussion continues about Cindy Sheehan. See my Blogcritics opinion column from August 9.

Why is Jodie Evans in Crawford, TX?

Why is Celeste Zappala in Crawford, TX?

It's getting really dirty and the Right is looking like some of the lowest lifeforms on the face of planet Earth. A Right blogger calls Cindy Sheehan a whore for publicity and points his finger toward another group of Moms. A disgusting and divisive abuse of mothers and their emotions. The blogger known as "Desert Rat" claims that one group of mothers are "there to shower them with love when they come home again. Their thoughts are with them every day, no matter where they are." Cindy Sheehan's son is not coming home again - and she doesn't want more mothers to suffer the loss she has suffered without clarity of purpose.

The Sheehan situation is garnering more and more attention by the day, despite the odd cable news media blackout of the story.

When it comes to plain and simple human emotion and cut and dried decency, in the court of public opinion, Cindy Sheehan's case is a winner, hands down. A quote:

Reading [Robin] Cook’s obituaries and final comments it is hard not to think of Cindy Sheehan, camped outside Bush’s ranch Prairie Chapel in the blistering August heat, awaiting the chance to talk to the President about her opposition to the Iraq war. Her son was killed there last year and she has become a dedicated anti-war activist. Cook’s final words echo in my ears and I’m sure they would in hers if she has heard them: “ It is dire. I mean, frankly, it is worse than my greatest fears…..Those that advocated the war on the basis that Iraq would be a blow against terrorism have made an immense blunder for which we will be paying the price for a long time to come.”

I hope President Bush will honor the lives of Casey Sheehan and Robin Cook by taking a few minutes out of his vacation to explain his thinking to one suffering mother.

[Jane Wells: Reflections on Robin Cook and Cindy Sheehan ]

The Common Ills features a statement on the quality of NPR coverage of the Cindy Sheehan situation, where a mention of the threatened arrest of Sheehan was omitted from Morning Edition coverage. 'Ruth's morning report' says: "In another time, when NPR was braver and less structured, Ms. Sheehan would be profiled each day because her vigil is news and this is a story that speaks to NPR listeners." [Common Ills]

This headline has Michael Ledeen and visions of 'Iraq redux' written all over it.

The Republican Party has quietly paid hundreds of thousands of dollars to provide private defense lawyers for a former Bush campaign official (James Tobin) charged with conspiring to keep Democrats from voting in New Hampshire. *hat tip to Buzzflash See my prior posting here. [Yahoo news]

Josh Marshall comments on the Tobin case: "Tobin's defense doesn't seem to rest on his being innocent of the deeds in questions but rather on claims that no laws cover what he did." [Talking Points Memo]

38 members of Congress have written to President Bush, asking him to meet with Cindy Sheehan. I wonder why it's always the same brave Congresspeople. Where are the rest of our Representatives? Sen. George Allen of the GOP was bold and empathetic enough to urge the President to see the lady. I'd like to see more of this. [See Buzzflash for pdf link]

Bill O'Reilly Goes Off Deep End to Harm Sheehan supporters

Bill O'Reilly Goes Off Deep End to Harm Sheehan supporters

"I think Cindy Sheehan is being used by far left elements who object to our way of life."

Bill O'Reilly said this on national television.

My mouth dropped open when I read that he'd said it.
I'm as American as apple pie.
I agree 100% with the mom of Casey Sheehan.
Cindy's son Casey died for "our way of life."
Bill O'Reilly is an ignorant jackass.

That may sound harsh, yet I can't find any other appropriate word for anyone who would use his popular media show as a vehicle for leading others to believe that anyone like me or the millions who support Cindy Sheehan are "controlling" her.

Au contraire.

Cindy Sheehan's the one who's driving us.

Her sorrow is palpable. Her questions are reasonable.

Cindy says, "Maybe I'm using them." [Hear her say it by clicking the link]

_____________

The message from Sheehan and her supporters is not that our country is a bad and evil country, as O'Reilly tries to convince his audience that it is. (Why is O'Reilly purposefully dividing America into two divisions when we are all individuals with our own minds? Isn't this anti-Declaration of Independence?) We're saying: "This is our country. Let's make it better. We aren't evil people. Our government is of the people, for the people, and by the people. The people of America are heartful and caring people who value honesty and truth. We wish our representatives to represent the values we hold as sacred."

Anyone who would lie or mislead a nation into war is "bad" - at least in my eyes, it's bad. Really bad. I, like Cindy Sheehan and her many supporters, believe just the opposite - that America's people are good and decent - and the Representatives who act in our democratic interests- especially our President - should not have misled us into this war.

She's only asking, "What's it all about, Alfie?"



"Where's the nobility in the cause?"

"Look me in the eye, " Cindy begs of the President. "Tell me so that I may fully understand."

Last year the defenders of the radical right tried to tell us that we were trying to win an election by criticizing the Iraq war. Here we are - many months into President Bush's first term, and we're still asking why we were misled. We're still asking why American mothers' sons and daughters are shedding their blood.

We're tired of slogans. We're especially tired of being accused of "bashing" the administration. We're amazed, even after all we know about many of the President's unwise and dishonest decisions, to see him doing nothing about Karl Rove, when he promised to fire anyone who would have involved themselves in leaks which harm national security.

O'Reilly asked a guest "If you had to choose, would you go with President Bush or Michael Moore?"

Did he mean "go" as in "go out on a date"? What?

Michael Moore is an American citizen, an Eagle Scout who will tell you that the GOP really knows how to get out the vote - and he tries to inspire everyone else to care and organize to effectively compete. President Bush is a guy who seems to have dropped off the radar screen during Vietnam when his country called upon him - his administration outs CIA agents for political vengeance - and he misleads soldiers to a war in Iraq which none of us understands with clarity, to this day.

President Bush, above all, is the President. Michael Moore is not. Michael Moore is not bound by the Constitution to make any decisions about leading the nation to war. Michael Moore is not bound to give us official explanations.



Why is this Bill O'Reilly's big choice du jour? He could have picked anyone -
Would you go with President Bush or Michael Jackson? Would you go with President Bush or the Elephant Man? Would you go with President Bush or Helen Thomas? Would you go with President Bush or Kevin Federline?


"Who ya gonna go with?
Bachelor No 1, 2 or 3?"


I happen to believe that Bill O'Reilly is a small, small man who uses his seething anger about anyone who disses him and brings that anger with him on to his show - slathering it into the nightly agenda. He's really bad for civic American life. It makes little sense to me. It's less sophisticated than any middle school political debate I have ever seen. Our own American children are much smarter - and more mature - than this.

Cindy Sheehan said it best:

"Bill O'Reilly is an "Obscenity to Humanity"

You go, girl.


Update: O'Reilly says, with a straight face, that he and Michelle Malkin were "respectful" to Sheehan, the day after all this trash I just mentioned was aired on his show, including calling Cindy Sheehan's plea "borderlibe treason". You can see the video at Media Matters. Be prepared to stop yourself from spitting at the screen - it could damage your computer.

President Bush - Call Off the dogs on Cindy Sheehan

President Bush - Call Off the dogs on Cindy Sheehan

Raw Story is talking about the article from 2004 which Matt Drudge is employing, with a Right attack-dog-wind beneath his wings [he got the report archive from Freepers]. The mission to attack is on - the objective is to discredit the mother of a fallen Iraqi soldier.

A mother of a dead child pays close attention to the cause for which her boy dies. She looks, with open eyes, for the higher cause - something she can hold in her heart as a solid reason for never seeing her loving son on the face of this earth again.

Cindy Sheehan is horrified by what she is seeing. And she has been told that she will be arrested if she remains in Crawford, begging to see the President and have him look her in the eye, once again - only this time she has the courage that conviction has brought to her. She isn't in shock any longer. She cannot remain silent. Her conscience will not allow her to do so.

Her mourning has turned to questions. It was good of the President to have consoled her in mourning. It is wrong of the President to ignore her very public concerns.

Sheehan says that, during the Republican National Convention, she saw President Bush exploiting the meeting he'd had with her family to "justify what he was doing." She continued, "It's now clear to me that what I had feared is true: Bush lied us into war, and Casey, more than 1,800 other Americans and thousands and thousands of Iraqis are dead because of what he did."

Michelle Malkin says this might be politically-motivated, and to that I would say 'No kidding'. Sheehan said herself, in the quote I just used above, that her perception of the President's political misuse of her son's brave death and the family meeting that followed for re-election purposes - and all that has happened in Iraq since Casey's death - has caused her initial fears to come true. I am especially bothered by Ms. Malkin insinuating that Cindy Sheehan "has lost sight of the fact that her 24-year-old son, Casey, proudly and willingly served." Cindy Sheehan has never led anyone to believe that. I am disappointed to see Michelle being little more than an echo chamber for Matt Drudge. As a highly visible Conservative blogger, I expect more intellectual and emotional honesty from her. Michelle also imagines she has a telepathic connection to the fallen soldier when she speaks for him:

I can't imagine Army Spc. Casey Sheehan would stand for a bunch of strangers glomming onto his mother's crusade and using him to undermine the war effort as they shouted "W killed her son" in front of countless TV cameras.

How can anyone purport to know what Casey would have thought? How he would have reacted? Casey is dead. He's not coming back to confirm or deny this little chestnut.

Accusing a woman of crocodile tears over the death of a child and concern about the cause for which he died is about as low as it goes. It doesn't get much lower, folks. (Hear that bottom-of- the-barrel scraping sound?)


Support the troops - unless they die and their Moms start asking too many questions about "why."

Taking a fallen soldier's Mama away in handcuffs is not going to do wonders for the President's already ebbing popularity. (Maybe they can stick a Yellow-Ribbon magnet on the handcuffs to make it acceptable to the extremists of the Right who think the president can do no wrong).

To President Bush, I would say: I'm a mom. My own boy just saw you last week at Fort A.P. Hill. I've raised him to respect the office of the President and to be a responsible American citizen. He's a good boy. Casey Sheehan was a good boy, too. There's millions and millions of moms out here in America. Our children are our treasure. We're watching you, President George W. Bush. You say you are a man of compassion. Do the right thing - denounce Sheehan's ugly rightwing attack-squad and give her the meeting she desires. Look her in the eye - talk to her. We'll think a lot more of you for having done so. Thank you.



Crossposted at Blogcritics

UPDATE: Cindy Sheehan can be heard responding to Michelle Malkin's decidedly inappropriate comments about her son, Casey. [Think Progress]

Congress Needs to Lean on Bush to Change Course/Policy on Iraq

"And this litany of lies he will versify with reverences for God and the flag and democracy, when just what he and his party are doing to our democracy is choking the life out of it."

- E.L. Doctorow

Congress Needs to Lean on Bush to Change Course/Policy on Iraq
Americans are watching President Bush's stubborn determination with understandable confusion. It's becoming clear that his depth of heart comes nowhere near his hardball political ambition. George W. Bush seems to see himself as "big radical daddy" who wants to change everything we "children" have been raised to believe about the traditional values we've shared. Through his policies, he seems to want to take away the traditionally American (Bible-based) compassion for our fellow man and replace it with "selfy-based" policy (while calling it "faith-based"). We used to know how to translate our Christian hearts into good and decent governmental policies. One unnecessary war and 1800 dead Americans later, citizens are paying close attention to the man at the bully pulpit.

E.L. Doctorow writes:

On the eve of D-Day in 1944 General Eisenhower prayed to God for the lives of the young soldiers he knew were going to die. He knew what death was. Even in a justifiable war, a war not of choice but of necessity, a war of survival, the cost was almost more than Eisenhower could bear.

But this president does not know what death is. He hasn't the mind for it....To mourn is to express regret and he regrets nothing...He wanted to go to war and he did...

..He does not feel for the families of the dead, he does not feel for the 35 million of us who live in poverty, he does not feel for the 40 percent who cannot afford health insurance, he does not feel for the miners whose lungs are turning black or for the working people he has deprived of the chance to work overtime at time-and-a-half to pay their bills - it is amazing for how many people in this country this president does not feel.

I realize that E.L. Doctorow's words are blunt and harsh. Perhaps they are overly judgemental - and yet my own intuition has led me to think the same thoughts about Mr. Bush.

I took note of Doctorow's words for a few reasons. First, my own grandfather died, in 1975, of Black Lung disease. We knew poverty in my family, and we were able to work and climb our way out of it, thanks to our work ethic, commitment to education, and Franklin Delano Roosevelt's policies. Second, I believe Dwight D. Eisenhower was one of America's greatest presidents. He knew, all too well, the cost of war and would not lead our boys into war without good reason. Third, actions speak louder than words, and the domestic policies of the current President hold no solace or promise for those living in poverty, but instead pay lip service while, by his policies, paying off special contributors who are living off the backs of the middle class in America. I see the effects of Bush's indifference to the poor in the attitude of his journalist-minions such as Mark Steyn.

It's become fashionable to laugh at the poor - surely not an encouraging example of where we appear to be going in this country.

"The president we get is the country we get. With each president the nation is conformed spiritually. He is the artificer of our malleable national soul. He proposes not only the laws but the kinds of lawlessness that govern our lives and invoke our responses."

I thank God, each day, that we have a two-term limit for the office of President. I wonder what has happened to the Republican party of old - the one that gave us Abe Lincoln, who taught us the hard lesson of the value of a united nation and the value of central government - - I look for the party that gave us the great heart of Dwight D. Eisenhower. It's become an empty money-worshipping shell.

I pray, too. I pray that we have all learned a lesson after all of this. I pray for a man (or woman) with a true heart and a keen mind to come to lead our nation. Does that sound like a wish from a gothic fairy tale - a Lord of the Rings or Superman -inspired dream? Perhaps - - but aren't you having the same hopes?

_____________________________________________

We must look at where we stand in Iraq before we can plot a respectful and successful guide for safekeeping their burgeoning democracy

Is there any man or woman out there today who can look us in the eye and tell us they have a plan to rectify the many mistakes that the Bush administration has made in Iraq?

The only way to preserve America's reputation is for all of Congress to lean upon President Bush to admit his huge mistakes and to bring our warrior-troops home and to make a humble appeal to our international allies for material support in a peace-keeping mission in Iraq. Republicans in Congress need to leave their clinging partisanship at the door and do what is right for America. It only makes sense that we cannot leave Iraqi troops to fend for themselves, because it will not preserve the fragile democracy blooming in Iraq. It's also clear we can no longer occupy the nation - even those who THANK us for freeing them from Saddam Hussein are asking us to leave. Where are the sensible ideas? Are they being squelched because of the President's pointless determination to follow a failing course?

There would be no question that every lost life was worth the cost if only Congress would put their partisanship aside and work in America's best interests, applying political pressure to get Iraq right, for once and for all. No further American troops should be committed until they are committed for a peace-keeping effort with meaningful international cooperation. It is only through an American healing and uniting, with a full dose of humility from the Bush administration, that Iraq can be placed on the best course for success.

If only we could go back to the day before 9/11. Since we can't, let's get back to the spirit of the days following 9/11, when every good soul around the world was an American, if only for that moment. I am an optimist who believes that true civility in mankind can overcome extremism. The atmosphere of American politics that have entered the picture since 9/11 have not tapped into the spirit required to show the world our best intent. I would ask all people serving in the US Senate and the US House of Representatives to recommit themselves to the spirit of a united nation. You have strayed too far from the Promise.

Larry Diamond on "Squandered Victory"

Larry Diamond on "Squandered Victory"

At TPM Cafe, Stanford University professor and democracy expert Larry Diamond has posted his thoughts about his new book, "Squandered Victory." He hopes to have provided an account Americans will see as an honest one, at a time when honesty from our government seems to be a rare commodity. He lays much of the blame for the failure in Iraq at the feet of the civilian war planners in the Pentagon. (And from what we all now know, I'm not surprised). Diamond says:

"In my public speeches, as in the book, I have been quite critical of the mistakes we have made in Iraq, mistakes not just of strategy and preparation but, crucially, of attitude and demeanor as well.

Yet I have also endeavored to highlight some of the things we did, or tried to do, right in Iraq, the efforts we made to establish the precedent for a future Iraq that would be democratic, federal, and united, and the long odds that we were up against. I have found, both in the responses to the book and in my many speaking events since its publication, a great deal of public anger about the human, financial, and strategic costs of our mistakes in Iraq—with many Americans viewing the decision to invade in the first place as the seminal act of folly.

I find a growing number of Americans who believed we did the right and necessary thing to launch a war to topple Saddam Hussein, but now wonder if the effort was worth the price—or how long we can stay there. Most of all, I find a country here at home that remains confused, uncertain, even torn by the experience, and eager for an honest account. My ambition in writing this book was to begin to fill that urgent and very justifiable need."

Peter Jennings Has Died

Peter Jennings Has Died

My thoughts, as conveyed last April, will tell you how I feel tonight. Peter has died at the age of 67. I am very sad, and my prayers go out to Peter's family and friends. I'll miss him very much. He was as much a part of my life as any close member of my community. I considered him to be a friend who I had never had the opportunity to meet. I thank him for coming to my home each night and telling me the stories that filled in the outline of history and caused me to care. Godspeed, Peter.



In my end is my meaning.
-Thomas Merton

Scott from Powerline Joins Steyn in Mocking the Poor

Scott from Powerline Joins Steyn in Mocking the Poor

"..John Edwards dusts off his "Two Americas" stump speech -- the one with the heartwarming Dickensian vignette about the shivering girl whose parents can't afford to buy her a winter coat ($9.99 brand new from Wal-Mart) -- he might want to add a section about how an easy way for shivering coatless girls to keep warm is to run around the block a couple of times."

- Mark Steyn - an ugly man in many ways, in a Sun-Times column (the newspaper that fails to edit out CIA outings)

Does anyone think the quote above is funny or amusing in any way? A right winger mocking the poor? And can anyone actually find me a decent $9.99 winter coat (that will actually keep a little girl warm in the harsh Illinois winter) at a Walmart? Nowadays, you pay about that much at the goodwill store for a decent winter coat. Of course, I wouldn't expect Steyn to know that because he probably hasn't stepped his foot (which should be in his mouth) into a goodwill store in quite some time.

Powerline thought enough of this excerpt from Steyn's column to paste it into their blog today. I don't think that says much for their good faith or good taste. All this in the name of attacking Air America? All I can say is that Air America must be driving some of these wingnuts mad when we see them driven to mock Americans who live in poverty. Shame on you, Scott.

If Powerline offered any type of commentability, I would have made a comment at the entry site. I guess Powerline doesn't like to be challenged. Unchallengeable journalism doesn't seem like the American way, does it? Regardless of whether or not you agree with Michelle Malkin , you cannot say that she's afraid to take on a challenging comment or two. [edited]

Swish

Sswishhh...

It's a Time to be Enchanting

It's a Time to be Enchanting

"..experts, who include a pioneer in personality profiling, say al-Qaida, always loosely knit, is mutating into satellites that attract local operatives bound by disenchantment with the Western societies in which they grew up."

It isn't rocket science, so where have we gone wrong?

Main Entry: en·chant
Pronunciation: in-'chant, en-
Function: transitive verb
Etymology: Middle English, from Middle French enchanter, from Latin incantare, from in- + cantare to sing -- more at CHANT
1 : to influence by or as if by charms and incantation : BEWITCH
2 : to attract and move deeply : rouse to ecstatic admiration
synonym see ATTRACT

We must learn the art of counter-enchantment, and our best traditional values should reflect that in every political and diplomatic move we make. We should reinforce the belief that the West welcomes diaspora communities and still holds the promise of integration and a better life. Ask yourself why so many youths have stopped believing in the promise of opportunity in the West. Enchant them with a genuine "promise of freedom" in a society in which they are welcomed and in which they can honestly participate and feel they are an important part. Empower them with education. Enlist them in a campaign to end the ideology of murdering one's fellow man as the only desperate way to achieve a feeling of justice. Show them what real social justice means - and that the spirit and the promise of it lives here in the West.

US politics have moved so radically to the right that winning hearts and minds seems to have lost its meaning altogether. Now, England is having a debate about the way certain people will be routed out of their own society. How can anyone ever attract support in this way? A war against poverty and social injustice cannot be won by creating a social atmosphere of distrust of diversity, alienation of immigrants, or an abandonment of multiculturalism.

This is the toughest battle we've ever seen. I fear the murderous side is getting ahead of the game because we do not understand how to mesmerize the "invisible people" who live amongst us with light and hope. The politics of fear will continue to cause us to lose. What a shame.

"How do you attack an ideology?"

Come up with a better idea.

It's what the GOP keeps telling the Democrats when it comes to many issues, including a plan to defeat al Quaeda extremism. When will the party who has enjoyed the electoral majority for the past decade come up with a successful idea?

Attention Trust

Attention Trust

Have you heard about Attention Trust? Read about it at Got Ads? or at Corante. Attention Trust wishes to educate you about a new way to think about the data that you create every day, whether or not you are cognizant of the fact that you're doing so. Examples might be your Google searches, your Amazon transactions, or your connections on a social network, ie. your LinkedIn account. Think of "attention" as a valuable resource, and since you create it, you own it. We are operating in an "attention economy." It's natural to expect that others will want to exploit our individual "attention," and its evidence, for their economic ends, rather than our own. This Trust moves us toward more self-control over economics of choice. Definitely interesting and worth looking into.

Arianna and Gore Vidal Discuss Judy Miller

Arianna and Gore Vidal Discuss Judy Miller

Meowwww - I just love today's Arianna Huffington piece - her latest on the Judy Miller file. Doug Jehl at Miller's own newspaper, the NYT, is digging deep so as to avoid getting the NYT scooped by another media source. Arianna has been talking to Gore Vidal, one of my personal favorites. Arianna says:

"During a conversation with Gore Vidal (more about that tomorrow) we talked about the fact that we had both heard from different people that Judy was planning to start writing a book about her experiences in the Plame case while in jail. "De Profundis it's not going to be," Vidal said, referring to Oscar Wilde's jailhouse classic. "More like De Shallow-undis."

Gore also made the point that Miller had continued to carry water for her neocon chums right up until her incarceration. The last articles she wrote before going to jail -- about Kofi Annan and that neocon bugaboo, the UN -- stand as an example of sloppy and slanted journalism that required two Times corrections, one of them an entire article. For chapter and verse on this, look here and here.

I can't wait to hear the rest tomorrow.

Sen George Allen: Bush should face Cindy Sheehan

Sen George Allen: Bush should face Cindy Sheehan

Sen George Allen just told Wolf Blitzer, on his Sunday Late Edition show, that President Bush should meet Cindy Sheehan face-to-face. A national security aide has met with Sheehan, but Allen says that is not enough - Bush needs to face her - to met privately with her. (That aide was none other than Stephen Hadley - who was responsible for those 16 lying words in the President's SOTU speech in 2003 - talk about a slap in the face).

Barbara Boxer, also a guest on Blitzer's CNN show, said that she thinks it would be a very important thing for President Bush to do. Boxer also encouraged Ms. Sheehan to continue speaking her mind. Bush has refused to meet with Ms. Sheehan.

I think it's the worst PR for President Bush - ever - to have the public knowing that the Secret Service is trying to intimidate Ms. Sheehan to leave Crawford while Bush is refusing to meet with a woman who lost her son while fighting for America in Iraq. This is the age of the Internet. Intimidation and the dirty secrets surrounding it don't fly these days.

The White House is saying they already have met with Sheehan, along with other parents of the fallen, in the past. I'm not impressed with the White House excuse for snubbing this woman.

Wolf Blitzer invited Cindy Sheehan to participate on today's show, and she accepted. She is the one who TOLD Joe Hagin and Stephen Hadley, in a meeting yesterday, that she had met with President Bush once before, on June 17, 2004, after her son Casey had been killed in Iraq. Bush had met with Sheehan and some of her family members, as he had done with about 15 other families that day. He breezed in with a "party" attitude, in Sheehan's view. He was jovial and impersonal, and seemed to wish to keep his business strictly impersonal. The first thing he'd said was "Who are we honoring here?" (He didn't even take a moment to put Casey's name to memory, if only for that brief moment). He refused to look at pictures of Casey when they were offered. He refused to take the time to hear some stories about Casey.

This past week, too many Marines died in Haditha for Sheehan to let her conviction rest. When she heard President Bush once again invoke the fallen soldiers to encourage Americans to support his "killing policies" in Iraq, she demanded a new meeting with him. She says that Bush's representatives, Stephen Hadley and Joe Hagin, with whom she met yesterday, gave her spin on the reasons for the war and she stated, flat out, that she didn't believe them...and couldn't believe THEY really believed what they were saying.

When they left, they told her they would convey her feelings to the President.

If Israel Ever Needed a Friend - They Need it Now

"I am the son of a historian. I want people to be able to say in ten years, 'He was not party to this.'"

- Benjamin Netanyahu, speaking about Israel's planned pullout from the Gaza strip, protests over which have caused Netanyahu to dramatically resign

If Israel Ever Needed a Friend - They Need it Now

Likudnik Benjamin Netanyahu's political move shows that Ariel Sharon needs the firm support of America now - more than ever. Israel cannot afford to have its government or their sense of fragile unity torn apart. Don't they have enough adversity facing them - all around them? If President Bush is committed to battling extremism everywhere, he should back Ariel Sharon and make it very clear that we support him - now.

Netanyahu feels strongly about this issue and he is saying that his move is purely political (Israeli elections will take place in November and Netanyahu will surely seek the office of Prime Minister), but let's not fail to think about how this symbolic act will affect the Israeli street. Expect extremism to flourish - because extremists will feel they have been greatly empowered by Netanyahu's resignation.

Haaretz reports:

A minister opposed to an important governmental decision is not supposed to be a part of that government. After his resignation the former minister can criticize the government at will, something he was not free to do beforehand.

Whose side is the Bush administration on? And why? I think we Americans deserve to hear Bush speak about these questions. We have a stake in Israel's future, because it involves stability in the Middle East. (In case you haven't noticed, over 1800 American soldiers have died in the Middle East because of the deliberate instability aggravated by the neocon Likudniks of America).

Last spring, the Bush administration had reaffirmed U.S. support for the Gaza-disengagement proposal, but had taken no stand on the political maneuverings surrounding it. An AIPAC spokesman (recently the target of espionage indictments in the US) said the group would not comment on "private discussions" with the Israeli prime minister's office. It seems we, in the US, can no longer play both political sides, seeing that they are so deeply divided.


Update: A good posting and quote from DHinMI at The Next Hurrah (with interesting discussion as well - a question of the timing of elections may make or break the Gaza pullout plan):

It's a real statement about how screwed up Israel's politics are these days that a cabinet resignation that puts more power in the hands of Ariel Sharon should be such as clear improvement, that progressives and those hoping for peace between Israelies and Palestinians should be heartened that Sharon may be on the verge of dispatching a rival. Or, rather, if the Gaza pullout is a success, that Sharon's rival may have just dispatched himself.