GOTV
Monday
Touch-screen voting blues
Critics warn of post-election problems if no paper trail exists
In many ways, politics in the United States are unlike those in Venezuela. The South American nation last month held a recall election for President Hugo Chavez, who survived an attempted coup in 2002.
But in another sense, that election may foreshadow the upcoming election in this country. The Venezuelan vote was conducted using electronic voting machines that generate a voter-verified paper trail. Chavez's opposition claimed that the victory, in which 59 percent voted to keep Chavez in power, was rigged. But international election monitors were able to conduct an audit by comparing the paper record to the electronic vote tallies.
"Without a paper trail to audit, there would have been no way to reach any closure on this situation," said one American observer on the scene in Caracas, Venezuela's capital. "There would be no paper trail, and you would be left with the assertion that some kind of manipulation happened. You have a safe bet that something like that is going to happen in November" in the United States.
The Venezuelan referendum is just one more chapter in the controversy over direct recording electronic (DRE) machines, most of which use a touch screen to record votes. A U.S. company, Smartmatic Corp., made the machines used in Venezuela. Each machine has a built-in printer to create a paper record. Another U.S. company, AccuPoll Inc., also makes DREs with built-in printers. Other vendors, mostly basing their products on older technologies, are trying to add printers to some models, with mixed results.
How could so many otherwise intelligent Democratic officials let themselves get rolled by the Help America Not Vote Act?
Friday
Thinking strategically
Somerby gives us the memo
We’ve finally read Unfit for Command, the John O’Neill book that savages Kerry; the book hadn’t been in stores in this city, and we finally had to order from Amazon. But now that we’ve seen it, let’s state the obvious—it’s hard to believe that such an odd book has changed an American White House election. We’ll discuss it in detail at a later time, but its charges are based on feats of memory that ought to intrigue the medical world, and its crackpot anti-Communism makes it sound like a document from a past era. “Looking at John Kerry’s record in the U.S. Senate since 1984, it is difficult, if not impossible, to find any position he took regarding Vietnam that the Communists would not favor,” O’Neill writes. Again, the book deserves a more through critique than we’re able to give it today. But it’s hard to believe that a mainstream observer could review this book without concern.
But so what? The Washington press is afraid of accusers, and it’s especially scared of rough, crude men who come to us from the crackpot right! Indeed, the mainstream press has rolled over for attacks on Dem White House hopefuls ever since the Bush camp slimed Dukakis in 1988. On last Friday’s Hardball, poor Roger Simon was wringing his hands, concerned that ’88 was occurring again. But it’s happening again because weak men like Simon are too afraid to stand and deliver. Simon’s too frightened and weak for his job. And those accusers do know how to fight.
Did the Swift Vets publish an odd-seeming book? Beyond that, did they self-contradict; sign phony affidavits; make blatant misstatements; contradict basic records? So what? It’s easier to do what William Raspberry did—roll over and wash one’s hands of the mess. And that’s just what the press has done over the course of past sixteen years. They ran with fake tales through the Whitewater hoax—fake tales which began in the ’92 race—and they ran with two years of absurdly fake tales about Candidate Gore during Campaign 2000. The odd Swift Boat charges are the latest chapter in a now-standard part of our White House campaigns. How do White House races now work? The House of Bush will gin up nasty charges—and a frightened press corps, pampered and powdered, will turn and walk right off its posts.
Yes, the Washington press corps is too scared to challenge accusers like the Swift Vets. Are the Swift Vets “liars,” as Ron Reagan said? We’re not sure how to answer that question. But the millionaire Matthews knew what to do when Reagan dared to make such a statement. He knew he had to change the subject. And that’s just what the frightened man did.
No, the Washington “press corps” will never step up and challenge accusers without being forced. It will never say that accusers have written a strange, improbable book. And when witnesses contradict those accusers, the press corps will know what to do with their tales—they’ll throw their tales right in the drink (see THE DAILY HOWLER, 8/30/04). The Washington press corp just doesn’t care—except about salaries and good party invites. “I don't know what to make of the controversy,” they’ll type. And they’ll go on the air unprepared.
So that leaves it up to our most hapless org—the inept and uncaring DNC. This is the fifth straight White House campaign in which they’ve been slimed by weird, puzzling charges. And this time, as always, the Dems are surprised. The Kerry campaign was shocked, just shocked, to think there were liars inside the Bush camp! Fool me twice, shame on me? Counting ahead from 1988, John Kerry got fooled the fifth time!
The Whitewater hoax? “Invented the Internet?” Kerry is really a secret Commie? These crackpot campaigns will occur every time until the Dems learn how to fight back. And what should the Democrats do about this? What must the DNC do to fight back? The DNC is so inert that we might as well offer these thoughts to a wall. But if the Democrat ever plan to get off their keisters and fight for the values they claim to respect, they’re going to have to take a page from the Republican camp.
Forty years ago, the GOP did something quite smart; it began to develop a meta-narrative to explain its place in the world. That meta-narrative is Liberal bias, a pleasing tale the GOP recites to explain all unpleasant events. (You saw Bush do it last night.) Voters have heard about “liberal bias” for decades. Any time an event occurs which puts the GOP on the defensive, hacks haul out this pleasing excuse. And they’ve learned to use this old script quite well.
The time has come when our uncaring Democrats have to start telling the truth to the people. But what meta-narrative should the Dems tell? They need to tell an accurate narrative: Every four years, Republican hacks make a joke of our lives, inventing strange stories about the Dem candidate. They distract; they deceive; they direct us to trivia; they make a joke of our public discussion. It’s perfectly clear that our Big Major Dems don’t really care if this costs them elections. But will these lazy, feckless pols ever defend the rights of the public? Will they ever show that they actually care when a joke is made of our White House elections? On Wednesday night, the Bush camp was lying in voters’ faces in those speeches by Miller and Cheney. And the DNC plainly doesn’t care—doesn’t bother debunking the charges, doesn’t bother explaining the process. As long as they get to sell us their cook books, the whole thing is just fine by them.
The DNC needs a meta-story—the Republicans keep making a joke of your discourse. But to tell a story, again and again, DNC honchos have to believe it—and care. We see no sign that they really do care, and that explains our quadrennial clowning. Clearly, the Washington press doesn’t care. Does the DNC care? Let them prove it.
WHAT DEMS MUST DO
Somerby gives us the memo
We’ve finally read Unfit for Command, the John O’Neill book that savages Kerry; the book hadn’t been in stores in this city, and we finally had to order from Amazon. But now that we’ve seen it, let’s state the obvious—it’s hard to believe that such an odd book has changed an American White House election. We’ll discuss it in detail at a later time, but its charges are based on feats of memory that ought to intrigue the medical world, and its crackpot anti-Communism makes it sound like a document from a past era. “Looking at John Kerry’s record in the U.S. Senate since 1984, it is difficult, if not impossible, to find any position he took regarding Vietnam that the Communists would not favor,” O’Neill writes. Again, the book deserves a more through critique than we’re able to give it today. But it’s hard to believe that a mainstream observer could review this book without concern.
But so what? The Washington press is afraid of accusers, and it’s especially scared of rough, crude men who come to us from the crackpot right! Indeed, the mainstream press has rolled over for attacks on Dem White House hopefuls ever since the Bush camp slimed Dukakis in 1988. On last Friday’s Hardball, poor Roger Simon was wringing his hands, concerned that ’88 was occurring again. But it’s happening again because weak men like Simon are too afraid to stand and deliver. Simon’s too frightened and weak for his job. And those accusers do know how to fight.
Did the Swift Vets publish an odd-seeming book? Beyond that, did they self-contradict; sign phony affidavits; make blatant misstatements; contradict basic records? So what? It’s easier to do what William Raspberry did—roll over and wash one’s hands of the mess. And that’s just what the press has done over the course of past sixteen years. They ran with fake tales through the Whitewater hoax—fake tales which began in the ’92 race—and they ran with two years of absurdly fake tales about Candidate Gore during Campaign 2000. The odd Swift Boat charges are the latest chapter in a now-standard part of our White House campaigns. How do White House races now work? The House of Bush will gin up nasty charges—and a frightened press corps, pampered and powdered, will turn and walk right off its posts.
Yes, the Washington press corps is too scared to challenge accusers like the Swift Vets. Are the Swift Vets “liars,” as Ron Reagan said? We’re not sure how to answer that question. But the millionaire Matthews knew what to do when Reagan dared to make such a statement. He knew he had to change the subject. And that’s just what the frightened man did.
No, the Washington “press corps” will never step up and challenge accusers without being forced. It will never say that accusers have written a strange, improbable book. And when witnesses contradict those accusers, the press corps will know what to do with their tales—they’ll throw their tales right in the drink (see THE DAILY HOWLER, 8/30/04). The Washington press corp just doesn’t care—except about salaries and good party invites. “I don't know what to make of the controversy,” they’ll type. And they’ll go on the air unprepared.
So that leaves it up to our most hapless org—the inept and uncaring DNC. This is the fifth straight White House campaign in which they’ve been slimed by weird, puzzling charges. And this time, as always, the Dems are surprised. The Kerry campaign was shocked, just shocked, to think there were liars inside the Bush camp! Fool me twice, shame on me? Counting ahead from 1988, John Kerry got fooled the fifth time!
The Whitewater hoax? “Invented the Internet?” Kerry is really a secret Commie? These crackpot campaigns will occur every time until the Dems learn how to fight back. And what should the Democrats do about this? What must the DNC do to fight back? The DNC is so inert that we might as well offer these thoughts to a wall. But if the Democrat ever plan to get off their keisters and fight for the values they claim to respect, they’re going to have to take a page from the Republican camp.
Forty years ago, the GOP did something quite smart; it began to develop a meta-narrative to explain its place in the world. That meta-narrative is Liberal bias, a pleasing tale the GOP recites to explain all unpleasant events. (You saw Bush do it last night.) Voters have heard about “liberal bias” for decades. Any time an event occurs which puts the GOP on the defensive, hacks haul out this pleasing excuse. And they’ve learned to use this old script quite well.
The time has come when our uncaring Democrats have to start telling the truth to the people. But what meta-narrative should the Dems tell? They need to tell an accurate narrative: Every four years, Republican hacks make a joke of our lives, inventing strange stories about the Dem candidate. They distract; they deceive; they direct us to trivia; they make a joke of our public discussion. It’s perfectly clear that our Big Major Dems don’t really care if this costs them elections. But will these lazy, feckless pols ever defend the rights of the public? Will they ever show that they actually care when a joke is made of our White House elections? On Wednesday night, the Bush camp was lying in voters’ faces in those speeches by Miller and Cheney. And the DNC plainly doesn’t care—doesn’t bother debunking the charges, doesn’t bother explaining the process. As long as they get to sell us their cook books, the whole thing is just fine by them.
The DNC needs a meta-story—the Republicans keep making a joke of your discourse. But to tell a story, again and again, DNC honchos have to believe it—and care. We see no sign that they really do care, and that explains our quadrennial clowning. Clearly, the Washington press doesn’t care. Does the DNC care? Let them prove it.
WHAT DEMS MUST DO
Somerby gives us the memo
We’ve finally read Unfit for Command, the John O’Neill book that savages Kerry; the book hadn’t been in stores in this city, and we finally had to order from Amazon. But now that we’ve seen it, let’s state the obvious—it’s hard to believe that such an odd book has changed an American White House election. We’ll discuss it in detail at a later time, but its charges are based on feats of memory that ought to intrigue the medical world, and its crackpot anti-Communism makes it sound like a document from a past era. “Looking at John Kerry’s record in the U.S. Senate since 1984, it is difficult, if not impossible, to find any position he took regarding Vietnam that the Communists would not favor,” O’Neill writes. Again, the book deserves a more through critique than we’re able to give it today. But it’s hard to believe that a mainstream observer could review this book without concern.
But so what? The Washington press is afraid of accusers, and it’s especially scared of rough, crude men who come to us from the crackpot right! Indeed, the mainstream press has rolled over for attacks on Dem White House hopefuls ever since the Bush camp slimed Dukakis in 1988. On last Friday’s Hardball, poor Roger Simon was wringing his hands, concerned that ’88 was occurring again. But it’s happening again because weak men like Simon are too afraid to stand and deliver. Simon’s too frightened and weak for his job. And those accusers do know how to fight.
Did the Swift Vets publish an odd-seeming book? Beyond that, did they self-contradict; sign phony affidavits; make blatant misstatements; contradict basic records? So what? It’s easier to do what William Raspberry did—roll over and wash one’s hands of the mess. And that’s just what the press has done over the course of past sixteen years. They ran with fake tales through the Whitewater hoax—fake tales which began in the ’92 race—and they ran with two years of absurdly fake tales about Candidate Gore during Campaign 2000. The odd Swift Boat charges are the latest chapter in a now-standard part of our White House campaigns. How do White House races now work? The House of Bush will gin up nasty charges—and a frightened press corps, pampered and powdered, will turn and walk right off its posts.
Yes, the Washington press corps is too scared to challenge accusers like the Swift Vets. Are the Swift Vets “liars,” as Ron Reagan said? We’re not sure how to answer that question. But the millionaire Matthews knew what to do when Reagan dared to make such a statement. He knew he had to change the subject. And that’s just what the frightened man did.
No, the Washington “press corps” will never step up and challenge accusers without being forced. It will never say that accusers have written a strange, improbable book. And when witnesses contradict those accusers, the press corps will know what to do with their tales—they’ll throw their tales right in the drink (see THE DAILY HOWLER, 8/30/04). The Washington press corp just doesn’t care—except about salaries and good party invites. “I don't know what to make of the controversy,” they’ll type. And they’ll go on the air unprepared.
So that leaves it up to our most hapless org—the inept and uncaring DNC. This is the fifth straight White House campaign in which they’ve been slimed by weird, puzzling charges. And this time, as always, the Dems are surprised. The Kerry campaign was shocked, just shocked, to think there were liars inside the Bush camp! Fool me twice, shame on me? Counting ahead from 1988, John Kerry got fooled the fifth time!
The Whitewater hoax? “Invented the Internet?” Kerry is really a secret Commie? These crackpot campaigns will occur every time until the Dems learn how to fight back. And what should the Democrats do about this? What must the DNC do to fight back? The DNC is so inert that we might as well offer these thoughts to a wall. But if the Democrat ever plan to get off their keisters and fight for the values they claim to respect, they’re going to have to take a page from the Republican camp.
Forty years ago, the GOP did something quite smart; it began to develop a meta-narrative to explain its place in the world. That meta-narrative is Liberal bias, a pleasing tale the GOP recites to explain all unpleasant events. (You saw Bush do it last night.) Voters have heard about “liberal bias” for decades. Any time an event occurs which puts the GOP on the defensive, hacks haul out this pleasing excuse. And they’ve learned to use this old script quite well.
The time has come when our uncaring Democrats have to start telling the truth to the people. But what meta-narrative should the Dems tell? They need to tell an accurate narrative: Every four years, Republican hacks make a joke of our lives, inventing strange stories about the Dem candidate. They distract; they deceive; they direct us to trivia; they make a joke of our public discussion. It’s perfectly clear that our Big Major Dems don’t really care if this costs them elections. But will these lazy, feckless pols ever defend the rights of the public? Will they ever show that they actually care when a joke is made of our White House elections? On Wednesday night, the Bush camp was lying in voters’ faces in those speeches by Miller and Cheney. And the DNC plainly doesn’t care—doesn’t bother debunking the charges, doesn’t bother explaining the process. As long as they get to sell us their cook books, the whole thing is just fine by them.
The DNC needs a meta-story—the Republicans keep making a joke of your discourse. But to tell a story, again and again, DNC honchos have to believe it—and care. We see no sign that they really do care, and that explains our quadrennial clowning. Clearly, the Washington press doesn’t care. Does the DNC care? Let them prove it.
Thursday
It's Hard To Be a Democrat
Todd Symth sent the following email:
I was checking George Bush's play book the other day for the passages that say "Steal from the poor and give to the rich because they know how to dodge their taxes" and “Attack people with depleted uranium cluster bombs.” But the Bible I have says: “Blessed are the peacemakers”, “Love your enemies,” “Heal the sick”, “Give to the poor” and “Plead the cause of the poor and needy.” I thought: Do I have the wrong version? Does Bush have a special translation? -or- Does Bush's Dyslexia cause him to understand things as the opposite of what they really mean?
It's hard to be a Democrat because we have to be so many things to so many different people. We’re undisciplined, disorganized, and we’re up against 3000 billionaires who don't like to share and don’t play well with others. These billionaires own the corporations and sit on the boards of all the major media outlets. They control the message and they use FEAR to divide us so many will vote against their own best interests. They embrace the uninformed, paranoid and gullible among us and they call themselves and their minions Republicans. They are well funded, organized and unified around the basic emotions of fear and greed.
George Bush's chief advisor has said:
"As people do better, they start voting like Republicans - unless they have too much education and vote Democratic, which proves there can be too much of a good thing"
-Karl Rove
Despite the fact that in the last century Democrats performed better on National Security and the Economy, Republicans have reversed the general perception. While Republicans won the invasion ofGrenada, Democrats won WWI (Wilson), WWII (FDR/Truman) andKorea(Truman). While Republicans paid for economic performance with reckless deficit spending, Democrats created more jobs, increased the stock market and GNP while doing better at reducing deficit spending, balancing the budget, and still protecting the poor.
Job Growth Record by President
Economy and Presidents
Democrats better for the stock market
Presidents and Budget / Unemployment - (PDF)
In the past, Republicans have used coded language like the “Soft Bigotry of Low Expectations”, “Welfare Queens” and “Quotas” to mask their assault on Social programs that protect the poor. Pleasant sounding lies like "Compassionate Conservative" and claiming to be a "Uniter not a Divider" were used to make the 2000 election close enough so the Santa Claus of the wealthy could be installed by the Supreme Court.
George W. Bush has used deceptive language like “No Child Left Behind” to dismantle funding for education in poor neighborhoods. He uses doubletalk like “Clear Skies” and “Healthy Forests Initiatives” to roll back pollution and logging restrictions. All to favor and maximize profits for super rich Republican cronies.
Republicans cry “Class Warfare” when we point out what they do. Like a pick pocket complaining, you looked at his hands as he robbed you blind. When the news is bad they blame the "Liberal Media" even though they own the companies and sit on the boards that make the decisions that shape the news.
If Al Gore had been president during the 9/11 attacks and had failed to act on the August 6, 2001 PDB: “Bin Laden Determined to Strike in US” he would have been burned alive by the same Republican witch hunters that made national scandals out of Whitewater, Filegate, Travelgate and Troopergate. Republicans wasted $45 million dollars on a four-year persecution that cleared Bill Clinton of all charges. They had to settle for a job favor for an intern, while Dick Cheney and Ken Lay were stealing billions from taxpayers, investors and employees of Halliburton and Enron by declaring false prophets and receiving no-bid contracts from our government.
While Democrats are not without flaws, the Republican Party is the one pressing the agenda of the super rich and powerful. While these may not be the original ideals of the party, they are a cancer that has taken over our government. Before you wince too hard, read the concerns of former presidents who wrote about the threat to our Democracy of corporate wealth and power.
"I hope we shall crush in its birth the aristocracy of our monied corporations which dare already to challenge our government to a trial by strength, and bid defiance to the laws of our country." -- Thomas Jefferson 1816, (U.S. President 1801-09)
"I see in the near future a crisis approaching that unnerves me and causes me to tremble for the safety of my country... Corporations have been enthroned and an era of corruption in high places will follow, and the money power of the country will endeavor to prolong its reign by working upon the prejudices of the people until all wealth is aggregated in a few hands and the Republic is destroyed."
-- Abraham Lincoln,Nov. 21, 1864(U.S. President 1861-65)
"This is a government of the people, by the people, and for the people no longer. It is a government of corporations, by corporations, and for corporations."
-- Rutherford B. Hayes, 1876 (U.S. President 1877-81)
"Corporations, which should be the carefully restrained creatures of the law and the servants of the people, are fast becoming the people's masters."
-- GroverCleveland, 1888 (U.S. President 1885-89 and 1892-96)
"The citizens of theUnited Statesmust effectively control the mighty commercial forces which they have themselves called into being. There can be no effective control of corporations while their political activity remains. To put an end to it will be neither a short nor an easy task, but it can be done."
-- Theodore Roosevelt, 1910 (U.S. President 1901-09)
"The liberty of a democracy is not safe if the people tolerate the growth of private power to a point where it becomes stronger than their democratic State itself."
--FranklinD.Roosevelt, 1938 (U.S. President 1933-45)
And then it happened. The concerns of our former presidents came to pass while we were numb to the mutation of Jeffersonian Democracy into a Feudal Plutocracy where only the very wealthy have reliable access to political power. There was no need for conspiracy just the natural result of mutual self interest and greed, growing unchecked like mold on our society.
What use to be known as "The rich get richer and the poor get poorer" is now called a "Jobless recovery." Over the last 30 years, the poor and middle class have been squeezed tighter and tighter while the wealthy have become filthy rich. The richest 10% in the US now own over 70% of our total accumulated wealth. In 1970 there were 190 billionaires and now there are more than 3100 billionaires while middle-class jobs are outsourced, work hours increase, income declines, and poverty has reached an all time high in our country.
Benito Mussolini claimed credit for defining Fascism stating: "Fascism should more appropriately be called corporatism because it is a merger of state and corporate power." In 1938, Mussolini established the first Fascist state by replacing the Italian Parliament with the "Camera dei Fasci e delle Corporazioni" - the Chamber of Fascist Corporations.
During World War II the New York Times asked U.S. Vice President Henry Wallace: What is a fascist and how dangerous are they in America?"
Wallace responded:
"The American fascist would prefer not to use violence. His method is to poison the channels of public information. With a fascist the problem is never how best to present the truth to the public but how best to use the news to deceive the public into giving the fascist and his group more money or more power." … "The American fascists are most easily recognized by their deliberate perversion of truth and fact"
"They claim to be super-patriots, but they would destroy every liberty guaranteed by the Constitution. They demand free enterprise, but are the spokesmen for monopoly and vested interest. Their final objective toward which all their deceit is directed is to capture political power so that, using the power of the state and the power of the market simultaneously, they may keep the common man in eternal subjection."
"…to crush fascism internally, (Democracy) must develop the ability to keep people fully employed and at the same time balance the budget. It must put human beings first and dollars second. It must appeal to reason and decency and not to violence and deceit. We must not tolerate oppressive government or industrial oligarchy in the form of monopolies and cartels."
-- Henry A. Wallace (U.S. Vice President 1941-1945)
Corporatism = Fascism by Thom Hartmann
Republicans call Democrats “Socialists” because it makes them look less like Fascists as they persistently move our country closer toMussolini’s definition. George Bush has tried to make liberal a dirty and unpatriotic word when it actually means warmhearted, generous and freethinking. George Bush has played on our fears, questioned our patriotism and divided the country with his "With us or against us" message.
"The people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism, and exposing the country to greater danger."
-- Herman Goering (Testimony from theNurembergtrials)
GeorgeBush's radical Neocon Republicans have spent tens of millions of dollars to brain wash Americans into believing that John Kerry and John Edwards have done something wrong when they tried to stop Bush from stealing and endangering our children. Bush has sacrificed public safety, seeking Torte Reform and relaxed regulations that would poison the air and water and endanger our children by producing dangerous products, all to maximize rich Republican profits. Bush has tried to buy his way out of economic quicksand with reckless deficit spending that piles up massive debt on our children.
Again, I sense a skeptical twinge in the back of your neck as you read this. I understand because we don’t like dealing with things that challenge our understanding. But here is another item that might surprise you.
Despite common belief, the Boston Tea Party was not a protest against a tax increase. The Tea Act of 1773, which led to the Boston Tea Party, was a tax refund and exemption for the East India Company that actually lowered the price of tea in the colonies. Powerful members of the British Parliament were heavily connected to The East India Company which was poised to gain a monopoly over the American tea trade.
The Boston Tea Party was a protest against corporate corruption and unfair influence on a corrupt British Parliament. Corruption that pales in comparison to the influence pedaling and war profiteering that has favored Cheney’s Halliburton and Bush Sr.’s Carlyle Group as a result of theIraqwar. Notice that Ken Lay and Osama bin Laden are still free while Martha Stewart is going to jail.
Now that Bush has turned over the government in Iraq more than 8.8 billion dollars are missing from US tax dollars and more than 20 billion dollars in Iraqi oil revenue. From Halliburton alone tens of $ millions are unaccounted for in overcharges and missing equipment. Bush is presiding over a fleecing of both the American and the Iraqi people.
Based on Dick Cheney's blue print Halliburton offshores their profits and pays less than 1% in US taxes. They are repeatedly fined by the SEC for accounting fraud, defrauding the government in overcharges, price gouging and ignoring health and safety regulations and yet they continue to receive no-bid sweetheart contracts from George Bush and Dick Cheney.
Audit shows $8.8 billion in Iraq funds missing
Charity says billions missing in Iraqi oil revenues
$20B of Iraq's Oil Revenue Unaccounted For By U.S.
Halliburton Questioned on $1.8 Billion Iraq Work - REUTERS
New Halliburton Whistleblowers Say Millions Wasted in Iraq
Ex-employees accuse Halliburton of fraud
Halliburton To Pay SEC $7.5M - CBS
Prominent Republicans have publicly stated they want to reduce government control over private industry. Some have said they want it small enough that government can be drowned in a bathtub. They accomplish this by massive deficit spending that racks up the national debt and weakens our government. It prevents us from enforcing trade, labor and environmental controls which empowers US corporations to abuse and exploit people around the world which has led to the terrorism and hatred we face today.
The terrorists don't hate our freedom. They don't hate our Social Security or our desire for affordable healthcare, clean air or clean water. Terrorists hate that our government supports brutal dictatorships that cooperate withUScorporation's to abuse and exploit their people. From their point of view, terrorists and the people who support them believe that Americans profit at their expense and suffering. In reality, only a small minority of the wealthiest profit but the American people are targeted.
National Debt History
U.S. National Debt Clock
George Bush has made this situation much worse by using the war on terrorism as an excuse to accomplish his agenda. Our reputation around the world has never been lower and our alliances are weakened.
Before the attacks on 9/11, George Bush did nothing to protect us from terrorists; demoting his chief counter terrorism expert and ignoring warnings from the previous administration. The official report that named Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda responsible for the USS Cole bombing came out two months before Bush took office but he did nothing to pursue the growing threat. Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz criticized Bill Clinton for his obsession with Osama bin Laden. Despite repeated warnings John Ashcroft told his people he didn't want to hear anymore about terrorism.
After 9/11 Bush turned the world against us by insulting our allies and misleading the world into a war for his on re-election and war profiteering. He sent our troops to war unprepared and poorly equipped. He failed to pursue Osama bin Laden inAfghanistanand turned to invade the one country in theMiddle Eastthat had the fewest ties with al Qaeda.
Afghanistan,Iran,Pakistan,Saudi Arabia,SyriaandEgyptall had significant ties and contact with Al Qaeda and Islamic Jihad. Iraqis a secular country and had the fewest ties with Al Qaeda of all the Islamic countries in theMiddle East. ButIraqhad the second largest oil reserve in the world and once he got access to that oil George Bush announced “Mission Accomplished.”
George Bush fulfilled Osama bin Laden's wildest dreams by invading a country in theMiddle East. With no one held accountable for the widespread abuse and torture of prisoners inIraq, Afghanistan andGuantanamoBay,Cuba, Bush has further outraged 1.4 billion Muslims around the world against theUnited States. Bush has increased the number of al Qaeda terrorists from 3000 in 2001 to more than 18,000 now.
We found no weapons of mass destruction. There was never any connection between Saddam Hussein and the 9/11 attacks. There were no mobile labs or stock piles of biological or chemical weapons. There was no uranium or aluminum tubes intended for nuclear weapons. There were no unmanned aerial drones that could be launched within 45 minutes resulting in a mushroom cloud onUSsoil. These were some of the lies that were told to the American people by the Bush administration.
Tony Blair has now admitted that the claim of 400,000 mass graves inIraqwas exaggerated. They have only found about 5000 bodies which correlate to the uprising after the first Gulf War when Bush Sr. encouraged the people ofIraqto overthrow Saddam but then failed to back them up and they were slaughtered.
In a global war on terror, you can not win without the support of the global community. And in a global economy you can't get ahead by pissing off the global part of that equation. Democrats engage our allies not because it's easy but because it's the smart way to fight terrorism and grow a healthy economy. Democrats balance the budget because it makes our Democracy stronger and more efficient.
Peace Cannot Be Kept By Force - It Can Only Be Achieved By Understanding
-- Albert Einstein
It requires effort to think of others first, keep an open mind and include everyone. Democrats don’t use God as an excuse to ignore science; we thank God for the science he gives us to perform miracles like healing the sick and feeding the poor. We are thankful for the science that warns us about Global Warming and tells us why missile defense won't work. We are skeptical when Bush and Cheney ignore the same science because it benefits Halliburton and their cronies. We don’t have much faith in the benevolence of corporate generosity or "Trickle Down Economics."
Democrats don’t try to take God’s place by legislating discrimination into the Constitution in God’s name. It's hard to be a Democrat because you have to go up to people you don’t know and beg them to register to vote, volunteer and donate money. Republicans just scrub Democrats from the voter rolls. Democratsare fighting to restore our Democracy on a field that is rigged against us. It’s easier to hate your enemies, insult your allies, ignore the poor and ignore science because the alternatives are complex and difficult. And that is why it’s hard to be a Democrat.
-- by Todd Smyth
Tuesday
James Socas cites transportation and education as key issues
From the Conntection:
Socas and his young family moved to McLean in early 2002. Working as a staffer on the U.S. Senate Banking Committee, Socas learned first-hand about one of Northern Virginia's most visible woes: traffic. It would become one half of Socas's two-pronged political platform. Since 1980, Socas said, the average commuter's annual travel time has increased by over 40 hours.
"People have lost a week of salary to sit in traffic," he said. "You miss the dinner with the kids. You don't see them when you get up. People are ready to have a revolt in the streets over lack of progress in transportation."
Sunday
BERT SEIDMAN
From Jim Moran's blog:
Bert Seidman always felt it was the right of every worker to have a decent job, affordable healthcare and the ability to retire with a pension. Mr. Seidman passed away at the age of 84 in Falls Church, Virginia on June 24th. He believed in Labor's just cause because of the dignity and equality the movement conferred on all of the men and women in America.
Mr. Seidman received his degrees in economics from the University of Wisconsin at Madison. He finished his undergraduate degree in 1938 and his master's degree in 1941. During his years in Wisconsin he was an activist in the Young People's Socialist League, the co-op movement and engaged in local politics, becoming friends with the two Socialist mayors of Milwaukee.
Bert Seidman began his career at the Bureau of Labor Statistics in Washington. During World War II he was a conscientious objector and performed alternate service, never shirking his duty or wavering in his beliefs. In 1948 he joined the staff of the American Federation of Labor, soon to be the AFL-CIO, where he began as a research economist. He served the American Labor movement with tireless devotion for the next four decades. Bert Seidman became labor's expert on healthcare, pension, social welfare and occupational health issues.
He served as the AFL-CIO's European representative from 1962 to 1966 and was a member of the of the U.S. delegation to the United Nation's International Labor Organization from 1958 to 1976. He was appointed again in 1987 and 1988 to that organization. Bert Seidman
was an outspoken proponent on behalf of Social Security and health insurance for all Americans. He led the fight to stop the privatization of Social Security and worked without respite to find a solution to our nation's uneven health care system.
His life is an inspiration for all of us who believe that government should have a positive role in our society. He was dedicated to many progressive causes in his time but they all had a common thread. Bert Seidman thought that there was no good reason for people to work their whole lives and not have a pension to tide them over during their remaining years; he thought there was no good reason that people couldn't go to a doctor when they were sick if they didn't have enough money.
He believed in the essential dignity of every American worker. He spent his life helping the labor movement win and then keep the hard-won benefits of our nation's working class. Bert Seidman was a great American. Our nation owes him a debt of gratitude.
Neo-con-poop's dirty operations
Atrios quotes Juan Cole:
The Neoconservatives have some sort of shadowy relationship with the Mojahedin-e Khalq Organization or MEK. Presumably its leaders have secretly promised to recognize Israel if they ever succeed in overthrowing the ayatollahs in Iran. When the US recently categorized the MEK as a terrorist organization, there were howls of outrage from scholars associated with the Washington Institute for Near East Policy (a wing of AIPAC), such as Patrick Clawson and Daniel Pipes. MEK is a terrorist organization by any definition of the term, having blown up innocent people in the course of its struggle against the Khomeini government. (MEK is a cult-like mixture of Marx and Islam). The MEK had allied with Saddam, who gave them bases in Iraq from which to hit Iran. When the US overthrew Saddam, it raised the question of what to do with the MEK. The pro-Likud faction in the Pentagon wanted to go on developing their relationship with the MEK and using it against Tehran.
So it transpires that the Iranians were willing to give up 5 key al-Qaeda operatives, whom they had captured, in return for MEK members.
Franklin, Rhode and Ledeen conspired with Ghorbanifar and SISMI to stop that trade. It would have led to better US-Iran relations, which they wanted to forestall, and it would have damaged their proteges, the MEK.
Since high al-Qaeda operatives like Saif al-Adil and possibly even Saad Bin Laden might know about future operations, or the whereabouts of Bin Laden, for Franklin and Rhode to stop the trade grossly endangered the United States.
...
Franklin's movements reveal the contours of a rightwing conspiracy of warmongering and aggression, an orgy of destruction, for the benefit of the Likud Party, of Silvio Berlusconi's business in the Middle East, and of the Neoconservative Right in the United States. It isn't about spying. It is about conspiring to conscript the US government on behalf of a foreign power or powers.
More from Janes:
Iran, Israel trade barbs over new missile tests
Israel's plans for Iran strikes
Israeli interrogators in Iraq - An exclusive report
Fresh scrutiny on a rogue Pentagon operation
Iran-Contra II?
On Friday evening, CBS News reported that the FBI is investigating a suspected mole in the Department of Defense who allegedly passed to Israel, via a pro-Israeli lobbying organization, classified American intelligence about Iran. The focus of the investigation, according to U.S. government officials, is Larry Franklin, a veteran Defense Intelligence Agency Iran analyst now working in the office of the Pentagon's number three civilian official, Undersecretary of Defense for Policy Douglas Feith.
The investigation of Franklin is now shining a bright light on a shadowy struggle within the Bush administration over the direction of U.S. policy toward Iran. In particular, the FBI is looking with renewed interest at an unauthorized back-channel between Iranian dissidents and advisers in Feith's office, which more-senior administration officials first tried in vain to shut down and then later attempted to cover up.
Friday
Vote no on Question 2
Question 2
QUESTION: Shall Section 16 of Article V of the Constitution of Virginia be amended to provide for additional possible successors to fill the office of Governor in the event of an emergency or enemy attack and until the House of Delegates is able to meet to elect a Governor?
I don't know what the Republicans had in mind when the proposed this, but I don't like the sound of it.
2004 Bond Referendum
Information
Fairfax County voters will be asked to vote YES or NO on four individual bond questions in the Nov. 2, 2004, general election. The ballot will include separate questions for human services, libraries, parks and park facilities, and transportation bonds. The human services bond question asks voters to allow the county to borrow $32.5 million for construction, renovation and capital renewal of mental health and juvenile court facilities. The library bond question asks voters to allow the county to borrow $52.5 million to build two new library branches and renovate four branches. The park bond question asks voters to allow the county to borrow $75 million for use by the Fairfax County Park Authority and the Northern Virginia Regional Park Authority to acquire land, renovate existing facilities and develop new facilities. The transportation bond question asks voters to allow the county to borrow $165 million to fund the county’s share of the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority’s capital program and the county’s four-year transportation plan, which includes pedestrian, highway and transit improvements.
If you have a specific question you can send email to Greg Werkheiser, member of the 2004 Bond Referendum Citizen’s Committee, at gwerkheiser[@]wcsr[.]com
Sum of a Glitch
Out good friend Corrente points to Evidence shows that machines might be the real swing voters this November.
It is not enough to win this for Kerry, we must do so by a theft proof margin. They did it in the Philippines in 1985 and we can do so in the United States in 2004.
Chief Chambers Hearing: September 8, 2004
Email from Honest Chief:
Things have been incredibly busy around here that it?s difficult to know where to start. We are all working overtime to get ready for the September 8th hearing before the Merits Systems Protection Board (MSPB) to challenge the actions that the Department of Interior took against the Chief. We will let you know exactly when and where the hearing will be, so be on the alert for future emails!
In the meantime, we have had the leadership of the Park Service and Interior in the PEER offices, under oath, answering questions. It has been literally a rogue?s gallery of ?responsible officials,? including?
· Steven Griles, Deputy Interior Secretary
· Craig Manson, Assistant secretary and his Deputy, Paul Hoffman; and
· Fran Mainella, NPS Director, and her Deputy Don Murphy.
These depositions have been most illuminating and extremely valuable. These witnesses have repeatedly contradicted themselves, each other and the company ?line? on why Chief Chambers had to be gagged and disciplined.
For those of you who contributed to the Honest Chief Fund, thank you. Your contributions made these depositions possible. We have more transcripts to produce, so please share this email with friends and co-workers and help support upcoming depositions.
Sincerely,
Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER)
Wednesday
GUANTANAMO BAY, CUBA
Dear member of the ACLU family:
This will not read like an authoritative ACLU report on the Guantanamo Military Commissions; we hope to provide that later.
I’m dictating this weblog to give our ACLU colleagues and all of you a sense of what this black box known as Guantanamo is like.
I arrived yesterday on a commercial charter plane from Fort Lauderdale. When my colleague from Amnesty International and I stepped off the plane, there was some confusion as to where we were supposed to be going. Finally, after being assigned a roommate (I’m bunking with another colleague from Human Rights Watch), we got dinner at the Officers’ Club.
Without a specific itinerary planned for the Non-Governmental Organization (NGO) participants, we simply tagged along with the media contingent of more than 53 different reporters. They ran the gamut from broadcast, print and wire services, including ABC, the Associated Press, the New York Times, CBS, Washington Post, Miami Herald and many others.
Beginning the day at 6 A.M., we almost got breakfast, but after piling into the bus and then piling into the mess hall, the cooks didn’t show up. So we all got back on the bus and various industrious reporters began to make pots of coffee in the lobby of the Combined Bachelors Quarters (CBQ), which is where we’re staying. Please don’t tell my partner that that’s what it’s known as.
After that, we started on the round of briefings regarding the Military Commissions, the [Enemy] Combatant Status Review tribunals and the facility where the commissions will be held this week. I expect to be in the actual commission room even though most members of the media will be observing in a different building through closed-circuit television (only a small delegation of media is allowed each day in the room where the proceedings are taking place). I’ll report back when I’ve actually observed the commissions and the tribunals.
But, let me give you a quick read of what I’ve learned today.
As to the commissions, we expect we will observe preliminary hearings for four of the accused. The Military Commissions panel will be comprised of five members, presided over by Col. Peter Brownback III, an Army lawyer and the only attorney among the five. We don’t expect to see any witnesses but we do expect the accused to be present in the commission room. In these preliminary proceedings they will read the charges against the accused (i.e. like an arraignment). They will explain the process to the accused and they will conduct voir dire of the commission members to ensure that they can sit on the commission.
As you know, we have raised serious concerns about how these commissions will proceed: the lack of an independent review outside the military chain of command, the expected use of secret evidence and the difficulties incurred by the defense counsel representing their clients. I don’t expect that anything we’ll see this week will fundamentally alter our criticism on these three major points.
We also learned a great deal more about the Combatant Status Review tribunals. Thirty-one tribunals have been completed thus far. Nineteen of the accused have decided to participate, whereas 12 refused to participate. Twenty-three determinations have been sent to Washington, D.C. for review, of which 14 have been validated as “enemy combatants.” Of the 14, only one witness has appeared in these tribunals and none of the 14 have yet been informed of the validation of their designation as enemy combatants.
For the accused who do participate, the proceeding normally takes under two hours: one hour for the unclassified portion and one hour for the classified portion. For those who do not choose to participate, the entire Combatant Status Review takes approximately one hour. There are 585 men held here in Guantanamo and there are 177 open Combatant Status Review tribunals.
Two themes have come out of this first day of briefings. One is the ambivalence that the military has toward NGO participants and even the broader media. They want to give us access, but not too much access. They want to be transparent, but the transparency can’t go too far. For instance, tomorrow, members of the media will travel to Camp Delta, but unfortunately the NGO participants were told that we cannot attend that tour, even though we have been given full security clearance to sit in the commission room on Tuesday.
The second theme is that there is a great desire to show how the commissions and the tribunals are fair and just, and how they mirror the American system of justice. But yet, when you compare the rules for both the commissions and the tribunals, you find serious departures from either military justice proceedings or regular criminal proceedings. For instance, under the Combatant Status Review tribunals, which are “administrative” we were told, each detainee is assigned a personal representative who is not a legal representative and whose conversations with the detainee are not confidential in any way. In fact, this personal representative is able to provide both exculpatory and inculpatory evidence that he gleans in his “personal representation” of the detainee.
How this all plays out, I hope to be able to tell you more in coming days. As I said to one of the reporters today, this isn’t about the guys in the orange jumpsuits, this is about us. This is about what rules and values will guide an American system of justice that we can hold up to Americans and to the entire world. So far, I have no comfort to give on that front and I doubt that much will change by the end of the week.
I’ll keep you posted and talk to you tomorrow. Please send suggestions for what you’d like me to report on in coming days at gitmo@aclu.org. Let me know what’s on your mind.
Anthony D. Romero,
ACLU Executive Director
Diplomat Teacher Democrat
Ken Longmyer
At a time when America is paying a heavy price for misguided and mismanaged domestic and foreign policies, Ken Longmyer offers the voters of theUS Capitol dome 11th Congressional District decades of hands-on domestic and international experience.
