Senate Dems plan to rescind 2002 war authorization

Now we're talking.

"We gave the president that power to destroy Iraq's weapons of mass destruction and, if necessary, to depose Saddam Hussein," Biden said of the 2002 resolution in a speech last week before the Brookings Institution. "The WMD was not there. Saddam Hussein is no longer there. The 2002 authorization is no longer relevant to the situation in Iraq.

Biden and Levin are drafting language to present to their colleagues when the Senate reconvenes on Tuesday, following a week-long recess.

The new framework would set a goal for withdrawing combat brigades by March 31, 2008, the same timetable established by the bipartisan Iraq Study Group. Once the combat phase ends, troops would be restricted to assisting Iraqis with training, border security and counterterrorism.

Senior Democratic aides said the proposed resolution would be sent directly to the Senate floor for action, without committee review, possibly as an amendment to a homeland security bill scheduled for debate next week."

Anyone who was concerned that non-binding resolutions were too nice, well Harry Reid just gave you your answer. The non-binding resolution was a necessary first step. A legislative shot across the bow. And the Republicans killed it. So now we have no choice but to try sterner stuff. The Republicans can't complain that what we're proposing is too extreme, too risky, when they refused to let us try the non-extreme, non-risky alternative. Anyone who complains about Democrats "micro-managing the war" will need to explain why, then, they didn't let the Congress pass a bipartisan resolution that wasn't micro-managing the war at all. We gave Bush and the Republicans a chance and they blew it.

I like this, a lot. And I suspect a majority of the American people are going to like this. And that matters now, and through 2008. The American people no longer support this war. As George Will said recently, there is no anti-war movement, we are an anti-war nation. Republicans oppose our ongoing, ever-increasing efforts to stop the madness at their own peril. Read More......

Tim Hardaway, the anti-gay former NBA star, speaks

WEIRD interview. He's the former NBA star who recently said he "hates gay people" and that gay people shouldn't even be allowed in America. He kind of makes up for what he said, but it's weird, very weird. Not quite sure how to react. Curious on your thoughts. Read More......

How to use an RSS feed to read my blog and many others

(UPDATE: I Bumped this old post back to the top, and will again another time or two, so folks understand how to use RSS feeds. They're quite useful for reading lots of blogs and news sites throughout the day.)

We've talked before about RSS feeds, and I wanted to mention another way you can use them to more easily read your favorite blogs and news sites.

First off, an RSS feed is simply a different way to read the new content published on a blog. The "normal" way is to simply visit my blog and read the content. But let's say you have ten favorite blogs and five favorite news sites (like the NYT, AP, etc.) Do you really want to read 15 Web sites a day for your news AND have to visit each of those sites every hour to find the latest news?

Well, RSS feeds helps you do this much more easily and efficiently.

Today, we're going to talk about Google Reader. Google Reader basically works like an email inbox, but the "emails" coming into your inbox are all content from your favorite blogs and news services.

First, here's a good and quick (45 seconds or so) video explaining Google Reader. I suggest you watch it, and turn up your speakers - it's literally less than a minute long (and the guy is hot). (And if you want to read even more, this is a good link for more general info on what an RSS feed is.)

Okay, now let me walk you through it. It's pretty easy.

Go to the Google Reader home page here. If you dont have a Google Reader account already, set one up - it's free and it's easy, and it's quick - do it, it took me like ten seconds, and you can use whatever email address you have, you don't need a gmail address. Once you set up your Google Reader account, head back to the Google Reader home page. When you get there, you'll see this page:



On this page, you see the Google Reader 45 second video I was talking about. Watch it if you haven't already.

Once you're done watching the video, click on the "Add Subscription" button on the left hand side of the page (I numbered it "1"). You'll see a search box open up. Let's say you wanted to subscribe to the AMERICAblog feed. If so, then type americablog in the search box, then click "add." You'll see a number of search results pop up on the right, and the first is our blog. Under the listing for our blog, click the "Subscribe" button. You've now subscribed to my blog's feed. Let's add one more feed so you can see how a few work together. Click again on "add subscription" and then enter "thinkprogress" - when the feed comes up, subscribe to that one too.

Now, in the top left hand corner of the page, click on "All Items." It should take you to a page that looks like this:



You'll see the blogs you subscribed to, listed on the left. The number of posts on that blog that you haven't yet read are listed in parenthesis. And on the right, you see all the recent posts from every blog you subscribed to. Click on any of the titles of the posts on the right and you'll see either a summary of the blog post, or the entire thing. Then scroll down to the next blog post and click again. Each time you click, it will close the previous blog post and open the new one. Very cool. And after you've clicked on several blog posts, look at the top of the row of blog posts and click on the blue button that says "refresh" - that will refresh the page and only list blog posts you haven't read yet.

There's a lot more you can do, experiment by clicking on various buttons, including "home," "expanded view," and even clicking on the left hand side on the names of the various blogs you subscribed to. Also, consider subscribing to your favorite news sites, like Reuters or the New York Times. Just type their names in the "add subscription" button and you can add them too. This is a great way to keep up on a lot of blogs at once.

Oh, and when you're previewing a blog post, you can click on the title of the post and it will take you to the post on the actual blog - that way you can join in the comments, etc.

Let me know if any of you try this, and what you think. Thanks, JOHN Read More......

GOP Speaker in Wyoming casts tie-breaking vote killing anti-gay marriage bill

Wow. Anybody up on what happened behind the scenes to get a GOP Speaker to cast the deciding vote against hate legislation?

House Speaker Roy Cohee, R-Casper, cast the tie-breaking vote in committee Thursday to kill a bill that would have barred Wyoming from recognizing gay marriages from other states.

Read More......

"Ghosts of Abu Ghraib," on HBO tonight, 9:30PM Eastern

Rory Kennedy, the filmmaker, is the daughter of Robert Kennedy. From HBO:

In her new documentary, Ghosts of Abu Ghraib, acclaimed filmmaker Rory Kennedy (HBO’s Indian Point: Imagining the Unimaginable) looks beyond the headlines to investigate the psychological and political context in which torture occurred at Abu Ghraib. A major contributor to this documentary is Al McCoy, author of A Question of Torture: CIA Interrogation, from the Cold War to the War on Terror, who is interviewed and featured extensively.

Ghosts of Abu Ghraib airs on HBO tonight, February 22nd at 9:30 eastern time. For a synopsis, along with a list of future airings, visit the documentary’s page.

Read More......

Chemical weapons found in Iraq... and it's our fault that they're there

Oh let me count the ironies. We invaded Iraq because they supposedly had chemical weapons. They didn't. And now the insurgents supposedly actually HAVE chemical weapons, which they didn't have until we invaded.

Are we winning yet? From the NYT. Read More......

McCain: Love the surge, hate the war

Round and round he goes, where he stops, nobody knows. More push-me-pull-you from John McCain. Read More......

George Bush may very well be breaking the Army

Speaker Pelosi's blog, the Gavel, expands significantly on a NYT story today about the extent to which Bush's "surge" in Iraq is straining our military resources. The Gavel notes the following military experts expressing real concern that Bush may be breaking the Army:

Lieutenant General David Poythress, the state adjutant general for the Georgia National Guard, 12/17/06:

“There is a danger of breaking the Army, but there is an equivalent danger of breaking the Guard. Guardsmen don’t sign up to be full-time soldiers. If that’s what they wanted, they’d join the active Army.”

General Peter Schoomaker, Chief of Staff United States Army, 12/14/06:

“At this pace, without recurrent access to the reserve components, through remobilization, we will break the active component. Further, because almost all reserve component units have already been either partially or completely mobilized in support of the Global War on Terrorism, current mobilization policies and practices require the Army to rely on individual volunteers from the reserve components. This runs counter to the military necessity of deploying trained, ready, and cohesive units.”

Lynn Davis, a senior analyst in the Arroyo Center, a division of the Rand Corp. that does research for the army, 9/22/06:

“The continuing frequent deployments to Iraq and Afghanistan have stretched the U.S. Army so thin that there are few brigades ready to respond to crises elsewhere.”

Andrew Krepinevich, retired Army officer and author of a Pentagon report arguing that the Army is “in a race against time” to adjust to the demands of war “or risk ‘breaking’ the force in the form of a catastrophic decline” in recruitment and re-enlistment, 1/24/06:

“You really begin to wonder just how much stress and strain there is on the Army, how much longer it can continue.”

George Joulwan, retired four-star Army general and former NATO commander, 12/5/05:

“And we’re fighting in all of Iraq, and we’ve got deployments in Afghanistan and worldwide. They are stretched thin. Whether they’re broken or not, I think I would say if we don’t change the way we’re doing business, they’re in danger of being fractured and broken, and I would agree with that.”

Read More......

Cheney personally attacks Pelosi day her brother dies

Remember Cheney's personal attack on Pelosi yesterday, once again saying she was doing Al Qaeda's dirty work? Well, he decided to do this only hours after her brother died. Classy. As Lynne Cheney would say, "he is not a good man."

Our condolences to the Speaker. Read More......

New danger in Iraq from chlorine bombs

Chemical bombs. The "fabulous success" continues in Iraq. Read More......

A completely understated headline about the Brits leaving Iraq: Ally's Timing Is Awkward for Bush

You think Great Britain's decision to remove troops from Iraq while Bush insists on an escalation is awkward? Awkward is an understatement. Tony Blair's decision completely undermines Bush. The Bush spin machine hit a brick wall with this one. In fact, most are mocking the claim from the White House that this is a good thing. And, it is mockable:

As the British announced the beginning of their departure from Iraq yesterday, President Bush's top foreign policy aide proclaimed it "basically a good-news story." Yet for an already besieged White House, the decision was doing a good job masquerading as a bad-news story.

What national security adviser Stephen J. Hadley meant was that the British believe they have made enough progress in southern Iraq to turn over more of their sector to Iraqi forces. To many back in Washington, though, what resonated was that Bush's main partner in Iraq is starting to get out just as the president is sending in more U.S. troops.

Bush and the Republicans are gearing for another attack -- but against the Democrats -- not a real attack in Iraq. The Republicans put all their energy in to fighting political battles about the war instead of figuring out a plan for the real war.

But Bush and the GOP are on the wrong side. The American people don't support the war. Now, with Bush's best ally bailing out of the quagmire, the GOP are running out of arguments:

Rep. Ray LaHood (R-Ill.) said the move will undercut Republicans in Congress trying to stave off attempts to limit what Bush can do in Iraq.

"It's probably not going to bode well for those of us who want to make a case against what Murtha and Pelosi plan for the supplemental," LaHood said. "It does not help."

Another understatement. Of course, this means the GOP will start getting really ugly. Exhibit A is Dick Cheney's ugly attempt to smear Pelosi and Murtha yesterday. We can expect a lot more of that in the weeks ahead. And we can also expect the Democrats to fight back -- hard. Very hard. Read More......

Thursday Morning Open Thread

Not that I care about British royalty, but Prince Harry is going to Iraq. What's the latest on the Bush twins? Still traveling, partying and shopping? Couldn't they at least volunteer at Walter Reed? Their father just expects sacrifice from other families.

Take it and thread. Read More......

UK pullout from Iraq a defeat, no matter how Blair spins it

You have to wonder what exactly is going on inside Blair's head as he tries to spin the withdrawal as a sign of success. His generals wanted a much larger and faster removal from Iraq, citing security problems associated with the presence of British troops. As Blair rolls out his plan for limited withdrawal and a time line, nobody other than the White House believes that he is leaving Iraq with any success and hardly any "peace with honor" or whatever that new spin is. The hard truth is that Blair contributed greatly to the catastrophe that is the new Iraq.

It is an admission of defeat. Iraq is turning into one of the world's bloodiest battlefields in which nobody is safe. Blind to this reality, Tony Blair said yesterday that Britain could safely cut its forces in Iraq because the apparatus of the Iraqi government is growing stronger.

In fact the civil war is getting worse by the day. Food is short in parts of the country. A quarter of the population would starve without government rations. Many Iraqis are ill because their only drinking water comes from the highly polluted Tigris and Euphrates rivers.

Nowhere in Mr Blair's statement was any admission of regret for reducing Iraq to a wasteland from which 2 million people have fled and 1.5 million are displaced internally.

Read More......

Mugabe to celebrate with $1.2 million birthday bash

Meanwhile, his own people continue to scrape by with 1600% inflation and skipping meals. Finding food is part of the problem but with well over 70% unemployment, possibly even closer to 80%, finding the money to buy food is no small task to most so lavishing himself with a million dollar (US) party is an insult to suffering country. Hail to the chief...it's good to be the king. Read More......

Open thread

Off to bed.

Okay, have to add one more. Under the oddly understated headline "Ally's Timing Is Awkward for Bush," we get the following from the Washington Post about Britain's decision to pull out of Iraq:

No matter the military merits, the British move, followed by a similar announcement by Denmark, roiled the political debate in Washington at perhaps the worst moment for the White House. Democrats seized on the news as evidence that Bush's international coalition is collapsing and that the United States is increasingly alone in a losing cause. Even some Republicans, and, in private, White House aides, agreed that the announcement sent an ill-timed message to the American public.

"What I'm worried about is that the American public will be quite perplexed by the president adding forces while our principal ally is subtracting forces," said Sen. John W. Warner (R-Va.), a longtime war supporter who opposes Bush's troop increase. "That is the burden we are being left with here."

The notion that the British pullback actually signals success sounds like bad spin, added Sen. Arlen Specter (R-Pa.). "I think it's Alice in Wonderland looking through the looking glass," he said.

Read More......