Friday Orchid Blogging

(click the photo to see it larger)

This is your standard gorgeous red cattleya mix. I suspect this is actually a catt mixed with a laelia or something else. But it's gorgeous, isn't it? This is my picture, but it's not my plant. I took this one in Chicago at Hausermann's orchids. The plant itself was rather large, so this one isn't for me. But I just can't get over the colors - they're that stunning in person. Catts generally require a good amount of sunlight all year round, watering about once a week or so. So, if you have the sunlight, they'll flower, otherwise, they won't.

Enjoy. JOHN Read the rest of this post...

Lieberman 46%, Lamont 40%

And the question remains, will Liberman cut and run as an independent because he just can't take the heat? Funny that Joe is all "guns and glory" when it's other people's kids dying in Iraq, but when his own political butt is on the line suddenly he's on the verge of running for the hills. Read the rest of this post...

North Korea testing missile that could reach US

While Bush was sneaking in to Iraq for his photo op, North Korea was getting ready to test a missile:

North Korea is accelerating preparations for testing a missile that has the potential to strike the United States, a U.S. government official said Friday. A test of the Taepodong-2 long-range missile may be imminent, the official said.

The official agreed to speak but only on the condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the information.

The official said the Bush administration is very concerned about activities that point toward a test, but declined to elaborate.

Bush often says he can do more than one thing at a time, but clearly, he can't. Read the rest of this post...

Harry Reid blasts the White House over the 2,500 dead in Iraq

UPDATE: McJoan over at DKos has the transcript of this video.

Ooh, this is good. It's an excerpt of a new show we're doing on Politics TV, called The Congress. It's hosted by Democratic strategist Jamal Simmons and Dem pollster Margie Omero. They're going to check in weekly with Harry Reid and possibly other members of the House and Senate to talk about issues facing Congress.

The show premieres next week, but here's a sneak preview snippet of Harry Reid blasting the White House over their idea that 2,500 US soldiers dead in Iraq is "just a number."

QuickTime

Windows Read the rest of this post...

Open Thread

At last, the weekend...and what a week it has been. Read the rest of this post...

Three year old kid throws "NewsHour" birthday party

Check out the article, but then check out the video - it's hysterical. Read the rest of this post...

Cliff's Corner

NOTE: John and Joe have been doing a great job discussing the importance of the issue of privacy. At the risk of self-promotion, I wrote a piece for AlterNet back in January making the case for a Constitutional Amendment on this very issue—which could build a left/right coalition as it pertains not only to abortion rights, but gay rights, property rights, government spying and The Patriot Act, corporate data theft and sharing, Terry-Shiavo-type situations, etc. Please check it out if you get a chance. CS

The Week That Was 6/16/06

Another week. More preposterousness to report.

Those Republicans sure are a heady bunch (and not just in a Newt Gingrich with the secretary kinda way). The same week they support amnesty for Iraqis who like to kill American soldiers and cheer the fact that the treason-committing, sebum-sweating, stay-puffed marshmallow man Karl Rove was not indicted for outing an agent monitoring real WMDs in Iran, they fancy a debate on their stirring strategy of turning Baghdad into downtown Mogadishu over the past three years. Another locale where Islamic extremists just took control by the way. Heckuva job Hydey!

They did get Musab Al Zarqawi, however. I know because I saw 429 pictures of his bloated, lifeless face this past week on the news (luckily Republicans have passed the Broadcast Decency Enforcement Act, so I am sure we’ll be seeing no more of these types of images in the future—especially if a dead terrorist’s nipple peers out while being blown away).

Although, in fairness, some of those photos may have been of Representative John Sweeney after his fourth keg stand and fifth flaming Dr. Pepper at the nearest Alpha Delta Phi Chapter. And kudos to the administration for not even having to embark upon their fool-proof plan B if the air strikes failed to kill Zarqawi:

Sending in Representative Don Sherwood with spiked gloves, a dog-collar and actionable intelligence that Zarqawi was really his 29-year old mistress.

Now if only they could have done that three years ago when we had the Intel to kill Zarqawi, but didn’t, because we would have lost an excuse to engage in George Bush’s War on the War on Terrorism. But Our Pet Goat knew we had to fight them in Iraq so we don’t have to fight them in Somalia. Or Sudan. Or Afghanistan, Indonesia, Pakistan, Thailand, or pretty much anywhere else we’ve let Al Qaeda thrive and mutate by taking on a secular despot Donald Rumsfeld broke bread and hummus with back when Reagan was illegally providing arms to Iran. Who we may also now have to go to war with according to the Neos. These guys are nothing if not consistent at fucking up our foreign policy.

Quite simply, Republicans are to America’s national security what Bill Frist is to a stray Abyssinian.

So have your debate about your war “plans” to keep soldiers in Iraq while raising your own pay and cutting taxes for those contributors giving you the most lucrative reach around. And attack Democrats for “cutting and running” and being dangerous to put in charge of Iraq, as if you guys aren’t the Maginot Line of Iraq.

Just a few words of advice guys: If a big horsey is placed right outside the Green Zone, its probably best not to bring it in. And if you do encounter an uncensored image while accidentally turning to the BBC, try not to run screaming to the bathroom like Ann Coulter after accidentally ordering the three-ounce salad instead of the two. Finally, if you do go to Iraq and are really frightened, even though according to your descriptions of all the progress and beauty there it sounds a lot like Belize, just think of Ken Mehlman, and try and channel the intestinal fortitude that has allowed him to remain true to his principles of abstinence over these past 40 or so years. Read the rest of this post...

Shoe bomber blows self up in Iraqi mosque, kills 10

Great, now Bush has given Al Qaeda a proving ground to practice the shoe bomb thing. I thought we won when Zarqawi was killed? Read the rest of this post...

Iraq's amnesty plan endangers American troops. Period.

The reported Iraqi plan to give amnesty to insurgents (read: terrorists, at least according to Bush) who have attacked and killed US troops defies comprehension. Reports indicated that there was a plan to release detainees suspected of attacking U.S. forces, as long as they hadn't targeted Iraqis. The source for this reporting was a "top adviser" to Prime Minister Maliki.

But now the Washington Post reports that the adviser who made those statements has resigned! Maliki has issued a statement saying that the adviser was not speaking for his administration, which is a highly unusual rebuke, and he appears to be backtracking on the plan.

Except that in the meantime, while everybody thought the reported plan had the blessing of Maliki, Republicans jumped all over themselves to support the pardoning of insurgents who attacked Coalition forces. This is what happens when a party's congressional leaders can't think for themselves. When they're people who take direction from Dear Leader without any kind of cognitive process. When they think running Congress simply means picking up and running with any bad plan the big guy gives them. Democrats are screaming about it, and rightly so.

But aside from the astonishing heartlessness and political stupidity of Republicans who immediately embraced this imbecilic plan, amnesty for anti-Coalition fighters endangers U.S. troops. How do we reconcile releasing people who have killed U.S. forces in the past with arresting and detaining those who do it in the future? "Sorry, Joe Insurgent, but you missed amnesty by a day. If you had only blown up that tank yesterday you could go free, but instead it's off to Abu Ghraib." And any such precedent sets up a situation in which the Iraqi government will constantly be using this as a card to play in negotiations. Negotiations with "terrorists." Something I thought we didn't do.

Under some circumstances amnesty is understandable, even beneficial. Most notably in a cease-fire agreement. But you can't have a government that both asks America to keep our troops there AND tells its people that it's okay to kill our troops. How is it possible that there are Republicans who don't understand that? Read the rest of this post...

Hillary calls for "Privacy Bill of Rights"

I feel like Diogenes. Finally.

Senator Clinton spoke today at the American Constitution Society's 2006 National Convention. She presented her vision of a Privacy Bill of Rights, and none too soon. We have seen weekly privacy invasions for months now. From the growing domestic spying scandal, to veterans' data being stolen, to companies losing data affecting millions of customers, to people selling your cell phone information online.

For some reason, politicians from both parties seem to be loathe to enter the fray on the privacy issue. When in fact, privacy is a great issue to jump on. First off, it sounds good. Who isn't for privacy? Secondly, it's an issue that appeals to lots of folks on the left and the right (gun folks like privacy too). Third, it drives the religious right crazy - they think privacy leads to people having sex. So, you've got an issue that appeals to all Dems, moderate and even some middle-of-the-road Republicans, and even some conservative Republicans, while ticking off the religious right. How can you do better than that?

Anyway, here's the link to the video of Hillary's speech.

And here's are some highlights, provided by the American Constitution Society:

-Senator Clinton's Privacy Bill will be known as the Privacy Rights and Oversight for Electronic and Commercial Transactions Act of 2006 (PROTECT Act)
-The PROTECT Act will protect consumer information by allowing credit card companies, banks and other financial service providers to share information only when customers "opt it." Current law requires consumers to opt out.
-It will protect cell phone numbers and call records against disclosure.
-It will allow victims of identity theft to immediately freeze their credit rating.
-It will allow consumers to sue financial service providers to sue directly in federal court for violations of their privacy.
-It will create a right to be notified immediately if you are a victim of identity theft, to know when your information is transmitted overseas, and to receive a free copy of your credit report each year.
-It will create a "privacy czar" within the Office of Management and Budget.
-It will expand HIPAA by adding additional sanctions to ensure violators are held accountable.

In her speech, Clinton said she was inspired by the recent theft of Veteran's Administration record that you have blogged about. She also included several skillful digs against the administration, including one to the effect of "we must be better prepared to deal with privacy that we were to deal with hurricanes."

Read the rest of this post...

Iraq: Media continues to overstate al Qa'ida influence

This Associated Press story, entitled "Captured papers show weakening insurgency," is grossly misleading.

Whether or not the papers are even real, the article conflates the (overblown) efforts of "al Qa'ida in Iraq" (AQI) with the overall insurgency. I'm going to type this very, very slowly so reporters can understand:

AQI is a tiny percentage of the overall Iraqi insurgency, and perpetrates even smaller percentage of the overall violence in the country.

"Arrests, weapons seizures and money shortages are taking a heavy toll on al-Qaida's insurgency in Iraq" is tremendously misleading because it's not al-Qa'ida's insurgency. It's a native-based Sunni insurgency that, for the moment, allows foreign fighters freedom of movement. If and when the Sunnis decide to expel the foreign fighters, um, they'll be able to do it. Although AQI has committed some of the more high-profile attacks, it is far from the driving force of the insurgency.

If this document is real, hey, I'm psyched. I'm happy to see AQI lose heart, get killed, or whatever keeps them from blowing shit up. But it's lunacy to pretend that AQI is the insurgency focal point. How does an article get written that implies the insurgency is weakening -- allegedly by admission of insurgents themselves -- without mentioning, y'know, that casualties are at record highs? April and May had the highest number of Coalition deaths since October, and sectarian killings are skyrocketing, but Dick "Last Throes" Cheney says that the document, if authenticated, shows that terrorists know they are losing the war. Ohhhhkaayyyyy.

Attention media: the causes of violence in Iraq are, in descending order: regular old crime (due to total lack of security), sectarian conflict, anti-Coalition native insurgency, and foreign fighters (AQI). If a doctor brags about fixing a broken toe on a guy who's in the middle of a heart attack, it's nice that the toe is fixed . . . but the doctor is an idiot. Read the rest of this post...

"I can't name them all"

Another reason we love Colbert.

It's bad enough when the GOPers who push the Ten Commandments don't practice them (Don "The Choker" Sherwood comes to mind). But to push multiple pieces of legislation when you don't even know them -- that's just too much.

Which is why we love this quote of the day from Political Wire:

"I can't name them all."

That would be Congressman Lynn Westmoreland. He's a co-sponsor of at least least four pieces of legislation pushing the Ten Commandments: H.Con.Res. 12, H.RES.214, H.Con.Res 11, H.J.Res. 57

Crooks and Liars has the video.

Maybe if they knew them, they could practice them. Read the rest of this post...

Make no mistake: Iraqi government does NOT support the U.S. troops

It's a fraud for the GOP to claim that they support the troops when they support Iraqi governments that take the lives of our troops for granted.

Yesterday, the Washington Post reported that Iraq's new government was planning to grant amnesty to terrorists who had killed U.S. soldiers.

Republican Senators defended this policy. The Iraqi official who made this statement had to quit, but stood by his words:

The Maliki aide who resigned, Adnan Ali al-Kadhimi, stood by his account of amnesty considerations, reported Thursday by The Washington Post. Kadhimi said Maliki had indicated the same position less directly in public. "The prime minister himself has said that he is ready to give amnesty to the so-called resistance, provided they have not been involved in killing Iraqis," Kadhimi said Thursday.

This should not be a surprise. The Iraqis have been on record since last November saying they didn't have a problem with killing U.S. soldiers. And, the Bush administration condoned their policy.

Last November, Iraqi officials held a meeting in Egypt where they agreed that terrorism did not include attacks on U.S. soldiers.:

"Though resistance is a legitimate right for all people, terrorism does not represent resistance. Therefore, we condemn terrorism and acts of violence, killing and kidnapping targeting Iraqi citizens and humanitarian, civil, government institutions, national resources and houses of worships," the document said.

The attempt to define terrorism omitted any reference to attacks against U.S. or Iraqi forces. Delegates from across the political and religious spectrum said the omission was intentional. They spoke anonymously, saying they feared retribution.

By "resistance," they meant resistance against the occupying force -- that meant the U.S. In Iraq, attacks on U.S. soldiers is not considered terrorism. That was okay with the Bush administration then. Our Secretary of State basically said "whatever:"

QUESTION: The Iraqi factions, who don't always get along, have been meeting with the Arab League and others as they prepare for next month's elections. A statement they did agree on says that they recognize the legitimate right of Iraqi citizens to resist the occupation forces. How do you explain that to the parent or the spouse of an American serviceman or woman on the ground in Iraq, getting shot at every day, that the people they're fighting for, the people they're trying to protect to bring these elections and this democracy about, say that the people who are shooting at them have a legitimate right to do so?

SECRETARY RICE: Well, that's not how I read the statement, John. I do think there were many, many voices at this conference -- and by the way, the Iraqi Government was there, but so were many, many people who were not -- and the purpose is to try to give all Iraqis a sense of stake in their future. But the line about resistance was very quickly followed by, but of course we condemn terrorism and of course violence should not be sanctioned. I think what they were trying to do was to get a sense of political inclusion while recognizing that violence and terrorism should not be a part of resistance. After all, do Iraqis really want to -- any Iraqi, sitting around that table, want to suggest that killing an innocent Iraqi child standing at a bus stop is legitimate? Or that killing Iraqi soldiers who are lining up at recruitment centers is legitimate? Or even that multinational forces -- who by the way are there under a UN mandate -- are somehow legitimate targets?

I don't think that that was what was being communicated. But I would just remind people that this was a really broad range of voices, and the Iraqis who have governed themselves by violence and coercion are now trying to do it by compromise and politics.

Bush and Rice are so desperate for any sign of progress in Iraq, that they continue to let the Iraqi leadership endanger the lives of U.S. soldiers.

That's beyond outrageous. Meanwhile, Bush and the Republicans on the Hill pound their chests and act tough. They claim to support the troops. Instead, the GOP has propped up Iraqi governments that take their lives for granted. Disgusting. Read the rest of this post...

Friday Morning Open Thread

Wow. Those NBC reporters -- especially Kelly O'Donnell and Campbell Brown this morning -- are working extra hard to convince us that Bush is just the greatest President ever.

What is it with the media and Bush? It's actually bizarre...some kind of variation of the Stockholm syndrome.

Anyway, the GOP House wraps up their purely political and craven debate on Iraq today.

I need coffee....what else do we need to know? Read the rest of this post...

Mission Accomplished II not quite accomplished - Shiite mosque bombed

Despite a coordinated campaign of media propaganda, which admittedly was more subtle then standing in front of a banner saying "Mission Accomplished" but nevertheless still obvious, the bloody mess that the GOP created in Iraq continues. Today, 10 more killed in a bombing and 20 wounded at a mosque in Baghdad. So much for the 75,000 Iraqi troops in the streets and the "discovered" evidence that the insurgency was on its last legs. Propaganda and deception is more important to the GOP then telling the truth and leveling with the American public. So where do they spin from here? Read the rest of this post...

So while the Democrats are taking action against corruption

...the GOP continues to ignore the culture of corruption and do nothing. Anyone surprised? Read the rest of this post...

GOP governor waffling on massive energy rate increases

Maryland governor Ehrlich is facing a tight race for re-election in the autumn as well as a battle over a 72% average energy cost increase for the state. The Maryland General Assembly delivered veto-proof legislation yesterday that would limit the rate increases for consumers on a temporary basis and then provide a few options at a later date. Now Ehrlich is faced with taking on a painfully sensitive subject months before an election that is already close.

His response so far is to call public meetings and listen (i.e. finger in the wind) to the public and try to have a debate on the issue, helping people to understand why the market rates with a 72% increase is actually a good thing. Uh huh, I can't imagine how that debate is going end up because we all know how many people out there are lining up to pay higher energy costs. "Please, please, please raise our rates because the energy business is struggling to make ends meet" is what Ehrlich will no doubt hear. Read the rest of this post...