Elections | Economic Crisis | Jobs | TSA | Limbaugh | Fun Stuff
Follow @americablog
Wednesday, June 16, 2004
Cheney Won't Back Down on Saddam-Qaeda Links
You tell 'em, Dick. Lie out your ass, but never cede an inch when they catch you, because that's what a real man would do. He'd sell his gay daughter for votes, lie to his country to justify a war, then never say he's sorry, because then someone might think he's less than a real man, then he'd have to sell himself for votes and that would just get too confusing.
Read the rest of this post...
Boycott Virginia
I am 100% supportive of this effort. Virginia just passed the most restrictive anti-gay law in the nation, and it's about time that state entered the 21st century (hell, I'd settle for the 20th). Remember, this is the state that only 30 years ago fought to defend its ban on inter-racial marriages up to the Supreme Court. Some very nice modern educated people live in Northern Virginia, and God bless them, the rest of the state is run by bigots.
Do not do business there, do not hold meetings or conferences there, do not buy their protects. Virginia is for Haters, and that's why we now have VirginiaIsForHaters.org. Make sure you check with any groups you work with, do NOT do business with Virginia.
AP via Seattle Post-Intelligencer:
Do not do business there, do not hold meetings or conferences there, do not buy their protects. Virginia is for Haters, and that's why we now have VirginiaIsForHaters.org. Make sure you check with any groups you work with, do NOT do business with Virginia.
AP via Seattle Post-Intelligencer:
Gay activists are urging a boycott of Virginia because of a new ban on civil unions and other marriage-like arrangements for same-sex couples.Read the rest of this post...
VirginiaisforHaters.org, a Web site created by two Seattle men, urges people not to buy products or services from Virginia-based companies and suggests tourists visit states that are friendlier to gays. The name is a play on the state's tourism motto, 'Virginia is for Lovers.'
Another group, Make Love Legal, is urging a boycott of the 400th anniversary celebration of the founding of Jamestown in 2007. The state is expecting millions of visitors for the yearlong event.
'This whole idea is: Don't spend your money in a place where people hurt you,' said Diane Horvath, a Richmond attorney spearheading the Jamestown initiative. 'My family wanted to come to Jamestown and I said under no circumstances will I plan another vacation in this state until this state wants me here.'
The new law amends the state's Affirmation of Marriage Act, which prohibits civil unions and other arrangements 'purporting to bestow the privileges of marriage.' Gays and lesbians fear it may interfere with legal contracts between people of the same sex, such as powers of attorney, medical directives and wills.
Many gay rights supporters and legal scholars say it is the most restrictive anti-gay law in the nation.
Another military beating cover-up, this time a US soldier is the victim
If this isn't a stinking cover-up, I don't know what is.
The US Army has a soldier beaten to a pulp with serious brain damage, Abu Ghraib style, they have one of the soldiers apparently videotaping the entire thing, and no one afterwards has any desire to look at the videotape or to keep it as evidence of what the hell went wrong, and possibly evidence of a crime? First, the military claims that no such tape even exists. Then, after the story hits the TV news and one witness admits he shot the tape, the military says, oh yeah, there was a tape, but it was probably erased. Sorry. I'm sure this was just an isolated incident.
Some amazing investigative reporting from WLEX-TV in Lexington, KY:
You can read more background on this story here. Read the rest of this post...
The US Army has a soldier beaten to a pulp with serious brain damage, Abu Ghraib style, they have one of the soldiers apparently videotaping the entire thing, and no one afterwards has any desire to look at the videotape or to keep it as evidence of what the hell went wrong, and possibly evidence of a crime? First, the military claims that no such tape even exists. Then, after the story hits the TV news and one witness admits he shot the tape, the military says, oh yeah, there was a tape, but it was probably erased. Sorry. I'm sure this was just an isolated incident.
Some amazing investigative reporting from WLEX-TV in Lexington, KY:
Petty Officer Christopher Sherwood, a spokesman for Southern Command, noted Tuesday that an initial investigation at Guantanamo found no misconduct or negligence by any soldiers involved in the training session.Also, check out WLEX-TV's coverage of this story for a video clip of their news segment, it's in the upper left corner of the page, labeled "Army Investigating Case Of Beaten Soldier."
'Since that time, we've looked for the tape and it's probably been recorded over,' Sherwood said.
Baker's attorney, Bruce Simpson, has requested the tape from the military. He said Tuesday that the military's account of the tape 'adds another bizarre feature to this whole sad story of Sean Baker.'
'If any tape ought to be preserved, it ought to be that one,' he said.
A soldier who witnessed the incident provided a written statement that a tape was made of the training session, Simpson said.
Simpson also cited an oral statement from another soldier who tried to obtain the videotape shortly after the incident but was told that the tape was erased, destroyed or the camera had malfunctioned.
Simpson said he planned to discuss the fate of the videotape with the Army investigators on Wednesday. Simpson also has asked the Army to turn over all of Baker's medical records."
You can read more background on this story here. Read the rest of this post...
BREAKING NEWS: Frist promises religious right anti-gay constitutional amendment vote week of July 12
The Family Research Council just reported via their Washington Update email service that Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist joined religious right leaders in a secret telephone conference call this morning in which Frist promised that the Senate will vote on the anti-gay amendment to the US Constitution the week of July 12.
Feel free to call Senator Frist's office and rip them a new one. Remember, DON'T threaten them or say or do anything illegal. But as for being polite, he doesn't deserve it, and we're way past polite at this point. Frist's office in DC: (202) 224-3344. It'd be nice if they heard from lots of angry people over the next month asking why they're all such bigots. Read the rest of this post...
Feel free to call Senator Frist's office and rip them a new one. Remember, DON'T threaten them or say or do anything illegal. But as for being polite, he doesn't deserve it, and we're way past polite at this point. Frist's office in DC: (202) 224-3344. It'd be nice if they heard from lots of angry people over the next month asking why they're all such bigots. Read the rest of this post...
Let's play: Count the colored people
Since the Southern Baptists are such outspoken "experts" on civil rights issues, I thought we might just take a look at the most recent photos of their national conference in order to see just how many people of color are attending this "welcoming" congregation:
None here...
Nor here...
Not here either...
Oops, there's one!
Read the rest of this post...
None here...
Nor here...
Not here either...
Oops, there's one!
Read the rest of this post...
JonBenet Ramsey's Father Runs for Office...
And... he's a REPUBLICAN!!!! LOL
Read the rest of this post...
Keep talking like that and I'll sign up!
"Your days are hot. Your mission is hard. Many of you have faced long deployments, sometimes longer than you expected." - President Bush, bucking up troop morale in Florida today.
Read the rest of this post...
Feds Decline to Create 'Do - Not - Spam' List
The FTC is afraid a national Do-Not-Spam list would be a hassle to implement and might even help spammers. Of course, there's a simple solution: a national opt-in Please-Spam-Me list. Anyone who wants junk spam can sign up and businesses are free to send those folk all the spam they want. It should be easy to maintain since the list would have about ten names on it. Also, enforce a $20 fine per violation on any business that sends out spam that is unsolicited, or any email (whether solicited or not) that has a false email address or does not contain a simple one-step opt-out procedure.
Read the rest of this post...
Bush Wants Hussein's "Republican Palace"
The Bush Administration continues its tone deaf ways in Iraq. Apparently, the White House wants to take over Saddam Hussein's marble-tiled Republican Palace (love the name!) as an extension for what the New York Times terms its "vast new embassy." The new Iraqi President is saying hands off. Why the US would want to ensconce itself in a symbol of Saddam Hussein's hated reign is beyond me. But these are the same people who tortured and reportedly killed prisoners in Saddam's despised and feared prison and even stupidly broadcast its propoganda on the same TV channel that Saddam reserved solely for his own absurd lies -- making it all too easy for Iraqis to dismiss Bush as insincere and full of lies.
Read the rest of this post...
Well, that gets them to the 13th century
"Pope John Paul asked forgiveness for the Inquisition, in which the Church tortured and killed people branded as heretics," so says Reuters today.
Isn't that special? It only took the Pope 771 years to recognize that the Vatican screwed up in 1233 when it launched an all out war on witches and people who claimed the earth rotated around the sun. Some 25,000 people were killed out of a population of 16 million.
I guess that means pedophilia should be on the Vatican's agenda come 2775. We'll be watching. Read the rest of this post...
Isn't that special? It only took the Pope 771 years to recognize that the Vatican screwed up in 1233 when it launched an all out war on witches and people who claimed the earth rotated around the sun. Some 25,000 people were killed out of a population of 16 million.
I guess that means pedophilia should be on the Vatican's agenda come 2775. We'll be watching. Read the rest of this post...
HOLY CRAP
Read this story. Then send it to your friends.
In a nutshell, a US soldier based in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, was told, in January of this year, to play the role of an unruly detainee in order to give the other soldiers practice in controling unruly detainees. What happened next is horrifying. Not only did this guy get the shit beaten out of him, causing a traumatic brain injury (gee, sounding familiar to Abu "Isolated Incident" Ghraib?), but even worse, Bush's army completely disowned the guy even though he can now no longer work as a result of his injuries.
Mr. Bush, why do you hate our soldiers?
From the LA Times:
In a nutshell, a US soldier based in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, was told, in January of this year, to play the role of an unruly detainee in order to give the other soldiers practice in controling unruly detainees. What happened next is horrifying. Not only did this guy get the shit beaten out of him, causing a traumatic brain injury (gee, sounding familiar to Abu "Isolated Incident" Ghraib?), but even worse, Bush's army completely disowned the guy even though he can now no longer work as a result of his injuries.
Mr. Bush, why do you hate our soldiers?
From the LA Times:
Four MPs slammed Baker to the floor, he says, then choked him and pounded his head at least three times against the floor. Gasping for breath, he managed to spit out a code word — "red" — and to croak: "I'm a U.S. soldier! I'm a U.S. soldier!"Read the rest of this post...
But the beating continued, according to Baker, until the jumpsuit was yanked down in the struggle, revealing his military uniform. Only then did the MPs realize that they had been beating an American soldier — causing a traumatic brain injury, Baker alleges....
Honorably discharged with a medical retirement in April, Baker spends dreary days inside a nondescript duplex in central Kentucky, unable to work because of what he says are seizures caused by the beating. He is taking nine prescription medications for seizures and headaches, his lawyer said. He has yet to receive disability payments promised by the military.
"The way the military treated Sean is unconscionable — and the way they continue to treat him is even worse," said attorney Bruce Simpson....
The military at first said Baker's medical discharge was not related to the beating at Guantanamo. Last week, the military reversed itself, saying the incident was partly responsible for his discharge....
"I never thought my military career would end as a result of a beating which I sustained at the hands of my fellow troops," he wrote. "Someone in charge should have known better."
Bush Policies a Failure, Retired U.S. Diplomats Say
This guy is hemorrhaging bad news.
Reuters:
Reuters:
President Bush led the United States into an ill-planned Iraq war that weakened U.S. security, retired diplomats and military officers said on Wednesday in a challenge to one of Bush's main arguments for re-election.Read the rest of this post...
'We all believe that current administration policies have failed in the primary responsibilities of preserving national security and providing world leadership,' said a statement signed by the 27 retired officials. 'We need a change.'
The rare criticism by career senior U.S. officials came from a group that included members of both major political parties, two former ambassadors to the Soviet Union and a retired chairman of the military Joint Chiefs of Staff....
"Our security has been weakened," the group said.
The former officials, some of whom said they had voted for Bush, said the Republican president manipulated intelligence on Iraq to lead the United States into an "ill-planned and costly war from which exit is uncertain."
Bush has maintained an "overbearing" approach to foreign policy that relied excessively on military power, spurned the concerns of U.S. traditional allies and disdained the United Nations, the group said.
"It justified the invasion of Iraq by manipulation of uncertain intelligence about weapons of mass destruction, and by a cynical campaign to persuade the public that Saddam Hussein (news - web sites) was linked to al Qaeda and the attacks of September 11," it said. "The evidence did not support this argument."
"Never in the two and a quarter centuries of our history has the United States been so isolated among the nations, so broadly feared and distrusted," it added.
Sneak Peek at "Fahrenheit 9/11"
Actually, John, one of us knows exactly what Michael Moore's movie "Fahrenheit 9/11" is because I saw it in Cannes. Moore's film is definitely political, but those hoping for a "Frontline" style documentary that makes a damning case against Bush may be a little disappointed. It does critique Bush strongly, but the film is as much an emotional look at life in Iraq for the soldiers and civilians. (Seeing a dead Iraqi baby is sad, but not an argument about the invasion either for or against.)
The movie is entertaining (though perhaps not quite as good as the solid "Bowling for Columbine") and could possibly have an impact on undecided voters since it reminds them of so many facts they might have forgotten or never known. (It is much more careful with its facts, I think, than say "Bowling for Columbine" or Moore's other movies.)
This boycott - the attempt to pressure movie theaters into not showing the movie -- is typical of the radical right and contrary to what a true believer in a free market economy (whether it be of jobs or ideas) should do. Remember, NO ONE on the left tried to "ban" The Passion of the Christ or try and pressure movie theaters not to carry it. They simply expressed concern about the script and then the final film and argued with Gibson and its backers in the public arena. Everyone on the left repeatedly said he had the right to make the film and have it seen. (Obviously.)
Contrast that with those on the right who attack religious-themed movies they DON'T approve of and organize boycotts, protestors and so on. (Think of The Last Temptation of Christ, Jean Luc Godard's Hail Mary, Canada's Jesus of Montreal etc.) Quite un-American.
Read the rest of this post...
The movie is entertaining (though perhaps not quite as good as the solid "Bowling for Columbine") and could possibly have an impact on undecided voters since it reminds them of so many facts they might have forgotten or never known. (It is much more careful with its facts, I think, than say "Bowling for Columbine" or Moore's other movies.)
This boycott - the attempt to pressure movie theaters into not showing the movie -- is typical of the radical right and contrary to what a true believer in a free market economy (whether it be of jobs or ideas) should do. Remember, NO ONE on the left tried to "ban" The Passion of the Christ or try and pressure movie theaters not to carry it. They simply expressed concern about the script and then the final film and argued with Gibson and its backers in the public arena. Everyone on the left repeatedly said he had the right to make the film and have it seen. (Obviously.)
Contrast that with those on the right who attack religious-themed movies they DON'T approve of and organize boycotts, protestors and so on. (Think of The Last Temptation of Christ, Jean Luc Godard's Hail Mary, Canada's Jesus of Montreal etc.) Quite un-American.
Read the rest of this post...
Gay newlyweds kill two GIs in attack on base in Iraq
Not really. It was Iraqi militants who killed them. But Bush and the Republicans in Congress seem to think that gay marriage is the source of all of America's biggest problems, so who am I to argue?
Read the rest of this post...
Republicans trying to ban Michael Moore's film
Big surprise here: Criticizing President Bush makes Michael Moore "anti-American," according to a new Web site launched by the pro-Bush thought police. The Bushistas are now contacting every movie theatre in America demanding the film not be run.
I've said it before and I'll say it again, the ability to silence someone does not necessarily give you moral right to do so. If Michael Moore were running a movie that lauded the killing of 3000 people in NYC, I'd have a problem with it. But all he did, apparently, is put together a film that shows George Bush to be the ass he really is (of course, none of us know exactly what the movie says as it's only been shown in Cannes). Thus, the right is, again, trying to silence someone simply because they disagree and not because of some larger "crying 'fire' in a crowded theatre" defense.
In fact, their only defense seems to be "crying 'liar' in a crowded theatre." Read the rest of this post...
I've said it before and I'll say it again, the ability to silence someone does not necessarily give you moral right to do so. If Michael Moore were running a movie that lauded the killing of 3000 people in NYC, I'd have a problem with it. But all he did, apparently, is put together a film that shows George Bush to be the ass he really is (of course, none of us know exactly what the movie says as it's only been shown in Cannes). Thus, the right is, again, trying to silence someone simply because they disagree and not because of some larger "crying 'fire' in a crowded theatre" defense.
In fact, their only defense seems to be "crying 'liar' in a crowded theatre." Read the rest of this post...
Reagan's former staff says Bush is no Reagan
The pain just keeps coming and coming (thanks to Buzzflash for finding this NYT article)...
Mr. Bush's effort to wrap himself in the Reagan legacy drew plenty of skeptics, including a number of top Reagan officials, who said, all anonymously, that the presidencies could not have been more different. Mr. Reagan was pragmatic, they said, but Mr. Bush is ideological. Mr. Reagan was a unifier, they argued, while Mr. Bush has polarized.Read the rest of this post...
'Bush wants to defeat his opponents, Reagan wanted his to join him,' one former official of the Reagan White House said.
Reagan family not ready to endorse Bush
Oh, this is getting good. The Bush surrogates are now using Reagan in ads for Bush's reelection WITHOUT THE REAGAN FAMILY'S PERMISSION, something the family has come out and said is expressly required before running such an ad, and something the family would NOT approve.
But even more interesting, the family's response said that by using Reagan, the ad implies that Reagan endorsed Bush's candidacy, and that's something the family is not willing to do at this juncture. In other words, the Reagan family is NOT WILLING to be seen endorsing Bush's re-election at this juncture. That, my friends, is news.
Here's the story from AP:
But even more interesting, the family's response said that by using Reagan, the ad implies that Reagan endorsed Bush's candidacy, and that's something the family is not willing to do at this juncture. In other words, the Reagan family is NOT WILLING to be seen endorsing Bush's re-election at this juncture. That, my friends, is news.
Here's the story from AP:
Days after Ronald Reagan was laid to rest, a conservative interest group on Tuesday unveiled a campaign ad that aligns him with President Bush and criticizes Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry.The only remaining question is when Bush plans to apologize to the Reagan family for this desecration of their father and husband only days after he was buried, and when Bush plans on publicly calling on his supporters to NOT use Reagan's image in the future out of respect to the family. Read the rest of this post...
The Club for Growth's ad, which is to begin airing Wednesday, portrays both Republican presidents as leaders — Reagan on communism and Bush on terrorism, while claiming Kerry was "wrong then, wrong now" on national security.
The ad shows Kerry, a Vietnam veteran, testifying to Congress in 1971 that "we cannot fight communism all over the world and I think we should have learned that lesson by now."
Former President Reagan is then seen at the Berlin Wall in 1987, saying "Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall." That's followed by Bush telling rescue workers at the World Trade Center after the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks: "I can hear you, the rest of the world hears you, and the people who knocked these buildings down will hear all of us soon."
The Reagan family's spokeswoman said Tuesday that permission is needed for anyone to use Reagan's likeness in an ad because doing so implies that he endorsed one candidate over another.
"No one has requested the permission to use his image in an ad, nor would we feel it appropriate to give such permission at this juncture," Joanne Drake said. "We protect his image very carefully, particularly as it relates to politics."
Reagan's family tells Bush: Stay away from my dad's legacy
While it's perhaps not news that there's no love lost between the Bushies and the Reagans, it is VERY interesting that the Reagans are apparently willing to let these stories percolate out there about them NOT wanting Bush to wrap himself in Ronald Reagan's legacy. That's not at all good news for Bush just months before the election.
Read the rest of this post...
Something fishy is going on in the US Senate
The US Senate voted 65-33 yesterday to add gays and lesbians to ALREADY EXISTING federal hate crimes laws. That's a good thing, whatever your position on hate crimes laws - the laws are ALREADY on the books, all the Senate did yesterday was vote to add gays to the list of protected classes already covered by the law.
What concerns me here is that I fear this hate crimes vote is a cover-your-ass for Senators who want to vote for the anti-gay constitutional amendment. Now they claim they're not "pro-hate" because they actually voted for a "hate crimes" bill. Having said that, I'm fascinated that the White House appears scared to death by the gay issue now. Bush has always opposed adding gays to the federal hate crimes law, yet when asked about Bush's views on the legislation, a White House spokeswoman said:
Finally, what this vote does show is that I was right, several months ago, when I proposed that we try to pass every single gay rights bill on the planet as a quid pro quo for the constitutional amendment - let the president and congress prove that they're not anti-gay. There's no way they'd accept the trade, but it would be fun to watch them explain why not. Read the rest of this post...
What concerns me here is that I fear this hate crimes vote is a cover-your-ass for Senators who want to vote for the anti-gay constitutional amendment. Now they claim they're not "pro-hate" because they actually voted for a "hate crimes" bill. Having said that, I'm fascinated that the White House appears scared to death by the gay issue now. Bush has always opposed adding gays to the federal hate crimes law, yet when asked about Bush's views on the legislation, a White House spokeswoman said:
"The president believes anyone who commits a violent act should receive swift and sure punishment, and that all violent crime is hate crime," she said. "The president believes all individuals should be treated fairly and equally under the law."Putting aside the fact that this is clear and utter BS - the president in fact believes that gays and lesbians should be treated as second-class citizens and defined as such in the US Constitution - it's pretty fascinating that he's now going all weasley on the hate crimes issue. This is particularly interesting as the religious right has been sending out action alerts for weeks claiming that adding gays to hate crimes legislation will cause the feds to arrest any preachers who quote Leviticus.
Finally, what this vote does show is that I was right, several months ago, when I proposed that we try to pass every single gay rights bill on the planet as a quid pro quo for the constitutional amendment - let the president and congress prove that they're not anti-gay. There's no way they'd accept the trade, but it would be fun to watch them explain why not. Read the rest of this post...
Bush targets AIDS groups to appease to far right
Washington Post editorial:
Now another election campaign has started, and Mr. Bush has dropped the pretense of moderation. He has followed up his defunding of groups that perform abortions by defunding other groups that associate with them. Last year Marie Stopes International, a British charity that had received State Department money for AIDS work among refugees, failed to win renewal of its grant; its sin was to have cooperated in China with the United Nations Population Fund, which has long been a target of Mr. Bush's right-wing supporters. This month in Washington, an annual conference on health in developing countries, which in previous years had been partially funded by the United States and had been attended by senior Bush administration officials, went ahead without U.S. government support. Again, its offense was to invite the dreaded U.N. Population Fund, along with the International Planned Parenthood Federation. Next month the biennial International AIDS Conference will convene in Bangkok, and the Bush administration will be doing less to support it than in the past: The administration's conservative supporters object that AIDS prevention strategies based on condoms will receive more emphasis in Bangkok than ones based on abstinence.Yes, let's let people die because the religious right doesn't like condoms. Read the rest of this post...
Abortion will always be an agonizing issue, and the right balance between abstinence and contraception is a fair subject for debate. But the attempt to deny conference platforms to groups that oppose the administration's view is inimical both to free speech and to scientific inquiry. To attack a conference of public health specialists, canceling grants that would have been used to allow delegates from developing countries to attend, is to drag the battles over abortion and conservative values into forums where they have no place.
Kerry is most pro-Catholic Senator
Na, na, na, na, na:
When Dick Durbin's hometown priest slammed the Senator's pro-choice voting record, Durbin's office did not sit idle. It compiled a scorecard ranking 24 Catholic Senators by their votes on issues of concern to the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops.Read the rest of this post...
Abortion made the list, but so did the minimum wage, the death penalty and media ownership, all weighted equally. Democrats did better than Republicans, and the test's high scorer was John Kerry.
Cheney lies and lies and lies
You'll note in a previous post where Dick Cheney again this week tried to link Saddam and Osama, even though there simply is not evidence for a link. Well, the 9.11 commission seems to agree:
A senior Iraqi intelligence official reportedly met with bin Laden in 1994 in Sudan, the panel found, and bin Laden 'is said to have requested space to establish training camps, as well as assistance in procuring weapons, but Iraq apparently never responded.'As for quibblingt over the definition of "is," yes, there have been "contacts" between Iraqis and Al Qaida, but if simply having spoken is a "contact" worthy of war then the US has had "contacts" with all sorts of evil people and thus, necessarily, someone should invade us promptly. Read the rest of this post...
'There have been reports that contacts between Iraq and al-Qaida also occurred after bin Laden had returned to Afghanistan, but they do not appear to have resulted in a collaborative relationship,' the report said. 'Two senior Bin Laden associates have adamantly denied that any ties existed between al-Qaida and Iraq.'
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)