Even evil Gallup now says it's a tie

That was quick.

Favorable public reaction to his performance in the first presidential debate has boosted Massachusetts Sen. John Kerry and narrowed the contest with President Bush to a tie, according to a new USA TODAY/CNN/Gallup Poll.

Bush's lead of 8 percentage points before Thursday's debate evaporated in a survey taken Friday through Sunday. Among likely voters, Bush and Kerry are at 49% each. Independent candidate Ralph Nader is at 1%....

In the 17 states seen by both sides as most competitive, Kerry has a slight lead, 47% to 45%. Before the debate, he lagged by 7 points in those battlegrounds.

Read the rest of this post...

#3 CIA pick was caught shoplifting

There's something oh so comforting when the Bush Administration picks a new #3 guy at the CIA and we find out the guy is a petty thief. Read the rest of this post...

The argument the Dems are afraid to make

I want a Democratic Congress as much as the next guy, but at some point I wonder whether it's time to put all our eggs in the presidential basket and start arguing that divided government is a good thing. I.e., if you're going to have a Republican Congress, you should have a Democratic president to even things out. In the past, polls have show that this argument resonates with the public. And as the latest articles are suggesting that the Repugs may keep control of the Congress, is it time to start using this argument openly with the voters. Namely, the Republicans have controled the House, the Senate, the presidency and the Supreme Court for the past four years. Isn't it time for a bit more competition?

Finally, as you know, I don't believe the election is decided until the fat lady votes, but nonetheless it's interesting that the Dems aren't willing to use this persuasive argument this time around. Read the rest of this post...

Amusing myself on a Sunday night...

Read the rest of this post...

Nice

Read the rest of this post...

Drudge catches Bush cheating during the debate

Matt Drudge has been on a roll lately in terms of posting anti-Kerry attacks photos, documents, etc., that end up biting Bush in the ass. Drudge outdoes himself today with a post claiming Kerry came to the debate podium and allegedly takes a sheet of paper out of his breast pocket. The debate rules apparently say that you can bring NOTHING to the podium not even paper or pencil, and that all the materials will be placed for you on the podium.

Oh, but only as Drudge can do, the video Drudge posts as "proof" on his site bites Bush in the ass. If you zoom the video to full screen (right click on it while it's running and click "zoom" and then "full screen") you can see Bush unfolding a piece of paper and laying it down on his podium! Remember the debate rules say all paper will already be on the podium, and unless the debate organizers folded the paper up in a wad before placing it on the podium, Bush is cheating with his own cheat sheet.

Now, I could care less about this issue, but how dare Drudge and company try to come up with a scandal here when their own boy is caught doing exactly what they're accusing Kerry of doing?

Check out the Drudge video and keep your eyes on Bush's hands - notice his unfolding and laying flat a piece of paper. Priceless. (I particularly like the cheesy 1970s porn music in the background of the video.) Read the rest of this post...

NYT on THE DRAFT

Big ass article in today's New York Times "Week in Review" about the draft. This is the best article I've seen to date explaining why a draft may come by necessity and not by design or desire:

In the worried steel town of Weirton, W.Va., last week, the first question from the crowd that came out to hear Senator John Edwards was not about the economy, tariffs or health care. It was about the draft: Is a new one coming?

The Democratic candidate for vice president was unequivocal. Not in a Kerry-Edwards administration, he replied. But Erika Lontz, a 19-year-old college sophomore, was not reassured. "Students worry about it a lot," she said later. "With the way the war is going, how could you not?"

Though President Bush and Senator John Kerry talk about it in only the most glancing ways - the president pledged to defeat terrorism with "an all-volunteer army" during Thursday's presidential debate - many people across the country are wondering just who will fight the nation's wars.

There is good reason to ask. By most accounts, the military, particularly the Army, has been spread thin by America's global commitments, and signs of strain are mounting.

More than one-third of nearly 3,900 former soldiers mobilized under a special wartime program have resisted their call-ups. The Army National Guard fell nearly 10 percent short of its 2004 recruiting goal of 56,000 enlistees. The Army, concerned about recruiting, has eased some standards. And there have been bipartisan calls in Congress to expand the Army by more than 20,000 soldiers.

Just months ago, Pentagon officials suggested that a new draft could be avoided if recruitment and retention numbers stayed high. But as fighting in Iraq escalates, signs are growing that those numbers may not be adequate in the coming years. Thus, the new talk about a draft.

Read the rest of this post...

It's called "Saudi Arabia"

"Imagine a country ruled by people who go around chopping off people's heads. That's a dark future." - US Secretary of Defense, Donald Rumsfeld, Reuters, Oct. 2, 2004.

Read the rest of this post...

Create your own "Military Draft" TV ad

With concern over an impending military draft becoming a bigger and bigger issue in the news, it got me wondering what the best way would be to capitalize on this issue.

The basic facts are:

1. The public is growing increasingly concerned about the increasing need for a draft as the fighting in Iraq goes not well, as studies point to an increasingly over-stretched and under-manned military, as the Bush administrations talks about future military actions against North Korea, Iran and Syria, and as evidence grows that the Bush administration is already secretly preparing for a draft in spite of their public statements to the contrary.

2. This issue is of most concern to moms and youth.

So, if you had your druthers, what TV ad would you run to get the point across to people that a draft could be just on the horizon if Bush is re-elected? Suggest away.

(And, you agree by posting a suggestion that your idea becomes public domain, I can use it or not as I see fit, and you relinquish all claims to it. This, just in case someone comes up with something REALLY good.) Read the rest of this post...

Bush doesn't even know when Sept. 11 happened

I kid you not. This is as bad as the "who's buried in Grant's Tomb" joke. I've not seen a newspaper yet note the fact that during the debate Bush flubbed "September 11" by referring to it as "September 10."

That's kind of a pre-September 10th mentality, the hope that somehow resolutions and failed inspections would make this world a more peaceful place.

No, Mr. President, that's a pre September 11 mentality, or it's a September 10 mentality - but it's NOT a pre-September 10 mentality.

You may think this a small point, but imagine what Karl Rove would do if John Kerry flubbed the date America was attacked. How can John Kerry protect America if he can't even keep his dates straight? If he doesn't even know when America was attacked? We MUST start thinking Republican in order to win.

Which got me thinking. What other hardball questions like this should they throw at Bush the next debate?

- Mr. President, on what date does the 4th of July fall in the year 2010?
- What color is the White House?

Other suggestions? Read the rest of this post...

Condi outright lies to Stephanopoulos about 100,000 Iraqi security forces

Condi Rice just said this to Stephanopoulos on Meet the Press:

"Moving toward the creation of better Iraqi security forces. We have 100,000 trained now, 125,000 by the end of the year, 200,000 by the end of next year."

That is an outright lie that's already been exposed by the media ALL THIS WEEK.

- ABC reported the night of the debate that the DOD" says there are only 50,000 Iraqi security forces fully trained.

- Reuters reported earlier this week that even that figure is a lie:

[Pentagon documents show that] of the nearly 90,000 currently in the police force, only 8,169 have had the full eight-week academy training. Another 46,176 are listed as "untrained".... 22,700 Iraqi personnel have received enough basic training to make them "minimally effective at their tasks," in contrast to the 100,000 figure cited by Bush.

- And according to the same Pentagon document, the notion that we'll have 125,000 by the end of the year and 200,000 by the end of next year is also an outright lie that they keep repeating:

it will be July 2006 before the administration reaches its new goal of a 135,000-strong, fully trained police force.

Stephanopoulos didn't say a thing about this, he let the lie stand. Read the rest of this post...

Bush hates US vets from Iraq and Afghanistan wars

The system is being overwhelmed with US casualties from the Bush wars and he's making cuts at the VA. Returning vets deserve better than this. They've been through enough and do not need new obstacles during such a difficult time. Who's side is Bush on here?

The disability benefits and health care systems that provide services for about 5 million American veterans have been overloaded for decades and have a current backlog of more than 300,000 claims. And because they were mobilized to fight in Iraq and Afghanistan, nearly 150,000 National Guard and reservist veterans had become eligible for health care and benefits as of Aug. 1. That number is rising.

At the same time, President Bush's budget for 2005 calls for cutting the Department of Veterans Affairs staff that handles benefits claims, and some veterans report long waits for benefits and confusing claims decisions.

"I love the military; that was my life. But I don't believe they're taking care of me now," said Staff Sgt. Gene Westbrook, 35, of Lawton, Okla. Paralyzed in a mortar attack near Baghdad in April, he has received no disability benefits because his paperwork is missing. He is supporting his wife and three children on his regular military pay of $2,800 a month as he awaits a ruling on whether he will receive $6,500 a month from the VA for his disability.

Read the rest of this post...

1 in 60 Million and I had to meet her

While visiting a little bookstore in my Montparnasse (Paris) neighborhood yesterday the checkout clerk asked me if I was an American. Knowing what that can often mean here, I softly said "yes" which started an extended discussion of how much she loved America and George Bush. I was completely gobsmacked and had to pick my jaw up from the floor as my wife managed to chuckle and give the woman the latest information on just how poorly her man performed in the debates and that he was going down. Maybe she helps Richard Perle with his posh estate in the south of France or something, but that was an absolute first in the Bush years. People here loved Clinton but I have never met a Bush supporter in France. Talk about finding a needle in a haystack!
Read the rest of this post...

Florida to blind voters: Go Cheney yourself

Despite a federal judge's order, Duval County, Florida will not be providing touch-screen voting machines for blind voters. I guess they can just ask a BC04 supporter to help them complete a ballot. Rummy would just tell them that there are plenty of other blind voters taking part and it's not a perfect world, so tough luck.
Read the rest of this post...

NYT: Condi, Cheney, Powell lied about Iraq nukes before the war

Seems the New York Times has an October surpriseof its own. This story is 15 WEB PAGES LONG. Jesus. I'm using the Reuters summary of the Times story below to give you some quotes:

It referred to remarks by national security adviser Condoleezza Rice in September 2002 in which she said the tubes, a shipment of which were intercepted in Jordan in June 2001, were "only really suited for nuclear weapons programs."

The paper said that before she made the remarks, "she was aware that the government's foremost nuclear experts had concluded that the tubes were most likely not for nuclear weapons at all."

It said the Energy Department experts believed the tubes were probably intended for small artillery rockets, as Iraq itself maintained.

"Senior administration officials repeatedly failed to fully disclose the contrary views of America's leading nuclear scientists," the Times said, citing Rice, Vice President Dick Cheney and Secretary of State Colin Powell by name.

"They sometimes overstated even the most dire intelligence assessments of the tubes, yet minimized or rejected the strong doubts of their own experts. They worried privately that the nuclear case was weak, but expressed sober certitude in public.

"The result was a largely one-sided presentation to the public that did not convey the depth of evidence and argument against the administration's most tangible proof of a revived nuclear weapons program in Iraq," the paper said.

A White House spokeswoman had no immediate comment....

The times story said the theory that the tubes were intended for a centrifuge was largely promoted by one analyst at the CIA, a relatively junior staffer who had a background in mechanical engineering and operating U.S. centrifuges.

Read the rest of this post...

Rummy says using military is the wrong way to hunt terrorists

Rummy is the gift that keeps on giving.

1. Call me crazy, but Rummy just blasted Bush's decision-making in how to go after Zarqawi, and after every other terrorist in the world.

Asked why U.S. forces had not been able to find Zarqawi, Rumsfeld said it was "like finding a needle in a haystack."

"It's very hard to do. The United States military wasn't organized, trained and equipped to go out and do manhunts. That's an FBI job."

Huh? Then why the fuck did the president make the military in charge of searching for Zarqawi if they're not organized, trained and equipped to do so? Has Rummy told the president about this? What the fuck are we doing?

2. In making that comment about Zarqawi, what Rumsfeld was saying is that military troops are not organized, trained or equipped to find terrorists running around these countries. That's an FBI job. But I thought we invaded this country with MILITARY troops to do just that, find the terrorists? And isn't that why we're pouring in more and more troops, to help root out the now 10,000 to 20,000 terrorists that have filtered across the border? This is an incredibly disturbing admission from Rummy.

3. Rummy also added this little gem: The risk in Iraq isn't ending up in civil war, it's madmen taking over the entire country. Funny, isn't that why we invaded in the first place?

Asked about recent U.S. intelligence estimates warning of possible civil war in Iraq, Rumsfeld said:

"No one sees any sign of civil war in that country at the present time ... The risk is that the terrorists, and the extremists, and the people who are running around chopping off people's heads and killing innocent men, women and children will take over that country.

"Imagine a country ruled by people who go around chopping off people's heads. That's a dark future."

Glad to see Rummy is as optimistic as the president about Iraq's future. Read the rest of this post...