CT Senator Joe Lieberman is now giving Bush cover for declaring war on Iran

Enough of this "moderate" Democrat already. This is the imbecile who thinks Iraq is going really well. Now he's trying to convince people that we not only need to go to war in Iran, but that it will only take a surgical air strike? Is he crazy? First off, from what I hear, a surgical air strike isn't enough.

1. There may very well be nuclear facilities we don't know about - an air strike won't hit those.

2. The very reason the Bush administration is talking about possibly using nukes against Iran is because, one assumes, we fear conventional weapons aren't enough to destroy the Iranian nuclear facilities.

3. That means, according to defense experts I've spoken to, we're going to need to send in ground forces to scour the entire country of Iran in order to determine if we've sufficiently destroyed the nuke facilities we targeted, and to determine if there are any other nuclear facilities we didn't even know exist.

Yes, Virginia, we're going to need to launch a massive American ground invasion of Iran. Now consider a few fun facts about Iran and Iraq, from the CIA's own Web site:

Iran is three times the size of Iraq geographically
Iran: 1.6 million sq km
Iraq: 0.437 million sq km

Iran has more than twice the population of Iraq
Iran: 68 million
Iraq: 27 million

Yes, we're still at war in Afghanistan, we're still at war in Iraq, and Joe Lieberman is supporting yet another George Bush ground war in Iran, where the country is three times the size of Iraq and the population is twice the size (that means even MORE resistance than in Iraq).

And what available US military personnel are we going to use for the massive ground invasion of Iran? Uh, not clear since we really don't have any to spare - that's why our service members are going on their third tour of duty in Iraq, there is nobody else to replace them. So what exactly are George Bush and Joe Lieberman planning to use to invade Iran? Spit balls? Read the rest of this post...

Open thread

News? Read the rest of this post...

Laura Bush gets a bizarre serenade

And they were worried about gay parents at the Easter Egg roll? This tribute to Bush and FEMA by the "Katrina Kids" is just plain creepy. Talk about exploiting children for political reasons.

Nice job, Think Progress for finding this one. Read the rest of this post...

The Pulitzer Prize board clearly hates America

Rewarding leaks. Imagine that:

James Risen and Eric Lichtblau of The Times won for national reporting, for what the Pulitzer citation said were "carefully sourced stories on secret domestic eavesdropping." The citation also said that their articles had "stirred a national debate on the boundary line between fighting terrorism and protecting civil liberty."

Dana Priest of The Post won in the beat reporting category, for articles on secret prisons.

Can they bring their Pulitzers to prison? Read the rest of this post...

Just a thought about Iraq

If we're afraid of publicly stating a deadline for our departure, because that would empower the terrah-ists, then why don't we give the Iraqi government a deadline PRIVATELY for our withdrawal. I.e., tell them, come July 1, 2007, we're pulling out. Better get your act together by then.

The problem isn't deadlines. It's PUBLIC deadlines.

Okay, I'm off to tape our DemsTV style pundit show tonight for Politics TV. Later. Read the rest of this post...

If the White House "shake-up" doesn't get rid of Bush or Cheney, it's not a big deal

The traditional media is ga-ga over the report that Josh Bolten's going to make changes at the White House:

President Bush's new chief of staff told White House aides this morning to expect a shakeup and asked anyone who was thinking of leaving to quit now, White House spokesman Scott McClellan said.

Whatever.

Bush will still be President. Cheney will still be Vice President. We'll still be screwed. Read the rest of this post...

Open Thread

Thread openly. And proudly. Read the rest of this post...

Were Ken Mehlman and White House involved in illegal voter suppression?

Questions are building. Read the rest of this post...

Washington Post ombudsman yet again writes a propaganda piece defending Fred Hiatt

Seriously, what is the point of having an ombudsman whose only job is to constantly defend the newspaper against the indefensible? That's a propagandist, not an ombudsman.

Her latest LATEST atrocity? Penning a column yesterday defending the Washington Post's editorial board for writing an editorial that outright lied to you. You remember, the one entitled "A good leak."

You see, according to Howell, the concept of truth doesn't exist in journalism - or rather, truth is not an absolute, it's a universal. Meaning, truth is everywhere and in everything and no matter what you say or what you do you, no matter how wrong and how NOT based in fact you are, you will always find truth and be known as a defender of truth. Truth simply is. (Pass the bowl.)

For example, some people say the moon is made of rock, others say green cheese - the beauty of the Deborah Howell school of journalism is that both are right at the same time (think Schroedinger's cat, except that the people proposing the theory are not brilliant scientists, but rather total idiots).

You see, the Washington Post editorial board and the Washington Post front page - which debunked the entire Post editorial - are ALLOWED to use a different set of facts. In fact, it's even encouraged! It shows their "independence" from each other. Kind of like how flunking a trigonometry test shows your independence from Isaac Newton. It's a good thing.

But of course, Mrs. Howell ups the ante. You don't even need different sets of facts to be equally defending the truth, you can even use the same set of facts - or rather, don't use facts at all! Have one guy state an accepted truth, have the other guy just make shit up, and in Howellville, it's all good - hell, it's practically required.

To wit? The following explanation/defense from Howell explains the purpose of the Post editorial was:

The Post editorially has supported the war, and the purpose of the editorial -- headlined "A Good Leak" -- was to support that leak as necessary to show that the president had reason to believe that Iraq was seeking uranium.

Yeah, but the issue at hand, which of course Howell doesn't even address, is that THE INFORMATION THE PRESIDENT LEAKED HAD BEEN DEBUNKED MONTHS BEFORE.

Let me try that again.

The information Bush leaked had been debunked by the administration months before.

So Bush either knew or should have known that he was intentionally misleading the American people. Bush was NOT, as the Washington Post claims, trying to show the American people that he had reason to believe that Iraq was seeking WMD. He was intentionally peddling lies in order to trick us.

Let's venture into analogy-land, since we are dealing with the intellectual equivalent of children here.

I steal a car.

The cops catch me.

I tell the cops, and all the local newspapers and tv stations, with tears in my eyes, that the reason I stole the car was to get my pregnant wife, who was in the midst of hemorrhaging, to the hospital before she and our not-yet-born baby died.

There's a groundswell of public support for me and my wife, and the cops let me go.

Of course, it's a total lie.

I stole the car to go joy-riding with my mistress.

According to Deborah Howell, however, I told the cops that my wife was hemorrhaging in a valiant effort to explain my actions to the American people. In fact, I was lying out my ass in an effort to trick you and not be held accountable for my crimes. But to Deborah Howell and Fred Hiatt, I am Schroedinger's cat anthropomorphised - a liar and an American hero at the same time.

Facts. Right and wrong. Truth and lies. They aren't rocket science. It simply takes half a brain and a bit of character to sort these things out.

Too bad Howell hasn't the brain, and Fred Hiatt and Donald Graham lack the character.

PS Deborah Howell wants to Thank You All For Smoking.

(A more detailed take-down of Howell's latest anti-intellectualism from Media Matters. Read the rest of this post...

Gallup: 44% of Republicans want to withdraw some or all troops from Iraq

God damn cut and run Republicans.

In a surprise, the new poll found that 44% of Republicans now back withdrawing some or all troops from Iraq. The number for all Americans, 64%, is higher, but the fact that better than 4 in 10 Republicans back this idea is notable. Indepedents are tracking much closer to Democrats on all issues related to Iraq.

In another finding, 57% of Americans say it was a mistake to send troops to Iraq, while 42% say it was not.

Read the rest of this post...

NYT editorial demands AT&T; come clean, is it helping Bush spy on your email and phone calls?

NYT slaps AT&T; good:

A former AT&T; employee has come forward with documents suggesting that there may be a lot more domestic spying going on than President Bush has admitted. The AT&T; documents suggest that telephone companies may be helping the government engage in wholesale interception of telephone calls, e-mail messages and Web surfing. If AT&T; is violating its customers' privacy rights, it should come clean, and stop immediately.

And by the way, AT&T; is refusing to deny the allegation. Read the rest of this post...

Lunchtime open thread

Okay, what's going on today? Read the rest of this post...

Increasing jitters that Bush may hurt Republicans at the polls in November

Wash Post

Shirley Jackson of Woodbury, Minn., said she formerly considered herself an independent voter "and my husband used to be a staunch Republican. But now we're both Democrats."

The main reason, she said, is Bush's handling of the war. "My husband and I think he lied to us, and he won't admit he's lied to us," said Jackson, 69. She said she believes Bush launched the war to avenge Iraq's reported plan to assassinate his father....

Bruce, 54, said she is a moderate Republican and has given money to the party, but now she is exasperated with Bush and his economic policies. She recounted a conversation with neighbors who support Bush because of "moral issues." "I said, 'While he's not killing babies, he's killing you' " with high gasoline prices, a soaring deficit and other problems, Bruce said. "He is going to bankrupt us all."

Read the rest of this post...

Monday Morning Open Thread

Here we go...what can we expect this week? Read the rest of this post...

Ted Stevens attacks on Cantwell over ANWR making her stronger

Cranky Ted Stevens went to Washington State to make good on his vow to attack Maria Cantwell. He's really pissed because she led the opposition to drilling in the Alaska National Wildlife Refuge:

When Cantwell again worked last December to torpedo the drilling, Stevens warned on the Senate floor that he would go to her state and "tell them what you've done." And so he did last week, but more in sadness than anger.

"I can't remember until these past few years any senator from your state who wasn't a close friend of mine," Stevens said. "That is a problem."

His goal, of course, was to hurt Cantwell. Instead, he's helping her:

The problem, though, does not appear to be costing Cantwell voter support. Polls here show that the public is opposed to ANWR drilling and increasingly frustrated with Republican leadership on Capitol Hill.

Stevens's ire, in fact, may prove a political windfall for Cantwell, who squeaked into the Senate six years ago with a winning margin of just over 2,000 votes and whom some Republican strategists have described as beatable.

In the past year, Cantwell's knack for getting Stevens's goat has won widespread attention across this Democratic-leaning state, garnered favorable local press coverage, partially drowned out the campaign of her formidable Republican challenger and, polls suggest, may help her win reelection.

Thanks Ted. Maybe the DSCC should give Stevens other states where he show up and help Democratic candidates. campaign. Read the rest of this post...

Off to start Easter Monday meal

Somehow we're going to squeeze sixteen people into our little flat for our Easter meal but it's not obvious how it's going to happen. Lots of Champagne, pork tenderloin with onion confit wrapped in puff pastry and cheese from all over France. Time to run. Read the rest of this post...

Japan to take control of International Whaling Commission

As much as I like Japan, this one is really wrong. I've read for years that Japan was buying it's way into control of the IWC which means that international whaling limits that have existing for the past twenty years could be going away. Whale populations are hardly secure and an increase in whaling is not going to be helpful to the recovery of their populations. Poorer nations are going along with Japan (and Norway - where the hell is the EU on this one?) in order to receive money which I can understand. Japan also wants to introduce secret voting so that no single country can be identified for their vote and avoid criticism and boycotts.

While the world has been looking the other way, the Japanese have spent nearly a decade and many millions of dollars building up a voting majority in the IWC, by buying the votes of small member states with substantial foreign aid packages.

It will also allow them to get resolutions passed approving Japan's so-called "scientific" whaling - the commercial whaling in disguise the Japanese have continued since the ban. (This year they are hunting nearly 1,000 minke whales in the Southern Ocean). Although their pretence of killing the animals for research fools no one - the meat is sold commercially - the Japanese are anxious for it to be given international legitimacy, in the face of continuing worldwide criticism.

Read the rest of this post...

Open thread

Keeping it slow this evening, being the end of the weekend. Ooh, tomorrow is the Brokeback Easter Egg Hunt at the White House! Read the rest of this post...