There was a time when laws in the United States protected the weak and innocent from predators and warranted that criminals will be punished. That calculus has been reversed in the Age of Bu$h. Now we are all victims and George Bu$h, Dick “dick” Cheney and their criminal partners see us all as sheep to be fleeced.

The latest FISA atrocity, S2248, is due to expire by sunset provision on February 1st. This bill not only allows George Bu$h to have everybody in the US eavesdropped upon, it releases the telecoms from breaking the law (which they did) when they agreed to start wiretapping a month after Messers Bu$h and Cheney stole our White House and then took office in January 2001.

What we now have seen of the Bu$h malAdministration and its policy is that everything it does, says, plans, or initiates has only one basic function: achieving domestic political goals. It requires no stretch of the imagination to understand that the first targets of electronic information capture were Democratic politicians and those journalists and reporters considered unfriendly to the republican Party.

Considering that over the last seven years the Democratic “leadership” has gone out of its way to grovel and bootlick for George Bu$h those first few heady months of listening in on their landline and cell phone calls and emails must have been remarkable. During the height of the Cold War, the heads of GRU and KGB would have killed their mothers, wives, and children for the chance to learn one-tenth of the intelligence data that fell to Mt Bu$h in those first few months. I fail to see why anyone who has thought this out is surprised at what the Democrats have acquiesced to in order to keep their secrets from the public.

And now Mr Bu$h has demanded that they not only immunize the telecoms from legal liability, but also himself and others of his criminal gang.

And the Democrats, desperate to hide their privacy from their employers, the citizens of this country, will grant him what he wants, yet again.

Senator Chris Dodd has pledged to filibuster this bill. Why not contact his office and thank him for this effort?

Senator Chris Dodd (D-CT) (202) 224-2823

Email him support here:

If you think this is the wrong way to run a country, call your Senators.

In fact, it might not be a bad idea to call Harry Reid because he’s the one who’s most anxious to accommodate Mr Bu$h. Despite the fact that he’s in this Bu$h enabling up to his scrawny turkey neck he’s still a US Senator, and it’s appropriate to be diplomatic and polite when talking to his staffer.

Senator Harry Reid Harry (R - NV) (202) 224-3542 [OK, he's not officially an "r" - he just acts like one. as I said, I'd love to know what George Bu$h heard about his phone calls early in 2001.]

You could probably ask Senator Reid’s staffer why republicans are allowed to just say they want to filibuster and that’s good enough to kill a bill, but he’s going to force democrats to actually do the filibuster.

Senator Harry Reid Harry (R - NV) (202) 224-3542 [OK, he's not officially an "r" - he just acts like one. as I said, I'd love to know what George Bu$h heard about his phone calls early in 2001.]

You could probably ask Senator Reid’s staffer why republicans are allowed to just say they want to filibuster and that’s good enough to kill a bill, but he’s going to force democrats to actually do the filibuster.

UPDATE: Erroneous link fixed. I am a sloppy man sometimes.

One of the basic principles of Generalissimo Field Marshal Fred Kagan’s escalation was to send a lot more troops into Iraq to kill as many Iraqis as possible, (although truthfully males of fighting age were preferred to woman and children) and to die and bleed, and be wounded and maimed in order to allow the Shiite Maliki central government to have some room to make political changes with a view towards some sort of reconciliation.

Of course, many people with working brains can see that the real goal was to raise enough dust to quiet those who had the bad taste to note that the tar baby is just soaking up our blood and treasure, and to ensure some vague resemblance to “success” so that more criminals could be elected in 2008 under the banner of the republican Party.

Many wondered whether arming Sunnis and ex-Baathists was a wise solution, but they were willing to kill Saudis and Yemenis, and so the Army went ahead and put ‘em on the payroll – all 70-80,000 of them, at $300 each per month. Just don’t call them “Saudis and Yemenis” though because Mr Bu$h’s family has this long, profitable, on-going business relationship with the House of Saud.

Suddenly, if you were anti-occupation and wore a keffiyah you were automatically “al-Qaeda” (unless you were on the payroll as a ”concerned local citizen.”)

Hell, even this guy would have been “a-Q” because he fit the profile: foreigner, hated Western occupation, had the headdress and the robe, even.

The fly in the ointment is that the Shiites have just about zero interest in joining hands with the Sunni for anything, unless it’s to help the Sunni climb the steps to a gibbet. So political reconciliation was unlikely unless it was forced upon them, and in a confusing change in policy, our alleged Russian expert Condoleeza Rice doesn’t want to dictate to the Maliki government about stepping up the pace of reconciliation.

Despite the almost-universal distaste for change, something has snuck through. I know you will join me in applauding it.

The three stars that represented Saddam Hussein's Baath Party will be removed, to address the concerns of Iraqi Kurds.

They have refused to fly the flag since the fall of Saddam Hussein, saying it is too closely associated with a regime that repressed and killed their people.

The flag was also changed in 2004, when a line of script, allegedly in Saddam Hussein's own handwriting, was changed to Kufic script.

But the latest change - passed by 110 votes to 50 - is only temporary, as a design for a new flag will be sought after one year.

Well, that was momentous, wasn’t it?

The Arabic phrase shown above is pronounced as Bismillah ir-Rahman ir-Rahim, and is a beautifully poetic phrase which offers both deep insight and brilliant inspiration. It has often been said that the phrase Bismillah ir-Rahman ir-Rahim contains the true essence of the entire Qur'an, as well as the true essence of all religions.

Muslims often say this phrase when embarking on any significant endeavor, and the phrase is considered by some to be a major pillar of Islam. This expression is so magnificent and so concise that all but one chapter of the Qur'an begins with the words Bismillah ir-Rahman ir-Rahim.

The common translation:

"In the name of God, most Gracious, most Compassionate".

fails to capture either the true depth of meaning or the inspirational message of this beautiful phrase. So, let's look deeper into the meaning of these wonderful words.

The rest ought to be a snap now that they’ve straightened out that flag thing.

Nethoggers’ Cernig has picked up on Larissa Alexandrovna’s echoing of my commentary 10 days ago regarding the post-shooting bomb blast at the assassination of the Bu$h malAdministration’s beard, Benazir Bhutto. (I’m not being harsh about Ms Bhutto. Her death was a tragedy for Pakistan, despite her family’s rather spotted record of corruption and alleged skimming of that country’s national treasury.)

Three former US intelligence officials have told Raw Story that not only is the gunman dead, he was likely the actual target of the suicide bomber.

According to a former high ranking US intelligence official, who wishes to remain anonymous due to the delicate nature of the information, the US intelligence community understands the gunman to have been killed in the blast following Mrs. Bhutto's assassination.

"He was killed, probably not knowing that the suicide bomber was there," said this source. "We don't know for sure if the two men arrived together. We do know that the assassin died in the explosion, and was probably meant to."

Back last year I wrote:

I certainly don’t know anything about political assassinations, because I will deny that’s a skill set the US Army teaches its soldiers. But if I wanted to take a very important political target I wouldn’t use just one hitter. I might have a gunman in close in case the opportunity presented itself, and I might back him up with a dedicated zealot willing to kill himself (and the target) with a bomb. (This would also ensure the gunman couldn’t talk later.)

The fact that Ms Bhutto was in what is reported to have been an armored vehicle might well have mandated the bomb, should the pistol attack have failed. Providentially (or unfortunately) the pistol worked, and the bomb created further death and chaos, as well as silencing the shooter. It’s probably just coincident that the person with the vest bomb just happened to be standing right next to the shooter, eh?

Never one to leave a healing scab on a wound, I speculated further,

In case of failure I’d also have a couple of teams along the route of retreat, possibly with sophisticated anti-vehicle weapons, like RPGs. And I would need a spotter at middle distance to advise the cutoff teams whether the first attack failed, to alert them of the target’s approach.

While the suspicion of the world community has rightly settled on President Musharraf, having an inconvenient competitor eliminated in what can be passed off as a regrettable terrorist incident saves a lot of face for the Pakistani government. Face they promptly lost when they initiated an on-again, off-again series of speculations and laughable explanations about car roof levers and such. Shutting up the doctors after the fact was a nice touch, because it immediately switched the focus of the news cycle buzz from the killing to the cover up.

The danger in all this lies with the possibility that the USG might lose confidence in Musharraf, or at least more confidence than they had lost as evidenced by the insistence of Mr Bu$h and our alleged Russian expert, Ms Rice, that only Benazir Bhutto could save Pakistan from a fate worse than death. Or something.

And the only thing that could have pushed the Bu$h people to change course in Pakistan would have been the commentariat and punditocracy figuring it all out, spurred by a lot of questions from the man in the street inside the US.

Fortunately the only news audience that the Bu$hies ever pay attention to is domestic consumption. Propaganda Public diplomacy at its best, Bu$h-style. And the US corporate media has cooperated magnificently, speculating endlessly about neck wounds and moon roof levers and fortunately ignoring the first rule of political assassination: cui bono? How lucky.

As I said at the time,

I’m not saying anything. I‘m just saying eventually the truth will surface.

It should be obvious to any conscious mind that Ms Bhutto in exile was a minimal threat to President Musharraf. She was out of the country and has been noted in many places she was basically the heart and soul of the Pakistan Peoples’ Party. While it is true that any exiled politician with strong domestic support is a danger to incumbents, the simple fact is that she could not have re-entered the country without the state’s permission, and the PPP was sufficiently neutered so that there was no chance of a “students’ rebellion” a la Iran, 1979, which would gave paved the way for her triumphant return to replace the incumbent President.

I still find it hard to believe that the Bu$h malAdministration really believed they were going to get President Musharraf to shuffle off into retirement so easily, so they must have figured that they could prevail on Musharraf to allow Ms Bhutto to be Prime Minister and actually allow US forces to operate in the NWFP and FATA in order to somehow to something to distract the Taliban and al Qaeda from operating in Iraq and Afghanistan. But we have seen before that, they take counsel from their dreams, rather than from their fears.

Cernig ends his piece on a high note.

Can Bush at least stop selling the General-in-plainclothes advanced weaponry (e.g. nuke-capable fighters, anti-tank missiles, airborne early warning platforms) more useful against his neighbours than extremists, even if it does help line US arms manufacturers pockets with US taxpayers' money?

And he answers his own question at the same time!

Cui bono?

In the aftermath of the assassination of Benazir Bhutto, Pakistan remains chaotic in many areas. As is often the case, Professor Juan Cole has an excellent detailing of the troubles. Pakistani citizens appear to be very outraged by Ms Bhutto’s death, and I get the impression that believe President Musharraf, or proxies of his, had a hand in her death.

Points of interest include reports from several sources that government security forces apparently withdrew shortly before the shooting and bomb explosion, and the muddled matter of the cause of her death. Josh Marshall was on this story all day yesterday and has a few posts about it. Key points include the fact that the Pakistan Government’s official position is that she was not killed by a bullet or a piece of bomb shrapnel, but rather by hitting her head against a piece of the car she was traveling in when she ducked in reaction to the shots or the explosion. This stands in direct contrast to statements by doctors describing a large wound in the side of her head caused by something hitting her. Several of Josh’s readers with medical qualifications have written in to offer a studied, professional “bullshit” to the government narrative.

Dr. Mussadiq Khan of Rawalpindi General Hospital, who treated Bhutto before she was declared dead, said she had "a big wound" on the side of her head "that usually occurs when something big, with a lot of speed, hits that area."

Ms Bhutto’s family refused permission for an autopsy, and had her buried quickly, which I believe is a religious requirement common to Islam and Judaism.

The Government’s story varied throughout the day, with some details changing several times. The apparent settling on the “official” narrative that she died when she ducked would seem to be in line with the supposition of Ken Reynolds, interviewed by CNN.

CNN national security analyst Ken Robinson, who worked in U.S. intelligence in Pakistan during the Clinton administration, said he suspects Bhutto's enemies are attempting to control her legacy by minimizing the attack's role in her demise.

"They're trying to deny her a martyr's death, and in Islam, that's pretty important," Robinson said.

Bhutto, he said, threatens to become more influential in death than she was in life. "Her torch burns bright now forever. She's forever young; she's forever brave, challenging against all odds the party in power and challenging the military and Islamic extremism."

This opinion emphasizes the desire of the Musharraf government to deny Ms Bhutto a place in legend, and to short-circuit the Pakistan Peoples Party the icon of a martyr killed in opposition to Musharraf.

The Pakistani government quickly blamed the killing on Al-Qaeda and a-Q in fact has claimed they are responsible for her death. Whether these two facts are coincidental or convenient you’d have to judge for yourself.

Professor Cole has noted that several US politicians have “called for” an independent investigation under the auspices of the UN, adding that the Pakistani military dictatorship’s credibility is “low.” A skeptical man might wonder whether President Musharraf would be eager to have such a body finger-walking through his country. Based solely upon recent observations it seems to me the only country in the world that believes itself above such independent international commissions is the US, although I can’t imagine why.

UPDATE: Reader Dubhaltach, from Gorilla's Guides notes that there is a prescribed 40 day period or mourning, and forecasts some serious domestic disturbances somewhere around February 5th, 2008. We can be certain this fact has escaped the fully-politicized Bu$hCo Department of State, but oxygen breathers should take notes.

I think just about everyone agrees our GIs have had their helmets and heads unscrewed by the Bu$h malAdministration and their necks have been toiletized by these evil criminals. I’m confident that everyone on the oxygen-breathing side of the universe believes that. Over there among the Bu$h Jugend they of course believe that Heaven’s gift to the Heimat can do no wrong. It‘s just a matter of Will, you know.

Suffering deaths and maiming because of inadequate armor, being sent into a combat zone with unarmored vehicles, given spoiled food and filthy water, attacked by patriotic Iraqis who resented the occupation of their country, dragged back to Iraq a third, fourth, and fifth time, their families shattered, divorce rife with children that don’t even recognize their fathers because they’ve spent more time with their platoons than with their families, our GIs have been through the mill.

Once more spitting in the faces of our soldiers, Mr Bu$h has vetoed a $555 Billion defense appropriation bill recently passed by Congress at his demand. The criminals in the White House don’t like a provision in the bill that might allow Americans or corporations suing the Iraq government to freeze Iraqi financial assets during any lawsuit.

The Iraqi government asked the USG to do something about this. Mr Bu$h did. He vetoed the bill.

A cynical man might think that if somehow Baghdad started looking like Saigon, 1975 in the near future the government of Iraq – you know – that “sovereign” entity that controls most of the Green Zone (except for the areas occupied by Backwater and the other Teflon mercenaries) – might have to suddenly shift the finds of that “sovereign” country to some other banking system in some other country with banking regulations a bit more opaque than in the US, if you get my drift and I think you do.

The veto threat startled Democratic congressional leaders, who believe Bush is bowing to pressure from the Iraqi government over a provision meant to help victims of state-sponsored terrorism. The veto is unexpected because there was no veto threat and the legislation passed both chambers of Congress overwhelmingly. … "We understand that the president is bowing to the demands of the Iraqi government, which is threatening to withdraw billions of dollars invested in U.S. banks if this bill is signed," said House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.), in a joint statement. “The administration should have raised its objections earlier, when this issue could have been addressed without a veto."

A White House spokesman said the veto would officially be delivered by Dec. 31. The dispute could be settled in late January when Congress returns if Democratic leaders agree to tweak the language before sending the bill back to the White House.

I wonder whether there really are any lawsuits that could endanger the bank accounts of the “sovereign” Iraq. A cynical man might wonder whether the US banking system could easily weather a sudden withdrawal of the Iraq money, following right on the heels of the subprime mortgage flim-flam meltdown. Is everyone up to speed with the idea that the banks are far more important that the troops?

At issue is a provision deep in the defense authorization bill, which would essentially allow victims of state sponsored terrorism to sue those countries for damages. The Iraqi government believes the provision, if applied to the regime of Saddam Hussein, could target up to $25 billion in Iraqi assets held in U.S. banks. Iraq has threatened to pull all of its money out of the U.S. banking system if the provision remains in the bill.

I know you will be surprised to learn that all Iraq funds were in fact frozen by President Clinton on February 16, 1993, by Executive Order 12722, and reinforced by Mr Bu$h in Executive Order 13303, as detailed in this Salon piece by Andrew Cockburn.

I haven’t been able to find any legal authority unlocking these funds, and would appreciate it if someone can point me to any such ruling or law.

White House spokesman Scott Stanzel said the disputed provision "would permit plaintiffs’ lawyers immediately to freeze Iraqi funds and would expose Iraq to massive liability in lawsuits concerning the misdeeds of the Saddam Hussein regime. The new democratic government of Iraq, during this crucial period of reconstruction, cannot afford to have its funds entangled in such lawsuits in the United States."

So, if you were brutalized by Saddam Hussein’s government, and you thought you could get some justice by good old American revenge by cash, you’re just out of luck.

Senate Armed Services Chairman Carl Levin (D-Mich.) was angered that the White House decided on a veto long after the bill passed both chambers of Congress.

"It is unfortunate that the administration failed to identify the concerns upon which this veto is based until after the bill had passed both houses on Congress and was sent to the President for signature," Levin said. "I am deeply disappointed that our troops and veterans may have to pay for their mistake and for the confusion and uncertainty caused by their snafu.”

The item in the defense authorization bill causing all the hubbub was inserted by Senator Frank Lautenburg (D-NJ) with 30 Senatorial co-sponsors.

Lautenberg contends that his provision is aimed at holding countries like Iran responsible for state sponsored terrorism, including the bombing of the Marine barracks in Beruit in 1983. The measure would allow plaintiffs to target hidden commercial assets owned by countries that sponsor terrorism, and the language is not aimed at Iraq specifically. The Lautenberg amendment has 30 cosponsors, including a handful of conservative Republicans like Sen. Richard Burr (R-N.C.), Sen. Jim DeMint (R-S.C.) and Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.).

“My language allows American victims of terror to hold perpetrators accountable — plain and simple,” Lautenberg said. “After months of negotiations over this bill, it is hard to understand why President Bush would suddenly veto this bipartisan proposal at the last minute. The President should be listening to the pleas of Americans victims of terror and their families and should help give them the justice they deserve.”

The problem was known about more than a week ago, and was mentioned in this ABC News piece dated December 19th.

Mr Bu$h could have avoided all this by mentioning the matter before the bill was passed. We all know he’s quick enough to shriek in front of cameras and threaten a veto of other bills he considers too kind to the “little people.”

Yet, surprisingly, he waited until the very last second, after the bill was passed overwhelmingly, and transmitted to our desk in the Oval Office he occupies, to complain.

Government by tantrum is no way to run a railroad, Mr Bu$h.

A tip of the Kevlar helmet to reader Neil O’C for shoving this story over the transom.

Today is when Western nations traditionally mark the birth of a small child, born to parents in an occupied land. The family will soon be refugees when the land’s ruler learns of a prophecy that a child born in a particular city will bring about the destruction of the ruler’s realm.

The child grows to be a man, following in his father’s footsteps to become a carpenter, as was traditional in those days. History tells us little of his growing years other than that, sometime around his bar mitzbah, the traditional celebration of manhood, he astounded the priests in the temple with his knowledge of law and faith. Many today believe he was following in the footsteps of his other father, the creator and law-giver, and revere the words we are told he spoke as he taught his other father’s lessons.

When people write of this day they frequently use words like “hope,” “love,” and “compassion,” all concepts that are sadly lacking in this 21st century. As we stagger into 2008, CE, we see around us on every side war, oppression, cruelty, and hatred. Even those who grandly and publicly profess to be the most devout followers of this man seem to take great pride in turning their backs on his teachings. It is more than unseemly for religious leaders to advocate war, killing, torture, cruelty, and other barbarities. It is in fact obscene, but too many of today’s leaders have lost their way and use the veil of religion to hide the scars of political ambition and lust for power that have marked their souls for eternity.

In these days a nation conceived in the principles of Enlightenment liberalism is being dragged steadily and remorselessly into the pit of fascism.

The first ten amendments to the Constitution are known as the Bill of Rights. Those successful revolutionaries who tore this country away from an oppressive and neglectful British crown thought so highly of these certain rights that had been ignored by the British king that they were specifically enumerated and added to the Constitution to enshrine their importance.

We have seen many of these rights summarily taken away from us under the pretense of “protecting” us when in fact we are less safe today than we were seven years ago. The actions of those who lied, cheated, and stole their way into positions of power have formed the basis for many dark theories of conspiracy.

Most of these “leaders” have shown distressing hints that they intend to make their time in office permanent, establishing a form of government that patriots died to reject over 200 years ago. Members of the Executive and Legislative bodies are feared and despised all over the world. Members of the Legislative branch recently took time out from their busy schedule of ignoring the wishes of the American people to strongly affirm their dedication to the man whose birth we celebrate today, and to his teachings. They did this even as they refused to take active steps to condemn, and stop, the torture of helpless prisoners.

The press, those whose duty in the defense of liberty is enshrined in the Bill of Rights, is rightly charged with the solemn obigation of safeguarding the freedom of the citizens, to ensure that the US Government does not trample upon them. But the press has been co-opted by forces more interested in profit than liberty, and great swathes of the Press has aligned itself with the ideologues now determined to transform this country into something more commonly seen in some corrupt third world backwater banana republic.

Our economy and financial system has been bastardized, turned into something resembling a street corner three-car monte con in which only the insiders can win. Wealth that was once evident in most families has been ripped from the pockets of the middle class and concentrated in the hands of a very small and fortunate minority. Jobs that once paid a decent wage, enough to allow a family to live with pride, have been sent overseas by multinational corporations, sacrificed on the altar of profit. With the connivance of our lawmakers, banks have become predators, sucking the very lifeblood of those desperately trying to stay afloat in an economy rigged against them.

We approach a national election to choose new leaders, unsure that those who direct our nation’s course in the affairs of the world will permit them to occur, and also unsure whether they will be fair elections, or rigged and stolen like the last few we’ve had.

Those politicians running for office are collectively a dim lot, a frightening shadow of our present rulers – a pack of mediocre authoritarians who seem unable to develop a new course for the country, and instead advocate more of what got us to the edge of the abyss we are presently teetering on.

But for one day let us put aside our dark present and the specter of an even darker future and celebrate the message of the day.

May this day bring you and your families the happiness, joy, love, and good will that was the primary teaching of that child that legend tells us was born on this day over 2000 year ago. May your children shout and cry out with happiness and glee. May your argumentative uncle for once shut his yap and pass out early – hopefully not into the mashed potatoes. May your table be overflowing with the bounty of the earth, and may the music be joyous and hopeful as befits the day.

Time enough to worry about tomorrow when tomorrow comes.

Governor Huckabee’s base.

I have no idea how to embed this video so you have to follow the link. Wear asbestos survival gear. Bring your own oxygen.

People standing alongside a roadway with their eyes closed, mumbling and moaning, and testifying to an urban myth, are now considered a motivating portion of what is laughingly referred to as an “informed electorate.”

This morning’s WaPo carries an interesting story about a potential shift in emphasis in South Asia. Now that the Defense Department has as Secretary who stands on his hind legs, the uniformed services have found the courage to stand up (ever so slightly) to Mr Bu$h.

With violence on the decline in Iraq but on the upswing in Afghanistan, President Bush is facing new pressure from the U.S. military to accelerate a troop drawdown in Iraq and bulk up force levels in Afghanistan, according to senior U.S. officials.

Administration officials said the White House could start to debate the future of the American military commitment in both Iraq and Afghanistan as early as next month. Some Pentagon officials are urging a further drawdown of forces in Iraq beyond that envisioned by the White House, which is set to reduce the number of combat brigades from 20 to 15 by the end of next summer. At the same time, commanders in Afghanistan are looking for several additional battalions, helicopters and other resources to confront a resurgent Taliban movement.

The withdrawal mentioned is of course the tail end of Generalissmo Field Marshal Kagan’s famous surge escalation, which apparently might have actually had some effect on violence. The constant combatant pressure on insurgency may have caused the resistance to pull in its horns, at least temporarily. This, coupled with the providential “Anbar Awakening” has given the impression that, at long last, all the wishes and hopes of the never-right will come to fruition.

No one seems to have given any thought to the possibility that maybe the resistance is just marking time, until the drawdown begins. Iraq is – or was - a pretty modern nation. They’ve had calendars and newspapers for more than a couple of years, and they understand all about US national elections, and they understand that all this drawdown talk is all about the next election, like everything else the Bu$h malAdministration does.

Bush's decisions on Iraq and Afghanistan could heavily influence his ability to pass on to his successor stable situations in both countries, an objective his advisers describe as one of the president's paramount goals for his final year in office. They say Bush will listen closely to his military commanders on the ground before making any decisions on troops but is unlikely to do anything he believes could jeopardize recent, hard-won security improvements in Iraq.

Administration officials say the White House has become more concerned in recent months about the situation in Afghanistan, where grinding poverty, rampant corruption, poor infrastructure and the growing challenge from the Taliban are hindering U.S. stabilization efforts. Senior administration officials now believe Afghanistan may pose a greater longer-term challenge than Iraq.

The Bu$h malAdministration cares not a whit about grinding poverty, rampant corruption, and poor infrastructure, but the uniformed services do. Helmand Province continues to be a serious problem in Afghanistan. The recent battle for Musa Qala highlights a significant development: the strength of Taliban in the region and the failure of the US Government to prosecute the real war.

The battle of Musa Qala involved more than 8,000 combat troops from the US, NATO and the Afghan Army. This is close to the effective combat power of a full division. It took them the better part of a month to fight their way through a sophisticated defensive belt of mines, booby traps, fortified bunkers, machine gun posts and anti-aircraft gun positions defended by an estimated 2,000 Taliban. The G’s captured Musa Qala in February, and held the town ever since, using it as an expeditionary base, sending units out to other areas in order to distract NATO attention. It was also claimed the town was a drug-smuggling center and this is quite possible, since opium poppy production is reportedly higher than in past years.

Staging raiding and diversion parties from a central point is a classic use of second-level guerrilla forces, and the Western allies were unable to mount a proper offense until late this year, as British forces that had formerly been committed to Iraq became available. There were reports that artillery had been used to break through the defensive belt.

When you have to use artillery you’re not dealing with guerrillas. You’re fighting main force troops. And when you have to concentrate a division’s worth of troops from three countries in order to capture a town held by your enemy for almost a year a wise strategist would re-think his planning.

Since there are a finite number of US troops available to fight Mr Bu$h’s ego-war in Iraq and the real war in Afghanistan, there has been pressure to draw in the forces in Iraq, centering on the jewel in the crown, Baghdad and the Green Zone, and stationing troops in the “enduring bases” rather than actively seeking combat against the resistance in the provinces.

CAMP VICTORY, IRAQ -- In a change of plans, American commanders in Iraq have decided to keep their forces concentrated in Baghdad when the buildup strategy ends next year, removing troops instead from outlying areas of the country.

The change represents the military's first attempt to confront its big challenge in 2008: how to cut the number of troops without sacrificing security.

Actually, the military’s real challenge is how to slow down the decline in Iraq in order to take the violence off the news horizon and enable the Republicans to claim a great victory before the 2008 elections. It’s going to be interesting to see how the ideologues who have risen to influential positions in the Army react to a Democratic President and a Congress with a greater Democratic majority. I know if I were the strategist advising the new President I’d be recommending an immediate cashiering of about 80 or 90 generals and about 100 colonels.

Let’s get some uniforms in there that actually respect democracy and the US Constitution.

A year ago, when U.S. patrols in Baghdad were sparse and sectarian killings were spiraling out of control, President Bush proposed a troop buildup in part to establish order in the capital. Over the last four months, violence in the capital has begun to abate.

But the most significant improvements have been in outlying areas, where the first of about 28,500 additional troops arrived in February, followed by gradual improvements in Baghdad. Military planners at first thought it would be the other way around.

"There was a sense we would focus very significantly on Baghdad and change would come from Baghdad out," said a senior military official in Washington, who like others spoke on condition of anonymity when discussing troop strategy. "What we are seeing is just the opposite, it is probably outside-in, toward Baghdad."

Unspoken in this quote is the fact that the outer provinces, especially Anbar, are strongly Sunni. The capital is heavily Shiite. Prime Minister Maliki’s government, while ostensibly a coalition, is primarily Shiite within the ministries.

If we’re banking on change from the outer areas, are we actually expecting a renewal of the civil war?

UPDATE: Bernhard, who's always worth reading, believes the change in strategy presages a planned regime change in Baghdad.

Marc Armbinder is reporting that Joe Lieberman (R-Tel Aviv) is supporting John McCain for President. This is hardly surprising as Senator McCain has been by far the most wild-eyed supporter among the Republicans for the Oded Yinon Strategy, which calls for the destruction of all of Israel’s neighbors.

Senator McCain’s endorsement this morning by both the Boston Globe and Des Moines Register in the New Hampshire and Iowa primaries could breathe new life in the old warhorse’s campaign. If he has a respectable showing in Iowa and New Hampshire, it might even attract some funding to his campaign, which is presently mired in fifth place in the issues-free National Seventh Grade Popularity Contest administered by our bought-and-paid-for Corporate Media.

While the Des Moines Register described Senator McCain and Senator Clinton the most competent and ready to lead, there are some who might disagree.

"With dissension at home and distrust abroad, as American troops continue to fight wars on two fronts, the times call for two essential qualities in the next American president," the Register’s editorial board concluded. "Those qualities became the paramount considerations in making endorsements for the Democratic and Republican nominees in the 2008 Iowa caucuses.

"The times call for competence. Americans want their government to work again.

The times call for readiness to lead. Americans want their country to do great things again. They’ll regain trust in their government when they see a president make that happen."

The Des Moines Register editorial board may not have noticed it, but what Americans actually want is someone dedicated to the premise that American is a nation of laws, and the people overwhelmingly want to see some serious war crime trials, with many, many, many long-term imprisonments, and if we’re really lucky about 25 or 30 executions for treason.

While all the Republican candidates (except for Ron Paul) are for more war, more torture, and less taxes for the millionaires, which very surprisingly include themselves, if I really had to stick my hand into the box that might possibly contain that scorpion, I’d rather see McCain have a brush with destiny than Millionaire dog-tormenter Romney, Millionaire adulterer and Mafia buff Giuliani, or Governor Huckabee, who all seem to want to drag us back to the 10th century.

After all, Senator McCain has adequately shown his Foreign Policy knowledge and experience, and demonstrated his ability to plot a careful course in the Middle East, right?

Canada’s Darkblack supplies proof that Ricky Santorum was a prophet.

A tip of the too-small Kevlar helmet to the one, the only, 60 foot Therapod, TRex.

Americans woke Saturday to the news that the collaborators currently masquerading as leaders of the Democratic Party were determined to once again give George Bu$h every last penny in the cupboard in a desperate attempt to – do something or other. No one seems to be quite sure what.

The little bunnies were so frightened of a coward and bully, supported by 24% of the walking zombified of the nation, that they were going to give him all the ca$h he was demanding by holding the US troops in the Middle East as hostages. While they once stood up on their hind legs and pounded their little hollow chests before servilely caving in, this time they weren’t even going to do the kabuki for the cameras.

Senior lawmakers and Congressional aides said the broad outlines of the proposal called for the House to consider $30 billion for military operations in Afghanistan, as well as money for military bases and support programs for military families to quiet fears of Pentagon layoffs because of a lack of money. … After the measure returns to the House for a final vote, Democrats opposed to the war are likely to vote against it but may not be able to stop it. The decision to free some money for the war without a deadline or goal for withdrawal would represent a major concession by Democrats. They had earlier said they would not send Mr. Bush any more war money this year unless he accepted a change in Iraq policy.

But Democratic leaders now say they have concluded that a logjam of 11 appropriations bills cannot be broken without acceding to at least some of the president’s demand for more war money.[emph added]

I was cruel about this story on Saturday because the Democratic Party has shamed me and my country. Cruel, but accurate. Years of being double-teamed by the criminal conspiracy known as the republican Party and their running dog lackeys of the corporate media has made them so frightened of a harsh word or darkening brow that the Dems quiver in reaction when a coffee cup is dropped. They no longer plan political strategy in order to defend the nation. Now they sit down in a locked room and work out just how they are going to gull the country once again while they enable the criminals to steal more of our heritage and treasure.

This morning’s WaPo is carrying an article by Jonathan Weissman reporting that David Obey (D-Wisc) thinks he’s had enough.

A Democratic deal to give President Bush some war funding in exchange for additional domestic spending appeared to collapse last night after House Appropriations Committee Chairman David R. Obey (D-Wis.) accused Republicans of bargaining in bad faith.

Instead, Obey said he will push a huge spending bill that would hew to the president's spending limit by stripping it of all lawmakers' pet projects, as well as most of the Bush administration's top priorities. It would also contain no money for the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.

Mr Bu$h, who never saw a middle class or poor American that he wasn’t willing to crawl across broken glass to kick, had demanded that there be no additional or new domestic spending beyond that which he felt was appropriate for people dying the slow death of an unresponsive economy that has been tailored to increase the wealth of large corporations and a very small and elite group of multi-millionaires.

House Democratic leaders were scheduled to complete work last night on a $520 billion spending bill that included $11 billion in funding for domestic programs above the president's request, half of what Democrats had initially approved. The bill would have also contained $30 billion for the war in Afghanistan, upon which the Senate would have added billions more for Iraq before final congressional approval.

But a stern veto threat this weekend from White House budget director Jim Nussle put the deal in jeopardy, and Obey said he is prepared for a long standoff with the White House.

Mr Obey thinks he may have discovered a simple solution that he feels might goad Congress to stand up on its hind legs for once. Just take the pet projects (“earmarks”) out of the bill. As our under-worked and over-paid Congresscritters head home for their latest time off from work they want to show the folks in their districts that they’re squeezing the golden goose to best effect. There’s nothing more embarrassing than going home for Christmas without a nice little giftwrapped present for that big contractor in your home district.

Obey's proposal would ax about 9,500 home-district and home-state projects worth a total of $9.5 billion, according to Keith Ashdown, vice president of Taxpayers for Common Sense, a budget watchdog group. Republicans inserted about 40 percent of those projects.

White House spokesweasel Tony Fratto doesn’t care what Congressman Obey proposes. Following the official Bu$h malAdministration policy of showing maximum contempt for Congress at all times, he sniffed dismissively, "Different day, different Democrat, different direction. Our position hasn't changed[.]"

Many rank-and-file republicans are a bit frightened of this situation since earmarks were shaved off a 2006 appropriations bill and a 2007 spending bill passed earlier this year. The thought of bringing home empty bags two years in a row has frightened a number of them and they have begged Minority Leader John Boehner to lighten up a bit and work with the Democrats.

Knowledgeable observers noted Mr Boehner is more frightened of Mr Bu$h than of his own rank-and-file.

I was sort of mentally recapping the latest news – the asshole cowardly Vichy Dems caving in once again to a textbook psychopathic killer, the stunning revelation about why Nancy Pelosi took impeachment off the table, the news that even though the Intelligence Community understands Tehran is not threat to the US, we’re still going to bear down on them.

It all reminds me of an episode in Joe Wambaugh’s Police Story series from the 1970s in which a SWAT officer, played by Tony LoBianco, is horribly burned in a helicopter crash during a training exercise. Being treated in the hospital, subjected to daily torture as his bandages are removed, crazed by morphine, he asks the doctor whether the fight is all worth the pain, and all the doctor can tell him is that he has to decide that for himself.

He balls up and decides to tough it out, of course, and fights through, eventually returning to a somewhat normal family life.

So, fuck you, George Bu$h. And you too, Nancy Pelosi. The same to you, Harry Reid you corrupt Las Vegas pimp. Up your DLC-fellating ass, Steny Hoyer, you triangulating prick,

We’re going to beat all your sleazy, corrupt, cowardly asses and take back our country. And then we’ll see just who the hell we put in jail.

Carl Hulse writes in this morning’s NY Times that patriotic Americans will once again be disgusted by Democratic Party leaders.

WASHINGTON, Dec. 7 — Congressional leaders are assembling a $500 billion package to try to resolve an impasse by providing President Bush with unfettered money for the Iraq war in exchange for new spending on popular domestic programs.

If acceptable to lawmakers and the White House, the package to be considered in the House as early as Tuesday would avert the threat of a shutdown of federal agencies and end a dispute that has lasted months and pitted Congressional Democrats against Mr. Bush and his Republican allies. [emph added]

The Democrats are at a disadvantage here of course because the republicans did this under Newt Gingrch’s speakership and they got away with it. However, our bought-and-paid-for corporate media will not give Dems the same pass they give to the Fascist Party.

Senior lawmakers and Congressional aides said the broad outlines of the proposal called for the House to consider $30 billion for military operations in Afghanistan, as well as money for military bases and support programs for military families to quiet fears of Pentagon layoffs because of a lack of money.

The Senate would then add up to $40 billion for Iraq combat operations, with the expectation the final war spending total would produce enough Republican support to offset defections by House Democrats.

They expect enough republicans will support what Mr Bu$h wants to offset democratic defections!!! Can you imagine that? They’re planning on defeat. They are conceding the game before it is played.

After the measure returns to the House for a final vote, Democrats opposed to the war are likely to vote against it but may not be able to stop it. The decision to free some money for the war without a deadline or goal for withdrawal would represent a major concession by Democrats. They had earlier said they would not send Mr. Bush any more war money this year unless he accepted a change in Iraq policy.

But Democratic leaders now say they have concluded that a logjam of 11 appropriations bills cannot be broken without acceding to at least some of the president’s demand for more war money.

Mr Hulse’s article speaks with some authority: the Dems will do their face-saving little dance of responsibility before the cameras and then cave as they wring their hands so helplessly, just as they have done oh so many times before to this coward and bully.

Asked publicly on the House floor on Thursday night whether money for Iraq and Afghanistan that was not tied to a withdrawal deadline would be voted on next week, Representative Steny H. Hoyer of Maryland, the majority leader, replied, “I anticipate at some point in time that will be the case.”

When I grow up and become President I want to be like George W Bu$h. I want to lie every day of the year to American citizens and to the elected leaders of the country. I want to fritter away hundreds of tons of money and thousands of gallons of American blood on a foreign war designed to make me think my penis is the most prolific and most powerful penis in the world. Yes, that’s right – when you’re President it’s all about your ego, screw everyone else in the world.

I want to break laws, just like a real outlaw. Better than that, I want to tell everyone I‘m going to disregard any laws the taxpayers’ representatives may write – just flat out tell them, “This law may require you to follow its requirements, but I am going to act as if the strictures you incorporated in it don’t apply to me.”

I’m going to mock people at every turn, laugh at their illnesses, infirmities and diseases, piss down the pants leg of every news paper stenographer in the country and dare them to complain, and generally act like I’m one hell of a swell fellow. I’m gonna dare them to act like men and say something or try to do something.

I’m going to demand Congress give me whatever money I feel like asking for and will disparage them publicly for having the unmitigated gall to think they’re entitled to a voice in the governance process.

Just vote me the money you gutless little chickensqueezings.

That egomaniacal eight year old war criminal is right to treat them with complete contempt.

When reading information about Iraq a prudent man would remember that since Iraq is quite dangerous our intrepid journalists tend to get their information from the MNF-I PR flack of the day or from Bu$h malAdministration sources currently occupying our White House.

Both of these sources have been proven in the past to be inaccurate, as a charitable man might say.

Further on the Anbar question” Gorilla’s Guides has a good piece on the conditions in Anbar today.

RAMADI, Iraq, Nov 29 (IPS) - A semblance of calm belies an undercurrent of violence, detentions and fear across Iraq’s volatile al-Anbar province.

The province — which occupies one-third of Iraq’s geographic area — has been a bane to authorities since the beginning of the occupation.

"The Americans talked about our province as the deadliest enemy, and suddenly they are marketing us as their best friends," Sa’doon Khalifa, an independent politician in the capital city of al-Anbar Province, Ramadi — 110 km west of Baghdad — told IPS. "They were lying to their people and to the world in both cases as we were never terrorists nor their friends now," he stressed.

I tend to believe the writers at Guides, not because they’re on the same side of the ideological coin as I am, but because when I first started reading their work, I made a point of cross-checking what they wrote against other sources and verifying their statements.

Khalifa explained that resistance fighters in al-Anbar did fight occupation forces, but now they are standing down from launching new attacks against U.S. forces.

This is due in large part to U.S. military payments to collaborating tribal sheikhs — already totalling over 17 million dollars. The money funds tribal fighters who are paid 300 dollars per month to patrol their areas, particularly against foreign fighters.

The military refers to these men as "Concerned Local Citizens," "Awakening Force," or simply "volunteers," even though it is well known that most of them used to carry out attacks against the occupation forces.

"Those Americans thought they would decrease the resistance attacks by separating the people of Iraq into sects and tribes," a 32-year-old man from Ramadi — speaking on terms of anonymity — told IPS, "They know they are going deeper into the moving sand, but the collaborators are fooling the Americans right now, and will in the end use this strategy against them."

"It is true that hundreds of fighters were killed or detained by the so-called Awakening Forces, but there are thousands who will never quit fighting until this occupation is ended," Ali Khamees, a former major of the Iraqi army told IPS in Ramadi.

Khamees believes that the de-escalation is a "new technique by the resistance to reduce the suffering of people in al-Anbar and move somewhere else to fight."

Attacks against U.S. forces have increased in other Iraqi provinces — like Diyala, Saladin and Mosul.

The U.S. army reported dozens of soldiers killed throughout November while local reports insisted that the U.S. casualties are much higher than declared.

A fact that seems to escape our never-right brethren and sistren on the Dark Side is that they would fight just as damned hard if the US was occupied by some other country. (Well, I hope they would; I know I would. Possibly the right wing in this country is actually just a pack of cowardly collaborators. I don’t know. I hope we never have to depend on them.)

Lowballing Iraqi casualties would be very easy for MNF-I which is where most of our news comes from, ultimately. It would be more difficult for them to lie about deaths because local newspapers carry obituaries and I’m confident someone somewhere is tabulating those totals. This method would be necessary since Mr Bu$h has denied Americans the privilege of honoring and welcoming their valiant dead home at Andrews Air Base.

Our dead soldiers are sneaked in under cover of night, like thieves attempting to avoid police.

Yet one more indignity these criminals have heaped upon my Army.

That part of the resistance in Iraq that has been erroneously designated as “Al Qaeda” used harsh methods when attacking the occupying forces. The Mahdi Army was also cruel in its treatment of Sunnis during its ethnic cleansing of neighborhoods and districts of Iraq. Torture and beheadings were common. But in Anbar,

Iraqis across the province are complaining about harsh tactics being meted out by the new "Awakening Forces" supported by the U.S.

"We will behead anyone who carries a gun in this province," Wussam Hardan, a senior leader of the Awakening Forces in Ramadi told sources very close to IPS in the city. "No court, no lawyers, no nothing. We have our own ways to get those criminals to confess," Hardan said.

Ooops.

The people of the province fear the recent developments, despite the relative improvement in the security situation.

"It is quieter because the Americans stopped many of their activities in al- Anbar," Shakir Mahmood, a human rights activist in Ramadi told IPS — on condition that his false name be used. "There were so many arrests by U.S. forces, police and the Awakening during the past month and we cannot even talk about it because we feel threatened by all three of them," he said.

"So many of the detainees are well known to be innocent people taken into custody according to false information by others who have a personal feud with them or their families," Mahmood added, "It is the same old story being repeated and God knows what is going to happen next."

The bottom line is that as long as US deaths are down, the Bu$hies are happy. Lower casualties equates to a quieter domestic political climate, and that is their only yardstick.

Yesterday was a good day for George Bu$h. He got to whine and preen and show his eight year old child-mind when petulantly scolding Congress for trying to do its job:

WASHINGTON - President Bush compared Congress' Democratic leaders Thursday to people who ignored the rise of Lenin and Hitler early in the last century, saying "the world paid a terrible price" then and risks similar consequences for inaction today.

Bush accused Congress of stalling important pieces of the fight to prevent new terrorist attacks by: dragging out and possibly jeopardizing confirmation of Michael Mukasey as attorney general, a key part of his national security team; failing to act on a bill governing eavesdropping on terrorist suspects; and moving too slowly to approve spending measures for the Iraq war, Pentagon and veterans programs.

Pitching a hissy fit, the Leader of the Free Work™ objected mightily to Democratic Party attempts to somehow salvage the tattered reputation of the United States and its Department of Justice as it performed its Constitutional mandate while advising and consenting on the nomination of Michael Mukasey, a lawyer of 40+ years experience and judge almost 20 years, who says he has no idea whether or not torture is really torture. The Geneva Conventions, to which the US is a signatory, says waterboarding is torture, but Rudy Giuliani says it all depends on who’s doing it, and that’s good enough for the great solon, Mike Mukasey.

This nation is in deep trouble when it allows sociopaths to create its legal definitions.

Speaking of sociopaths, Mr Bu$h also said,

"Unfortunately, on too many issues, some in Congress are behaving as if America is not at war," Bush said during a speech at the Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank. "This is no time for Congress to weaken the Department of Justice by denying it a strong and effective leader. ... It's no time for Congress to weaken our ability to intercept information from terrorists about potential attacks on the United States of America. And this is no time for Congress to hold back vital funding for our troops as they fight al-Qaida terrorists and radicals in Afghanistan and Iraq."

A sensible man would agree that Justice needs a strong and effective leader, more especially so since it has spent the last few years plumbing the depths of ignorance and partisan politics establishing “dependable” US Attorneys in districts that were expected to produce strong Democratic challenges to the Republican Party in the 2008 elections. Sadly Judge Mukasey may not be the leader we need.

During his recent interviews and recantation so of what he testified to in Congress, Mr Gonzalez showed that he had no idea what was going on in the Department he was legally responsible for.

So, perhaps the prospect of a leader-less Justice isn’t really so bad, is it? After all, what difference is there between an empty chair and an empty suit?

Mr Bu$h’s embarrassing public temper tantrums have begun to be very familiar. He doesn’t want a Congress, really, because it just impedes his style as dictator, and these annoying attempts at Congressional independence and oversight just harsh his mind. The fact that he’s trying to browbeat Congress to just give him the money he’s demanding to find his ego-war for a few more months is heartening because it shows he isn’t quite finished with them.

Bush said any denial of war is dangerous.

"History teaches us that underestimating the words of evil, ambitious men is a terrible mistake," Bush said. "Bin Laden and his terrorist allies have made their intentions as clear as Lenin and Hitler before them. And the question is, will we listen?"

I wonder whether Congress has figured out that Mr Bu$h is at war with them? A sensible man would take note of his comments about evil men. Soon we will see him try to side-step Congress, and rule by administrative and execution order.

Mr Bu$h’s ego-streak continued yesterday when the Senate voted 64-30 to return a slightly-modified SCHIP bill to him. The House has already voted on it, 265-142 and there are some slight differences which will be ironed out. It’s not what he demanded, so we know that George Bu$h will once again deny needy children the health care that might save a life or four. A cynical observer would consider the balance between George Bu$h’s ego and the lives and health of poor and lower middle class children and realize there’s no hope for them as long as he’s in our Oval Office, destroying America.

Today’s WaPo has a followup on the ongoing Blackwater flustercuck that the State Department has created. Karen DeYoung gets into her waders and tries to deal with a basket of snakes.

The State Department said yesterday that it had provided "limited protections" to Blackwater Worldwide security guards under investigation in the deaths of 17 Iraqi civilians but insisted that its actions would not preclude successful prosecution of the contractors.

Signed statements the guards provided to State's Bureau of Diplomatic Security in the immediate aftermath of the Sept. 16 shooting deaths included what law enforcement officials said was a standard disclaimer used in "official administrative inquiries" involving government employees. It said that the statements were being offered with the understanding that nothing in them could be used "in a criminal proceeding."

These “protections” were first described as “immunity.” Knowledeable observers of the Bu$h malAdministration know by now that when they’re caught in one of their almost countless screw ups, the first reaction is either denial, or the first desperate lie that comes to mind. That explains the immunity story. That fable got flushed down the crapper fairly quickly and then State fell back on the story that it was a “partial immunity,” and thus the contractors are, unfortunately not indictable. After all, State did have to get to the truth, didn’t it?

As has now been acknowledged by a State Department spokesman, the Department has absolutely no authority to immunize anyone from any legal proceedings.

The decision to offer Blackwater guards protection from any use of their statements was made by State Department personnel in Baghdad without approval from Washington, sources said. Department lawyers subsequently determined that decades-old federal court rulings required such guarantees against self-incrimination for all government employees during internal investigations; the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 1973 that the protections also applied to federal contractors.

As some might guess, if there is to be criminal action on the Nissoor Square slaughter, among other atrocities, it won’t be happening in Iraq, and if the political decision is made to try the BW guards in order to stop the Democratic push, these “partial immunities” will crop up again in the courtroom and despite their patent non-applicability, they will be sagely argued for days.

State Department spokesman Sean McCormack said yesterday that State has no power to immunize anyone from federal criminal prosecution. "We would not have asked the FBI and the Department of Justice to get involved in a case that we did not think that they could potentially prosecute."

I believe the company owned by Erik Prince, a deep pockets Republican campaign donor and rock hard Fundamentalist will be prosecuted.

Don’t you?

Today’s NY Times blog “The Caucus” discusses Barack Obama’s disgraceful pandering.

COLUMBIA, S.C. _ At Barack Obama’s gospel concert here last night, more than 2,000 black evangelicals were singing, waving their hands and cramming the aisles _ most enthusiastically when Donnie McClurkin, the superstar black gospel singer, decried the criticism he has generated because of his views that homosexuality is a choice.

He said his past statements about homosexuality had been twisted and he had been unfairly maligned. He segued into a hymn about standing up for one’s self and thrust a defiant fist toward the ceiling. This led to a short pitch for Mr. Obama, who, he said, stands for change. “But the greatest change a person can have is not in politics,” he said. “There is only one king.”

Mr. McClurkin is the preacher who had said he was gay but was “cured” through prayer and tonight he was the star act in a parade of star acts, which included the Mighty Clouds.

I know a little something about addictions. I studied up a bit on alcoholism because both my parents were afflicted with this disease. You can’t cure alcoholism, but you can arrest it with effective treatment, which includes honest, even brutal, introspection and a strong resolve to change your life.

From what I’ve read about homosexuality it’s a hard-wired genetic change in our DNA that turns us towards members of the same gender. You can’t change it just with prayer, just as you can’t change alcoholism with prayer alone. I used to have a good laugh when I read fawning stories in the media about George Bu$h changing his life with prayer.

Has anyone who’s been paying attention for the last six years think he’s changed his life by dedicating it to a deity?

His inclusion had drawn public criticism from gay activists who wanted Mr. Obama to cancel his appearance. Mr. Obama did not, but issued a statement a few days ago saying he strongly disagrees with Mr. McClurkin’s views and that he has tried to address what he called the homophobia among some black voters.

So he looks to score points with black Christians, who actually follow the example of that carpenter far more than most of the self-expressed white “Christians” in this land. He invites a black preacher and gospel singer to take the stage with him, thereby implying an endorsement. People start asking what’s up with Pastor McClurkin and his unusual ways and Obama then denies any association, other than, of course, standing on the same stage with him, and at a political rally organized for Senator Obama’s benefit.

I don’t know a lot about the down low lifestyle – just what I’ve read at Steve Gilliard’s. He always said African-Americans were dead set against it, that it was more shameful than among whites. I have to go with his authority, because he was right about so many other things.

I can’t help wondering if Senator Obama really has tried to address the issue of homophobia, or is trying to, or would like to, maybe the best thing to do would have been to have stepped up to the microphone while Pastor McClurkin was heefin and hollerin and put his hand over the mike, and said, “Wait. Wait. You can’t say that. I disagree with the lifestyle too, but you can’t malign people like that. It’s not Christian. Did Jesus malign the lepers? Did he malign the Romans? Did he even malign Judas? Stop. Just stop. Thank you. Go home. We’re not here for this.” That would have put the focus right back on Senator Obama and not on Pastor McClurkin.

That could have established the two-year Senator, with very limited experience at the Federal level, as ready for prime time.

UPDATE: It seems Matt Stoller agrees, at least in part.

Ian Welsh once again speaks the truth that is not permitted in our corrupt and bought-out news media.

[P]onying up to save Afghanistan isn't going to happen. It's not just a matter of "the population" of NATO countries being unhappy, the governments haven't shown the willingness to pay either. In large part that's because while it's a NATO war officially, the US made it clear that Afghanistan wasn't a priority for Washington when the US invaded Iraq. Since Afghanistan isn't a priority for the US, why should it be a priority for anyone else? Sure, there are reasons -- it isn't just the US that has had al-Qaeda inspired attacks, but at the end of the day, Afghanistan was invaded because of 9/11 and if the US, which was attacked that day doesn't take it seriously, no one else is going to massively contribute either.

It is also the case that the money that would be required to win in Afghanistan has been thrown away in tax cuts for the rich, and on domestic pork, corruption and financial bubbles. Massive bonuses for hedge fund managers and record profits for corporations are a choice that America has made about where money should be spent and the refusal to tax that money is likewise a choice.

The people that George Bu$h used as an excuse to loot our Treasury, kill off and maim some of our best and brightest, destroy our Army, and shit on the Constitution will likely win back Afghanistan while the Republicans plan how to turn a probably 2008 Democrat electoral victory into accusations of treason so they can win in 2012.

While the US is fulminating over Iran, and the possibility it might get nukes it would never use in a first strike, the possibility of a real nuclear power, which already has nukes, falling to people much more radical than the Mullahs seems to be only peripherally on Washington's radar.

Unless they’re counting on it as part of their 2012 strategy. Creating a corporate dictatorship has a higher priority than national security.

Living in the Age of Bu$h.

This morning’s NY Times has an editorial pointing out that Kanye West was wrong when he said, “George Bu$h doesn’t like black people.” Actually, he doesn’t like any people, unless they’re millionaires, or corporations. Congress passed a renewal of the SCHIP act and Mr Bu$h vetoed it because it was wasted money that should have been spent on his legacy, the ego-war he’s saddled the nation with. (Yes, I know he said he provided for $5 billion more in his budget, but that wasn’t enough to keep pace with inflation and increased medical care costs. As I said, he just didn’t want to waste money on poor children that could be spent on the defense industry. If he’s entitled to his outrageous lies, then I’m entitled to mine.)

The House approved a revised bill to finance the children’s health insurance program yesterday by a 265-to-142 margin — a strong mandate, but still not enough to overcome another promised veto by President Bush.

If the president carries out this threat, we hope Congressional tacticians can find a way to enact this important measure over the adamant, ideologically driven opposition of Mr. Bush and House Republican leaders. The health of millions of children who lack insurance cannot be held hostage to the president’s visceral distaste for government and its essential role to protect the weak, or his desire to protect the tobacco industry.

The Times is wrong here. When George Bu$h vetoes this newest bill, they should turn it around and send it back up again two days later. Let him veto it again. Send it up a third time, and let him veto it again.

House Democrats tried hard to address the issues raised and relentlessly hyped by Republican critics. The bill would speed up the removal of childless adults who have been enrolled in the program in a handful of states, and would reduce the enrollment of parents, even though including parents is often the best way to reach their children.

So the Dems, gave in, and denied needy children in families making what the elititst and aristocratic millionaire Republican politicians consider “too much money.” Sorry, lower middle income kids in families living on incomes more than three times the poverty level. It’s your own damned fault for not being born into a Republican politician’s family. Next time show better biological sense.

Our own feeling is that states where the cost of living is high should be able to cover middle-class families. But if limiting the program to 300 percent of the poverty level is necessary to get this important legislation enacted, that would be a price worth paying.

The administration says it does not want to add $35 billion more to enlarge the program, known as S-chip, over the next five years. The House bill would pay for that largely by raising tobacco taxes, but that does not satisfy the White House. The president is also opposed to enlarging a government-financed insurance program that he says might compete with private insurance. To allay those fears , the new bill would encourage premium assistance to help families buy private policies and require all states to come up with policies to lessen the incentive to switch to S-chip.

But that still wasn‘t good enough for the Republicans. This is a stupid game. The Republicans will always find something wrong with any bill the Democrats produce. This game isn’t about sick children unable to get medical help. It’s about making the Democrats look hapless. Just how stupid are Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, and Heny Stoyer anyway? Have they been kicked so many times they’ve forgotten how to play a home game?

George Bu$h is a bully. The Republican leadershp in the House is a pack of yapping dogs, chasing at his heels. They’re bullies, too. Bullies only stop when they are defied. I learned this in the third grade. I don’t understand why the alleged Democratic leaders in Congress never grasped this simple lesson of life.

This morning’s NY Times points out the obvious: Mr Bu$h’s ego-war is damned expensive.

President Bush waited until he had vetoed a relatively inexpensive children’s health insurance bill before asking for tens of billions of dollars more for his misadventure in Iraq. The cynicism of that maneuver is only slightly less shameful than the president’s distorted priorities. Despite a pretense of fiscal prudence, Mr. Bush keeps throwing money at his war, regardless of the cost in blood, treasure or children’s health care.

Mr. Bush is threatening to veto most of the 12 domestic spending bills now before Congress because Democrats want to provide $22 billion more than the $933 billion he has requested. His argument? Something about the president’s responsibility to rein in lawmakers’ “temptation to overspend.”

This from a leader who turns federal surpluses into deficits, believes that the Iraq and Afghanistan wars can be financed on a separate set of books with borrowed money, and keeps having to go back to Congress for “emergency funding” because he cannot or will not tell the truth about what it is costing to fight these wars.[emph added]

Well, I can’t think of much to add, actually. This is like reading the Times of pre-1993 when the paper actually acted like a responsible public entity.

The Bu$h malAdministration elected to fight a war in Iraq despite the lack of logic to support that. In fact, we’ve seen that Mr Bu$h was actually determined to attack Iran in 1999, which is not surprising, since his brother JEB! joined up as a charter member of PNAC in 1996. A lot of people have accused PNAC of being war-mongers. Not true. They’re bat-shit crazy war-mongers. The original manifesto was clear: all of the Middle East must be “transformed” into a “lake of democracy” so that the little boat USS United States could cruise effortlessly and easily on its unrolled waters. There’s hardly a nation in the world that has achieved democracy without violence, and they planned for violence in the Middle East, picking Iraq as their starting point. They judged correctly that it was the central point in the region and massive military power could be exercised from there in order to assure that all the other countries thought “correctly,” as our old friends in the USSR described it.

Mr. Bush has said most of the new money would go for “day-to-day” military operations and “basic needs” like bullets, body armor and mine-resistant ambush-protected vehicles, which are designed to withstand bomb attacks, a rising threat to American forces in Iraq. The troops need safer vehicles and better armor, but it is beyond our ken why Mr. Bush could not cover this in his original budget submission, unless he wanted to confuse the public and limit Congressional oversight.

Actually, not all that money is going for “day-to-day” operations, as we’ll see in another commentary. [ed: below] Some part of this demand – because that is what it is when Mr Bu$h tells Congress to cough up some more of our grandchildren’s future – is going to MRAPs because the Iraqi resistance has discovered a really terrific way of fighting the occupation. IEDs have killed off quite a few American soldiers, and wounded many more. I can‘t help think that if there really is a heaven and hell Sam Adams is nudging Henry “Lighthorse Harry” Lee and Francis “Swamp Fox” Marion in the ribs and saying, “Don’t you wish we’d had something like that? Ah! How we could have slaughtered the English with them! We’d have been free years sooner.”

We’ll have more about MRAPs in another commentary. [ed: below]

Mr Bu$h is determined that not one soldier leave Iraq unless he is replaced by another, because his famous gut tells him this is the proper way to deliver the Middle East to the bat-shit crazy war-mongers of PNAC. Plus, it’s damned good for his best friends, the defense industry, and big corporations, including Big Oil.

Ironically enough, taming all the Arab countries, and turning them into either outright satraps or Western-aligned “democracies” is exactly what Oded Yinon described in the mid-80s in his “Strategy for a Greater Israel” in the Middle East. But I’m not allowed to suggest that our foreign and military policy is being run from Tel Aviv, because that would be anti-Semitic.

This morning’s NY Times starts with a simple bland fact about the fires in Southern California and then commits premeditated journalism.

With Katrina Fresh, Bush Moves Briskly

WASHINGTON, Oct. 23 — It was not quite 2:30 a.m. in Washington on Tuesday when Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger of California asked President Bush to declare an emergency because of the wildfires raging in his state. An hour or so later, the request — pre-approved by Mr. Bush before he left the Oval Office on Monday evening — was granted.

By the time most Californians awoke on Tuesday, the Pentagon had sent helicopters and troops to California and the homeland security secretary and head of the Federal Emergency Management Agency were on their way. By Tuesday evening, the White House announced that Mr. Bush himself would go on Thursday. He canceled a trip to St. Louis, planning to send Vice President Dick Cheney instead.

Quite a difference between the California fires and Mr Bu$h’s lackadaisical reaction to New Orleans being flooded out. The Times starts out suggesting it’s all a case of “once burned, twice wary,” which is just not the sort of reaction we’ve come to expect from the Bu$h malAdministration, which has seemed ideologically determined to go to almost any lengths to cosset the wealthy and religiously insane bases of the country and to remove as much social support as possible from the middle class and poor.

But still, maybe it’s better to just calmly and objectively examine the situation. Maybe it’s better to hope, like Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi, that maybe this time is different.

[I]f actions were not enough, Mr. Bush also served up words, interrupting a speech on Tuesday morning about the global campaign against terrorism to talk about the disaster. After warning of the threat of a ballistic missile attack, he segued into the wildfires, saying, “We send our prayers and thoughts with those who’ve been affected, and we send the help of the federal government as well.”

I know the residents who have been displaced, and those burned out, are appreciative of Mr Bu$h’s prayers. We all offer them.

There are a lot of hell-on-earth quotes going around abut this series of fires. This one is representative:

"It was nuclear winter. It was like Armageddon. It looked like the end of the world." - San Diego city firefighter Mitch Mendler.

So, why the difference this time? Opinions vary.

He’s trying to be proactive on something that he can be proactive on,” said James Thurber, director of the Center for the Congressional and Presidential Studies at American University. “He can’t be proactive on Social Security reform or Medicare funding, but this is one of the areas where he can. I think it’s part of a larger picture of how weak he is, especially domestically.”

Republican strategists say the all-out effort will help Mr. Bush but is not likely to be enough to restore his reputation — even in a state like California with a friendly Republican governor who is clearly coordinating his efforts with Mr. Bush.

But as Dan Schnur, a Republican strategist in California, said: “The worst possible situation for the White House would have been to have had even one state or local elected official complaining that they hadn’t heard back yet from the administration. This is still a very red state, so the accomplishment might be in terms of further damage avoided, rather than political capital gained.”

OK, that’s one view. The Times has a little sidebar that suggests another. Readers can draw their own conclusion about the sidebar and the reason it was included in the story.

THE AREA AFFECTED

Some people might say that the providential flooding of New Orleans required the dispersal of the very heavily Democratic population of New Orleans to 10 different states so as to thin out the numbers and allow the rest of the state, primarily Republican state to regain control of the state house and governorship. Louisiana only controls nine electoral votes, but that's still desirable in the red column.

Politics is just the art of the possible.

Last week I wrote about Senator Rockefeller’s decision to destroy the US Constitution for money. So did many other liberal and progressive bloggers. The story of Mr Rockefeller’s relaxed sense of protecting the civil rights of Americans when faced with the chance of taking cash has reached the Big Time.

Writing in today’s NY Tmes Eric Lichtblau and Scott Shane give some details of just how easily ATT and Verizon bought him off, and how he and his office are now practicing guilty denial.

Companies Seeking Immunity Donate to Senator

WASHINGTON, Oct. 22 — Executives at the two biggest phone companies contributed more than $42,000 in political donations to Senator John D. Rockefeller IV this year while seeking his support for legal immunity for businesses participating in National Security Agency eavesdropping.

The surge in contributions came from a Who’s Who of executives at the companies, AT&T and Verizon, starting with the chief executives and including at least 50 executives and lawyers at the two utilities, according to campaign finance reports.

The money came primarily from a fund-raiser that Verizon held for Mr. Rockefeller in March in New York and another that AT&T sponsored for him in May in San Antonio.

Just in case you think Mr Rockefeller has been a long-time favorite of the telcos, Messers Lichtblau and Shane have done their homework (a rarity in the dead-tree biniss.)

Mr. Rockefeller received little in the way of contributions from AT&T or Verizon executives before this year, reporting $4,050 from 2002 through 2006. From last March to June, he collected a total of $42,850 from executives at the two companies. The increase was first reported by the online journal Wired, using data compiled by the Web site OpenSecrets.org.

There isn’t much to say about this that hasn’t already been said. The real sickness infecting the American political process isn’t the insanity of the Republican Party and its even-more-insane fake Christians; it’s corporations and the vast amounts of ca$h they bring to the table. A truly cynical man would figure they’re also available to supply folding “walking around” money, but of course that’s hard to prove.

Mr. Rockefeller’s office said Monday that the sharp increases in contributions from the telecommunications executives had no influence on his support for the immunity provision.

“Any suggestion that Senator Rockefeller would make policy decisions based on campaign contributions is patently false,” Wendy Morigi, a spokeswoman for him, said. “He made his decision to support limited immunity based on the Intelligence Committee’s careful review of the situation and our national security interests.”

Dictionaries seem to define the word patently as “plainly” and “obviously” although a man with his eyes wide open would be looking carefully to see whether Wendy Morigi’s nose is growing.

A spokeswoman for AT&T, Claudia B. Jones, said contributions from its executives related to Mr. Rockefeller’s role on the Senate Commerce Committee, not immunity or other questions before the Intelligence Committee.

“Many AT&T executives work with the leaders of both the House and Senate Commerce Committees on a daily basis and have come to know them over the years,” Ms. Jones said.

A cynical man – you know – a politically aware American - would immediately understand that Senator Rockefeller wouldn’t recognize an ATT executive if he tripped over the guy, unless the guy had a bulging wallet sticking out of his pocket.

If you travel around much, you probably know that major hotel chains have a “corporate rate” for hotel rental rates. Now we know what the corporate rate is for violating laws.

$42,000.

I wonder what the individual rate for protection is in Mr Rockefeller’s office? You see, I had this problem in Oklahoma a few years ago.