Tuesday, June 29, 2004

More signs the end is near

Military personel is supposed to be the GOP bread and butter. I have a funny feeling that trend is about to end.

Army Recalling Thousands Who Left Service

And would anyone on the right care to explain how this doesn't conflict with the constant push from the GOP to make state labor laws conform with the "Right to Work" idealogy.

One more thing - this website is fucking hysterical - enter any website and it makes it porntastic.

Saturday, June 12, 2004

Why does it take a Republican to hit the nail right on the head?

From this artcile in the New York Times;

When Tom Brokaw of NBC suggested to Bob Dole that Ronald Reagan had been an inspiring flag-bearer for the World War II generation, it was a bit too much for Mr. Dole, who was wounded in Italy. He replied dryly that Mr. Reagan, who spent the war making Army training films in Hollywood, had never heard a shot fired. "But he was a captain," Mr. Dole said. "And mighty proud of it."

Wednesday, June 09, 2004

More signs the end is near for W

Gotten from this article off of Capitol Hill Blue;

"It reminds me of the Nixon days,” says a longtime GOP political consultant with contacts in the White House. “Everybody is an enemy; everybody is out to get him. That’s the mood over there.”

In interviews with a number of White House staffers who were willing to talk off the record, a picture of an administration under siege has emerged, led by a man who declares his decisions to be “God’s will” and then tells aides to “fuck over” anyone they consider to be an opponent of the administration.

“We’re at war, there’s no doubt about it. What I don’t know anymore is just who the enemy might be,” says one troubled White House aide. “We seem to spend more time trying to destroy John Kerry than al Qaeda and our enemies list just keeps growing and growing.”

And I found this one really fascinating;

WASHINGTON - A new book on the Bush political dynasty claims former President George H.W. Bush opposed last year's invasion of Iraq.

In "The Bushes: Portrait of a Dynasty," Peter and Rochelle Schweizer cite as evidence a summer 2002 interview in which the older Bush's sister said her brother had expressed his "anguish" about the administration's preparations for war.

"But do they have an exit strategy?" the former President is quoted as worrying.

"Although he never went public with them," the authors assert, "the President's own father shared many of [the] concerns" of Brent Scowcroft, his national security adviser and a leading war opponent.

Top Bush aide Jean Becker denied the allegations yesterday.

Monday, June 07, 2004

After much thought I figured out a way to pay my respects to Reagan, and expose what a third rate hack DubyaCo. is at the same time.

So What Else is News on Air America interviewed Walter Mondale about his impression of Reagan. He said he liked REagan personally, and admired his sunny optimism. Mondale even spoke in respective tones regarding the 1984 election. Reagan did not engage in the ugly personal attack style politics that now seem to be the norm. This might have something to do with Reagan's popularity, but I didn't follow politics back then. Heck I didn't know much about politics period, on account that I was 9 years old.

I certainly didn't like Reagan's policies then, and I didn't even know about the details of Reagan's Foreign Policy regarding Latin American. It seemed like a waste, for all the moolah that Reagan blew during the 1980's for nuclear ballistics and defense spending, but I would agree that our excessive defense spending contributed (not single handedly led) to the fall of Communism and the USSR.

We are, to this day, still paying for this strategy. The debt that was amassed during the Reagan Administration still hangs over our collective heads. The huge increase in the Pentagon's budget plus the tax cuts can be blamed for this one. Call it the Peace divided, or rather the Peace deficit. I would imagine that, had I been politically active during that period of time, I would have disagreed with the tax cuts Reagan implemented, BUT I will say this; charging 70% as the tax rate for those in the top tax bracket seems over the top. I know there are some libs who may balk at that comment, but 70% just seems excessive. Anything more than 1/2 in taxes for "earned income" doesn't seem right to me. What do I know?

Either way, here's my point; I know plenty of GOP strategists who would love to align Bush Junior with the Reagan legacy, but there is one huge glaring difference. During the 1984 re-election campaign Reagan didn't not mention Mondale's name till September. Reagan's popularity, or optimism, or confidence, allowed him to virtually ignore Modale until roughly the last two months of the campaign.

Bush on the other hand was trashing Kerry as soon as he was the inevitable Democratic nominee. I'm pretty sure Bush was running negative ads back in March, though I may be off by a little, so please correct me if I'm wrong. Think about that for one second - Reagan didn't say Modale's name till the last 8 weeks before election day. Dubya started in March and continues to run THE MOST NEGATIVE CAMPAIGN IN AMERICAN HISTORY.

For what it's worth I send my condolences to the Reagan family.

With that note, no amount of marketing or campaign contributions will hide the fact that Bush is a miserable failure. I'm looking forward to seeing Bush ejected from 1600 Pennsylvania Ave come November. At least Reagan could blame anything that went wrong on a Democratic Congress, like when Reagan blamed Tip O'Neil for pulling out of Lebanon, despite the fact that Ronnie was the one in charge of our troops. Dubya has no one else to blame for the failures of the last 3-1/2 years but his neo-con enablers, the lemmings in the House, and most of all himself.

After the tax cuts of 1981, Reagan and budget advisor David Stockman had enough sensibility to recognize that their "starve the beast" idea was not working. This is why Reagan raised taxes three times after the tax cut, to keep the Treasury from being swallowed in a sea of red ink. The myopia that afflicts the current hacks in Congress and the White House has blinded them from recognizing something so obvious, that the tax cuts are a disaster. Someone else will have to pay the price for the mess he's made. Nobody in the House and less than a handful in the Senate are prepared to admit the train wreck we're heading for.

Hell, the people surrounding Reagan were better crooks that the crazies that Dubya surrounds himself with. Somebody, or a whole lot of somebodys, in the Reagan administration managed to hide Iran Contra for a good long time, until after the 84 election. On the other hand the scandals come so hard and so fast at Dubya that by the time the shock has worn off of the most recent scandal a new one arrives. There might be a Bush fatigue at some point, although the American populace is more likely to just be plain sick of Dubya and send him packing. There's always a new scandal to take an old one's place. Face it, Cheney and the others are just sloppy crooks and thieves. I guess I should be happy about that one.

I heard this morning that no president has been re-elected when their approval rating is less that 50% by May or June. Dubya is below that number as of right now, which does not bode well for him. It may look like 200 Million dollars in campaign contributions cannot buy the White House. Can you imagine the level of failure this will be? The magnitude of money raised without putting the guy in office could change the way people look at campaign fundraising for Presidential campaigns in the future. Think of all those Rangers and Pioneers, imagine how pissed all those people will be when they've dropped serious coin on Bush and he still gets the pink slip. Some have predicted the possibility of a GOP bloodbath should the GOP lose the Presidency and one of the bodies on congress (possibly both?). The House won't be easy, but the Senate is well within reach.

In light of this stark comparrison, I have some advice for the current President; You may want to do some networking with all those heavyweights you'll be seeing at Ronnie's funeral. Update the resume perhaps? You never know who can help you out with a job. Because, by the looks of things, you're gonna need a new one come January.

Wednesday, June 02, 2004

Pending Draft Legislation Targeted for Spring 2005 The Draft will Start in June 2005

Does anyone out there in the blogosphere feel any differently about their support of war and the government we have with this kind of information floating around? Would anyone have thought twice about their support for the war had the true cost and consequences would be if we were to engage in it?

NPR had a report about how much we've asked of our Armed Forces thru the past couple of years. Extended tours of duty, among other things. Our armed forces are reaching a point where they are stretched. This administration lied to us about the necessary forces in order to prosecute this war. In the planning stages of the war General Shinseki gave an estimate of how many troops our nation would need to win this war. When Dubya Co. didn't get the answer they wanted they forced General Shinkseki to retire. Looks like General Shinseki was right.

Larry Linsey gave a more truthful answer about the cost of the war and he was fired for it.

To anyone who loves their children or has the potential to love any future child of this country, please speak out against forcing people onto a battlefield. Especially when the driving force behind such a legislation is lead by the greed for oil. Don't let this happen again!!!!!!!!!!!

From http://www.congress.org

There is pending legislation in the House and Senate (twin bills: S 89 and HR 163) which will time the program's initiation so the draft can begin at early as Spring 2005 -- just after the 2004 presidential election. The administration is quietly trying to get these bills passed now, while the public's attention is on the elections, so our action on this is needed immediately.

$28 million has been added to the 2004 Selective Service System (SSS) budget to prepare for a military draft that could start as early as June 15, 2005. Selective Service must report to Bush on March 31, 2005 that the system, which has lain dormant for decades, is ready for activation. Please see website: www.sss.gov/perfplan_fy2004.html to view the sss annual performance plan - fiscal year 2004.

The pentagon has quietly begun a public campaign to fill all 10,350 draft board positions and 11,070 appeals board slots nationwide.. Though this is an unpopular election year topic, military experts and influential members of congress are suggesting that if Rumsfeld's prediction of a "long, hard slog" in Iraq and Afghanistan [and a permanent state of war on "terrorism"] proves accurate, the U.S. may have no choice but to draft.

Congress brought twin bills, S. 89 and HR 163 forward this year, http://www.hslda.org/legislation/na...s89/default.asp entitled the Universal National Service Act of 2003, "to provide for the common defense by requiring that all young persons [age 18--26] in the United States, including women, perform a period of military service or a period of civilian service in furtherance of the national defense and homeland security, and for other purposes." These active bills currently sit in the committee on armed services.

Dodging the draft will be more difficult than those from the Vietnam era.

College and Canada will not be options. In December 2001, Canada and the U.S. signed a "smart border declaration," which could be used to keep would-be draft dodgers in. Signed by Canada's minister of foreign affairs, John Manley, and U.S. Homeland Security director, Tom Ridge, the declaration involves a 30-point plan which implements, among other things, a "pre-clearance agreement" of people entering and departing each country. Reforms aimed at making the draft more equitable along gender and class lines also eliminates higher education as a shelter. Underclassmen would only be able to postpone service until the end of their current semester. Seniors would have until the end of the academic year.

Even those voters who currently support US actions abroad may still object to this move, knowing their own children or grandchildren will not have a say about whether to fight. Not that it should make a difference, but this plan, among other things, eliminates higher education as a shelter and includes women in the draft.

The public has a right to air their opinions about such an important decision.

Please send this on to all the friends, parents, aunts and uncles, grandparents, and cousins that you know. Let your children know too -- it's their future, and they can be a powerful voice for change!

Please also contact your representatives to ask them why they aren't telling their constituents about these bills -- and contact newspapers and other media outlets to ask them why they're not covering this important story.