We’ve been told Obama’s “got this” because he can shoot hoops in the WH basement with skill, and grab flies out of the air like a Kung Fu master. We’ve been told Obama’s playing “multidimensional chess” with his opponents by continuing every single one of the illegal and anti-democratic policies of his Neocon predecessor. And now, with the health insurance reform debate gone all Town Hall during recess, we are told we don’t really need health insurance reform, single payer health care, or even a public option to facilitate the expected mandate we’ll be handed that forces us to pay more money than we’ve got to the murder-by-spreadsheed for-profit industry.

We still have “state secrets” privilege on who’s lobbying in the Oval Office. We still have DADT in the military. We still have two illegal wars going, a new third front opened in Columbia, off-the-books deficits accumulated by the fact that there’s twice as many paid mercenaries in those war zones than U.S. soldiers, we’re still rendering and torturing “detainees” who haven’t been charged with any crimes and haven’t been afforded the status of POWs, and we’re still bailing out Wall Street gamblers to the tune of multiple trillions while not even beginning to address reinstating necessary regulations.

A plethora of Democratic/Progressive activist groups have sprung up to pressure Congress and the White House on these issues as well as health insurance reform, letter-writing campaigns, calls and emails to representatives and senators, mass demonstrations… You name it, it’s being done. And what we get from the WH is insults and dismissals as those of us anywhere to the left of center are repeatedly told to STFU.

Meanwhile, I am receiving between 6 and a dozen pleas for money every single day from various Democratic entities. DCCC, DLC, etc., etc., each one of them extolling me to give more to ensure that “my” interests are represented and protected by people who have amply demonstrated they don’t represent my interests or care about protecting me or my family from the corporatist policies of the Neocons who Won’t Go Away. So I have decided to take a clue from my grandson, who turned 18 last year and registered to vote for the first time. For Obama, of course.

We were originally a little piqued that he chose to register Independent instead of Democratic, but he was adamant and is perfectly happy with his choice. In our state he could still vote in the primary – one merely has to request either the Dem or Rep ballot to vote in one of them, it doesn’t matter what your own registration is. And I notice that he never gets any political mail asking for money he hasn’t got or telling him outrageous lies about what ‘his’ party’s doiing in the state or in D.C.

If the end product of this health insurance charade turns out just as it looks very strongly to be turning out, I am changing my voter registration from Democrat to Independent. Figure that the party hacks who don’t care about what I think or want can do what they do without my support or my money. They can just cross me off their list, and my email will be much more manageable. In writing this, there’s a small chance that others might consider the idea to be pretty good, and perhaps a few of them will change their registration too. If the idea catches on, a lot of people might decide to change their registration to reflect something real that nobody in D.C. seems to have noticed.

The Republicans are now marginalized to a regional sub-party status, claiming less than 20% of all voters and dominant in only 5 states. Libertarians are stronger than that. They’ve a few leftover power brokers in D.C. stonewalling all things necessary to save the country, but Democrats dominate. Dems now calll themselves the “Center-Right” party, telling us that the 79% of Americans who are center-left to progressive are insignificant. We don’t deserve representation. If they were to actually LOSE that 79% – or any considerable fraction of it – they just might have to start doing the jobs they were elected (by us) to do. And if not, we can go ahead and field candidates of our own and have a real chance of winning.

We are all the way to a single-party system in this country, all possible challengers relegated to 20% of the electorate or less. Except for the left-leaners in the dominant party, who have been told to STFU. Well, okay. We can split that coconut rather dramatically, and end up with a larger portion than they’ve got left.

Or not. I won’t be holding my breath for other progressives to catch a clue. I’m changing my registration and getting my name off their fundraising list. After more than a week of battling swine flu, it’ll make me feel much better, I’m sure. Wish me luck!

After just 64 days in office attempting to orchestrate some way out of the unholy mess those nutty Neocons left in their disastrous 8-year wake, President Barack Obama (oooh, I love saying that!) held his second hour long in-depth press conference on Tuesday night. Imagine a POTUS who actually makes himself available on occasion to the press to answer real questions! A POTUS who can speak proper English without inventing nonsense words out of whole cloth and lapsing into feigned ‘folksiness’ or juvenile frat-boy antics! This is all quite foreign to a populace that votes not for intelligence and ability, but on who they’d most like to get drunk with down at the bowling alley. Wow. It’s beginning to like like America just might have decided to join the 21st century at long last, doesn’t it?

In this second presser Obama chose not to call on ‘the usual suspects’ among the WH Press Corps’ denizens (who got their chance at the spotlight last month). He didn’t call upon reporters from the Washington Post, the New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, the Los Angeles Times, the Chicago Tribune or even USA Today. Instead, he gave the backup bench a bit of a workout. This predictably led the stars to whine loudly that they weren’t getting their due amount of attention from their host.

But the true highlight of the evening was when Obama went ahead and DID call on one of those usual suspects – Ed Henry of CNN, who tried really hard for a “gotcha” question Obama would trip and fall over. Henry had already asked the question, but didn’t like the answer. So thought he’d have another go at wasting valuable air time with his oversized ego.

Henry wanted to know – and know right now – why it took Obama two days to come out publicly with outrage about the AIG bonuses. Especially since other people were expressing outrage right away. Visibly annoyed, Obama delivered a bitch-slap right to Henry’s cheek…

“It took us a couple of days because I like to know what I’m talking about before I speak.”

Oh, OUCH!!!!! That’s gotta hurt.

You can put lipstick on a pig, but it’s still a pig. An old adage of folk wisdom akin to not buying a pig in a poke, not happening until pigs fly, and teenager’s bedrooms likened to a pig-sty. It’s been a coon’s age to a gnat’s ass, he needs to buck up and take it like a man, you can’t make a silk purse from a sow’s ear.

Republican John McCain’s campaign flunkies are all over this observation about the situation in Iraq, claiming that Obama called VP hopeful Sarah Palin a “pig” because she likened herself to a “pit bull with lipstick” in her RNC acceptance speech. What a total load of hooey! Looks to me like John McCain’s campaign thinks of Sarah Palin as a pig wearing lipstick, and wants everyone to notice.

When Joe Biden talked about funding for stem cell research in hope of treatments and cures for genetic diseases, the McCain campaign insisted the subject of people with ’special needs’ is off the table because Palin has a baby with Downs Syndrome. Huh!??! That’s like saying the subject of health care is off the table because Sarah Palin flew 2,000 miles and drove an hour across the tundra after her water broke so she could have a baby with Downs Syndrome at her local stitch-em-up. Or…

The subject of sex education is off the table because Sarah Palin’s 17-year old daughter is pregnant. The subject of co-mingling church and state is off the table because Sarah Palin’s a dominionist holy-roller. The subject of reproductive rights is off the table because Sarah Palin can’t keep from getting pregnant. The state of the union is off the table because the Palins have secessionist ties. Science education is off the table because Sarah Palin believes Adam and Eve rode to church on a dinosaur. The subject of family law is off the table because Sarah Palin’s in the middle of a blood feud with her ex-in-laws…

Wow. Who’d have thought at the beginning of the summer that the Republicans would succeed in taking all issues of national concern and policy off the table just by picking a whiny, self-described pit bull wearing lipstick as Vice-Presidential running-mate? Thaaaaat’s some clever new 21st century Politics!

There is hope that the Tabloid Press can manage to reach the millions of low-information voters at the grocery checkout lines with lurid details of the Palin family’s dysfunctional soap operas in the not-so frozen northland. But then, those same low-information voters might vote for McCain/Palin just to keep themselves in cheap entertainment for the next four years. There is hope that Americans with 3-digit IQs will wake up and smell the frying bacon… er, mooseburgers, vote the nation’s best interests this fall instead of their own boredom.

You never know… we might be pleasantly surprised.

It seems that Bush’s visit to Europe last week has produced some recommitment to his ever-expanding Mid-East War, at least from the Brits. I’m figuring that Palau isn’t quite ready to invade Iran for us. Prime Minister Gordon Brown, however, did promise tougher sanctions on Iran and an increase in its troop strength in Afghanistan. Brown announced that he has ordered a freeze on the assets of Iran’s biggest bank.

The New York Times reported Monday that Brown sought to speak directly to the Iranian people during the joint Bush/Brown press conference.

“We will take action today that will freeze the overseas assets of the biggest bank in Iran, the Melli bank, and secondly, action will start today for a new phase of sanctions on oil and gas.”

Bush reiterated that “all options” were on the table in regards to U.S. actions against Iran, which includes military strikes. Brown committed to increased troop strength in Afghanistan as NATO began redeploying forces to meet a new threat there as hundreds of Taliban fighters took over villages in the south over the weekend during heavy fighting, releasing hundreds of insurgents from the Kandahar prison.

U.S. troops are primarily bogged down in Iraq, supplying the bulk of troops in that country, with fewer than 20,000 troops in Afghanistan. This years after “success” of the missions was declared – it looks like we’ve had less trouble ejecting leadership in those countries than we’ve had in “securing the peace” in either. Some troops have done as many as six tours of duty and are being prevented from leaving the service by “stop loss” directives.

Where the heck is he planning to get troops to deal with Iran? I mean, if he just sends in the Air Force to bomb them, what makes him think the Iranian Army won’t cross into Iraq and Afghanistan to wreak havoc on our troops there?

Despite Bush’s desire to leave America in much, much worse shape than he found it in 2000, opening yet another front in his ‘forever-war’ isn’t a very good idea. Will Congress act to prevent it this time?

The web page for Forever Friends Pet Cremation Services explains…

Pet cremation is a clean, sanitary way of saving your pet’s remains. Pet cremation is environmentally sound, providing an alternative to placement in municipal landfill sites, or for those who do not have adquate space for burying their pets.

The problem of taking up space in municipal landfill sites must have been a big consideration when an officer accompanying the body of a comrade to his final disposition discovered that the military had contracted with Forever Friends to handle the bodies of US servicemembers killed in Afghanistan and Iraq.

On Friday [May 9] the Pentagon banned the arrangement, which had been in place since 2001. According to a story in the Washington Post, Some War Dead Were Cremated at Facility Handling Pets, Pentagon officials say they don’t think human and animal remains were ever comingled at the facility. That will probably soothe the outrage of families who might suspect from this news that they’ve got some dog’s ashes in that urn or plot instead of their loved one.

From now on, the Pentagon promises, all cremations will be done by crematories associated with actual human funeral homes. For those who thought it wasn’t a very good idea when these wars of foreign aggression were started that the news media was barred from photographing returning coffins or covering funerals of service personnel killed in those wars, this is just one more reason why it behooves us to pay some real attention to the horrors the new “privatized military” brings. It’s cheaper to cremate dogs than people, so I’m sure some pencil-pusher honestly thought no one would ever be the wiser.

Those whose loved ones were cremated after they were killed in action will no doubt be gratified to know that Secretary of Defense Robert Gates found “the site and signage insensitive and entirely inappropriate for the dignified treatment of our fallen. The families of the fallen have the secretary’s deepest apologies,” Pentagon press secretary Geoff Morrell said at a news conference hastily staged when the news hit the fan.

Worse, had the officer not attended the cremation of his friend (because no family members were present), the situation might never have become known. Lt. General Frank Klotz, Director of the Air Force Staff, said he doesn’t know whether ANY military officer previously had ever inspected the contracted crematories.

David Bose, manager of Forever Friends, said that typically service members would drop off remains at his crematory after he signed the paperwork, and would return the next day to sign for and pick up the cremains. This is contrary to normal procedure described by Gen. Klotz, where the military provides escort for all service members killed overseas during all transport and processing at the Dover mortuary until the deceased returns home for interment.

Wow. My father and father-in-law, whose trifolded flags adorn the mantle in glass cases honoring their service to this nation would be spinning in their graves in total outrage! Or, in the case of my own father who spent 27 years being the best he could be, there would probably be tears and a badly broken heart.

There is something very, very wrong here. It’s been wrong ever since GW Bush launched these ill-conceived oil wars, and it’s still wrong today even though we hear that the Pentagon won’t be cremating our war dead with assorted dead cats and dogs any more since last Friday. I hope some outraged, still-human country in this world takes these war criminals to the Hague someday. They deserve it.

Links:

Some War Dead Cremated at Facility for Pets
Pentagon objects to cremation facilities
Pentagon Shipping Troops’ Remains to Pet Crematory
Forever Friends Pet Cremation Services

The full text of the letter is below the fold:

April 3, 2008

The Honorable Michael Mukasey ?Attorney General of the United States ?U.S. Department of Justice ?950 Pennsylvania Ave., NW ?Washington, DC 20530

Dear Mr. Attorney General:

We are writing about two disturbing recent revelations concerning the actions and inactions by the Department of Justice and the federal government to combat terrorism. These include a public statement by you that appears to suggest a fundamental misunderstanding of the federal government’s existing surveillance authority to combat terrorism, as well as possible malfeasance by the government prior to 9/11, and the partial disclosure of the contents of a secret Department memorandum concerning Executive Branch authority to combat terrorism, which has been previously requested to be provided to Congress. We ask that you promptly provide that memorandum and that you clarify your public statement in accordance with the questions below.

First, according to press reports, in response to questions at a March 27 speech, you defended Administration wiretapping programs and proposals to change the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) by referring to a pre-9/11 incident. Before the 9/11 terrorist attacks, you stated, “we knew that there had been a call from someplace that was known to be a safe house in Afghanistan and we knew that it came to the United States. We didn’t know precisely where it went. You’ve got 3,000 people who went to work that day, and didn’t come home, to show for that.”1

This statement is very disturbing for several reasons. Initially, despite extensive inquiries after 9/11, I am aware of no previous reference, in the 9/11 Commission report or elsewhere, to a call from a known terrorist safe house in Afghanistan to the United States which, if it had been intercepted, could have helped prevent the 9/11 attacks. In addition, if the Administration had known of such communications from suspected terrorists, they could and should have been intercepted based on existing FISA law. For example, even assuming that a FISA warrant was required to intercept such calls, as of 9/11 FISA specifically authorized such surveillance on an emergency basis without a warrant for a 48 hour period.2 If such calls were known about and not intercepted, serious additional concerns would be raised about the government’s failure to take appropriate action before 9/11.

Accordingly, we ask that you promptly answer the following questions:

1. Were you referring to an actual pre-9/11 incident in the portion of your statement quoted above? If not, what were you referring to?

2. Do you believe that a FISA warrant would have been required to intercept a telephone call from a known terrorist safe house in Afghanistan to the United States in 2001? If so, please explain.

3. Even assuming that such a warrant would have been required, do you agree that even before 9/11, FISA authorized emergency interception without a warrant for a 48-hour period of phone calls from a known terrorist safe house in Afghanistan to the United States?

4. Assuming that you were referring to an actual pre-9/11 incident in your statement, please explain why such phone calls were not intercepted and appropriately utilized by federal government authorities in seeking to prevent terrorist attacks.

Second, in the March, 2003 Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) memorandum publicly released on April 1, 2008, the contents of a secret October, 2001 OLC memorandum were partially disclosed. Specifically, the 2003 memorandum explains that in an October 23, 2001 memorandum, OLC “concluded that the Fourth Amendment had no application to domestic military operations.”3 On two prior occasions – in letters of February 12 and February 20, 2008, – Chairman Conyers requested that the Administration publicly release the October 23, 2001, memorandum .4 The memorandum has not been received despite these specific requests.

Based on the title of the October 23, 2001 memorandum, and based on what has been disclosed and the contents of similar memoranda issued at roughly the same time, it is clear that a substantial portion of this memorandum provides a legal analysis and conclusions as to the nature and scope of the Presidential Commander in Chief power to accomplish specific acts within the United States. The people of the United States are entitled to know the Justice Department’s interpretation of the President’s constitutional powers to wage war in the United States. There can be no actual basis in national security for keeping secret the remainder of a legal memorandum that addresses this issue of Constitutional interpretation. The notion that the President can claim to operate under “secret” powers known only to the President and a select few subordinates is antithetical to the core principles of this democracy. We ask that you promptly release the October 23, 2001, memorandum.

Please provide your responses and direct any questions to the Judiciary Committee office, 2138 Rayburn House Office Building, Washington, DC 20515 (tel:202-225-3951; fax: 202-225-7680). Thank you for your cooperation.

Sincerely,

John Conyers, Jr. ?Chairman, Committee on the Judiciary

Jerrold Nadler ?Chairman, Subcommittee on the Constitution, Civil Rights and Civil Liberties

Robert C. “Bobby” Scott ?Chairman, Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism and Homeland Security

Of course, sternly worded letters are not very impressive in DC these days, given that the Bush administration regularly ignores any and all demands from Congress for information. The ‘Unitary Executive’ policy that Dick Cheney has worked so hard to institute for so many decades does not have room for a Constitutional separation of powers or any respect for the Congressional duty of oversight.

I predict Mukasey will ignore this demand as well, and that Bush will assert presidential privilege to prevent him from talking to the Judiciary Committee. But at least We the People can see that some members of Congress still take their oaths and jobs seriously, which is a hopeful sign for the future. Or maybe it’s all just for show.

Hat Tip to The Bonddad Blog

This video consists of clips of Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson lying his ass off on George Stephanopolis’ Sunday talk-fest (you can tell he’s lying because his lips are moving, but pay attention to his “tell” – how he blinks, stutters and shakes his head when he tells lies, negating what he’s saying. The man just cannot defend bailing out a speculative investment bank – the fifth largest in the country – while doing precisely zip to help the citizens who are losing their homes to this mess.

Which, unfortunately, is only going to get worse as more greedy billionaires who haven’t paid any taxes since Bush exempted them get the people they’ve screwed (US citizens) to bail them out of their bad decisions. If the US taxpayers have to bail out the billionaires, shouldn’t we also make them pay some taxes? How about refinancing their homes at a flat 4% for 30 years, as if they’d gotten those loans from a fed-guaranteed lender (since that’s now who owns the paper)? How about wiping out THEIR debts?

I like this “Hillbilly Report,” thought readers would find it refreshingly truthful too. Enjoy!

Will the Candidates Show?

Government leaders, university presidents, leading scientists, engineering leaders, business executives, American innovators have been making the call loudly and with some help from NPR, MSNBC, the New York Times and Time Magazine as well as increasing numbers of other media outlets. Now that both the Democratic and Republican fields of potential Presidential candidates are down to two apiece, it’s time for Science Debate 2008 to happen.

The invitations to the candidates have been sent, the debate will be held at the Franklin Institute before the Pennsylvania primary on April 22. Thus far none of the candidates have responded that they will commit. While we all know that issues of science and technology are usually handled by advisors who have knowledge of the subjects, it would be nice to get a feel for whether the candidates for our country’s highest office have a basic grasp of those issues and a defensible position on policy. Or find out if all they’re good for is to mouth sound bites their handlers feed them.

If you’re interested in what you may be able to do to help convince them, visit the Science Debate 2008 website and sign on. And it wouldn’t hurt to write to the campaigns and request the candidates’ participation while you’re at it.

Link:
Science Debate 2008

[Cross-Posted to Science News Review]