Friday, January 06, 2006

yeah, this is what I see in my backyard at night...tree "house" in the apple tree. ripe set for a dramedy that includes ghost children, psycho neighbors and canning jars. and stars snadra bullock (not that i'm still obsessing on her...if you want, you can substitute Samanthat Motron for Sandra and I'll be okay with that).

Bush Declares He's Telling The Truth This TIme

"I'm not making this up,"
Oh well then. I guess I've gotta go with Bush now. He's telling the truth. How do I know? Because he said so. What, ain't good enough for you? Dirty little Commie. You dare to question the integrity of the PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES? Might as well put a turban on your head and eat the rest of those children you got hanging in your sandhut.

Scooter "Free" Ride

Scooter scoots from potential felon to perenially fraudulent. Honestly, how does a person under indictment for crimes against the country get a job offer? Yes, I know I sound naive, but I'm not. Really. Doesn't it strike you as almost inevitable now that no matter what the administration pulls at our expense to enrich theirs they will somehow come up smelling like right wing roses? This man is under indictment by a federal Special Prosecutor. He is no longer working for the White House. He is supposed to be disgraced merely by being touched with the indictment wand. Had Clinton been offered a job by the ACLU (he's a lawyer after all) in the event that he was actually kicked out of office the Right wuld have been apoplectic and denouncing the ACLU as commies, reds, pinkos, terrorists sympathizers and everything that's wrong with Liberal Media. Scooter gets an offer and I'll bet not one Republican (and few Democrats) will stand up and say this is completely unethical, immoral and downright not too cool.
Of course, the unspoken message here is this: the Heritage Foundation expects Scooter, if he's convicted, to be pardoned by Bush on Bush's way out. And they would be right.
I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby , chief of staff and national security adviser to Vice President Cheney until that indictment unpleasantness a few months ago, has found a new perch as he awaits trial.

Polls Lie, But You Know I Never Will

Hmmm...JBS couldn't stand for the John Birch Society, could it? Could it?!? Why, yes indeedy. It could. Click the red thingy if you don't believe me. The Birchers are either being hit hard by the left wing version of Freepers (may they rot in New Jersey) or the trend of right wing loonies getting more and more disgusted with our Imperial Idiot is growing.
(Hey George, God called. He said to move 10 feet farther away from Dick "Grounding Rod" Cheney the next time you see a cloud. He's getting tired of having to actually aim.)

Should George Bush be impeached and removed from office?

Yes, because he lied us into war, has used the NSA to eavesdrop on the conversations of Americans without a court order, and has violated the Constitution in other ways. 59%

No, because George W. Bush was justified in going to war and continues to do a good job. 18%

No, because even though he has made mistakes those mistakes do not rise to the level of impeachment. 20%

I don't know. 3%

Hot Off The Press (Generik Should Like This One)

Whoa, whoa, whoa!!! What the hell is this? NATO is 'unreliable'? What, because they weren't necessarily so giggly about invading Iraq? David Sirota finds this item buried in a UK paper, but nowhere in the US journals:
"The Bush administration says it wants to be able to form 'coalitions of the willing' more efficiently for dealing with future conflicts rather than turning to existing but unreliable institutional alliances such as Nato. 'We ad hoc our way through coalitions of the willing. That's the future,' a senior State Department official said in a briefing this week."
It wasn't oh so long ago that our beloved White House was telling us just how unreliable and obsolete the UN and the Geneva Convention were. So, what's the message here? No matter what the law is we'll find a way around it or just scrap it altogether? No matter what the majority of people and countries believe? If that's the case, then the Bible is way overdue for a burning. But, then, Bush does have God's ear (or the other way around). He's also a horse's ass and a monkey's nephew. Not that even I know what I meant by that. Doesn't relly matter, though. If Bush can read "Pet My Goat" to children I can make shit up.

Wednesday, January 04, 2006

Happy Birthday Lecram

NBC is checking into whether Christiane Amanpour was wiretapped by Bush. If this is true, that a journalist was spied on in the course of her journalistic duties, then we have us a whopper of a scandal that no one can ignore. Eavesdrop on a CNN reporter? We would be entering into Nixonian territory in terms of flagrant disregard for the law. Felony and high treason all the way, baby. Just think of the prominent Americans she has spoken to over the past four years that this wiretap gig has been in business. Who knows? Bush may have dirt on many biggie politicians without their knowing it. Who knows? Bush (and Cheney) may have been using overheard info to silence their critics across the aisle.

Oh yeah. David Letterman, on his show no less, tells Bill O'Reilly that he's 60% full of crap. Finally, a late night talk show host is doing something other than glitterati spooge and sponge-off.

Cherokee Nation, Cherokee Tribe! Evidently, this nation finally remembered that they have always held gay people in high regard as mystical people.

Considering that the Bush group refused to listen to Clinton holdouts about the Bin Laden threat prior to 9/11 it's amazing to read that Cheney claims if we had been wiretapping before then we could have stopped 9/11. How much more did they need to know about the threat before doing anything at all about it? They knew Clinton tried to target bin Laden with missiles. They knew of the reports about bin Laden planning on attacking us with hijacked planes. So, basically they needed a burning bush to point the way? Without big fat arrows pointing to the intended targets there was no way for them to even get close to an inkling of a suggestion of a whisper of a rumor that bin Laden had a hankering to get at us? Puh-leeze.

And a big happy birthday to that uber-maestro of demonic maestros: lecram.

Tuesday, January 03, 2006

New Year's Musings

Just pisses me off when I'm not allowed to post because of questionable content.
I read the Daily Kos today and clicked on the "boy are they stoopid" link. the link's writer asked for submissions to name a convention in contrast to 'Kosyearly". So, I did.

"Since it's Cheney who really runs the administration, how about:
Dick's Dicks in '06
and for the women:
Dick-WAC Heart Attack."

What's questionable about that? Quite catchy if you ask me and I know you did. What's that you say? The website probably didn't want suggestions that might in any way disparage our Commander-In-Thief? Oh. See, I didn't read it that way. I thought it was an honest and open environment for everyone. Not just the brainwashed...huh. Go figure.

Hee hee. Scott McClellan reads about as much as Bush:

Q Scott, Republican lobbyist Jack Abramoff has pleaded guilty to fraud and corruption and tax evasion here in the federal court in Washington. Already the DNC has put out a statement essentially saying that this is another example of what they are calling the "culture of corruption and abuse of power" that has been the hallmarks of the Bush administration. Any response?

MR. McCLELLAN: Well, I've seen press reports that indicate that he has -- he and his clients have given to both Democrats and Republicans. So that's the first thing that I would say.Secondly, I'm not sure if he's actually entered a plea at this point, but the wrongdoing that he apparently now is acknowledging he was involved in is outrageous. And if he broke laws, he needs to be held to account and he needs to be punished. And beyond that, I think we'd just be speculating about things at this point, and I'm not going to engage in speculation.

You can read the links to find the lies, but I'll tell you now that it looks as if Abramhoff gave not one dime to any Democrat in quite some time and lots and lots to Republicans. As for his clients, they're not on trial at this point, so it seems that Scottie (good doggie) is already in smear mode. The first thing he would say is "he and his clients have given to both Democrats and Republicans"? Wow. That is as political and partisan a statement as I've ever heard come out of Scottie's (good doggie) mouth. Flat-out saying "it ain't just us". Not even a denial. Straight to the smear. Do I think that Dems are just as greedy as Reps? You bet. However, the Reps are in power and suffering the slings and arrows of folks who realize Reps are terrible at balancing greed with running a country. The Dems got very good at it. They learned to share some of it with us little people. The Reps can't quite get the hang of it. That's why all of the scandals. They don't understand that as the rich get richer, so must the poor and not as poor rise as well. Do they really think that someone like me is going to be swayed by a recitation of the Clintons' wealth? I know they're filthy rich. I, also, know that the very people pushing Bush and Cheney make the word "filthy" smell like baby's breath (which, to be honest, we all know can be somewhat offputting right after a good burping). Democrats accepting cash, favors, trips? Gasp. Ya think? But who is it getting caught? It ain't the Dems. At least, it ain't the Dems en masse. It's those idiot Reps who claimed the higher moral ground and then ground it under their heel. Almost as if they felt they were owed their due. Almost as if they felt a few trillion or so into the pockets of them and their backers was an acceptable butcher's bill for wiping out those devilish Dems. No mention of the fact that the trillions would be taxpayers' money, taxpayers' retirement, taxpayers' medical coverage, taxpayers' children's future, taxpayers' social security net, taxpayers' children's military deaths. No mention of the fact that they would be dispersing radioactive waste in Iraq. No mention that help would be scaled back to Asia in time of tsunami crisis, because one government wouldn't allow us military fly-over privileges while our aircraft carriers idled offshore. No mention that genocide is not cool if the victims aren't white (and therein can we blame both parties and most of America). Not a word about torture, carpet bombing, collateral damage, 100,000+ Iraqi civilians dead. No mention of a CIA agent's outing by the administration.
So much to condemn as an enlightened 21st century American. And so little to defend.

Jack Abramoff. Will he or won't he?
Scott (good doggie). Should he or shouldn't he?
The usual suspects. Did they or didn't they?