Blog Flux Directory Subscribe in NewsGator Online Subscribe with Bloglines http://www.wikio.com Blog directory
And, yes, I DO take it personally
Mandy: Great blog!
Mark: Thanks to all the contributors on this blog. When I want to get information on the events that really matter, I come here.
Penny: I'm glad I found your blog (from a comment on Think Progress), it's comprehensive and very insightful.
Eric: Nice site....I enjoyed it and will be back.
nora kelly: I enjoy your site. Keep it up! I particularly like your insights on Latin America.
Alison: Loquacious as ever with a touch of elegance -- & right on target as usual!
"Everybody's worried about stopping terrorism. Well, there's a really easy way: stop participating in it."
- Noam Chomsky
Send tips and other comments to: profmarcus2010@yahoo.com

And, yes, I DO take it personally

Thursday, January 03, 2008

Yeah, I like John Edwards, but I also like the U.S. Constitution, the rule of law, and accountability

i'm grabbing booman's post in full (booman tribune and daily kos) because i think it has a lot of good things to say... i'm not throwing it up here because i'm endorsing edwards, but i do think booman does a good job of articulating why i've been drawn more in edwards' direction over the past few weeks... i'm still holding out for someone who will directly and forcefully address our constitutional crisis, but, sadly, of the only candidates who have even come close to doing that - dodd, kucinich, and paul - only paul is going to have any momentum (momentum = $$) after tonight, and i simply can't get behind ron paul, at least not now...

even more than explaining the progressive/liberal blogsphere tilt to john edwards, however, booman sets out quite nicely why i have turned almost exclusively to the internet and the blogosphere to stay in touch with what's going on, and also why i started and have doggedly maintained my own weblog for going on three years... besides helping maintain my sanity, it also gives me a voice that, no matter how small and muted it may be, is still the most public voice i've ever had... i reach many people through my teaching and consulting work, but blogging my political views while doing the full-frontal monty by trying to put the puzzle pieces together out in public, is a completely different order of beast...

Why the Blogosphere Went for Edwards

I feel like writing this now, before any caucus or primary results, while my feelings are uninfluenced by events that right now remain uncertain. I don't think the mainstream media or the people that work inside the Beltway really understand the blogosphere at all. We may not fully understand them either, but we have a better grasp of what makes them tick than they have of what makes us tick. We're fighters. Fighting is pretty much all we do.

This whole movement was born of a vacuum. The primary vacuum was in the media. We discovered in the lead up to the invasion of Iraq that the media was not only shutting out our voices, but they were distorting the facts, and the facts were, therefore, going unrebutted. And we discovered that we could publish our voices just as easily as the New York Times could publish the lies of William Safire, Judith Miller, or Dick Cheney. We discovered that we could factcheck the articles appearing in the papers and the warmongers appearing on our television.

We found a truth deficit and set out to provide the truth that was lacking. For those of us that have been doing this for years, we are steeped in this contrast between what is reported and what is true. We know who the liars are. We know who the lazy reporters are. And we know who has been battling with us (Russ Feingold, Chris Dodd) and who has not (Joe Lieberman, Harold Ford). We now have comrades-in-arms...people that we have been standing with day after day after day. And we have enemies that have undermined our mission at every opportunity.

I'm sitting here listening to a speech Barack Obama made yesterday in Coralville, Iowa. He's saying all the right things. Here's an example (paraphrased): 'If you have been steeped in the common wisdom of Washington DC that says it is a good idea to invade Iraq, you can't be the best person going forward to question and change our foreign policy.' And that is exactly right. That explains so clearly what it means to have been in the fight on the side of the blogosphere versus what it means to have been on the sidelines within the consultancies of the Capitol. But Obama hasn't really embraced us. He's gone his own way. And that explains why, in the end, the blogosphere broke heavily for John Edwards.

No, I don't mean people turned their back on Obama because he didn't pay the proper respect to the blogosphere. That isn't what happened. Obama didn't embrace our way of doing things. Worse, he began to use rhetoric we had spent energy to debunk. He went even further. He tossed aside one of our central insights...an insight won through hard experience: we cannot compromise with the Republican Party...we must smash them.

Perhaps because his wife is such an avid reader of blogs, Edwards' campaign tapped right into our zeitgeist. He came out with our insight front and center. You want Edwards' message? Here it is: 'Fuck David Broder, fuck Joe Klein, fuck Chris Matthews, fuck FOX News, fuck Tim Russert, fuck Mitch McConnell, fuck Big Oil, Big Pharma, and Big Defense. We don't need them. They won't negotiate in good faith. They're stacking the deck against us. And we can beat them by telling the truth and getting organized.' That's Edwards' message, and that is the message we have internalized both through our successes and our failures.

What's funny is that Obama is saying many of the same things, in his own way. The policy differences between Edwards and Obama are minimal. But Obama's tone deaf to the blogosphere. And, as a result, the blogosphere didn't trust him. Take Armando:

...we do not criticize Obama's political style on aesthetic grounds; we criticize his style because we think it will not work to actually EFFECT CHANGE. We believe that despite his being touted as the change candidate, his political style is the one LEAST likely to achieve progressive policy change.

His 'style' will be ineffective. Why did so many of us conclude this? It's because we have watched Tom Daschle, Harry Reid, and Nancy Pelosi try to negotiate with the Republicans (in the minority, the majority, no matter) and it does not work. We have watched the Dems talk tough and then back down time and time again. We're done with conciliation and we don't believe bipartisanship is possible without first crushing the Republican Party down to a stump.

Ironically, Obama might be the perfect candidate to provide the kind of crushing victories this November that will make true bipartisanship possible again. I definitely think that is a possibility. In fact, I feel his chances are strong enough that I can't endorse Edwards over Obama. I do hope Edwards wins in Iowa, but not necessarily because I prefer him to Obama. More than anything, I want Edwards' style to be vindicated. I want partisanship and combativeness to be rewarded. And I want Clinton/Lieberman/Ford/Carper/Carville/Begala/Penn to lose.

In any case, this is the best I can do to express why the blogosphere went for Edwards. None of the candidates were going far enough on policy, but at least Edwards was representing our fighting natures. And that, in the end, was decisive.

now, if somebody would PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE step forward and start addressing the constitutional crisis, the rule of law, and accountability...

Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Submit To Propeller



[Permalink] 0 comments

Saturday, November 03, 2007

Booman doesn't want to see Kucinich's impeachment resolution squashed

and who can blame him...?
I've been advocating the impeachment of the president and vice-president ever since the FISA violations were revealed in December 2005. I am not going to make the case again here. In fact, I am not happy to learn that Dennis Kucinich is going to introduce a privileged resolution to bring articles of impeachment against Dick Cheney.
Congressman Dennis Kucinich (D-OH) announced today that he will be offering a privileged resolution on the House floor next week that will bring articles of impeachment against the Vice President, Richard B. Cheney.

“The momentum is building for impeachment,” Kucinich said. “Millions of citizens across the nation are demanding Congress rein in the Vice President’s abuse of power.

Do I disagree with any of that? No. Emphatically no. But I am so sick and tired of seeing the party's 'moderates' roll over and play dead that I don't think I can emotionally handle the spectacle of Kucinich's resolution getting the back of the hand from the Washington Establishment, the press, and the majority of elected Democratic officials.

my response...
as much as i agree with you about the total demoralizing effect of watching yet another highly appropriate and urgent effort squashed, i have to agree that it's important to keep this stuff visible and to force the co-conspirators and collaborators out into the light of day...

keep in mind too, it won't only be the impeachment resolution and the 21 who get smacked down, it will be done in the context of the goofy, ridiculous, woo-woo, ufo-sighting, weirded-out freak that is the picture of kucinich we are being force-fed by the media, because, you see, only somebody as deluded as THAT could possibly support impeachment...

by all means, gird your loins and dump the thoughts of shooting yourself, and instead take some comfort at the fact that nancy is going to have to look at the very thing she has stonewalled lying right there "on the table..."

Labels: , , , , ,

Submit To Propeller



[Permalink] 0 comments

Friday, October 19, 2007

BooMan's rundown on what's going on with Dodd, Reid and the filibuster threat

he's got a pretty concise, quite understandable and probably reasonably accurate summary of the dodd/reid/senate/hold/filibuster/fisa backstory to which i was prompted to offer this comment...
i have been waiting for a confrontation to blow the constitutional crisis out into the open... i had hoped the dems would summon the cojones to proceed with inherent contempt charges in light of the white house flipping off congressional subpoenas, but, for the congressional dem leadership, who have evidently submitted to voluntary neutering and spaying, that is not to be... too bad it has to come in the form of in intra-party battle, but so be it... one way or another, we are way, WAY overdue in facing up to the most serious crisis that has ever faced our democratic republic...

Labels: , , , , , , , , ,

Submit To Propeller



[Permalink] 0 comments

Sunday, September 16, 2007

BooMan: "Impeach or Armageddon"

booman has a fairly comprehensive run-down on the run-up to what increasingly looks like war on iran, unless, of course, we bestir ourselves to toss the bastards out...
Considering how far Iran is away from actually having a nuclear bomb and how close we are to having a new administration, we cannot allow this attack on Iran to go on in the next 16 months. We can't hope that Condi Rice will resign, or that her resignation will prevent an attack. We have to impeach, convict, and remove this administration. Don't say it can't be done. It has to be done. Or it's Armageddon.

booman also has what i believe to be a pretty accurate perspective on darth and his evil...
[T]he word has definitely gotten out that Dick Cheney is frothing at the mouth to make more evil. There's not a constant amount of evil in the world, you know. It's not a zero-sum game. Cheney makes evil where evil did not previously exist. And his brush-clearing sidekick is too eager to go along.

george, darth and the other evil minions simply have to go... it's incomprehensible to me that their occupation of the white house continues, nearly seven years after the illegal 12 december 2000 scotus decision...

Labels: , , , , , , , , , ,

Submit To Propeller



[Permalink] 0 comments

Wednesday, September 05, 2007

Nukes for Iran?

a very suspicious story to begin with...
"A B-52 bomber mistakenly loaded with five nuclear warheads flew from Minot Air Force Base, N.D, to Barksdale Air Force Base, La., on Aug. 30, resulting in an Air Force-wide investigation, according to three officers who asked not to be identified because they were not authorized to discuss the incident," according to the Navy Times.

[...]

The B-52 was loaded with Advanced Cruise Missiles, part of a Defense Department effort to decommission 400 of the ACMs. But the nuclear warheads should have been removed at Minot before being transported to Barksdale, the officers said. The missiles were mounted onto the pylons of the bomber’s wings.

Advanced Cruise Missiles carry a W80-1 warhead with a yield of 5 to 150 kilotons and are specifically designed for delivery by B-52 strategic bombers.

Air Force spokesman Lt. Col. Ed Thomas said the transfer was safely conducted and the weapons were in Air Force custody and control at all times. However, the mistake was not discovered until the B-52 landed at Barskdale, which left the warheads unaccounted for during the approximately 3 1/2 hour flight between the two bases, the officers said.

grows one hell of a lot more suspicious after reading this thought-provoking post by larry johnson at the booman tribune...
by Larry Johnson
Wed Sep 5th, 2007 at 05:11:26 PM EST
Why the hubbub over a B-52 taking off from a B-52 base in Minot, North Dakota and subsequently landing at a B-52 base in Barksdale, Louisiana? That’s like getting excited if you see postal worker in uniform walking out of a post office. And how does someone watching a B-52 land identify the cruise missiles as nukes? It just does not make sense.

So I called a old friend and retired B-52 pilot and asked him. What he told me offers one compelling case of circumstantial evidence. My buddy, let’s call him Jack D. Ripper, reminded me that the only times you put weapons on a plane is when they are on alert or if you are tasked to move the weapons to a specific site.

Then he told me something I had not heard before.

Barksdale Air Force Base is being used as a jumping off point for Middle East operations. Gee, why would we want cruise missile nukes at Barksdale Air Force Base. Can’t imagine we would need to use them in Iraq. Why would we want to preposition nuclear weapons at a base conducting Middle East operations?

His final point was to observe that someone on the inside obviously leaked the info that the planes were carrying nukes. A B-52 landing at Barksdale is a non-event. A B-52 landing with nukes. That is something else.

Now maybe there is an innocent explanation for this? I can’t think of one. What is certain is that the pilots of this plane did not just make a last minute decision to strap on some nukes and take them for a joy ride. We need some tough questions and clear answers. What the hell is going on? Did someone at Barksdale try to indirectly warn the American people that the Bush Administration is staging nukes for Iran? I don’t know, but it is a question worth asking.

thank god we have people out there who know people who can shed light into our government's darkest corners...

Labels: , , , , ,

Submit To Propeller



[Permalink] 0 comments

Saturday, July 21, 2007

One more... (I can't help myself...!)

booman...
Pelosi? Conyers? You listening?
"In circumstances like this, the constitutional prerogatives of the president make it futile and purely political for Congress to refer to a U.S. attorney a contempt citation," White House spokesman Tony Snow said yesterday. "The legislative branch is not in a position to compel action on the part of the executive branch, other than in areas related to its legitimate oversight role."

It's Inherent Contempt or it's the end of the Republic.

i don't think he's exaggerating one tiny bit...

Labels: , , , , , , , , ,

Submit To Propeller



[Permalink] 0 comments

Friday, July 20, 2007

Beating the drum of fear, fear, fear

this kind of concerted push to convince us that another terrorist attack may be right around the corner simply can't be good... something's up and it smells like a dead skunk under the back porch...
Chicago's Sears Tower and other iconic buildings in Seattle, Dallas and Los Angeles still top al Qaeda's target list in the U.S., according to the top U.S. intelligence official.

"Their intentions are mass casualties larger than 9/11 inside the United States," Director of National Intelligence Mike McConnell said in an interview with the D.C. radio station WTOP. "A very large building. The Sears Tower, or some large building in Seattle or L.A. or Dallas."

McConnell also confirmed publicly what senior officials had told ABC News privately.

"In some cases they've got people positioned, more in Europe -- we suspect here in the United States, but we have no clear and compelling evidence they're in the United States," McConnell told WTOP.

booman puts it quite succinctly...
The last time I felt this sick to my stomach was in December 2005 when the Bush administration responded to revelations that they were breaking the FISA law by insisting they had every right to do so...and then framed the 2006 elections around the wisdom of them doing so.

i agree... i have been feeling very nearly physically ill all day, actually for several days... like i said last week, every nerve in my body is a-tingle...

Labels: , , , , , , , ,

Submit To Propeller



[Permalink] 0 comments

Thursday, July 12, 2007

Good for you, BooMan

i'm obviously not alone in my viewpoint... always nice to know...
I don't support her threatened campaign against Speaker Pelosi but Cindy Sheehan is welcome to post her thoughts here [Booman Tribune]. Daily Kos seems to be incapable of co-existing with anyone on the left that doesn't automatically show fealty to the Democratic Party. It's becoming a nation of Paul Begalas.

and furthermore...
It's a mistake. Who cares if she wants to promote a third party campaign? Argue on the merits. Pelosi won her last election with 84% of the vote and I think the green did better than the Republican. Pelosi isn't going to notice anyway.

and even a lot FURTHER-more...
As for Sheehan, let me make two points.

1. She isn't going to even make Pelosi break a sweat. She should have picked on someone that might actually have to worry, like Ike Skelton or something. It doesn't matter whether she runs in the primary or the general. She'll have no effect on the outcome. And if she has any effect at all, it will be a positive effect.

2. Trashing her and forbidding her from discussing her campaign is just weakening your community and causing scads of people on the left to feel unwelcome.

Dumb and Dumber.

Labels: , , , , , , ,

Submit To Propeller



[Permalink] 0 comments