This man has come a long way since Sports Machine...

I often wonder after listening to Keith why some people are so STUPID as to continue to see Bush as anything other than what he is, an idiot.

I knew this all along... And I have a feeling that a lot of the people who voted for Bush, did too, and they just didn't care. It FELT too damned good to be Large and in Charge! These are the same people who called many of us traitors, and yet they are the ones who gleefully welcomed a Forrest Gump Presidency, a war based on Lie and Lie, and a ruined economy, congrats guys, you must feel real proud of yourself.

The Clintons “have introduced the politics of personal destruction” to the presidential race and they “bear responsibility for cheapening the tone of the contest.” Um hmmmm... And we are just now figuring this out. Truth be known, the Clintons, mainly Bill, have poisoned the well so badly at this point that neither the Clinton's nor Obama will have a chance of winning...

Good riddance... Rudy is so....

2001!

I had hoped that this would not happen, and that Obama would not get dragged into this kind of conversation. The big news now is about old school politics and how the Clintons especially will use surrogates, especially BLACK ones, to try and plant the seeds of doubt about Obama.

Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama have become embroiled in racially tinged disputes as large numbers of black voters prepare to get their first say in the Democratic presidential campaign.

The candidates and their surrogates are heating up their rhetoric, and it could prove to be combustible beyond South Carolina's Jan. 26 primary.

Clinton, on defense over comments that she and her husband made regarding Martin Luther King Jr.'s legacy and Obama's fitness for the White House, tried to turn the tables on her top primary rival. She accused his campaign of looking to score political points by distorting their words.

Hillary Clinton had said King's dream of racial equality was realized only when President Lyndon B. Johnson signed the Civil Rights Act of 1964, while Bill Clinton said Illinois Sen. Obama was telling a "fairy tale" about his opposition to the Iraq war. Black leaders have criticized their comments, and Obama said Sunday her comment about King was "ill-advised."

"I think it offended some folks who felt that somehow diminished King's role in bringing about the Civil Rights Act," he told reporters on a conference call. "She is free to explain that, but the notion that somehow this is our doing is ludicrous."

As evidence the Obama campaign had pushed the story, Clinton advisers pointed to a memo written by an Obama staffer compiling examples of comments by Clinton and her surrogates that could be construed as racially insensitive. The memo later surfaced on some political Web sites.

"This is an unfortunate story line the Obama campaign has pushed very successfully," the former first lady said Sunday on NBC's "Meet the Press." "I don't think this campaign is about gender, and I sure hope it's not about race."

Clinton taped the show before appearances in South Carolina, where at least half the primary voters are expected to be black. On Monday, she planned to attend a union event honoring King's legacy in New York City.

But no sooner had Clinton said she hoped the campaign would not be about race than it got even more heated. A prominent black Clinton supporter, Black Entertainment Television founder Bob Johnson, criticized Obama and seemed to refer to his acknowledged teenage drug use while introducing Clinton at her next event.

"To me, as an African-American, I am frankly insulted the Obama campaign would imply that we are so stupid that we would think Hillary and Bill Clinton, who have been deeply and emotionally involved in black issues — when Barack Obama was doing something in the neighborhood; I won't say what he was doing, but he said it in his book — when they have been involved," Johnson said.

I for one have lost all respect for the Clintons.

Jay Tea of Wizbang is in an uproar over a post by Oliver on Mormonism. The post is under Jay's "Asshat," category. Well add me to the Hat Brigade. Unlike Jay though, I have lived in Salt Lake City, and have many Mormon friends. What this gentleman says about the CULT of Joseph Smith,

Is absolutely true. Most of the Mormons I have known are far more likely to ask you about Joseph Smith than Jesus Christ. The Guy in the above video destroys the two "missionaries." I respect Mormons as good, decent people, who really believe the nonsense they have been taught. I dont care what religion Mitt Romney adheres to, but I do wonder about a guy who believes that a huge civilization of Israelites existed in North and South America thousands of years ago, and that Upstate New York was the site of battles involving millions of warriors...Or that there are Magic undies that protect Mormons...

Although on that point it could be a good thing, think of how much money we would save from the secret service budget. Hell, I think Mormons should share their magic drawers with all of us... Just think we would never have to worry about terrorism again!

The fact is that Joseph Smith stole a bunch of the Masonic rituals and converted them for use by his church.
Any Master Mason will recognize quite a bit from the following video.

Not to mention the fact that Joseph Smith died hoping that a Mason would save his ass...

Smith was a disgrace to the Masonic Brotherhood of which I belong, and his church is nothing more than a cheap copy of freemasonry, and of my religion...

From John Cole:

Poor Jeff is upset with me. You see- I fail to recognize the UTMOST SIGNIFICANCE in the fact that last week, a media report (according to the comments, several reports) was found that didn’t include a “D” next to Rep. Filner’s name after he allegedly shoved (or something) a flight attendant (or someone). Therefore, this is proof that the media is biased and that I am not a “TRUE CONSERVATIVE.”

I think, Jeff, what we all need to really get the lesson is a 22,000 word essay from you on the issue. Something fascinating. With lots of cockslapping and your normally dense and unreadable prose. And hopefully, if we are really lucky, you will get a comment from someone who disagrees with you, which you can add to the post in a 10,000 word update of additional impenetrable gibberish. Maybe you can throw in some thoughts on masculinity, too. Riveting stuff.

But let us know, first. I will need to have a few drinks first to catch up with you.

Dayum I always wanted to say that. Is it just me, or do the Bush Hacks just appear more and more ridiculous, as some of their former, but obviously more reality based, colleagues point out the obvious....

It's over DUDES, your glorious reign lasted a little over five years. The days of smug superiority are over. What rocks my boat is that there are people who were smart enough to see it, and sincere enough to admit that they were wrong.... Tsk, tsk... Cant wait for those 10,000 words...

Alberto Gonzalez, you are without a doubt, the worst Attorney General in the History of the United States. You are the first Attorney General to advocate and excuse torture, and your legacy will be one of incompetence, stupidity and lies... Goodbye!

Adios Disgraciado!

Turd Blossom, AKA Karl Rove, you were the architect of what will one day be recognized as one of the most incompetent, corrupt and arrogant administrations in history. Your divisive, corrosive and manipulative approach to politics help destroy the credibility of our nation and our political system. How appropriate that you will be remembered in the end as the man who got his ass whupped in 2007, when the nation finaly woke up from six years of hypnosis. Goodbye!

Auf Wiedersehen dummkopf

May your boss be not far behind!

is staggering...

And I could not be happier:\

His best debate performance so far. Stood up to sustained questioning on his alleged inexperience, which led the first seven minutes of the event, without losing his cool or backing down. He even made a well-received joke about preparing for the debate by riding the bumper cars at the Iowa State Fair. Tripled down on standing up for his recent controversial foreign policy statements on nuclear weapons, meeting with foreign leaders, and hunting al Qaeda, with firmness and good humor. Drew audience applause for again playing the I-opposed-the-Iraq-War card to tout his judgment. Sounded almost (Bill) Clintonesque in talking about trade and merit pay for teachers. Displayed the confidence of a leader.

I did not get a chance to see this debate, but have heard all day that he clearly won it... Good for him.

And he is trying hard to extract his foot from mouth...

Republican presidential hopeful Rudy Giuliani said Friday that he misspoke when he said he spent as much time, if not more, at ground zero exposed to the same health risks as workers combing the site after the Sept. 11 attacks.

"I think I could have said it better," he told nationally syndicated radio host Mike Gallagher. "You know, what I was saying was, 'I'm there with you.'"

The former New York mayor upset some firefighters and police officers when he said Thursday in Cincinnati that he was at ground zero "as often, if not more, than most of the workers."

"I was there working with them. I was exposed to exactly the same things they were exposed to. So in that sense, I'm one of them," he told reporters at a Los Angeles Dodgers-Cincinnati Reds baseball game.

Fire and police officials responded angrily, saying Giuliani did not do the same work as those involved in the rescue, recovery and cleanup from the 2001 terrorist attacks, which left many workers sick and injured.

On Friday, Giuliani said he was trying to show his concern for the workers' health.

"What I was trying to say yesterday is that I empathize with them, because I feel like I have that same risk," he said.

"There were people there less than me, people on my staff, who already have had serious health consequences, and they weren't there as often as I was," Giuliani said, "but I wasn't trying to suggest a competition of any kind, which is the way it come across."

Giuliani's explanation further angered his ground zero critics, prompting several to issue a statement demanding an apology.

"He is such a liar, because the only time he was down there was for photo ops with celebrities, with politicians, with diplomats," said deputy fire chief Jimmy Riches, who spent months digging for his firefighter son.

"On 9/11 all he did was run. He got that soot on him, and I don't think he's taken a shower since."

Harold Schaitberger, president of the International Association of Fire Fighters, a union that fiercely opposes Giuliani, said he doubted Giuliani misspoke.

"I think he was simply showing what his true character is - a self-absorbed, self-deluded promoter who got caught and is now just simply trying to backtrack," Schaitberger said.

Emphasis mine... Maybe we will be spared another Republican Convention draped in American flags and served up with the blood of true heroes, while people like Guilliani, and Bush utilize heroism as their very own personal campaign tools...

This is an AMAZING Video.... (X Rated)

See the whole series here.

Damn I love this guy.

Since I somehow made the mistake of starting to read Hugh Hewitt again and commented twice about his nonsense, I might as well continue on with another post. Today, I am mentioned by name:

I am not surprised that the Bush haters like Sullivan and Cole are outraged that General Petraeus would be interviewed by an admirer of the president, or that the anti-war extremists like Greenwald, Yglesias and the others cannot disguise their contempt for the military (though they think their attack on General Petraeus' integrity won't identify them as anti-military.)

I'm not surprised that new media journalists producing interviews of a sort far superior to what MSM serves up in one minute sound bytes excites the anger of folks who prefer their defeatist agendas advanced by a dominant MSM. They don't want the Beltway-Manhattan media elites to lose their monopoly on "important" interviews as that means instead of Democratic journalists like Tim Russert, George Stephanopoulos and Chris Matthews asking defeat-slanted questions, new media outlets will step in and allow serious people to make extended arguments about the stakes in Iraq and the state of the various battles in the broader war on terror.

Dear Hugh- I don't hate Bush. I voted for him twice (votes I now deeply, deeply regret), and I hate what he has done to this country, I hate his incompetence, I hate that he has let propagandists such as yourself take the lead in designing and pushing policy, I hate that he has lost or is losing not one, but two wars, I hate that he has politicized (more accurately, allowed his lackeys to politicize) everything from NASA to the FDA to the Pentagon to a level that would have made Hugh scream out in rage were the President's last name Clinton. I hate all of those things.

But for all that, I still don't hate Bush. I think he is a small, shallow, feeble-minded man, whose "resolve" you cherish is merely the result of a man incapable of thinking on the spot and changing course. While he is ultimately responsible for anything that has been done during his tenure, I am of the opinion that he is little more than a puppet.

So, Hugh, I don't hate him. In fact, I almost feel sorry for him. This will go down as the most incompetent and morally compromised administration in history, and when those history books look back, they will not refer to this sorry period as the "Cole administration," nor will they refer to it as the "Hewitt administration," despite the fact that so very many of your bad ideas have, in fact, been instituted (and usually not because they reflect or represent your 'deep' principles, but because you felt there was some sort of immediate political/electoral gain to be seized). History will dub this sorry era as the Bush Administration.

There was a time, during the last two presidential elections, where I seriously considered the sanity of the people on the Right. I started reading John Cole early last year, and he is one of the few BIG Conservative Bloggers that just makes sense! The guy does not march lockstep with anyone or anything except his own conscience.

This guy used to be one of my heroes, and was in fact one of the first major Conservative Blogs to see the light. It seems, that he has become so dissapointed that he does not even write about politics any, well at least not directly...

I miss the old days when we could have honest, good spirited debates. But it seems more and more common, that even the most die hard supporters of Bush and his policies are either taking a hard look at what they have wrought, and finally speaking out... Or simply choosing to change the subject or pretend that certain things did not, are not or will not.... happen... Or that if they did, are will.... they are not responsible for it. Others will stay with the ship, LONG after it has sunk into history as one of the worst disasters in American History. (Sigh).

My own work life has prevented me from posting much lately or participating in the debate. I have a comeback plan and intend to get back into the blog, but I would rather take the time to do it right, rather than posting simply for posting sake.

By the way, I dont hate Bush either. I'm a...

My Conservative Identity:

You are a Flag-Waving Everyman, also known as a patriot. You believe in freedom, apple pie, rooting for America at all times, and that God gave us a two-day weekend so we could enjoy football and NASCAR.

Take the quiz at www.FightLiberals.com

Heh.... I don't think so. But the test was funny anyway!

The Real Me:

My Liberal Identity:

You are a Social Justice Crusader, also known as a rights activist. You believe in equality, fairness, and preventing neo-Confederate conservative troglodytes from rolling back fifty years of civil rights gains.

Take the quiz at www.FightConservatives.com

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Millions of White House e-mails may be missing, White House spokeswoman Dana Perino acknowledged Friday.

"I wouldn't rule out that there were a potential 5 million e-mails lost," Perino told reporters.

The administration was already facing sharp questions about whether top presidential advisers including Karl Rove improperly used Republican National Committee e-mail that the White House said later disappeared.

The latest comments were a response to a new report from a liberal watchdog group, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW), alleging that over a two-year period official White House e-mail traffic for hundreds of days has vanished -- in possible violation of the federal Presidential Records Act.

I just logged on this morning, I cant wait to see how my Bush Lover buddies spin this one...

Oh yeah... They will just ignore it

Now being in the IT world myself, I can tell you that NO organization can lose 500 emails, much less 5 million... without knowing about it. That the WHITE HOUSE, the most secure facility in the world, would lose 5 MILLION emails, or anywhere near that number is frankly.... inconceivable. Just another example of the arrogance of an administration that really does not respect the intelligence of Americans....

Hehe....

Amanda Marcotte has resigned as John Edwards’ blogger. As James points out, it is all over the blogsphere... My thoughts on the issue? Honestly?

It's why I dont blog much anymore... The blogsphere is full of hatred, pettiness and juvenile bullshit. The worst think that happened with the blogsphere, is that some people got famous, and that fame straight went to their heads (That is ghetto slang). Hehe.. And therein lies the difference... I never set out to be a blog celebrity. I started my blog originaly for my children, as they were in the United States while Dad toiled away founding a company in Costa RIca.
For a while, I got really hung up in the political battle. I made some friends, and made some enemies, but I had fun. My blogs popularity grew, I helped found a big bloggers alliance, and blog daddied a few progressive blogs. All in a Years work. But I never quite fell in with the Netroots crowd. Mostly a matter of choice, but also I suspect.... because a few of them were not quite ready to make room for another African American blogger to their little club.... Whatever...

Or maybe because I just wasnt LEFT enough. Dont know, don't care. There are few bloggers I TRULY respect, some of them are even on the Right. There is some discussing going on in a group I belong to related to my fraternity. The discussion was a positive one, directed at some major reforms in the fraternity. A few days ago, a brother appeared and posted a resolution to ban Gays from the fraternity. Suddenly, all the discussion about reforms went out the window and the entire focus is now on Gays in the Frat. Much of what passes for discourse in the blogsphere these days is just like that thread... A bunch of people making hay about nothing. Was Marcotte out of line in her comments about the Catholic Church? I will leave that to catholics to decide, an organization of which I am not a member, though my wife and kids are. But I will say this, her comments were no better or worse than a lot of the drivel I hear from the Right on a daily basis. The funny thing is that they seem to feel free to attack anyone, and any religion, as it suits them, but have little tolerance for anyone who does not march in lockstep. They also have a tendency to put "Thoughts in people's heads." I already made my Obama post for today, so I will leave it to Maestro John Cole to speak for me....

Pretty much. If you think, as I do, that this administration has bungled Iraq in every way possible, and that we are now in a chaotic situation in which the options range from awful to terrible, to state that we have wasted the lives of thousands of Americans, tens of thousands of Iraqis, and billions of billions of dollars should not only not be construed as a grievous assault on the sacrifice of our troops, but it should be self-evident.

So maybe that is Obama’s real sin- he stated the obvious, and the obvious is a threat to the political ambitions of the GOP and their blogosphere hacks/supporters. We have wasted a lot of lives and lot of money, and Barack is on the hot seat for stating that publicly.

Now I am going to get back to what is really important to me... Making money.

Seems the conservative types are really starting to show their true colors when it comes to Barak Obama. How many lives have been lost in Baghdad in the last week, month, six months? Does the electricity run 24/7? Is Iraq safer than when we entered the war? How do YOU define wasted. I am sorry, but I take nothing away from the sacrifice of our troops when I say, "This war has been a disaster unparalleled in the history of our country, and if return for sacrifice is any measure of whether our soldiers lives were, "wasted," or not, I would say they were wasted, and all the spin and Conservative Bullshitista rhetoric in the world, will not change that fact...

The Dixie Chicks, were finally vindicated last night. Right on for them. I can hear the Conservatives crying right now.

"I haven't checked, but I imagine that most of the conservative blogs are making hay today about Wolf Blitzer asking about Cheney's pregnant Lesbian daughter... Oh the outrage!"

Cheney makes ridiculous comments about how, "well," things are going in Iraq and WHOOSH! It goes right over the head of the right wingers... And just as I predicted... They could not help themselves.

Just what does it take for these people to recognize REALITY?

"It seems that being black is not an issue of skin color; it's an issue of mind set. You are black if you are liberal, say the right things, and have the right experiences. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and Justice Clarence Thomas, on the other hand, are conservatives and don't parrot the liberal line, so they are dismissed. Even though Hillary has never experienced anything of what Morrison outlined, she is married (sort of) to Bill Clinton, which gives her a pass."

From a Wizbang post on the news that the majority of African Americans recently polled identify more with Hillary than Obama.

A couple of notes... Blacks will vote for the candidate whom they see as:

1. More in step with their values and political priorities.
2. The candidate they see as more likely to win.

As for Secretary Rice and Justice Thomas, both are black obviously. The fact that they are not embraced by the Black Community is simply a reflection of most blacks opinion that neither represents their values or political priorities. Add to that Thomas's shady past, and I doubt if either would be widely embraced by any group in the Black Community. It is also important to note that neither has reached out in any significant way to the black community. Clinton was not "The black president," but he did identify with African Americans, and made efforts to reach out to them.

While it is true that Black people tend to vote democrat, and support progressive candidates. it is grossly condescending to lump all black people into a category, just because they are black. I happen to be proud of the accomplishments of both Rice and Thomas in reaching the pinnacle of their careers, this does not mean I agree with them, or respect their political positions... It also doesn't mean I see them as any less black...

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Vice President Dick Cheney on Wednesday dismissed as "hogwash" the suggestion that blunders may have hurt the administration's credibility on Iraq.

In an interview with CNN's Wolf Blitzer, conducted a day after Bush delivered his State of the Union address, Cheney was asked to respond to some Republicans in Congress who "are now seriously questioning your credibility, because of the blunders and the failures."

To that, Cheney answered, "Wolf, Wolf, I simply don't accept the premise of your question. I just think it's hogwash."

What kind of drugs is Cheney taking... Or what kind does he think WE are taking. This guy is so arrogant, and so out of touch, that NO credible news operation should be polluting the airwaves with this man's drivel. But the fact that he is indifferent to the impact of the war is understandable, he had "more important things," to do during the Vietnam conflict, his opportunity to serve.... The only "Hogwash," here Mr. Vice President, is your own arrogant, self serving state of denial. But then again, who want to admit how stupid they have been? I havent checked, but I imagine that most of the conservative blogs are making hay today about Wolf Blitzer asking about Cheney's pregnant Lesbian daughter... Oh the outrage!

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Overall, President Bush's State of the Union was received favorably by a sample of speech watchers interviewed by CNN and Opinion Research Corporation immediately after his 50-minute address to a joint session of Congress.

But the poll showed that Bush registered his lowest "very positive" post-State of the Union reaction of his presidency. Bush reached a high water mark of a 60% "very positive" response immediately following his 2005 speech. In 2006, 48% of speech watchers described his address as "very positive."

As for Tuesday night's speech, only 20% of those polled had a "negative" reaction to Bush's speech, while 41% walked away with a "very positive" feeling about the speech and 37% had a "somewhat positive" reaction.

A bare majority of Americans who watched the speech said they were confident that the U.S. would achieve its goals in Iraq; 46% were not confident. Compare that to the 2004 State of the Union, less than a year after the start of the Iraq war, when 71% of people who watched that speech expressed confidence about Iraq.

He asked for a chance to see if the new strategy for Iraq will work. We have to give him that chance, there are NO other options. I liked Webb's response... I frankly am sick of Conservatives touting the economy message... Maybe it is good for Rich Republicans, but not for many other Americans...

When one looks at the health of our economy, it's almost as if we are living in two different countries. Some say that things have never been better. The stock market is at an all-time high, and so are corporate profits. But these benefits are not being fairly shared. When I graduated from college, the average corporate CEO made 20 times what the average worker did; today, it's nearly 400 times. In other words, it takes the average worker more than a year to make the money that his or her boss makes in one day.

Wages and salaries for our workers are at all-time lows as a percentage of national wealth, even though the productivity of American workers is the highest in the world. Medical costs have skyrocketed. College tuition rates are off the charts. Our manufacturing base is being dismantled and sent overseas. Good American jobs are being sent along with them.

In short, the middle class of this country, our historic backbone and our best hope for a strong society in the future, is losing its place at the table. Our workers know this, through painful experience. Our white-collar professionals are beginning to understand it, as their jobs start disappearing also. And they expect, rightly, that in this age of globalization, their government has a duty to insist that their concerns be dealt with fairly in the international marketplace.

In the early days of our republic, President Andrew Jackson established an important principle of American-style democracy ­that we should measure the health of our society not at its apex, but at its base. Not with the numbers that come out of Wall Street, but with the living conditions that exist on Main Street. We must recapture that spirit today.

I also liked his very poignant comments on the war...

I want to share with all of you a picture that I have carried with me for more than 50 years. This is my father, when he was a young Air Force captain, flying cargo planes during the Berlin Airlift. He sent us the picture from Germany, as we waited for him, back here at home. When I was a small boy, I used to take the picture to bed with me every night, because for more than three years my father was deployed, unable to live with us full-time, serving overseas or in bases where there was no family housing. I still keep it, to remind me of the sacrifices that my mother and others had to make, over and over again, as my father gladly served our country. I was proud to follow in his footsteps, serving as a Marine in Vietnam. My brother did as well, serving as a Marine helicopter pilot. My son has joined the tradition, now serving as an infantry Marine in Iraq.

Like so many other Americans, today and throughout our history, we serve and have served, not for political reasons, but because we love our country. On the political issues, those matters of war and peace, and in some cases of life and death, we trusted the judgment of our national leaders. We hoped that they would be right, that they would measure with accuracy the value of our lives against the enormity of the national interest that might call upon us to go into harm's way.

We owed them our loyalty, as Americans, and we gave it. But they owed us ­ sound judgment, clear thinking, concern for our welfare, a guarantee that the threat to our country was equal to the price we might be called upon to pay in defending it.

The president took us into this war recklessly. He disregarded warnings from the national security adviser during the first Gulf War, the chief of staff of the army, two former commanding generals of the Central Command, whose jurisdiction includes Iraq, the director of operations on the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and many, many others with great integrity and long experience in national security affairs. We are now, as a nation, held hostage to the predictable ­and predicted ­disarray that has followed.

The war's costs to our nation have been staggering. Financially. The damage to our reputation around the world. The lost opportunities to defeat the forces of international terrorism. And especially the precious blood of our citizens who have stepped forward to serve.

The truth is that we are asking too much from our men and women in Uniform, some of them have been sent on a third tour of Iraq. And while few will say it, I will... How many of those soldiers, or their families are beginning to wonder... "How long will my luck last? When is my number going to come up?"

As has often been discussed here, the Chickenhawk argument becomes more and more compelling, the longer this war of choice lasts... How can we continue to ask the FEW to continue to make these sacrifices, while the Presidents own children party in Cabo San Lucas, and some young, obviously fit Conservative Pundits, continue to cheer from the sidelines...

No, we cant leave Iraq in a state of civil war, especially one that we enabled... So I am all for giving this latest effort a chance. But it is fair and just to hold Bush accountable for the disaster, even if some are still living in the fantasy world that says, "It is not that bad in Iraq."

And whats up with the "Democrat Majority," thing... Dude you lost. Your party had it's ass handed to it in November. You are the most unpopular President in history. Your administration is winding down to one just slightly less disgraceful than Richard Nixon's. Wipe the smirk off your face and get some maturity... The comments to Speaker Pelosi were nice, but the silly little snipe at the Democratic Party was just another example of the arrogance that led to your current position... Get over it!

As far as the rest of the speech... I don't take much stock in SOTU Addresses. They are usually just laundry list of shit that never happens. I have no reason to expect that any Bush's list will pass either. And the proof is in the fact that most of his previous ones have not...

The Bush administration is one of the most corrupt and morally bankrupt administrations in U.S. history. How some people continue to get up and defend these dirtbags day after day, is beyond revolting.

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Top White House officials tried to blame vice presidential aide "Scooter" Libby for the 2003 leak of a CIA operative's identity to protect President Bush's political strategist, Karl Rove, Libby's defense attorney said Tuesday as his perjury trial began. (emphasis mine)

I. Lewis Libby is accused of lying to FBI agents, who began investigating after syndicated columnist Robert Novak revealed that a chief Bush administration critic, Joseph Wilson, was married to CIA operative Valerie Plame.

When the leak investigation was launched, White House officials cleared Rove of wrongdoing but stopped short of doing so for Libby. Libby, who had been asked to counter Wilson's criticisms, felt betrayed and sought out his boss, Vice President Dick Cheney, Wells said. (Watch why jurists were asked about Vice President Cheney Video)

"They're trying to set me up. They want me to be the sacrificial lamb," attorney Theodore Wells said, recalling Libby's end of the conversation. "I will not be sacrificed so Karl Rove can be protected."

Rove was one of two sources for Novak's story. The other was then-Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage. Nobody, including Rove and Armitage, has been charged with the leak. Libby is accused of lying to investigators and obstructing the probe into the leak.

Cheney's notes from that meeting underscore Libby's concern, Wells said.

"Not going to protect one staffer and sacrifice the guy that was asked to stick his neck in the meat grinder," the note said, according to Wells.

The description of the White House infighting was a rare glimpse into the secretive workings of Bush's inner circle. It also underscores how hectic and stressful the White House had become when the probe was launched.

By pointing the finger at Rove, whom he referred to as "the lifeblood of the Republican party," Wells sought to cast Libby as a scapegoat.

"He is an innocent man and he has been wrongly and unjustly and unfairly accused," Wells said.

To all my friends on the right who tried to say that Rove was vindicated... Shame on you, and shame on this administration for the web of lies that they have wove, since BEFORE taking office. But it's all coming home to roost. Even the Republicans are abandoning Bush on Iraq. And the Press, so long a tool for this administration, whipped into being so by YOU, are being forced to see the truth.

Let me make a prediction....

Bush will go down in History as the worst President in History, and YOU, all of you, will live with the shame of your shameless cheerleading for an administration that is responsible for heinous crimes... Your obsession with Bill Clinton's blow job seems pathetic in the face of this historical disaster...

His war has driven his ratings into the tank, speculation is rampant as to whether he is, "The Worst President in History," Even a google search finds the official White House Page for G.W.! And now, it looks like he may find a hard time finding a home for his $200 Million Dollar Presidential Library.

DALLAS, Texas (AP) -- A group of Methodist ministers from across the nation launched an online petition drive Thursday urging Southern Methodist University to stop trying to land George W. Bush's presidential library.

The petition, on a newly created Web site, http://www.protectsmu.orgexternal link, says that "as United Methodists, we believe that the linking of his presidency with a university bearing the Methodist name is utterly inappropriate."

"Methodists have a long history of social conscience, so questions about the conduct of this president are very concerning," said one of the petition's organizers, the Rev. Andrew J. Weaver of New York, who graduated from SMU's Perkins School of Theology.

I've noticed that a bit of the swagger has gone out of his step... Even the Iraqi Prime Minister is challenging him. I could almost feel sorry for the man, if he had kept his promise to bring civility back to Washington, instead of spending the last 7 years pissing all over our constitution and ruining our reputation around the world, with one arrogant misstep after another...

Is he the worst President in History? Ummmm History will decide that, but at the moment it is not looking too good.

The conservatives all said that the Democrats had no plan for Iraq?

I am still waiting for one from Bush... I guess I could get behind this whole "Troop Surge," thing, if I thought it would work. At this point I dont...

But then again, that seems to be the only plan they have... That and Bashing the Democrats about not wanting to send more troops to Iraq to be killed, without a plan for what to do with them once they get there... I guess it is easy to second guess when you aint a "surger," yourself?

I nearly shat my pants, and blew hot coffee out my nose...

Tom Delay is a total idiot, or at least the moron he has running his site is...

What's wrong with that picture... Which is from here by the way, (See it before they edit it, and claim it never was posted)

Jon Swift is about as conservative as... well.... Jesus General! LMAO!

Great Start to your blogging career Tom! Maybe it will be easier from Jail!

With two years to go before the Presidential Election, they seem to be terrified of Obama.

I have not heard enough of Senator Obama's ideas to have an idea one way or the other, but I find it entertaining that he has people like Rush Limbaugh making even more of an idiot of himself...

The only other African American being mentioned as a candidate, Condi Rice... probably wont run. Laura says because she is not married, but I think Jon Ponder put it much better...

Condi can't be president because she has a record of egregious incompetence and a political tin ear. Her marital status is irrelevant.

I sure hope they take THIS advice in 2008! What a recipe for disaster. Let me spell it out for those still drinking the Kool Aide!

People Like THIS, are NOT the voice of America. They are a lunatic fringe, who's conservatism is not really conservatism, it is more regression. They want to go back to a time in America that does not exist any more. A time when Black Folk, and other "agitators," knew their place.

That time... IS DONE!

Thank God!

Today's piece:

I must admit, Marc, I am extraordinarily disturbed by the growing chorus of apologia for brutal thug Augusto Pinochet. The argument seems to be twofold: 1) A left-wing dictator would have been worse, and 2) at least he helped spark the economy. Both, I feel, are being wielded far too casually to excuse one of the hemisphere's most notorious tyrants.

To the first, yes, Pinochet is likely better than Fidel Castro. Castro, for his part, is likely better than Adolph Hitler. The debate as to whether right-wing or left-wing dictators are "worse" is tiresome and, I feel, puts the desire to score partisan points ahead of what should be a bipartisan and universal norm of condemning all of history's murderous tyrants to the hell they belong. Moreover, I can't be too impressed by Pinochet voluntarily stepping down and "pav[ing] the way for liberal democrac[y]" after over a decade in office, given that he got there by overthrowing a democratically elected government in Salvador Allende. Allende may not have been ideal, but he was the elected leader (unlike Mr. Castro), and I think its an absurd attempt at counterfactual to assert that he, too, would have been a brutal thug. Democracy, at the very least, already existed in Chile. Pinochet replaced democracy with a particularly vicious tyranny.

To the second, I don't feel these sort of extrinsic issues can or should in any way be used to lament the loss of evil. I'm no fan of stagnated economic development, but I dislike thousands of "disappearances" and mass torture a whole lot more. Giving points to Pinochet for improving the economy is like giving props to Castro for increasing the literacy rate, or the British colonial government for making the trains run on time. When weighed against the type of incalculable evil waged by Pinochet against his populace, it is a flyspeck.

David is spot on...

Pinochet was a ruthless dictator who was responsible for the murder, rape and torture of thousands in his country. If you want to know what happened in Chile and elsewhere in Latin America during the battle against the spread of communism, read Empire's Workshop. Pinochet got an express ticket to Hell, where he will be tortured for all eternity by the screams of his victims. You know, the ones who were thrown out of airplanes flying over the Pacific Ocean, or of the women who watched their babies bludgeoned to death, before they were raped and had their throats slit. He might also hear the cries of the mothers of the dissapeared... I have no sympathy for the man. Nor do I celebrate the Shock Therapy that led to the so called economic miracle, that starved his population, and drove many into bankruptcy, before "curing them."

It's amazing to see Pinochet compared with Castro, as if it makes sense to compare two mass murders and to conclude that one was "less evil," than the other. Castro is an evil man, who is responsible for the death of thousands, and a brutally oppressive regime. When his time comes, he will share hell with Pinochet. It is the ultimate in hypocrisy to lessen the crimes of a murderer because he fits one's political ideology, or because he ultimately retired, or that the legally elected President he replaced MIGHT have been worse.... All ridiculous and immoral arguments, literally spitting on the graves of those who died at the hands of Mr. Pinochet, many guilty only of being "suspected," of being a communist, or being a family member of one, or... simply speaking out against the atrocities... Everyone eulogizing this monster should be forced to sit in a room with the survivors of his victims and listen to their stories of horror.

Interesting the hypocrisy of these people... If you are a murderous dictator that thumbs your nose at the US, you are bad. If you are a murderous dictator who works closely with the CIA to murder your own people, and commits acts of terrorism on U.S. soil, you are just slightly flawed.

I live in Central America. I personally know people who suffered under repressive dictatorships during the late 20th Century. Pinochet was one of many ruthless dictatorships or puppet governments sponsored by the U.S., and installed with CIA dirty tricks, and the wounds have not healed. Even today, in a country like Costa Rica, which was spared most of the worst of U.S. intervention, there is resentment. This resentment is most often today expressed in the form of opposition to the CAFTA agreement, which is seen by many intellectuals as an extension of traditional American Imperialism.

Pinochet was a murderer and a thief who stole tens of millions of dollars from his country's treasury during his rule. To remember him as anything less is immoral...

Bush seems to think that in the end his "Iraqi Folly," will be justified and that like Harry Truman, his legacy will be acknowledged with time...

Durbin said he challenged Bush's analogy, reminding him that Truman had the NATO alliance behind him and negotiated with his enemies at the United Nations. Durbin said that's what the Iraq Study Group is recommending that Bush do now - work more with allies and negotiate with adversaries on Iraq.

Bush, Durbin said, "reacted very strongly. He got very animated in his response" and emphasized that he is "the commander in chief."

I can just imagine him pouting and stomping his feet!

I understand why so many conservatives, especially bloggers, just keep defending this guy. He is just too much of an embarrassment for them to acknowledge how monumentally wrong they were... This guy has been playing Generalisimo for the last six years, spent hundreds of billions of our dollars, sent thousands of our young people to Iraq to die, while it appears that NO ONE in his family has come close to serving in "Bush's war." A civil war rages in Iraq... The situation in Afghanistan is deteriorating daily. The World hates America. Our President is considered a buffoon at best... And conservative bloggers focus on whether an Iraqi Police Captain is REAL OR NOT? I mean whether some people were set on fire outside a Mosque may or may not be true... But the reality is that dozens die daily in Iraq, including our soldiers. Where is the outrage about that...

I guess for people who have been writing about how much "better" things are in Iraq for the last two years, it's hard to pass up dissecting some bad news, that may not have happened. I mean, they all want the Media to write "smoke rings up your ass stories," about hospitals and schools, and how many Iraqis love the Invasion. Or maybe, with the devastating loss in November, they are longing for the days of Rathergate, Cigars champaign and, "taunting the Liberals." Sorry dude, it will be two years before you can even THINK about taunting a Liberal again. Every day looks worse, and the Frat Boy YOU elected President has done more damage to our international prestige... And our wallet:

And even if we're able to constrain discretionary spending for the next ten years to the rate of inflation, which we haven't for a long time, we still face large and growing structural deficits in the years ahead. Bottom line? The status quo is unacceptable and unsustainable. We're on an imprudent and unsustainable fiscal path. Tough choices are required. We will not be able to grow our way out of this problem. Anybody who says that suffers from two problems. Number one, they have not studied economic history adequately; and number two; they probably wouldn't do real well at math. Because the numbers just don't add up.

Than generations can hope to fix...

Well, at least some people came to their senses, or maybe it's not that at all... Maybe it's just that some people have integrity and don't march in lockstep when the people in front of them are all farting... I don't know. But I am glad there are people out there who put principle before political party.

"Though Bush may be viewed as a laughingstock, he won't have the zero-integrity factors that have kept Nixon and Harding at the bottom in the presidential sweepstakes..."

Douglas Brinkley

I don't need a poll to tell me that.

Despite some notable accomplishments in domestic and foreign policy, Nixon is mostly associated today with disdain for the Constitution and abuse of presidential power. Obsessed with secrecy and media leaks, he viewed every critic as a threat to national security and illegally spied on U.S. citizens. Nixon considered himself above the law.

Bush has taken this disdain for law even further. He has sought to strip people accused of crimes of rights that date as far back as the Magna Carta in Anglo-American jurisprudence: trial by impartial jury, access to lawyers and knowledge of evidence against them. In dozens of statements when signing legislation, he has asserted the right to ignore the parts of laws with which he disagrees. His administration has adopted policies regarding the treatment of prisoners of war that have disgraced the nation and alienated virtually the entire world. Usually, during wartime, the Supreme Court has refrained from passing judgment on presidential actions related to national defense. The court's unprecedented rebukes of Bush's policies on detainees indicate how far the administration has strayed from the rule of law.

One other president bears comparison to Bush: James K. Polk. Some historians admire him, in part because he made their job easier by keeping a detailed diary during his administration, which spanned the years of the Mexican-American War. But Polk should be remembered primarily for launching that unprovoked attack on Mexico and seizing one-third of its territory for the United States.

Lincoln, then a member of Congress from Illinois, condemned Polk for misleading Congress and the public about the cause of the war -- an alleged Mexican incursion into the United States. Accepting the president's right to attack another country "whenever he shall deem it necessary," Lincoln observed, would make it impossible to "fix any limit" to his power to make war. Today, one wishes that the country had heeded Lincoln's warning.

Historians are loath to predict the future. It is impossible to say with certainty how Bush will be ranked in, say, 2050. But somehow, in his first six years in office he has managed to combine the lapses of leadership, misguided policies and abuse of power of his failed predecessors. I think there is no alternative but to rank him as the worst president in U.S. history.

The war in Iraq is the tip of the iceberg. His Presidency has been a disaster from the final vote count in Florida 2000.... Bush and his cronies have literally raped the constitution of the United States and made a mockery of our international standing.

Bush will be remembered by the international community as the "idiot," who ran America for a while. As a result of his Presidency, America and indeed the world is a less safe place to live. Americans are hated abroad. Our international influence is propped up by nothing more than our over stretched Military, and our country is divided into hateful camps. Those who question the President and his policies are accussed of Bush Hatred Derangement Syndrome, while there appears to be some evidence that the other side are the deranged ones.

Michael at TMV says the jury is still out on Bush's Presidency. I disagree. There is little this Administration can do to redeem itself in the next two years.

O'Reilly is an idiot, who gets paid by the Bush Propaganda machine called Fox news...

Some folks apparently don't have very much for centrist, or moderates.

That's okay, I don't have very much respect for dogmatist.

I tend to agree with Michael...

Anyhow, some advice for Jane: please refrain from giving your opinion about centrists. Just do what you always do: repeat the talking points of the far left and demonize everyone who disagrees with you. After all, it's what you do best.

Thanks to Teresa for sending me the link!

From the NYT Editorial Page:

As President Bush throws himself into the final days of a particularly nasty campaign season, he's settled into a familiar pattern of ugly behavior. Since he can't defend the real world created by his policies and his decisions, Mr. Bush is inventing a fantasy world in which to campaign on phony issues against fake enemies.

In Mr. Bush's world, America is making real progress in Iraq. In the real world, as Michael Gordon reported in yesterday's Times, the index that generals use to track developments shows an inexorable slide toward chaos. In Mr. Bush's world, his administration is marching arm in arm with Iraqi officials committed to democracy and to staving off civil war. In the real world, the prime minister of Iraq orders the removal of American checkpoints in Baghdad and abets the sectarian militias that are slicing and dicing their country.

In Mr. Bush's world, there are only two kinds of Americans: those who are against terrorism, and those who somehow are all right with it. Some Americans want to win in Iraq and some don't. There are Americans who support the troops and Americans who don't support the troops. And at the root of it all is the hideously damaging fantasy that there is a gulf between Americans who love their country and those who question his leadership.

Mr. Bush has been pushing these divisive themes all over the nation, offering up the ludicrous notion the other day that if Democrats manage to control even one house of Congress, America will lose and the terrorists will win. But he hit a particularly creepy low when he decided to distort a lame joke lamely delivered by Senator John Kerry of Massachusetts. Mr. Kerry warned college students that the punishment for not learning your lessons was to "get stuck in Iraq." In context, it was obviously an attempt to disparage Mr. Bush's intelligence. That's impolitic and impolite, but it's not as bad as Mr. Bush's response. Knowing full well what Mr. Kerry meant, the president and his team cried out that the senator was disparaging the troops. It was a depressing replay of the way the Bush campaign Swift-boated Americans in 2004 into believing that Mr. Kerry, who went to war, was a coward and Mr. Bush, who stayed home, was a hero.

"FEAR is the Mind Killer..." And in the case of many on the Right, it seems that death happened a long time ago. It would be funny reading some of the desperate post on Right Wing blogs, you know.... the ones with the apocalyptic imagery, and grave warnings about how we are all going to be in danger if the Democrats win... If they were not so scary. No not scary in the sense that they are believable. Scary in the sense that these people are so desperate to stay in power that they will do ANYTHING, and I mean anything... to scare us into voting for this bankrupt administration again.

Well, perhaps I am wrong, but I see signs that the tide has turned. Once, the Republicans effectively used the claim that the Democrats had no platform other than "anything but Bush." Well now it seems that the Republicans find themselves in a position where they have nothing to talk about, so its about demonizing the Democrats, and creating issues where they do not exist, with Democrats that are not running for office. It is not working....

Have you ever "smelled" fear? Ever seen the look on the face of a cornered animal... We are seeing the digital equivalent of this in the last few days before the elections.

It's not just about Iraq. Scandals in the Republican party have consumed the party for over a year, but Republican control of both houses have prevented proper investigation and disclosure. It looks like in these last days before the election, they are having an impact:

Indictments, investigations and allegations of wrongdoing have helped put at least 15 Republican House seats in jeopardy, enough to swing control to the Democrats on Tuesday even before the larger issues of war, economic unease and President Bush are invoked.

With just five days left before Election Day, allegations are springing up like brushfires. Four GOP House seats have been tarred by lobbyist Jack Abramoff's influence-peddling scandal. Five have been adversely affected by then-Rep. Mark Foley's unseemly contacts with teenage male House pages. The remaining half a dozen or so could turn on controversies including offshore tax dodging, sexual misconduct and shady land deals.

Not since the House bank check-kiting scandal of the early 1990s have so many seats been affected by scandals, and not since the Abscam bribery cases of the 1970s have the charges been so serious. But this year's combination of breadth and severity may be unprecedented, suggested Julian E. Zelizer, a congressional historian at Boston University.

For more than a year, Democrats have tried to gain political advantage from what they called "a culture of corruption" in Republican-controlled Washington. Republican campaign officials insist the theme has not caught on with the public, but even they concede that many individual races have been hit hard.

So perhaps fear will play a role in this election after all. But it wont be fear of faceless terrorist... It might just be the fear of Conservatives and Republicans who are staring defeat in the face.... The NYT editorial was spot on...

"when candidates for lower office (or conservative bloggers) make their opponents out to be friends of Osama bin Laden, or try to turn a minor gaffe into a near felony, that's just depressing. When the president of the United States gleefully bathes in the muck to divide Americans into those who love their country and those who don't, it is destructive to the fabric of the nation he is supposed to be leading." (insert mine).

Others with thoughts:

The Democratic Daily, The Moderate Voice, DownWithTyranny!, Is That Legal?, Barking Moonbat Early …, Hullabaloo,