Also... You tea party mother fuckers are stupid. MOST of your taxes should be lower now... The original tea party had no problem with taxation. Only taxation w/o representation. You voted. You have representation. Or maybe you're just bitter that your party finally got the boot. And you're hypocritical. Where were you when bush was spending the country into the ground? I guess you were too busy telling us that Iraq was going "swimmingly" and that it wasn't about the oil. I've read dozens of webpages about what these things are supposed to mean and what you're trying to accomplish, and they all stink of bitter beans. You don't even know what you're doing. You're just mad that you had an 8 year run and chose the dumbest mother fucker in the world to lead it and now you've got to let the other side try something for a change. It wouldn't suck so much had you also been out in force when the cowboy-in-chief was spending all of our money, but you weren't. Somehow it's ok to blow our wad on starting a war so trigger-happy-george could get his rocks off, but you have a problem with spending money in an effort to solve our domestic problems? Fuck you. Sore. Losers.

Labels: george bush

This past Saturday, Allison and I went uptown to the Charlotte Torch Rally (for Sudan). It was kind of lucky that we knew it was happening; I was just randomly screwing around online one day and came across the page. I'd vaguely remembered it when I serendipitously heard an episode of Charlotte Talks on NPR that was talking about the rally. So, luckily, I remembered, and we managed to get there before it was over... albeit it barely. This also ended up being the first day that either of us had gotten to ride the light rail, which was an added bonus. Probably would not have gone if we had had to drive and find a place to park. I did screw up and made us walk all the way to East Blvd, which took about 20 minutes... I didn't know there was a station less than 5 minutes walk from my house. I certainly needed the exercise, but I wish we didn't get there so late. Lateness aside, riding the train was really cool; I'm more excited than I probably should be that we finally have it. It was crowded, but I didn't care. There's something about riding a train through the city in the midst of a few hundred other people that connects you to the things by which you are surrounded. No worries about traffic or light or pedestrians... just getting to look around at all these little pieces of the town I'd never seen before in a pretty relaxed manner was great. After we got off and were walking to center city, I happened to notice that we could see the entire reflection of the Bank of America building behind us in whatever glass building was in front of us. I'm sure many many people see this every day, but I hadn't noticed it before... I thought it was really cool, and I tried to get Allison in the photo, but it didn't work. It's still a neat picture, I think.
I also noticed a lot of people wearing Davidson paraphernalia as we were walking. I thought it was odd and only later that night did I find out that Davidson was playing Duke in the arena. (and only barely lost) When we got to the rally, the very first person I saw was a girl I had slightly known from Davidson. I wish I could remember her name, but I can't. We caught the tail end of one of the speakers talking about stuff that I mostly already learned from the Dave Eggers thing a few weeks prior, and we headed over to the booth housing the banner to be sent to the Chinese embassy. I'm sure they're going to throw it away as soon as they get it, but it's still kind of cool that our names are on it. The guy speaking finished, and then some band started playing. We both looked at each other in that *groan* kind of way. The band was fine, but they sucked at the same time. They sounded, as Allison put it, "like every Christian band ever." They sang some songs about how it wasn't the fault of the refugees that they were refugees and about how it sucks to be raped or something. But it was all just that lame tame contemporary Christian sound, and what was the point of having a band there anyway? Everyone cleared out from in front of the stage when the speaker left and the band started. I felt kind of bad for them, but it was still funny. It kind of looked like they wanted to rock out (especially the bass player), but they just... couldn't. I don't suppose I actually have any sort of point here other than to say we went. The crowd wasn't huge and, while there were a lot of cameras there, the coverage on Fox News that night was for maybe 30 seconds. I'm not really sure what good this thing did, but maybe it did something. It's hard to get across REAL ideas and feelings at this kind of thing, I believe. But at least, I guess, people are trying to do something. They did take donations, but I'm poor and didn't give; I don't know what the results were. And although that signed banner looks pretty cool, it's depressing that, in a city of approximately 700,000, they could only amass a few hundred signatures. That thing should be covered.
All-in-all, it was definitely a good day despite feeling insignificant and lame in the face of terrible things happening to real people. I've been too busy to really read lately, but I'm still making progress in What is the What. And it's really fantastic. And frightening. I learned another reason why those george bush mother fuckers should all go to hell tho. Said better than I could do it from the Asia Times newspaper: It's the oil, stupid. And why don't we stop them now? Well the genocidal Muslim government of Sudan is cooperating in w's "War on Terror." We wouldn't want to offend them by telling them to stop killing all the Dinka. *sigh* 2011 can't get here soon enough. Provided, of course, we don't watch it go to fire in 2010... :)

Labels: george bush

My hero...


I guess that's pretty old, but I just now saw it.

Labels: george bush

george bush is at it again. How has he managed to not get shot? Is everyone just more afraid of Dick?

From Sojourners...

Imagine walking into your local library, planning to read a theologian such as Reinhold Niebuhr or Karl Barth, or a popular inspirational work, such as Rick Warren's Purpose-Driven Life or Harold Kushner's When Bad Things Happen to Good People.

But instead of finding such important and popular titles, you discover that the religion section has been decimated – stripped of any book that did not appear on a government-approved list.

That's exactly what's happening right now to inmates in federal prisons under a Bush administration policy. As The New York Times put it, "chaplains have been quietly carrying out a systematic purge of religious books and materials that were once available to prisoners in chapel libraries."

The news reports seem implausible. The idea of government bureaucrats drafting a list of approved books on religion seems like something out of Soviet-era Russia, not the United States of America, where freedom of religion – even for those behind prison walls – is something we treasure.

But the reports are true. All of the books and authors named above have been removed from prison libraries. In some instances, according to the Times, chaplains have been forced to dismantle "libraries that had thousands of texts collected over decades, bought by the prisons, or donated by churches and religious groups."

To make matters worse, the contents of the "approved" list are extremely capricious. For example, "80 of the 120 titles on the list for Judaism are from the same Orthodox publishing house," and the list for Christianity "lack[s] materials from early church fathers, liberal theologians and major Protestant denominations."

The Bureau of Prisons says they merely want to ensure prisons are not recruiting grounds for terrorists and other militant groups. So why are they removing the vast majority of materials on faith and religion? And if prisoners are not free to pursue their own faith journeys, what cause for hope should they have?

Christians from across the political and theological spectrum are justifiably outraged. As Mark Earley, president and chief executive officer of Chuck Colson's Prison Fellowship, told the Times, "It's swatting a fly with a sledgehammer. There's no need to get rid of literally hundreds of thousands of books that are fine simply because you have a problem with an isolated book or piece of literature that presents extremism."

Labels: george bush

that video is pretty cool, but trying to watch it on the Al-Jazeera site is annoying... The direct YouTube links work tho...

part 1

part 2

Labels: george bush

Bush’s Fake Sheik Whacked:
The Surge and the Al Qaeda Bunny

A special investigative report from inside Iraq
by Greg Palast

Monday, September 17, 2007- Did you see George all choked up? In his surreal TV talk on Thursday, he got all emotional over the killing by Al Qaeda of Sheik Abu Risha, the leader of the new Sunni alliance with the US against the insurgents in Anbar Province, Iraq.

Bush shook Abu Risha's hand two weeks ago for the cameras. Bush can shake his hand again, but not the rest of him: Abu Risha was blown away just hours before Bush was to go on the air to praise his new friend.

Here's what you need to know that NPR won't tell you.

1. Sheik Abu Risha wasn't a sheik.
2. He wasn't killed by Al Qaeda.
3. The new alliance with former insurgents in Anbar is as fake as the sheik - and a murderous deceit.

How do I know this? You can see the film - of "Sheik" Abu Risha, of the guys who likely whacked him and of their other victims.

Just in case you think I've lost my mind and put my butt in insane danger to get this footage, don't worry. I was safe and dry in Budapest. It was my brilliant new cameraman, Rick Rowley, who went to Iraq to get the story on his own.

Rick's "the future of TV news," says BBC. He's also completely out of control. Despite our pleas, Rick and his partner Dave Enders went to Anbar and filmed where no cameraman had dared tread.

Why was "sheik" Abu Risha so important? As the New York Times put it this morning, "Abu Risha had become a charismatic symbol of the security gains in Sunni areas that have become a cornerstone of American plans to keep large numbers of troops in Iraq though much of next year."

In other words, Abu Risha was the PR hook used to sell the "success" of the surge.

The sheik wasn't a sheik. He was a fake. While proclaiming to Rick that he was "the leader of all the Iraqi tribes," Abu lead no one. But for a reported sum in the millions in cash for so-called, "reconstruction contracts," Abu Risha was willing to say he was Napoleon and Julius Caesar and do the hand-shakie thing with Bush on camera.

Notably, Rowley and his camera caught up with Abu Risha on his way to a "business trip" to Dubai, money laundering capital of the Middle East.

There are some real sheiks in Anbar, like Ali Hathem of the dominant Dulaimi tribe, who told Rick Abu Risha was a con man. Where was his tribe, this tribal leader? "The Americans like to create characters like Disney cartoon heros." Then Ali Hathem added, "Abu Risha is no longer welcome" in Anbar.

"Not welcome" from a sheik in Anbar is roughly the same as a kiss on both cheeks from the capo di capi. Within days, when Abu Risha returned from Dubai to Dulaimi turf in Ramadi, Bush's hand-sheik was whacked.

On Thursday, Bush said Abu Risha was killed, "fighting Al Qaeda" - and the White House issued a statement that the sheik was "killed by al Qaeda."

Bullshit.

There ain't no Easter Bunny and "Al Qaeda" ain't in Iraq, Mr. Bush. It was very cute, on the week of the September 11 memorials, to tie the death of your Anbar toy-boy to bin Laden's Saudi hijackers. But it's a lie. Yes, there is a group of berserkers who call themselves "Al Qaeda in Mesopotamia." But they have as much to do with the real Qaeda of bin Laden as a Rolling Stones "tribute" band has to do with Mick Jagger.

Who got Abu Risha? Nothing - NOTHING - moves in Ramadi without the approval of the REAL tribal sheiks. They were none-too-happy, as Hathem noted, about the millions the US handed to Risha. The sheiks either ordered the hit - or simply gave the bomber free passage to do the deed.

So who are these guys, the sheiks who lead the Sunni tribes of Anbar - the potentates of the Tamimi, Fallaji, Obeidi, Zobal and Jumaili tribes? Think of them as the Sopranos of Arabia. They are also members of the so-called "Awakening Council" - getting their slice of the millions handed out - which they had no interest in sharing with Risha.

But creepy and deadly or not, these capi of the desert were effective in eliminating "Al Qaeda in Mesopotamia." Indeed, as US military so proudly pointed out to Rick, the moment the sheiks declared their opposition to Al Qaeda - i.e. got the payments from the US taxpayers - Al Qaeda instantly diappeared.

This miraculous military change, where the enemy just evaporates, has one explanation: the sheiks ARE al Qaeda in Mesopotamia. Just like the Sopranos extract "protection" payments from New Jersey businesses, the mobsters of Anbar joined our side when we laid down the loot.

What's wrong with that? After all, I'd rather send a check than send our kids from Columbus to fight them.

But there's something deeply, horribly wrong with dealing with these killers. They still kill. With new US protection, weapons and cash, they have turned on the Shia of Anbar. Fifteen thousand Shia families from a single district were forced at gunpoint to leave Anbar. Those moving too slowly were shot. Kids and moms too.

Do the Americans know about the ethnic cleansing of Anbar by our erstwhile "allies"? Rick's film shows US commanders placing their headquarters in the homes abandoned by terrorized Shia.

Rick's craziest move was to go and find these Shia refugees from Anbar. They were dumped, over a hundred thousand of them, in a cinder block slum with no running water in Baghdad. They are under the "protection" of the Mahdi Army, another group of cutthroats. But at least these are Shia cutthroats.

So the great "success" of the surge is our arming and providing cover for ethnic cleansing in Anbar. Nice, Mr. Bush. And with the US press "embedded," we won't get the real story. Even Democrats are buying into the Anbar "awakening" fairy tale.

An Iraqi government official frets that giving guns and cover to the Anbar gang is like adopting a baby crocodile. "A crocodile is not a pet," he told Rick. It will soon grow to devour you. But what could the puppet do but complain about his strings?

This Iraqi got it right: the surge is a crock.

Labels: george bush

just in case anyone forgot...

http://www.knowledgedrivenrevolution.com/Features/Quote/Week_49_Bush.htm

GOP leaders told Bush that his hardcore push to renew the more onerous provisions of the act could further alienate conservatives still mad at the President from his botched attempt to nominate White House Counsel Harriet Miers to the Supreme Court.

“I don’t give a goddamn,” Bush retorted. “I’m the President and the Commander-in-Chief. Do it my way.”

“Mr. President,” one aide in the meeting said. “There is a valid case that the provisions in this law undermine the Constitution.”

“Stop throwing the Constitution in my face,” Bush screamed back. “It’s just a goddamned piece of paper!”

Labels: george bush

Rumsfeld is gone!! What a fucking piece of shit he was... wow... YES!

Labels: george bush

this is fantastic. :)

Fla. Governor Hopeful Skips Bush Event Florida GOP gubernatorial candidate decides to skip planned appearance with President Bush

Labels: george bush

From Greg Palast again... I want to believe the last sentence of this is true. I don't really want the world to be divided into "good" and "evil." I'd really like to believe that the person who did this really believed he was driven to it. I don't want our soldiers to get shot... I don't want anybody to get shot. I just desperately still want to believe that there are two viable sides to this farce of a war that our farce of a President started. Why? Maybe just because I want to be right. I want george bush to be more of a failure than he already is.

I *know* that's horrible.

Let me rephrase.

I don't want "him" to fail. I want his policies to fail because they suck. There was a time when he would say something, and it would be going well, and I was able to hope, "God, please let him say something... anything... that I can actually agree with and support." That time is Looooong gone. Now I just feel like I've been fed enough bullshit and let down enough times already. I'm starting on a tangent again. I want him to fail because I just can't believe that there's a significant section of humanity who is just "evil" and "wrong" because he says so. There just HAS to be another side to the story, and we don't get enough of it. I'm sure there are crazy psycho whack job mother fuckers who just like to blow up Americans because it's cool. Then there are the crazy psycho whack job mother fuckers who like to blow up Americans for real valid political and social reasons... which doesn't mean I support their methods, but I do think they have addressable grievances against the United States. Then, lastly, is the group that we don't here about enough. The people just trying to protect their homes. The people that have been pushed too far to just roll over and get trampled upon. Of course, the story below is conjecture. That sniper could have just have easily been thinking, "AllahVirginsAllahVirginsAllahVirginsAllahVirginsAllahVirginsAllahVirginsAllahVirginsAllahVirginsAllahVirginsWOOOOO!" when he pulled the trigger.

So I hope not. I hope that that segment of real rational people who just want to live their lives is real. The people who just can't take it anymore. I also hope that particular population is dwindling. Not because we're shooting them but because things are getting better. But somehow I doubt it. I hope these people exist b/c, if they don't, george bush is right and there are just large numbers of people out there who irrationally want to blow up Americans. He just can't be right though. He's a big fucking twat. I WANT TO HURT SOMEBODY by Greg Palast Thursday, November 2, 2006 for The Guardian (London) It was pure war-nography. The front page of the New York Times today splashed a four-column-wide close-up of a blood-covered bullet in the blood-soaked hands of an army medic who'd retrieved it from the brain of Lance Cpl. Colin Smith. There was a 40 column-inch profile of the medic. There were photos of the platoon, guns over shoulders, praying for the fallen buddy. The Times is careful not to ruin the heroic mood, so there is no photograph of pieces of corporal Smith's shattered head. Instead, there's an old, smiling photo of the wounded soldier. The reporter, undoubtedly wearing the Kevlar armor of the troop in which he's "embedded," quotes at length the thoughts of the military medic: "I would like to say that I am a good man. But seeing this now, what happened to Smith, I want to hurt people. You know what I mean?" The reporter does not bother -- or dare -- to record a single word from any Iraqi in the town of Karma where Smith's platoon was, "performing a hard hit on a house." I don't know what a "hard hit" is. But I don't think I'd want one "performed" on my home. Maybe Iraqis feel the way I do. We won't know. The only Iraqi noted by the reporter was, "a woman [who] walked calmly between the sniper and the marines." The Times reporter informs us that Lance Cpl. Smith, "said a prayer today," before he charged into the village. We're told that Smith had, "the cutest little blond girlfriend" and "his dad was his hero." Did the calm woman also say her prayers today? Is her dad her hero, too? We don't know. No one asks. The reporter and his photographer did visit a home in the neighborhood -- but only after the "hit" force kicked in the door. I suppose that's an improvement over the typical level of reporting we get. In dispatches home by the few US journalists who brave beyond the Green Zone, Iraqis are little more than dark shapes glimpsed through the slots of a speeding Humvee. Last month there was a big hoo-ha over the statistical accuracy of a Johns Hopkins University study estimating that 655,000 Iraqis have died as a result of this war. I doubt the Iraqi who fired that bullet into Lance Cpl. Smith read the Hopkins study. Iraqis don't need a professor of statistics to tell them what happens in a "hard hit" on a house. Of civilians killed by the US forces the Hopkins team found 46% are younger than fifteen years old. I grieve for Lance Cpl. Smith and I can't know for certain what moved the sniper to pick up a gun and shoot him. However, I've no doubt that, like the Marines who said prayers before they invaded the homes of the terrified residents of Karma, the sniper also said a prayer before he loaded the 7.62mm shell into his carbine. And if we asked, I'm sure the sniper would tell us, "I am a good man, but seeing what happened, I want to hurt people."

Labels: george bush

I've changed my mind. I don't want to go to Malta. Or back to Amsterdam. I want to live in Venezuela.

From The Progressive
By Greg Palast

You'd think George Bush would get down on his knees and kiss Hugo Chavez's behind. Not only has Chavez delivered cheap oil to the Bronx and other poor communities in the United States. And not only did he offer to bring aid to the victims of Katrina. In my interview with the president of Venezuela on March 28, he made Bush the following astonishing offer: Chavez would drop the price of oil to $50 a barrel, "not too high, a fair price," he said -- a third less than the $75 a barrel for oil recently posted on the spot market. That would bring down the price at the pump by about a buck, from $3 to $2 a gallon.

But our President has basically told Chavez to take his cheaper oil and stick it up his pipeline. Before I explain why Bush has done so, let me explain why Chavez has the power to pull it off -- and the method in the seeming madness of his "take-my-oil-please!" deal.

Venezuela, Chavez told me, has more oil than Saudi Arabia. A nutty boast? Not by a long shot. In fact, his surprising claim comes from a most surprising source: the U.S. Department of Energy. In an internal report, the DOE estimates that Venezuela has five times the Saudis' reserves. However, most of Venezuela's mega-horde of crude is in the More...form of "extra-heavy" oil -- liquid asphalt -- which is ghastly expensive to pull up and refine. Oil has to sell above $30 a barrel to make the investment in extra-heavy oil worthwhile. A big dip in oil's price -- and, after all, oil cost only $18 a barrel six years ago -- would bankrupt heavy-oil investors. Hence Chavez's offer: Drop the price to $50 -- and keep it there. That would guarantee Venezuela's investment in heavy oil.

But the ascendance of Venezuela within OPEC necessarily means the decline of the power of the House of Saud. And the Bush family wouldn't like that one bit. It comes down to "petro-dollars." When George W. ferried then-Crown Prince (now King) Abdullah of Saudi Arabia around the Crawford ranch in a golf cart it wasn't because America needs Arabian oil. The Saudis will always sell us their petroleum. What Bush needs is Saudi petro-dollars. Saudi Arabia has, over the past three decades, kindly recycled the cash sucked from the wallets of American SUV owners and sent much of the loot right back to New York to buy U.S. Treasury bills and other U.S. assets.

The Gulf potentates understand that in return for lending the U.S. Treasury the cash to fund George Bush's $2 trillion rise in the nation's debt, they receive protection in return. They lend us petro-dollars, we lend them the 82nd Airborne.

Chavez would put an end to all that. He'll sell us oil relatively cheaply -- but intends to keep the petro-dollars in Latin America. Recently, Chavez withdrew $20 billion from the U.S. Federal Reserve and, at the same time, lent or committed a like sum to Argentina, Ecuador, and other Latin American nations.

Chavez, notes The Wall Street Journal, has become a "tropical IMF." And indeed, as the Venezuelan president told me, he wants to abolish the Washington-based International Monetary Fund, with its brutal free-market diktats, and replace it with an "International Humanitarian Fund," an IHF, or more accurately, an International Hugo Fund. In addition, Chavez wants OPEC to officially recognize Venezuela as the cartel's reserve leader, which neither the Saudis nor Bush will take kindly to.

Politically, Venezuela is torn in two. Chavez's "Bolivarian Revolution," a close replica of Franklin Roosevelt's New Deal—a progressive income tax, public works, social security, cheap electricity -- makes him wildly popular with the poor. And most Venezuelans are poor. His critics, a four-centuries' old white elite, unused to sharing oil wealth, portray him as a Castro-hugging anti-Christ.

Chavez's government, which used to brush off these critics, has turned aggressive on them. I challenged Chavez several times over charges brought against Sumate, his main opposition group. The two founders of the nongovernmental organization, which led the recall campaign against Chavez, face eight years in prison for taking money from the Bush Administration and the International Republican [Party] Institute. No nation permits foreign funding of political campaigns, but the charges (no one is in jail) seem like a heavy hammer to use on the minor infractions of these pathetic gadflies.

Bush's reaction to Chavez has been a mix of hostility and provocation. Washington supported the coup attempt against Chavez in 2002, and Condoleezza Rice and Donald Rumsfeld have repeatedly denounced him. The revised National Security Strategy of the United States of America, released in March, says, "In Venezuela, a demagogue awash in oil money is undermining democracy and seeking to destabilize the region."

So when the Reverend Pat Robertson, a Bush ally, told his faithful in August 2005 that Chavez has to go, it was not unreasonable to assume that he was articulating an Administration wish. "If he thinks we’re trying to assassinate him," Robertson said, "I think that we really ought to go ahead and do it. It's a whole lot cheaper than starting a war . . . and I don't think any oil shipments will stop."

There are only two ways to defeat the rise of Chavez as the New Abdullah of the Americas. First, the unattractive option: Cut the price of oil below $30 a barrel. That would make Chavez's crude worthless. Or, option two: Kill him.

Q: Your opponents are saying that you are beginning a slow-motion dictatorship. Is that what we are seeing?

Hugo Chavez: They have been saying that for a long time. When they're short of ideas, any excuse will do as a vehicle for lies. That is totally false. I would like to invite the citizens of Great Britain and the citizens of the U.S. and the citizens of the world to come here and walk freely through the streets of Venezuela, to talk to anyone they want, to watch television, to read the papers. We are building a true democracy, with human rights for everyone, social rights, education, health care, pensions, social security, and jobs.

Q: Some of your opponents are being charged with the crime of taking money from George Bush. Will you send them to jail?

Chavez: It's not up to me to decide that. We have the institutions that do that. These people have admitted they have received money from the government of the United States. It's up to the prosecutors to decide what to do, but the truth is that we can't allow the U.S. to finance the destabilization of our country. What would happen if we financed somebody in the U.S. to destabilize the government of George Bush? They would go to prison, certainly.

Q: How do you respond to Bush's charge that you are destabilizing the region and interfering in the elections of other Latin American countries?

Chavez: Mr. Bush is an illegitimate President. In Florida, his brother Jeb deleted many black voters from the electoral registers. So this President is the result of a fraud. Not only that, he is also currently applying a dictatorship in the U.S. People can be put in jail without being charged. They tap phones without court orders. They check what books people take out of public libraries. They arrested Cindy Sheehan because of a T-shirt she was wearing demanding the return of the troops from Iraq. They abuse blacks and Latinos. And if we are going to talk about meddling in other countries, then the U.S. is the champion of meddling in other people's affairs. They invaded Guatemala, they overthrew Salvador Allende, invaded Panama and the Dominican Republic. They were involved in the coup d'etat in Argentina thirty years ago.

Q: Is the U.S. interfering in your elections here?

Chavez: They have interfered for 200 years. They have tried to prevent us from winning the elections, they supported the coup d'etat, they gave millions of dollars to the coup plotters, they supported the media, newspapers, outlaw movements, military intervention, and espionage. But here the empire is finished, and I believe that before the end of this century, it will be finished in the rest of the world. We will see the burial of the empire of the eagle.

Q: You don't interfere in the elections of other nations in Latin America?

Chavez: Absolutely not. I concern myself with Venezuela. However, what's going on now is that some rightwing movements are transforming me into a pawn in the domestic politics of their countries, by making statements that are groundless. About candidates like Morales [of Bolivia], for example. They said I financed the candidacy of President Lula [of Brazil], which is totally false. They said I financed the candidacy of Kirchner [of Argentina], which is totally false. In Mexico, recently, the rightwing party has used my image for its own profit. What’s happened is that in Latin America there is a turn to the left. Latin Americans have gotten tired of the Washington consensus -- a neoliberalism that has aggravated misery and poverty.

Q: You have spent millions of dollars of your nation's oil wealth throughout Latin America. Are you really helping these other nations or are you simply buying political support for your regime?

Chavez: We are brothers and sisters. That's one of the reasons for the wrath of the empire. You know that Venezuela has the biggest oil reserves in the world. And the biggest gas reserves in this hemisphere, the eighth in the world. Up until seven years ago, Venezuela was a U.S. oil colony. All of our oil was going up to the north, and the gas was being used by the U.S. and not by us. Now we are diversifying. Our oil is helping the poor. We are selling to the Dominican Republic, Haiti, Cuba, some Central American countries, Uruguay, Argentina.

Q: And the Bronx?

Chavez: In the Bronx it is a donation. In all the cases I just mentioned before, it is trade. However, it's not free trade, just fair commerce. We also have an international humanitarian fund as a result of oil revenues.

Q: Why did George Bush turn down your help for New Orleans after the hurricane?

Chavez: You should ask him, but from the very beginning of the terrible disaster of Katrina, our people in the U.S., like the president of CITGO, went to New Orleans to rescue people. We were in close contact by phone with Jesse Jackson. We hired buses. We got food and water. We tried to protect them; they are our brothers and sisters. Doesn't matter if they are African, Asian, Cuban, whatever.

Q: Are you replacing the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund as "Daddy Big Bucks"?

Chavez: I do wish that the IMF and the World Bank would disappear soon.

Q: And it would be the Bank of Hugo?

Chavez: No. The International Humanitarian Bank. We are just creating an alternative way to conduct financial exchange. It is based on cooperation. For example, we send oil to Uruguay for their refinery and they are paying us with cows.

Q: Milk for oil.

Chavez: That's right. Milk for oil. The Argentineans also pay us with cows. And they give us medical equipment to combat cancer. It's a transfer of technology. We also exchange oil for software technology. Uruguay is one of the biggest producers of software. We are breaking with the neoliberal model. We do not believe in free trade. We believe in fair trade and exchange, not competition but cooperation. I'm not giving away oil for free. Just using oil, first to benefit our people, to relieve poverty. For a hundred years we have been one of the largest oil-producing countries in the world but with a 60 percent poverty rate and now we are canceling the historical debt.

Q: Speaking of the free market, you've demanded back taxes from U.S. oil companies. You have eliminated contracts for North American, British, and European oil companies. Are you trying to slice out the British and American oil companies from Venezuela?

Chavez: No, we don't want them to go, and I don't think they want to leave the country, either. We need each other. It's simply that we have recovered our oil sovereignty. They didn’t pay taxes. They didn't pay royalties. They didn't give an account of their actions to the government. They had more land than had previously been established in the contracts. They didn't comply with the agreed technology exchange. They polluted the environment and didn't pay anything towards the cleanup. They now have to comply with the law.

Q: You've said that you imagine the price of oil rising to $100 dollars per barrel. Are you going to use your new oil wealth to squeeze the planet?

Chavez: No, no. We have no intention of squeezing anyone. Now, we have been squeezed and very hard. Five hundred years of squeezing us and stifling us, the people of the South. I do believe that demand is increasing and supply is dropping and the large reservoirs are running out. But it's not our fault. In the future, there must be an agreement between the large consumers and the large producers.

Q: What happens when the oil money runs out, what happens when the price of oil falls as it always does? Will the Bolivarian revolution of Hugo Chavez simply collapse because there's no money to pay for the big free ride?

Chavez: I don't think it will collapse, in the unlikely case of oil running out today. The revolution will survive. It does not rely solely on oil for its survival. There is a national will, there is a national idea, a national project. However, we are today implementing a strategic program called the Oil Sowing Plan: using oil wealth so Venezuela can become an agricultural country, a tourist destination, an industrialized country with a diversified economy. We are investing billions of dollars in the infrastructure: power generators using thermal energy, a large railway, roads, highways, new towns, new universities, new schools, recuperating land, building tractors, and giving loans to farmers. One day we won't have any more oil, but that will be in the twenty-second century. Venezuela has oil for another 200 years.

Q: But the revolution can come to an end if there's another coup and it succeeds. Do you believe Bush is still trying to overthrow your government?

Chavez: He would like to, but what you want is one thing, and what you cannot really obtain is another.

Labels: george bush

The 9/11 Report comic book on slate.com...
in its entirety.

HERE

It took me a long time to read it. But it was pretty interesting. Nothing shockingly new at all, but definitely some information I had forgotten and some things were clarified. I think it's great to have put this in comicbook form as it's much easier (I imagine) to read that pages and pages of text. Hopefully it will reach more people.

As for the report itself... as presented here... it seemed pretty unbiased to me. They didn't make george bush out to be the blundering fucking piece of shit that he is, nor did they really make him into this heroic god that he wishes he was. They didn't vilify Clinton either. Or make him into our lost savior.

btw... here's a nice quote from Dwight D. Eisenhower... you know... a GOOD Republican President. "Preventive war was an invention of Hitler. Frankly, I would not even listen to anyone seriously that came and talked about such a thing."

and I just ran across this too... by another President who didn't totally suck. "To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or that we are to stand by the president, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public." --Theodore Roosevelt

Labels: Comic Books, george bush

oh my... and then there's this:

From Palast's commentary on bush's speech to the NAACP yesterday. (or the day before? I can't remember)

Voting Rights Act -- This was a big applause line. Bush gloated about his convincing the White Sheets Caucus of the Republican Party to go along with the renewal the Voting Rights Act. But he forgot to mention the fine print. The Southern GOP only went along for renewing the law on the understanding that the law would never be enforced.

Think I'm kidding? Check this: in July 2004, the US Civil Rights Commission voted to open a civil and criminal investigation of his brother's Administration in Florida for knowingly renewing a racially-biased scrub of voter rolls. In April 2004, Governor Jeb Bush, of the "family committed to civil rights," personally ordered this new purge of "felons" from voter rolls, despite promising never to repeat the infamous scrub of 2000. The new purge violated a settlement he signed with the, uh, NAACP.

It also violated the Voting Rights Act. The Civil Rights Commission turned the case over to the US Justice Department which, two years on, has yet to begin the investigation. That's not to say President Bush did nothing. He swiftly replaced every member of the Commission who voted to investigate his brother.

(last line emphasis is mine)

Labels: george bush

I made up some new words to an old song this morning. It's awesome. I should join The Coup.

If you hate george w bush then clap your hands!
If you hate george w bush then clap your hands!
If you think that's he's a fuck-up
and he doesnt' know what to do...
If you really love your country
but george w says, "Fuck you!"
If you really hate george bush then clap your hands!

Labels: george bush, music

I believe I've posted this before, but it bears repeating...

Our enemies are innovative and resourceful. But so are we. They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people. And neither do we.

-gw bush.

fucking fuck you fuck FUCK fuck fucker FUCKFUCKFUSDAKvd'osADFL;KSJG;LAKS DGASDGASD BNUSH

Labels: george bush

From the new book Armed Madhouse by Greg Palast (recommended to me by way of Brian Wood's website).

Original Link

The GOP seemed to get awfully lucky with registration switches to the Republican Party in critical counties in swing states. There were the switches in "Little Texas" in New Mexico, and an amazing number of Florida college students, at least 4,000 of them, mostly African-American, who switched to the Republican Party a month before the November 2004 election.

However, Ion Sancho, the non-partisan elections supervisor in Tallahassee, became suspicious when he received a registration switch from one new Republican: his stepdaughter. Look at this signature; it's not a bad forgery. The students, it turns out, thought they had signed a petition to legalize use of marijuana for medical purposes. Covered over by the "legalize pot" sign-up sheet was a registration change form. The form requires two signatures. The second signature was forged, copied from the one obtained by the "pot" fraud. The students, doubly registered, then lost their right to vote altogether. Elections supervisor Sancho immediately called the cops, but Governor Jeb Bush's state police informed him that they would be too busy to investigate until after Election Day. They never did.

In Ohio, it was much simpler. Statistician Anthony Fairfax discovered that Black voters were twice as likely as white voters to have their mail-in registrations simply rejected. In Congresswoman Katherine Harris's district in Florida, Democrats found that, though they submitted registration forms on time, they were entered on the voter rolls only after the deadline, barring them from voting in the Presidential race.

Oddly enough... this book, though released on the 6th is still unavailable at Barnes & Noble in the Charlotte area. Yet Coulter's new "book" has floorstands galore. Sweet. I special ordered a copy tho... hopefully it will show up soon.

Labels: Books, george bush

This is for Dick.



"Why do I keep fuckin' up?"

Labels: george bush

The following was not written by me although I wish it was. All credit to D.C. Simpson over at idrewthis and ozy and millie.

March 19, 2006

The Bush 9/11 myth.

It's the great myth of the George W. Bush presidency: "Bush was brilliant right after 9/11."

You hear it from all sorts of people. You even hear it a lot from liberals, or at least I do. The sorts of liberals who are trying to sound reasonable by saying something nice about Dubya: "But, to be fair, he was really great right after 9/11."

And of course it's gospel truth in the media. Chris Matthews of MSNBC, for instance, recently referred to the peak of Bush's popularity as "when he was so heroic after 9-11."

(Matthews, of course, frequently says cartoonishly fawning things about Bush, calling him a "hero," saying he "glimmers with sunny nobility," saying he quite possibly "belongs on Mount Rushmore," comparing him to To Kill A Mockingbird's Atticus Finch. That many people accept him as a hard-hitting objective journalist, frankly, says absolutely terrible things about our media culture.)

Now, as far as I can tell now in hindsight, and in fact as far as I could tell at the time, the story of Bush's great performance after 9/11 is a complete myth, on all levels. There is absolutely no aspect of Bush's handling of that event and its aftermath that I find the least bit admirable.

Let's start before 9/11, shall we?

Clinton's outgoing national security team warned Bush's incoming National Security Adviser, Condoleezza Rice, that she was going to spend most of her time dealing with terrorism and Osama bin Laden. She did nothing to act on this advice, possibly because "do the opposite of what Clinton did" was the major ideological creed of the incoming administration.

In March of that year, the bipartisan Hart-Rudman study was issued, which argued that America was likely to face a large-scale terrorist attack in the near future and recommended some steps to protect against it (many of which, had they been in place, stood at least a chance of doing something to thwart 9/11). Bush ignored the report, and instead had Vice President Cheney convene an antiterror "task force" to come up with its own set of recommendations.

As of 9/11, Cheney's task force had never met. But it's not because Cheney didn't have the time for task forces; his energy task force met a bunch of times during the same period. The administration just didn't take the threat of terrorism seriously. Clearly, Gary Hart and Warren Rudman did. As had the previous administration.

But the Bush Administration dropped the ball. Even that infamous August 6, 2001, national security briefing, titled "Bin Laden Determined To Strike Inside the United States," failed to raise any alarm bells or rouse Bush from pretending to be a cowboy on his "ranch."

Could 9/11 have been prevented? Impossible to say. Plausibly yes, but quite arguably no. Experts much wiser than myself don't know. But it seems impossible to argue, with a straight face, that Bush had done everything he could, or even everything others with expertise in the matter were pleading with him to do.

And we got hit.

Think back to the day of. Now, you can think what you want about Michael Moore, but he did not fake that footage of Bush entering that classroom knowing full well that the first plane had hit the first tower, and hung out there for seven minutes after the second plane hit, with a confused expression on his face.

Maybe Chris Matthews and I have different definitions of "hero." Maybe everyone's definition of "bold, decisive action" differs radically from mine. I dunno.

Then Bush spent the rest of the day scurrying around the country on Air Force One, like a frightened squirrel. (The White House made up some excuse that's almost certainly not true about believing there was a credible threat that the plane itself would be a terrorist target. Well, then get the president off the plane, Einstein.) As it often would throughout the crisis, the job of actually doing something that would help, both substantively and psychologically, fell to Rudolph Giuliani, a man I normally don't like at all but who really does deserve credit for handling the crisis well.

So, okay. Then Bush landed, and went to work giving speeches. Former Bush speechwriter David Frum, author of The Right Man and coiner of the first two words of the phrase "axis of evil," lauds Bush in his book for standing at the wreckage of the world Trade Center and looking very serious and somber. To Frum, this is proof that Bush came of age as president in the wake of the crisis, rose from being "Dubya" to being a serious and historic commander-in-chief. But ask yourself--if the sole qualification for the presidency is seeing something tragic and not laughing inappropriately, what reasonably bright ten-year-old child couldn't serve as president?

What's more, Bush always gets credit for restoring the nation's confidence during this shaky period. But to the extent that he did this, he did it in the cheapest possible way--by making threats against people who not only hadn't done anything, but had in fact pledged already to support us. And in doing so, he squandered the event's only real silver lining, a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to cultivate international goodwill, even more vital in an era where the major enemies are lawless terrorists.

I mean, do you remember what it was like? As traumatized as we as a nation were, didn't it just make you cry when Chirac said "we are all Americans now," in a moving echo of "ich bin ein Berliner"? Not only did France pledge to support us--Iran did too. Everyone did. We had the whole world offering condolences and asking what help we needed.

There was only one proper response to this, for a president truly interested in what was best for his country: "Thank you. We appreciate the offers of help. If we do need anything, we will let you know."

But we had a president who was more interested in a short-term boost to his TV-based approval ratings, and damn the cost to international relations. So he thought he'd threaten everybody into doing what they'd already volunteered to do. "You're either with us or you're against us," he snarled, perhaps not realizing that Dirty Harry is not an international diplomacy guide. I think everyone was a bit taken aback by the truculence of Bush's tone. Instead of solidifying international alliances of goodwill, Bush set us firmly on the path to where we are now--isolation and hostility.

What's more, in a time of unparalleled national unity--I myself wore an American flag pin on my jacket, something I would have considered unthinkably jingoistic before that, from right after 9/11 right up until our troops went into Iraq--Bush turned us against each other. As usual, Bush didn't go on TV himself and decry his opponents as treasonous, because that isn't how Rove and co. operate--they have the front man go on TV and look all resolute, while the folks lower down smear dissenters. But recall how anyone who said anything even slightly off-message was treated. Ari Fleischer sounded positively fascist when he warned "Americans need to watch what they say, watch what they do."

So, okay, Bush did invade Afghanistan, and did it with an international coalition. But, honestly, absolutely anyone to the right of Dennis Kucinich would have done exactly the same thing. Everyone supported that invasion as a necessary thing. Al Gore was a full supporter of it, so any conservative who tells you Gore would have relied on diplomacy instead of invading doesn't know what he's talking about. You can't seriously call Bush a hero for taking an action absolutely anyone would have taken.

Bush also squandered every other opportunity he had to ask us for sacrifice, make significant changes to domestic policy. Presidents in wartime have a long history of asking for shared sacrifice and getting it, from a citizenry proud to give it, proud to unite in the service of a common cause.

A real "hero" of a leader would have called for energy conservation. He (or she) might have called for us to get off Middle East oil entirely, called for an Apollo-style project for total energy independence, using the tragedy of 9/11 to change the course of history for the better. The nation would, I believe, have risen to it.

So what did Bush, who is not a hero, call for? "Go shopping," he said. "Let us suspend whatever liberties we want. Oh, and have another round of tax cuts."

Subsequently, Bush and his military types let bin Laden escape at Tora Bora, then pulled key forces out of the region for an invasion of Iraq, for which they also abused the memory of 9/11 and further trashed international relations and national security.

A real hero would have addressed the genuine causes of the tragedy, admitted that he could have done more, and gone on to do more. He would have reached out to the world for help instead of snarling that they'd better stay in line or else. He would have called for shared sacrifice in the service of shared benefit, instead of using the crisis as a convenient excuse for policies he already wanted to pursue. He would have done the exact opposite of what George W. Bush did at every turn.

Labels: george bush

That Time magazine could have reported, on 23 March 2003, that in March 2002, Bush was running around saying, "Fuck Saddam. We're taking him out."

I guess he had reasons, but... well, like everyone who's in the know is saying, it sure backs the case that he was going to make the whole invasion thing happen no matter what.

Once again, I abohr this "man" and just about everything he's turning this country into.

Labels: george bush

and did you know this?

In the small print of the Bush administration's No Child Left Behind Act, there is a clause that requires public high schools to provide the names, addresses, and home phone numbers of their students to the military.

I hate this man so much.

Labels: george bush

This is sweet. I wish something would happen around here so I could participate in such events...

From Sojourners:

Karl Rove, seeking a friendly venue for a commencement speech in Michigan, approached Calvin and offered President Bush as the speaker. The college, which had already invited Nicholas Wolterstorff of Yale to deliver the speech, hastily disinvited him and welcomed the president. But the White House apparently was not counting on the reaction of students and faculty. Rove expected the evangelical Christian college in the dependable "red" area of western Michigan to be a safe place. He was wrong.

The day the president was to speak, an ad featuring a letter signed by one-third of Calvin's faculty and staff ran in The Grand Rapids Press. Noting that "we seek open and honest dialogue about the Christian faith and how it is best expressed in the political sphere," the letter said that "we see conflicts between our understanding of what Christians are called to do and many of the policies of your administration."

The letter asserted that administration policies have "launched an unjust and unjustified war in Iraq," "taken actions that favor the wealthy of our society and burden the poor, " "harmed creation and have not promoted long-term stewardship of our natural environment," and "fostered intolerance and divisiveness and has often failed to listen to those with whom it disagrees." It concluded: "Our passion for these matters arises out of the Christian faith that we share with you. We ask you, Mr. President, to re-examine your policies in light of our God-given duty to pursue justice with mercy...." One faculty member told a reporter, "We are not Lynchburg. We are not right wing; we're not left wing. We think our faith trumps political ideology."

On commencement day, according to news reports, about a quarter of the 900 graduates wore "God is not a Republican or a Democrat" buttons pinned to their gowns.

Awesome.
and, "fuck you, bush."

Labels: george bush, Religion

just...
wow.

I dunno how long these articles remain... or whether you can see them w/o signing up.... but check this out: www.charlotte.com/mld/charlotte/news/breaking_news/11593934.htm

basically, a church in North Carolina voted to revoke membership of 9 of their members b/c they wouldn't sign a pledge in support of bush and his antics.

praise Jesus.

Labels: george bush, Religion

Labels: george bush

From USA Today:
"a USA TODAY/CNN/Gallup Poll found that a majority of Americans disapprove of the way the war is being run and say Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld should resign."

WHY THE HELL DID YOU VOTE FOR HIM THEN??

Obviously Rumsfeld should resign. and cheney. and bush. and rice.

Were that many people duped by election rhetoric into actually believing that bush knows how to do anything right? Or were people just that afraid of John Kerry?

Labels: george bush

Thanks, Lou
This is no time for celebration
This is no time for shaking heads
This is no time for backslapping
This is no time for marching bands

This is no time for optimism
This is no time for endless thought
This is not time for my country right or wrong
Remember what that brought

There is no time
There is no time
There is no time
There is no time

This is no time for congratulations
This is no time to turn your back
This is no time for circumlocution
This is no time for learned speech

This is no time to count your blessings
This is no time for private gain
This is a time to put up or shut up
It won't come back this way again

There is no time
There is no time
There is no time
There is no time

This is no time to swallow anger
This is no time to ignore hate
This is no time to be acting frivolous
Because the time is getting late

This is no time for private vendettas
This is no time to not know who you are
Self knowledge is a dangerous thing
The freedom of who you are

This is no time to ignore warnings
This is no time to clear the plate
Let’s not be sorry after the fact
And let the past become out fate

There is no time
There is no time
There is no time
There is no time

This is no time to turn away and drink
Or smoke some vials of crack
This is a time to gather force
And take dead aim and attack

This is no time for celebration
This is no time for saluting flags
This is no time for inner searchings
The future is at hand

This is no time for phony rhetoric
This is no time for political speech
This is a time for action
Because the future’s within reach

This is the time
This is the time
This is the time
Because there is no time

There is no time
There is no time
There is no time
There is no time

Labels: george bush, music

Have I mentioned how much I absolutely abhor george bush?

Labels: george bush

surprise, surprise...

You preferred Kerry's statements 100% of the time Voting purely on the issues you should vote Kerry Who would you vote for if you voted on the issues? Find out now!

I actually like PARTS of some of Bush's statements better... sometimes they start well, but then there's always an after-clause that just gives me the creeps.

I like this:
Will vigorously defend the Federal law banning the violent and brutal practice of partial birth abortion.
but not this:
Enforce restrictions that prevent the expenditure of Federal funds to support or promote abortion.

I like this:
Seek to promote environmentally sound domestic oil production
but not this:
in just one percent of Arctic National Wildlife Refuge

Was kind of proud that I could recognize who made which statement every time. So at least I'm not totally uninformed... not like this:
http://www.idrewthis.org/2004/confusedvoters.gif

Labels: george bush

I got this on John Kerry's website and found it interesting...

From the Associated Press:

WASHINGTON - A poll of Iraqis commissioned by the U.S.-backed government has provided the Bush administration a stark picture of anti-American sentiment — more than half of Iraqis believe they would be safer if U.S. troops simply left.

The poll, commissioned by the Coalition Provisional Government last month but not released to the American public, also found radical cleric Muqtada al-Sadr is surging in popularity, 92 percent of Iraqis consider the United States an occupying force and more than half believe all Americans behave like those portrayed in the Abu Ghraib prison abuse photos...

"If you are sitting here as part of the coalition, it (the poll) is pretty grim," said Donald Hamilton, a career foreign service officer who is working for Ambassador Paul Bremer's interim government and helps oversee the CPA's polling of Iraqis.

...The poll results conflict with the generally upbeat assessments the administration continues to give Americans. Just last week, President Bush (news - web sites) predicted future generations of Iraqis "will come to America and say, thank goodness America stood the line and was strong and did not falter in the face of the violence of a few."

Labels: george bush

I wish I lived in a country that just whined when it didn't get its way then just went ahead and did whatever they wanted anyway. Oh yeah. I do. I was pulling for Bush during the election, but I really hate him now. We pretend to hide behind the UN and back them as long as they do what we want. Now that they don't agree with us (since the REST OF THE WORLD IS AGAINST US), we're going to just circumvent the whole process that we were trying to uphold. I feel like our country is run by a five-year-old whose parents aren't giving him what he wants. If the UN doesn't allow us to go to war, then we shouldn't go to war. Not that I think we should go to war anyway, but we can't possibly expect other countries to bow to the will of the UN when we just shirk our responsibilities to the world just ignore what the UN is telling us. Yay!! Hypocracy!! Don't get me wrong... I'll support our soldiers insofar as I hope nothing happens to any of them. But I can't support their imperialisitic mission. Saddam's an asshole and deserves to have his ass kicked, but this is just wrong on so many levels. Here's hoping our guys all get home safely and quickly. And, as an added bonus, maybe they'll all get there, realize we're being a terrible world neighbor, go home, and embarrass Bush into resigning.

Labels: george bush