People have been upset with Hillary Clinton, and rightfully so, for endorsing McCain's commander-in-chief experience and painting Obama as a lightweight with her "threshold" comment. However, I believe she has made a fatal mistake because in endorsing McCain's experience, she's signaling approval of comments like "Bomb, bomb Iran" and "Why not 1,000" years in Iraq.
And having made the comment three times, she's not going to be able to slither away from it unless Obama lets her. So, since Obama is probably going to be running against McCain, why not kill two birds with one stone with a TV commercial that wraps McCain around Clinton's neck?
Peter Rodino, who was Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee in 1974, didn't have the votes in the Senate to convict Richard Nixon when he opened impeachment hearings. That did not stop him or his colleagues from doing their duty. One black woman from Texas stood tall and explained for all time where duty lay and what was at stake.
A "clean bill" with the requirement that Bush ask for more money in July may not be quite as bad a compromise as it appears at first sight. Bush obviously hates the idea and an article from today's Daily Telegraph might contain one of the reasons.
Bob Iger, in defiance of a personal request from a former two-term President of the United States has decided that his 40-million-dollar love note to wingnut America, his cave-in to the Dobsonites, will be broadcast as scheduled. It's an insult not only to President Clinton, the 9/11 families and the truth, it's an insult to the people who elected and re-elected President Clinton.
That last one makes it personal. To 47 million Americans.
This is a defining moment for Disney and while it is important that this travesty be wrapped around Mickey Rat's neck forever - and I mean forever - it also calls for a more personal brand of justice. So I suggest a campaign of harassment so vast, so comprehensive, so personal and so long-term that a new term enters the English language and corporate executives around the world shall henceforth shudder at the thought of being "Igered."
Grass roots activists should be praised to the high heavens for keeping the pressure on Disney and forcing Scholastic to withdraw its support of the piece of partisan political propaganda known as The Path to 9/11. Their achievements, which represent countless hours of dedicated effort, are nothing short of amazing. They have done their job.
Elected Democratic leaders have betrayed these noble foot soldiers, however, through their stunning incompetence. It was up to them to change the narrative, to take the fight to the enemy and to make sure that this whole slanderous project exploded in Karl Rove's face. They not only failed, they didn't even try.
The Democratic response ensured that only the Clinton record was on trial.
Damn it. When will Democrats stop complaining about Republican tactics and just fight back? Here's Rep Slaughter denouncing a TV show. A TV show. What she should be denouncing is how the Bush Administration refused to take the threat of terrorism seriously. The reponse to this 9/11 schlockumentary is not a whinge about how unfair ABC is being, the response to this is
--My Pet Goat
--The August 5 PDB and Bush's response ("You've covered your ass now)
--Rice's testimony before the 9/11 commission.
--The fact that Bush wouldn't testify alone or under oath. What was he hiding?
--Ashcroft refusing to increase the anti-terrorism budget of the FBI before 9/11 and increasing funds to fight prostitution in New Orleans instead.
--Rice saying no one could have imagined terrorists would use planes as weapons when that very summer the Genoa G-8 Summit was guarded against that very threat
This began life as a comment and then someone with a low UID suggested I turn it into a diary, so I did. I'm not sure how original this is, but my argument would be along the following lines.
Our men and women in uniform are people who agreed to put their lives on the line to protect this country. To send them back for deployment after deployment and to force them to stay in the armed forces through stop-loss is a real betrayal of their willingess to sacrifice. It's also breaking the army, creating real problems in recruiting and weakening our long-term ability to respond militarily real threats.
Ending stop loss and multiple deployments means fewer troops starting today and the commanders on the ground are going to have to work out some detailed alternatives and present them. But that is one of the the first steps.
Proof? I don't need no stinkin' proof. I just want some high-profile Democrat to lay that charge out there and let the Bush Administration try to deny it.
Because once that charge is out there, and they have to start denying it, it will make some people start to think, "Hey, wait a minute. Could they really be doing that?" And it puts the argument where we want it -- abuse of power -- instead of where they want it, which is to pretend it's a regrettable but necessary step to keep our children from being blown to bits.
A false (or unprovable) charge can have the effect of immediately reframing an issue.
Yes that's right you cowards, when we go after someone like Joe Lieberman and support Ned Lamont, we are fighting for you. Not that most of you are worth it, not that we like you all that much, but the Democratic Party is the only party we've got. And by "we," I mean sane people.
I'm disappointed in Kossacks for the mass suck up to Senator Obama, who may talk pretty but represents the same old, same old DLC politics that have ripped the heart and soul out of the Democratic party and relegated it to the permanent minority status that a party that stands for nothing and stands up to no one fully deserves.
When some wingnut says something outrageous, don't attack the indivdual or the tiny wingnut group he's a member of. Attack the Rethuglican Party. For example: "Republicans want to stop extra-marital sex so much that they want more women to get cervical cancer. That's why the Republicans are trying to stop a vaccine that prevents it."
Democrats need to do this over and over and over. Here's why:
