Talking about a difference in the pace

CNN goes searching in Ohio and finds someone who's against the war but still supports McCain, which proves something-or-other:

A onetime war supporter is now a war critic. Yet in Tuesday's Ohio primary, and again in November, Dyer is supporting the candidate who insists things are finally improving in Iraq, and who insists the troops must stay to finish the job.

"Seems like we have shown a lot of progress and I don't think it is time to quit and run," Dyer said. "And I think if we hadn't shown some progress, it would be time to call it a day. .... I hope people who think we should just cut and run or get out as quickly as possible will at least listen to Sen. [John] McCain articulate the reasons why he wants to do the things he wants to do."*

Ah, yes, we've heard from Teh Elder Statesman already and found him, um, slighly wanting:


Dyer made his decision before our visit, but said he did some research on the Clinton and Obama campaign Web sites.

"I don't understand their position at all," Dyer said. "I think we are already talking about bringing combat troops home. We are talking about a difference in the pace."

"Difference in pace." Oh. I guess that explains McCain's "100 years" comment. See, he does indeed want us out of Iraq - just at a very, very SLOW pace. Whee! Q.E.D.

Of course, that means more years of billions of dollars being flushed down the occupation rathole, more soldiers pointlessly dying and being critically injured, more mercenaries being deployed to shore up an ever-weakening military, more bombs on "terrorist encampments" that end up killing women and children, and more antagonism towards the United States. But hey! It's all a matter of pace, donchaknow.


* I just love it when news stories do this kind of crap, when they feel they must print "Sen. [John] McCain" because they evidently think us dumbass Americans might mistake who's being spoken about for all the OTHER Senator McCains running for office in Ohio.

I dunno, maybe there's some kind of journalistic etiquette that demands that kind of thing. All I know is it seems American news has to explain things over and over again, as if every news day is a totally new creation, and it's annoying as hell.

As Atrios says

please, oh god please just make it stop.

Oh, PUH-LEEEZE!

Is there a soul who draws breath (DO souls draw breath, BTW?) who seriously believes the Republican Party really feels all that badly about this kind of thing?

"The RNC rejects these kinds of campaign tactics," Duncan said in a statement. "We believe this election needs to be about the critical issues confronting our nation."

The statement in question, which was released Monday, said the state party is joining a "growing chorus of Americans concerned about the future of the nation of Israel ... if Sen. Barack Hussein Obama is elected president of the United States."

It also included a photograph of Obama from a 2006 trip to Kenya, in which he is dressed in traditional attire.

Maybe the top of the Party objects to such tactics - but that's the idea: the foot soldiers fling the poo while the guys at the top, including the candidate, appear as responsible and mature. Best of both worlds, as far as they're concerned.

Digby at Hullaballoo did a post on the Cunningham thing the same day I did, and pointed out the principle is already well-established:

In this case, McCain not only gets these insults against both Democratic candidates aired over and over again, he makes himself look good for "repudiating" it. It's "out there" which is the best of all possible worlds.

Those of us who've been following the mores of the Village for a while will also recognize this gambit as an example of "Cokie's Law."

"At this point," said Roberts, "it doesn't much matter whether she said it or not because it's become part of the culture. I was at the beauty parlor yesterday and this was all anyone was talking about."

After all, a similar tactic was used against McCain back in 2000, and why abandon something that works so well?

Do as we say, not as we do

Karma steps up and takes a 2x4 to the back of America's head:

"The Turkish government should make clear to the Iraqi government, and everyone concerned, exactly what their intentions are and the limited goals and scope of their operations," Gates said, calling Turkey to balance its need for self-defense with Iraq's sovereignty.

Just like we did, ne? And how do you like that stirring defense of Iraq's national sovereignty! Why, it would be just so wrong to violate a country's national sovereignty just to chase after terrorists!

Defying Iraqi and U.S. calls for Turkey to wind up the six-day operation, a top Turkish diplomat said there was no "timetable" for the incursion following talks in Baghdad with Iraqi counterparts.

But this has to be the best part of the article:

Gates on Thursday called on Turkey and Iraq to work together to solve the problem.

"It should be clear that military action alone will not end this terrorist threat," Gates said. "While it is certainly part of the equation, there must be simultaneous efforts made with non-military initiatives," suggesting economic programs and political outreach.

Huh. "Non-military initiatives". Well! What a concept. Diplomacy between the two countries. Who'd'a thunk it?

Hey, you know, we might want to try that kind of thing at some point ourselves!

The Sophisticates

ABOVE: Separated at birth?

Evidently Mr. Sardonicus Cunningham felt more at ease on the Hannity & Colmes show, and put further lie to the idea that the McCain campaign had no idea just who they were putting out as a opening act for their candidate:

CUNNINGHAM: Your co-host, Alan Colmes, wants to have, like, a force field around Barack Hussein Obama, and if you touch it, you get electrocuted. What happened to me today is what's going to happen to conservatives for the next eight months if they bring up Barack Hussein Obama's name. Just say his name. All of a sudden, you're going to be electrocuted.

Well, yeah, if you do it as an attempt to tie into the "Obama = Muslim = terrorist" idea. After all, this is the same "news" network whose owner a year ago made a (not so) funny "confusing" Obama with Osama.

But Sen. Obama's real honorable middle name was just not enough for the perky lil' Mr. Cunningham:

COLMES: Let me point out that on your radio — what you're ignoring, Bill, is on your radio show didn't you call him Barack Hussein Mohammed Obama?

CUNNINGHAM: Well, I did call him that once, because Mohammed is the greatest prophet of God according to...

COLMES: I see. So why did you add a name that wasn't his name? Now you're acting like, "I just said his name." You didn't do that. You actually inserted the name "Mohammed" to his name. Why did you do that?

CUNNINGHAM: I believed at the time that his confirmation and one of his names was Mohammed, and I rescinded the statement. I said Barack Hussein Obama.

Oh, yeah, that's a mistake anyone would make. Of course, Billy can't get it straight whether it was, indeed, an honest mistake or more "respect", but hey, nobody would do something like that just to link Barack Obama to Muslim terrorism!

Of course not.

Particularly not a supporter of John McCain.

I mean, would Mr. Cunningham really assert that Barack Obama is some kind of Muslim terrorist Manchurian Candidate?

Maybe:

CUNNINGHAM: And the daily[sic] — the daily political machine gave us this — this stealth candidate, this Manchurian candidate. We don't know who in the heck he is. I'd like to know more about Obama.

Then again maybe not:

COLMES: You also had a caller to your radio show refer to him as a terrorist cell. Do you concur with that caller?

CUNNINGHAM: No, I did not concur with any caller. I do not believe Barack Hussein Obama is a terrorist or a Manchurian candidate. I do believe we know nothing about this guy from the daily political machine.

I just really have the utmost respect for someone who sticks by what they assert about someone, someone who doesn't bob and weave and dodge questions.

What Big Bill does know, though, is President Obama would be just terrible, terrible for the Great Holy Crusade Against The Bad Terrorist People:

CUNNINGHAM: Very easily. This is the candidate who wants to close down Gitmo, who wants to reinstate habeas corpus, who wants to criminalize — terrorist activities, and he wants to eliminate key elements in the Patriot Act. I'm referring to that, Alan Colmes, and not his name.

"wants to reinstate habeas corpus". *shudder* Why, what kind of sick bastard could want THAT!? Oh, and "wants to criminalize terrorist activities". Um, yeah.

After all, what we really need in these dangerous times is four more years of Bush:

CUNNINGHAM: And I want you to say that "George Bush has kept me safe for the last seven years." Say it, Alan. Say it.

For a limited set of "me", not including the people of New Orleans or American soldiers. Ignoring, also, the anthrax attacks, the monthly Orange Alerts just before the 2004 election, the constant warnings of terrorists lurking, and the trotting out of the latest B.S. "foiled plot" every time the Repugs need a boost in the polls. As well as the incapability of the federal government to protect us from gun violence, diseased meat, crumbling bridges, contaminated toys and a worsening economy.

And let's not forget the ever-popular "give me everything I want right now or we're all dead" propaganda from the White House.

But, after all, to Billy-Boy's tiny mind Alan "Hannity's Punching Bag" Colmes is the re-incarnation of Stalin:

HANNITY: What do you call Alan Colmes?

CUNNINGHAM: I call Alan Colmes a well-intended liberal who's a left-wing radical extremist to the left of a Bolshevik.

Um. Yeah.

Poo-flinging 101

CNN invites right-wing idiot on to "explain" himself and, as usual, just helps to catapult the propaganda.


Cripes, somebody's been into the Smilex!

But let's go to the transcript, shall we?

Bill Cunningham, what was the purpose today in repeatedly using Barack Obama's full name, Barack Hussein Obama?

CUNNINGHAM: I have repeatedly used the name of William Jefferson Clinton, Hillary Rodham Clinton. And the purpose was to identify that particular person, a name which is a great Muslim name. Hussein is a great Muslim name. I meant no offense and none was taken.

Oh, cripes, no, I'm SURE there was no offense meant. I mean, after all, it's not like people would associate the name "Hussein" with, oh, I dunno, dictatorial leader of a country we recently invaded. Nosirree!

After all, he ONLY wished to identify the person, to distinguish him from, oh, say, Barack Obama the football player, or Barack Obama the linguist, or Barack Obama the new $.99 value meal item at Hardee's.

But let me just backtrack just a second here. You said that Hussein is a very famous Muslim name. Barack Obama is not a Muslim. It is his middle name. Is there a purpose in repeating his middle name as you did to try to associate him with the Muslim faith?

CUNNINGHAM: No. He's at the United Church of Christ. The Reverend Jeremiah Wright in his church in Chicago gave a lifetime achievement award to Louis Farrakhan a few months ago. That largely was no covered by the media.

Oh, psheh, yeah, he means nothing either by mentioning Farrakhan's name, either. Certainly doesn't intend to portray Obama as a dangerous black radical, nope, nu-huh. Just mentioning it, you know, the way mendacious idiots just mention that it, after all, was called "National SOCIALISM", uh-huh, yup.

CUNNINGHAM: What it was, they told me to fire up the crowd. You're talking to conservatives. You're talking to individuals who are ticketed to be there. Get them fired up and give them some red meat.

Which is exactly the "bad cop/good cop" routine that the Repugs like to play - let the opening act go out there and spew the toxic waste, then have the star come on and repudiate the previous comments - letting the comments out there while insulating himself from the responsibility of being linked to them.

JOHN KING, CNN CHIEF NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, John, it's a great question. And what they say is that they didn't know he was going to say Barack Hussein Obama, use Hussein twice, after saying the prophet from Chicago. So, clearly, they took it that he was somehow trying to suggest Barack Obama is or was a Muslim at some point.

They say they did bring him to cause some red meat. Rob Portman, the former congressman, came in and said Bill Cunningham has helped us in the past, helped George W. Bush win two elections here in Ohio, close elections. So, they knew they were taking a risk. And they're apologizing to Senator McCain afterwards and acknowledging that risk backfired.

Oh, bullpshitt, you clowns, and you damn well know it. They knew damn well who they invited, I'm sure they were very familiar with his radio show, and they knew the "Obama Muslim" meme was out there already. As I said, they wanted to further the damage without having St. John personally tarnished. And it worked; not only did Cunningham get the speech Tuesday night but got to come on CNN and repeat his comments, in the same way that nobody from the Left would ever be invited to do.

Isn't this kinda freakin' surreal

Poking around CNN.com yesterday (bad habit, I know) and came across a headline on one of their sidebars - something about someone composing a "thank you" song for George Bush. "The HELL!?" I thought, and tried to flip back to see what it was about. Naturally it was gone, and I was hoping I just hallucinated it until I did a search.

Nope, I wouldn't have been so lucky:

MONROVIA, Liberia (AP) -- In a humid rehearsal studio, Liberia's pop queen is practicing her newest single -- a song called "Thank you" to be released for President Bush's visit here next week.

Her head tilted back, Juli Endee pulls the microphone close and belts out, "Thank you, George Bush."

"Thank you for democracy," she croons over the electric guitar, shaking her hips wrapped in yellow cloth. "Thank you for the rule of law," she sings. "Thank you for debt relief."

Well! I guess he took all that from America and sent 'em over to Liberia, 'cause we're sure as hell missing democracy, rule of law and debt relief HERE.

And call me crazy but what the HELL is up with the writing in this article?

Endee, the pop star, has no time to discuss critiques of Bush's foreign policy. In her studio, she is busy finishing not only her song, but also a welcoming dance. It begins with dancers asking each other, "Have you heard who's coming to Liberia?"

When one answers, "George Bush is coming to Liberia," they explode into dance.

Whee! Is it just me, or is there a whole subtext there about how THOSE people (YOU KNOW) just love to sing and dance? Natural rhythm and all that. (I mean, no, it isn't as racist as some, but cripes!)

Um, I hate to spoil Endee's party, but meanwhile in the real Liberia:

Bush will end his trip by spending a few hours in Liberia. There he will try to cast himself in the role of the compassionate conservative who successfully intervened in Liberia’s long civil war, thus heralding in a shining new democracy led by Africa’s first democratically-elected female president. In his February 14 press conference, Bush celebrated increasing private capital flows to sub-Saharan Africa. But the workers supposedly benefiting from foreign private investment in Liberia might have a different perspective.

For example, Liberia’s largest investor and employer, Firestone, has been exploiting workers on its rubber plantation for over 80 years. The company has been the focus of an international campaign and a lawsuit in U.S. courts because of its use of child labor and abuse of workers’ rights. Affidavits collected from child laborers on the plantation recently filed in the lawsuit show clearly how foreign direct investment and trade often do not benefit workers.

Sixteen-year-old James Roe IV is a typical example of a Firestone worker. He began working at the age of nine on the plantation, cleaning cups of latex and cutting grass with a machete. At the age of 11, he began collecting latex and applying toxic chemicals to trees without any protective gear. When he was nine, James was injured at work when he cut his foot with a machete. But he could not get proper health care because he lacked an ID card required by the company to access the Firestone Hospital. Since he works from 4 a.m. to 3 p.m., he has been unable to attend school and has only achieved a second-grade education. James was forced to work to help his father meet his daily production quota because if he failed to meet the quota, his family would not be able to afford food.

Somehow I get the feeling James would be disinclined to dance at the thought of Bush visting.

The incorrigible drollery of the wingnuts

Well, I'm glad to see someone else picked up on it.

Let's see... "Folks United Collectively Knowing Facts About Conservative Election Stuff", educating the public on what modern Republican Party members are.

Wheeee! Time to go fill out my 509(c)(3) paperwork and prepare myself for my appearances on CNN!

Are we all dead yet?

...so the "FISA extension" that, if allowed to expire, would mean the devastation of America at the hand of Islamonaziviks... is um, still expired.

. . .

And nothing happened.

Well.

One wonders if we should figure that the Dems are going to be heartened by this and stand up to Bush and the Repug Thugs next time they DEMAND something be passed.

(And yes, the Heritage Foundation still has its Doom Clock up on its front page. Sad, really.)

...tap tap tap... Is this thing on?

Know what? I took another hiatus. You can hardly blame me, though - it's kept me from commenting on the Presidential campaign and getting sucked into the war that's evidently going on over it. (Note: I don't really care at this point who's going to be the Democratic nominee - at least either way it'll be someone who doesn't make us cringe every time he/she opens their mouth.)

ANYWAY - isn't it adorable that this spent an extended time on the "Latest News" list over at CNN.com? I guess flag burning cements the "treason" label for Berkeley, even though all they did was tell the Marines they were unwelcome. Cripes, get out that "welcome" mat and put it in front of your house, folks, 'cause if you don't have one you're OBVIOUSLY for rounding your neighbors up and shipping them off to death camps. Sheesh.

And so we continue to equate militarism and patriotism in the stupidest way possible, deciding that if someone doesn't show proper subordination to the great and powerful Pentagon that they must, therefore, hate America, the flag, clean water, blue skies, baseball, hot dogs, and fuzzy puppies. (Being as, you know, they don't have puppies and blue skies in other countries, of course, much less flags.) The CNN.com comments on the original story are little jingo gems especially - the usual blather about how the military gave us the freedom that Berkeley "abuses" and how they should love it or leave it and how these people wouldn't get away with this in some furrin country what didn't love freedom as much as us! (Christ knows those Islamonazivik countries don't have protests.)

I mean, would someone PLEASE fookin' explain to me WHO the sainted Marines are exactly defending us FROM at the moment, anyway? Iraqis? Afghanis? Pakistanis? What country presents an actual threat to us that we need a Pentagon budget of half trillion dollars (NOT including, mind you, spending for Iraq/Afghanistan)? What threat is there of an actual Islamic invasion of the U.S. that bedwetters like the commenters seem to fear? Aren't our freedoms at the moment more threatened by our OWN GODDAMN GOVERNMENT than by foreign invaders?

I'm sure if I were to ask any of these lil' Sons of Liberty the above questions I'd get a guppy-faced expression, an exasperated sigh and a response of "YOU know- THE TERRORISTS!". Which isn't an answer. "Islamic fundimentalists" seems to be the closest they can come to an actual response, though the idea that, say, Iran would invade the U.S. is so outlandish even the clowns at National Review wouldn't suggest it. So we're stuck with a nebulous "THEM" that's out there somewhere, who plot to kill us all and that the Marines deployed in Iraq and Afghanistan are somehow defending us against, therefore they must not be criticized. And we'll know we're safe from THEM when the folks in power decide that we are, and decide to tell us so.

If that's not fascism, folks, it sure as hell leans in that direction.