May, 2007 archive

Robert Reich on tax havens:

So when the super-rich use offshore tax havens to avoid paying what they owe in taxes, they’re reneging on their duties as citizens. It seems only fair to me that the consequence of that kind of tax avoidance ought to be loss of citizenship. If it’s more important to someone to avoid paying what they owe in taxes than to continue being an American, then let them keep their money. They can become a citizen of the Cayman Islands or Bermuda or wherever else they store their wealth, and come here on a visitor’s visa – if they can get one.

Makes sense to me. If they don’t want to pay their fair share, keep them away from using the services that the rest of us pay for.

(Oh, yeah. Follow the link and read the comments. A real hoot from the “Get Something for Nothing” crowd.)

News from the underwearworld.

Police are asking Colorado women a rather delicate question: Are these your panties? As part of an investigation into widespread underwear theft, police have invited women to view photos of about 1,300 undergarments stolen from laundry rooms near Colorado State University.

Thank you, George Bush. Another milestone in the history of this Noble Experiment.

The United States is “the leading country using fear to justify the unjustifiable,” said Larry Cox, executive director of Amnesty International USA. “The U.S. used to be in a position to speak out effectively against torture and military tribunals. We can’t do that now because we are carrying out some of the same practices,” he said.

(Via Balloon Juice.)

(You ladies know how much that statement is worth.)

Dan Froomkin asks the question (emphasis added):

Despite President Bush’s attempt yesterday to win back support for the war in Iraq by reminding people of the dangers posed by al-Qaeda, today’s coverage is full of skepticism and distrust. And given the chance to address his lack of credibility at a hastily scheduled press conference this morning, Bush was unable to reassure the doubters.

Here’s the question from NBC’s David Gregory: “Mr. President, after the mistakes that have been made in this war, when you do as you did yesterday, where you raised two-year-old intelligence talking about the threat posed by al-Qaeda, it’s met with increasing skepticism. A majority in the public, growing number of Republicans appear not to trust you any longer to be able to carry out this policy successfully. Can you explain why you believe you’re still a credible messenger on the war?”

Bush’s reply: “I’m credible because I read the intelligence, David, and make it abundantly clear in plain terms that if we let up, we’ll be attacked, and I firmly believe that. You know, I — look, this has been a long, difficult experience for the American people. I can assure you al-Qaeda, who would like to attack us again, have got plenty of patience and persistence, and the question is, will we.”

(Many tired, discredited, NeoCon talking points and spin snipped. Follow the link if want to read the Same Old Lies One More Time. )

None of which, of course, answers the question. Offered a chance to address the seminal challenge facing his presidency, Bush chose stock phrases, straw-man arguments and an appeal to fear. And then he got personal.

“They are a threat to your children, David,” Bush said.

(And now Dan Froomkin cuts to the chase–ed.)

Over the past six years, the intelligence has been wrong or twisted or both, while Bush’s predictions about the Middle East have been almost uniformly wrong. But we’re just supposed to trust him again because he says so?

In other sophistry, lies, and spin (via Atrios):

Q Thank you, Mr. President. You say you want nothing short of victory, that leaving Iraq would be catastrophic; you once again mentioned al Qaeda. Does that mean that you are willing to leave American troops there, no matter what the Iraqi government does? I know this is a question we’ve asked before, but you can begin it with a “yes” or “no.”

THE PRESIDENT: We are there at the invitation of the Iraqi government. This is a sovereign nation. Twelve million people went to the polls to approve a constitution. It’s their government’s choice. If they were to say, leave, we would leave.

Aside: Notice, once again, that the Great Dissembler did not answer the question.

Atrios goes on to point out that Iraq was a sovereign nation in early 2003.

And this “sovereign nation” that the Current Federal Administrator points to is wholly a creature of the United States of America.

It is to laugh.

As my First Son nears the sixth month of his 12 15-month stay in Afghanistan, from today’s local rag, by W.D. Ehrhart, who earned the Purple Heart, the Navy Combat Action Ribbon, and two Presidential Unit Citations in Vietnam (emphasis added):

I begin to suspect that the politicians and generals who tell us that we must sacrifice our children for the cause of peace are perhaps being just a bit disingenuous. I didn’t see any politicians in the rice fields of Vietnam, and precious few generals died there.

(snip)

More recently, we were told repeatedly that we had to send our children into harm’s way because Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction that posed a direct and immediate threat to the peace and security of our country. Four years later, 3,200 more young Americans are dead, and 30,000 have been wounded. We all know that we went to war for a lie; Mr. Bush asks us to be patient; Congress dithers over nonbinding resolutions; and there is no end in sight.

Have the dead and wounded of our latest war sacrificed for their country? I don’t think so. Nor do I think my friends Kenny and Randy died for their country in Vietnam. They died for the fantasies and machinations of arrogant powerbrokers the American people repeatedly and mistakenly put our confidence in, generation after generation, too ignorant ourselves, or too spineless, to separate the rhetoric of patriotism from the substance of patriotism.

Does supporting the troops really mean sending them to die for a lie and for the “legacy” of a discredited liar?

To quote Simon and Garfunkel, “He must have been high on something, someone said.”

Ocean City police arrested a man who tried to pay a store clerk with marijuana, officials said today.

With a tip to Linda.

Liberty University’s motto used to be “Challenge Your Mind. (Yeah. Right. It was founded to staunch, not encourage inquiry–ed.) Build Your Faith.”

But it now seems to have a new motto, cited above.

Phillybits has aggregated the coverage and a lot of the reality-based commentary:

Of course, you won’t be reading about this as a terrorist incident. Instead, you’ll be reading about some wacky kids and their unsuccesful attempt to use “homemade napalm pipebombs” to counter protestors at Jerry Falwell’s funeral.

[EDITORIAL MODE ON]

We have our own native-born Ayatollahs who teach hatred and intolerance.

We must be as careful of them as we are of foreign ones.

[EDITORIAL MODE OFF]

Addendum:

ASZ on the irony.

Addendum Two:

Balloon Juice:

Ten bucks to the first reader who finds a major media outlet referring to this kid as a “terrorist.” He had real bombs, right? That makes him farther along than the last several terror busts combined. The New Jersey paintball gang couldn’t even burn a DVD. Twenty to anyone who points out a rightwing blogger arguing that since detergent is a chemical, the kid techically made a chemical weapon.

Will Bunch.

Read his post, then go back to the one just below this and listen to the song again.

Well worth a listen. (Kid safe, but may not be work safe if you work with or for wingnuts.)

With a tip to Gene Weingarten.

New porch roof.

Here in the left blogosphere, there is gnashing of teeth over this:

In grudging concessions to President Bush, Democrats intend to draft an Iraq war-funding bill without a timeline for the withdrawal of U.S. troops and shorn of billions of dollars in spending on domestic programs, officials said yesterday.

But, as Von Bismarck said, “Politics is the art of the possible.”

The forces of truth, justice, and the American Way do not have the votes to overturn a veto from the Current Federal Administrator. They are thereby limited to gestures.

And our elected representatives incongruously assembled can only do so much in the face of duplicitous intransigence.

But even gestures have meaning. I get the feeling that the Current Federal Administrator really sort of short-circuits at the idea that anyone might take issues with his pronouncements from on high.

Via Brendan.

My Daddy always counseled me against throwing good money after bad:

The Bush administration is quietly on track to nearly double the number of combat troops in Iraq this year, an analysis of Pentagon deployment orders showed Monday.

The little-noticed second surge, designed to reinforce U.S. troops in Iraq, is being executed by sending more combat brigades and extending tours of duty for troops already there.

He wasn’t big on liars and gamblers, either.

Or lying gamblers.

Or gambling liars.

Via Huffington Post.

Final Notice. Oh! Lord! Please make it so.

I have not made time to delve into the Immigration Bill, but apparently it’s creating a stir in the Wingnut community.

Disclaimer: I am personally certain that much of the opposition to immigration, both legal and illegal, is founded in bigotry. Historically, each wave of immigrants has looked with suspicion at succeeding waves of immigrants. Hence, the Know-Nothings (spiritual fathers of the current Republican Party.)

There is little or no evidence that illegal immigration poses a security threat. Remember that the 9/11 hijackers all entered the country legally.

I do not condone violating the law (except, of course, for my own convenience), but there is little or no evidence that Mexicans seeking work in the United States pose much of a security threat.

And with that long-winded introduction, I point you towards Phillybits.

From Delaware Liberal’s banner, words to vote by:

Politics is like driving. To go backward, put it in R. To go forward, put it in D.

It’s that time of year. By next weekend, my yard will be all over roses:

21 bushes, and the two great things about roses is that they are easy to grow and they bloom all season. Not like those wimpy daffodils and irises who bloom once and then just take up space for the next five months while you have to guide the lawm mowerr around them.

Roses, the flowers that keep on giving.

But the end of May, when they all bloom the first time, all at the same time, is the best.

This one was plucked and Linda photographed it in her office. She told me that her co-workers thought it had come from a florist. I assume that’s a compliment, since this flower came from the backyard. I guess her co-workers don’t know how easy roses are.

I said earlier

Ya know, every time I think the Current Federal Administration has exhausted the depths of sliminess, it surprises me with new bouts of creativity.

They have lost the capacity to surprise me, even as they try to roust a sick old man from his bed in ICU:

White House Counsel Alberto R. Gonzales and President Bush’s chief of staff, Andrew H. Card Jr., were on their way to the hospital to persuade Ashcroft to reauthorize Bush’s domestic surveillance program, which the Justice Department had just determined was illegal.

In vivid testimony to the Senate Judiciary Committee yesterday, Comey said he alerted FBI Director Robert S. Mueller III and raced, sirens blaring, to join Ashcroft in his hospital room, arriving minutes before Gonzales and Card. Ashcroft, summoning the strength to lift his head and speak, refused to sign the papers they had brought. Gonzales and Card, who had never acknowledged Comey’s presence in the room, turned and left.

And, as the local rag pointed out yesterday

Ashcroft is no ACLU member, so imagine what kind of proposed practices generated this kind of intense opposition from his Justice Department.

Dick Polman wonders who dispatched Gonzales and Card on their mission:

And who sent Gonzales and White House chief of staff Andy Card to Ashcroft’s hospital bed, anyway? Bush, in his press conference this morning, was asked whether he could enlighten his fellow Americans. He declined the invitation, saying: “There’s a lot of speculation about what happened and what didn’t happen, and I’m not going to talk about it.”

Of course he’s not going to talk about it. He might accidently say something that’s not a lie, and then what would he do?

It’s time to bring back HUAC and let them target those who are truly Un-American.

Jon Stewart sums it up (via Dan Froomkin):

Jon Stewart on the Comey testimony: “Holy [expletive]! Apparently the president of the United States sent his chief of staff and legal counsel to an ICU to convince a drugged-up, pancreatically-inflamed John Ashcroft to subvert the Constitution!”

Stewart shows Sen. Charles Schumer’s reaction: “The story is a shocking one. It makes you almost gulp.”

To which Stewart responds: “ALMOST? ALMOST GULP? What is it going to take to make you actually gulp? Do these guys have to sodomize the Declaration of Independence in front of you?”

God help us all.

Addendum, Later That Same Evening.

Delaware Liberal has an idea about how to get truthful testimony from Abu.

Use Enhanced Interrogation Techniques. Whaddya say? Sauce for the goose?

All Spin Zone.

Really, what is it about the Party of Family Values? Sheesh.