Buying The War

Ah, the liberal media...you gotta love 'em. This is an excerpt from a Bill Moyers journal episode called "Buying the War" which details how complicit the mainstream media was in selling the Iraq War. Check it out on PBS if you get a chance.

Ah, The Liberal Media

Since the comments section of the Sanchez post has been threading the way of the "liberal" media, I thought I would share this picture with all of you taken last October of 2006. Here we see President Bush meeting his "troops" or more specifically: Sean Hannity, Laura Ingraham, Michael Medved, Mike Gallagher, and Neil Boortz.

Now I tried to find a photo of Bill Clinton talking with his "troops," which is every single person in mainstream media if you believe conservatives, but I couldn't find one. I offer this photo, as well as the highly popular broadcasts of each one of these individuals, as evidence that the media is, in fact, not liberal. Talk to anyone who lives in a rural area in our country and they only hear right wing talk show hosts. The 3-5 conglomerates that own these stations will not put on any liberal hosts. How's that for fair and balanced?

So when General Sanchez says things like the press is "unquestionably engaged in political propaganda that is uncontrolled" he would be 100 percent correct!

OmygodIcan'tbelieveit! (Part Deux)

Warning: The following contains substantiated rumour, inuendo, gossip, and no substanative facts whatsoever (aka trying not to cause the ineveitable conservative tapping into their inner rage, flying off the handle at yours truly, and accusing me of being a communist)

But........

An avid reader of Notes From the Front just sent me this email (the names have been changed to protect the innocent...)

Jill (my wife) says that it is a widespread rumor that Michelle Bachmann is having an affair with someone in Washington, apparently another congressman. One of Jill's acquaintances observed Bachmann playing footsie with some guy in a meeting, and upon further discussion with those in the know learned that it's common knowledge she is having an affair.

I guess when Bush rejected her advances she went on to fry other fish.

And apparently her husband likes to watch, since she would never do anything without him telling her to do it.

Could it be true? Well, I know this is tabloid stuff but this is the closest I will EVER get to going Paris Hilton on all y'all's asses. I have scanned the Internet and found nothing. Perhaps Notes From The Front will be the first to break this story!!!

Well Well Well

Looks like ol'Markdelphia is right again. And all it took was a little time...

The Ex-CEO of Qwest, Joseph P. Nacchio (left), has alleged that the United States Government, specifically the NSA (National Security Agency), withdrew a 200 million dollar contract because Qwest refused to participate in a surveillance program. Now I know you must all be thinking that yours truly is caught in a time loop. Didn't we already have long and hard debates about this many moons ago? Wasn't Qwest the only company out of all the tele-communications companies to say NO to the NSA back when they wanted to listen to our conversations? Didn't Dave and Crabmaster Scratch argue vociferously that, because of the 9-11 attacks, these programs were needed?

And wasn't I told I was being "paranoid" and "libelous" by insinuating that our government wanted to use the NSA program for things other than protecting our nation from terrorism?

Well, the answers to all these questions is YES, of course but the current allegation by Mr. Nacchio is not being made in regards to surveillance programs since 9-11.

No, sir.

Then CEO Nacchio was approached by the NSA on February 27, 2001, A FULL SIX MONTHS BEFORE THE 9-11 ATTACKS!!!

That's right, folks. It comes as no surprise to me, but possibly to others who read and post here, that Herr Cheney wants to be up all of our collective asses with tweezers-you know, to make sure that we are all good little followers of the state. I'm sure that our beloved Fuhrer also wants to keep an eye (or ear in this case) on any dissenters and political enemies that might be plotting against him. And if anyone gets too powerful....or steps out line......

Ah, less government....you gotta love it.

Could any of this be true? As this story comes out, neocon pundits will point to the fact that Joe Nacchio has been found guilty of insider trading and will say anything to beat the rap. But a recent article in the Star and Tribune describes Nacchio as vainly attempting to tell the court that his sale of stock couldn't have been improper due to the fact the NSA cancelled the contract. Of course, this is proving difficult because all references to the NSA program have been redacted from court papers for "security concerns."

So that's what the kids are calling breaking constitutional law these days. Cool!

My questions are these: why did the Bush administration, who has stated repeatedly that the NSA program is necessary because of 9-11, want to bypass the courts and warrants back in February of 2001, well before the attacks? Have other companies complied? If so, why didn't this "necessary" surveillance prevent 9-11?

And why exactly did they want American's phone records again?

A Nightmare

The commander of coalition forces in Iraq from 2004-2006, Lt. Gen. Ricardo Sanchez, is speaking out.

In a recent interview, Sanchez, the top military man in Iraq during that time period, called the Bush Administration's handling of the war "incompetent" and a "nightmare with no end in sight." He went on to say that the Bush administration's plan is "catastrophically flawed and unrealistically optimistic." And how does he feel about the surge?

"A desperate move that would not achieve long term stability."

You may recall that Gen. Sanchez was forced into retirement because of the Abu Ghraib scandal. So is it sour grapes? Or is he covering his ass for the history books?

Could he be right?

We have a Winner

Al Gore has won the Nobel Peace Prize. And I, for one, am very happy. Regardless of what you might think about climate change, there is no doubt that there hasn't been anyone who has raised awareness more on the issue than our former VP.

Along with Gore, the IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) was given the award "for their efforts to build up and disseminate greater knowledge about man-made climate change, and to lay the foundations for the measures that are needed to counteract such change"

Even our current president has been talking more of the need to help combat climate change. I think we are headed down a good path, here, folks and kudos to the big Al for leading the way.

My Point About Conservatives Completely and Utterly Proven

Today's column by Katherine Kersten illustrates my contention from earlier in the week that conservative pundits are losing their minds. Vietnam and Iraq are two completely different countries and to make the assertion that Iraq would fall into chaos if we left, just as Vietnam did, is fucking moronic. Do these conservative pundits just make up a bunch of shit, ignore basic facts, and then print it as truth?

A 5th grader will tell you that Iraq and Vietnam are about as different as night and day. Not to mention the fact that it was our fault that the violence escalated regionally in Vietnam because we stayed to long, not because we left too soon. And aren't we doing quite a bit of trade with Vietnam now? Isn't the country more or less stable because we left?

You know, it's a nice pleasant fantasy when I am told to just ignore folks like Katherine Kersten and maybe they'll go away but people read what she is saying and think it's true.

And they can't see that they are being lied to by what is, without a doubt, the greatest propaganda machine in the history of the world.

Is It True?

A reader sent me this yesterday and I thought I would throw it out to all of you and see what you think. It was written earlier this year but I still think it is appropriate.

A Psychiatrist's Analysis of George W. Bush

George Bush's "irrational"consideration of a "surge" in the wake of the Iraq Study Group report -- which apparently defies all credible counsel -- has begun to generate speculation regarding his sanity. References to Bush's delusions" have appeared in the mainstream media and throughout the blogosphere. As a psychiatrist, I understandably get concerned when I see clinical terminology bandied about in political discourse, and thought it might be of interest to share a professional perspective on this question. I have a distinct clinical impression that I think explains much of Mr. Bush's visible pathology.

First and foremost, George W. Bush has a Narcissistic Personality Disorder. What this means, is that he has rather desperate insecurities about himself and compensates by constructing a grandiose self-image. Most of his relationships are either mirroring relationships -- people who flatter him and reinforce his grandiosity -- or idealized self-objects -- people that he himself thinks a lot of, and hence feels flattered by his association with them. Some likely perform both functions. Hence his weakness for sycophants like Harriet Miers, and powerful personalities like Dick Cheney.

Even as a narcissist, Bush knows he isn't a great intellect, and compensates by dismissing the value of intellect altogether. Hence his disses of Gore's bookishness, and any other intellectual who isn't flattering him. Bush knows that his greatest personal strength is projecting personal affability, and tries to utilize it even in the most inappropriate settings. That's why he gives impromptu back rubs to the German Chancellor in a diplomatic meeting -- he's insecure intellectually, and tries to make everyone into a "buddy" so he can feel more secure. The most disturbing aspect about narcissists, however, is their pathological inability to empathize with others, with the exception of those who either mirror them, or whom they idealize. Hence Bush's horrifying insensitivity to the Katrina victims, his callous jokes when visiting grievously injured soldiers, and numerous other instances. He simply has no capacity to feel for others in that way.

When LBJ was losing Vietnam, he developed a haunted expression that anybody could recognize as indicative of underlying anguish. For all his faults, you just knew he was losing sleep over it. By the same token, we know just as well that Bush isn't losing any sleep over dead American soldiers, to say nothing of dead Iraqis. He didn't exhibit any sign of significant concern until his own political popularity was sliding -- because THAT'S something he CAN feel. Which brings us to his recent "delusion." To be blunt, I don't see any indication that Bush has any sort of psychotic disorder whatsoever. The lapses in reality-testing that he exhibits are the sort that can be readily explained by his characterological insensitivity to the feelings and perceptions of others, due to his persistently self-centered frame of reference.

Mr. Bush knows that things aren't going his way in Iraq, and he knows that this is damaging him politically. He also sees that it is likely to get worse no matter what he does, and in fact it may be a lost cause. However, he recognizes that if he follows the recommendations of the Iraq Study Group, Iraq will almost certainly evolve into a puppet state of Iran, and given his treatment of Iran he will completely lose control of the situation -- and he will be politically discredited for this outcome. The ONLY chance that he has to avoid this political disaster, and save his political skin, is to hope against hope for "victory" in Iraq. Advancing the "surge" idea offers Bush two political advantages over following the ISG recommendations. One is that if it is implemented, maybe, just maybe, he can pull out some sort of nominal "victory" out of the situation. The chances are exceedingly slim, granted, but slim is better to him than the alternative -- none. Alternately, if the "surge" is politically rejected, he gains some political cover, so when things inevitably go bad, he can say "I told you so" and blame the "surrender monkeys" for the outcome. Most people probably won't buy it, but some (his core base) will. Now, I know what many of you are thinking -- is George Bush willing to risk the lives of hundreds, maybe thousands more American soldiers, on an outside chance to save his political skin, in a half-baked plan that even he knows probably won't work at all? Yes, he is. Because George Bush is that narcissistic, that desperate, and yes, that sociopathic as well.

Especially interesting about Mr. Bush, but quite common, Narcissistic Personality Disorder is frequently associated with alcoholism. The insufferable "holier than thou" attitude associated with "Dry Drunk" Syndrome" is indicative of underlying narcissism. Also, the way that Bush embraces Christianity is characteristically narcissistic. Rather than incorporating the lessons of humility and empathy modeled by Jesus, Bush uses his Christian faith to reinforce his grandiosity. Jesus is his powerful ally, his idealized "buddy" who gives a rubber stamp to anything he thinks . Finally -- and this will sound VERY familiar to many readers -- those persons with NPD are notoriously unable to say they're sorry. Admitting error is fundamentally incompatible with their precarious efforts to maintain their sense of order. Anyone having this particular character flaw almost certainly has NPD.

(Dr. Paul Minot, psychiatrist, Waterville, Maine)

I think that this analysis could easily extended to cover several conservatives I know as well.

Rush Limbaugh Phony Soldiers Comment

I figured since we are debating this in comments I would put this out front on the blog and let everyone judge for themselves.

Please! For the love of Mike....STOP THE INSANTIY!!!

Over the course of the last few years, y'all have heard me dish on a variety of things that irritate me about folks on the right side of the aisle. To be fair, the left side of the aisle irritates me as well, especially lately. Someone needs to let the Democratic Party know that every time Harry Reid speaks, rather than projecting strength, millions of Americans get the sudden urge to discuss the fine art of quilting and drink warm milk.

Lately, however, right minded folk seem to be losing their minds. I mean this quite literally and it's getting worse everyday. I'm sure that many folks who post here of the conservative ilk will tell you that liberals are just as bad but it's simply not true. Liberals have a plethora of other faults, to be sure, but they aren't anywhere close to what the conservatives are going through at present. They aren't even in the same ballpark. While it's true that everyone is capable of psychosis, in the last few weeks, conservative pundits have collectively demonstrated new depth to the word "loony."

Rush Limbaugh, on his daily radio show last week, called Iraq and Afghan troops that have criticized the war, "phony troops." Leaping to his defense, fellow radio host Melanie Morgan said, on Fox News, that soldiers like VoteVets.org Chairman Jon Soltz are part of the “soldiers who are fake, or who are embellishers, or who are posers.” Morgan then claimed that Soltz, who served honorably in both Kosovo and Iraq, has a “far left, anti-America agenda” and that he “undermine[s] the real mission of our troops, our heroes who are out there”



I have two words for you Melanie: FUCK and YOU.

The day you get shot at, truck bombed, or have shrapnel removed from your head is the day you can speak with any kind of authority of what constitutes a loyal solider. The same could be said to Rush, who the last time I checked, received a deferment in Vietnam because he had an anal cyst. And people think that these two individuals are accurate judges of what is patriotic and what is not? What a joke....

I challenge anyone here to find a liberal, as well known as Limbaugh and Morgan, who has called combat troops serving in Iraq and Afghanistan "phony" or "Anti-American." Where do Bushies come up with this shit? Oh yes, that's right....THEIR INSANELY WARPED MINDS!

Another shining example of this is Michele Malkin who, when commenting on Sally Field's statement at the Emmys that if "women ran things there would be no war," declared that Ms. Field is, obviously, the "type of mom who buys her kids liquor, condoms, and a hotel room on prom night rather than suiting up and doing battle."

Uh.....what?

Maybe it's the fact that they can see their support slipping away like granules of sand through their fingers. Or maybe they just can't get out of that "tap into my inner, delusional rage..make something up...and right it down as fact" loop of insanity. Clearly, these people aren't thinking rationally. But how did they get here? Where did they insanity begin?

I say it began with OJ.

Laugh all you want but I think that when OJ Simpson was found innocent of a crime he clearly committed, I believe that certain powerful folks, of the conservative persuasion, saw a golden opportunity. I speculate they realized that they could make up whatever they wanted, throw in some jingoistic lingo, tap into American paranoia and ignorance, and voila! Instant Mandate!

They sure have accomplished a lot, haven't they? They have lowered the level of civility in this country to the point of where we are now: calling US soldiers, who risk their lives for us everyday, "phonies" simply because they don't agree with their bizarre vision of patriotism. They have also given rise to groups like Moveon.org. The beef over the General Patreus ad made me laugh so hard I almost threw up. You see, this what you get, Bushies et al, when you lower the political discourse in this country to the mental and emotional level of a thirteen year old girl. You get liberal groups who say dumb ass shit that makes no sense. For every yin, there must be a yang...

So, I have to say that I quite literally can't take this anymore. Listening to any conservative pundit today on just about any topic is like listening a robot slowing breaking down...muttering unintelligible drivel. I've tried to listen...tried to be fair...but I just can't do it anymore. Would someone (or several someones) please slap these people in the face? You know, like in the 1940s when a woman would get too emotional and a man would have to bust them across the chops?

Maybe, just maybe, it will snap them out of their continually spiralling descent into delusion and cease to waste our time.

Torture Is For Pussys

Just ask these guys. Great article today in the Washington Post which details how real men (i.e. men who don't have dick size envy) can extract information from an enemy. Torture, to put it simply, does not work. Just out of curiosity, have US interrogators tried to maybe...oh...I don't know....use a softer approach like getting some Islamists drunk, showing them some porn, and seeing what they might give up.

I know that when I've had a few cocktails and have worked a little tail I am a little more conducive to dishing out secrets :)

This is what happens...

....when you privatize health care. Read this article from today's New York Times.

And people are worried about the government taking over health care? It sounds to me like the government just caught a bunch of thieving scumbags playing "pinch the penny so I can keep my vacation home" with people's lives.

The Regan Mantle

Sounds frightening, doesn't it? One of my readers sent me this column from Nancy Scola. Click here to read.

I have gone back and forth on my feelings for President Reagan. I didn't like him when he was in office. I appreciated him a little more later on in life. Now....I don't know...maybe his D looks so much better than President Bush's F right now.

I think perhaps my grandfather, at 91 years young, put it best. Bear in mind, he did vote for Reagan twice.

"What do I think of President Reagan?" Poppo asked in response to my question regarding our 40th president.

"Well, he was a good actor."

Amen, Pop, amen

So True

This one is hilarious. It really puts "terror" into perspective.

Fresh Celery

Ah, fall.....that crispness in the air....the leaves about to turn....there really is no other season like it. It happens to be my favorite. Baseball playoffs, football season, and a strong sense of a new beginning.

Perhaps this feeling of a new start has to do with the fact that this is the time of year when school is back in session. Minnesotans greeted the 2007-2008 school year with a full page spread in the Minneapolis Star and Tribune detailing how a full third of our schools are in jeopardy. That's right, folks. We here in the great North Woods are is deep trouble. No Child Left Behind trouble.

For those of you who don't know, No Child Left Behind (NCLB) is the education program of our current president, George Bush, which he signed into law shortly after he took office in 2001. Before I give my own take on it, however, I feel that we really need to understand what No Child means and how it works. Since I don't want to bore you with a lot of "edu-speak," I thought that a sports analogy would facilitate a deeper understanding of what is expected of our students under the NCLB laws.

Imagine that American students are on football team......(cue blurry, dreamy lap dissolve and "doodle oodle oo" music)

1. All teams must make the state playoffs and all must win the championship. If a team does not win the championship, they will be on probation until they are the champions, and coaches will be held accountable. If after two years they have not won the championship, their footballs and equipment will be taken away until they do win the championship.

2. All kids will be expected to have the same football skills at the same time even if they do not have the same conditions or opportunities to practice on their own. NO exceptions will be made for lack of interest in football, a desire to perform athletically, or genetic abilities or disabilities of themselves or their parents. All kids will play football at a proficient level!

3. Talented players will be asked to work out on their own, without instruction. This is necessary because the coaches will be using all their instructional time with the athletes who aren't interested in football, have limited athletic abilities, or whose parents don't like football.

4. Games will be played year round, but statistics will only be kept on the 4th, 8th, and 11th games.It will create a New Age of Sports where every school is expected to have the same level of talent and all teams will reach the same minimum goals. If no child gets ahead, then no child gets left behind. If parents do not like this new law, they are encouraged to vote for vouchers and support private schools that can screen out the non-athletes and prevent their children from having to go to school with bad football players.

No Child Left Behind is quite possibly the worst piece of legislation in the history of this country. It is ignorant, racist, and gives a big "Fuck You!" to people that are poor-something that has been quite common in the last six years.

It is ignorant because it assumes that the only way to measure assessment is to test children. Apparently people like President Bush and Margaret Spellings (our Secretary Of Education) have not picked up a book on learning styles in...oh, I don't know....25 years!

Everyone learns differently. Some learn in a more tactile way. Others learn in groups. Some learn by writing or research. Howard Gardner, a professor at Harvard University, identified, in 1983, eight multiple intelligences or ways people learn. They are: Linguistic intelligence, Logical-mathematical intelligence, Musical intelligence, Bodily-kinesthetic intelligence, Spatial intelligence, Interpersonal intelligence, and Intrapersonal intelligence. Testing would fall under the "Logical-mathematical intelligence" umbrella. As we can see, NCLB ignores the other seven ways people learn and thus is an extremly ignorant way to gauge learning.

It is racist because it does not take into account recent research that suggests that different cultures learn differently. The work of Gardner can be applied here as well. Some people are inherently bad test takers because it is simply not a part of their cultural environment. Or they can't speak English, the only way the test is available incidentally. In the last ten years, we have undergone a massive influx of immigrants from all over the world and they are immediately expected to conform to standardized testing. What if the only way they have been tested in the past is oral exams?

It says "Fuck You" to poor people because of how the questions on the test are worded. It assumes knowledge and understanding where there might not be either . One question on the test included the words "fresh celery." Well, nearly everyone from poorer families and/or from a non white group got that question wrong because they had no idea what fresh celery was. They had never seen it before in their lives! Did people at the Department of Education actually THINK when they drew up these tests? Or did they just do their usual Bushie bullshit and try to ram a square peg into a round hole? LEARN, DAMMIT, THE WAY NORMAL PEOPLE DO!!!!

Actually, I suppose it's prudent to mention that the one good thing that has come out of NCLB is the aggregate data that proves that people learn differently especially if they are from another culture. Ironically, NCLB invalidates itself by illustrating that a large segment of our student population doesn't do well on standardized tests.

As a result of poor test scores, they are punished by the slow removal of Title I money, which is basically what is happening with nearly a third of our schools in Minnesota. My children's school, replete with cultural diversity, is now on "warning" as they have failed to achieve NCLB standards in the 2006-07 school year. Students that failed to achieve the minimum requirements? ESL (English as a Second Language) and learning disabled kids...the ones who don't acquire intelligence through the "Logical-mathematical" arena.

If we really want our children to achieve basic knowledge sets, we need to start applying Gardner's theories on a national level. Everyone should be taught in a way that is most suitable to their comfort of learning. Grading should be based on a balance of testing, group work, hands on learning, classroom participation and oral exams. To simply focus on testing is so narrow minded and downright silly that we are really doing our children a great disservice

Because once the Title I money is taken away, schools usually get reconstituted, meaning class size increases in other schools in the district. This exacerbates the problem further and learning is even more diminished. Of all of the policies of President Bush, this one really is the worst, hands down. Y'know, people always ask me, when I go off about how incompetent Bush is, to give them a specific example of how Bush is destroying the future.

I always start with this one.

Chris Rock about the War on Terror

Joanne Tucker sent me this hilarious video of Chris Rock. Finally, all is explained!

Mr. Ahmadinejad Goes To New York

As I write these words, the President of Iran, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is about to speak at Columbia University in New York. The introduction that is being given before he goes on, by Lee Bollinger, president of Columbia University...well...to say that it is not very welcoming would be the understatement of the year. It makes me wonder why the right is as bunged up as it is over this visit because basically President A just got bitch slapped all over the mother!

The reaction to this whole visit has been hilarious, in sad and pathetic way. I could write a long essay about the substance of President Ahmadinejad's speech, being delivered as I am composing the remainder of this post, but what's the point? We already know what he is going to say. At this point I am more interested in illustrating how little we understand Iran fully exposed by the silly reaction of conservatives in this country.

President Ahmadinejad is not the leader of Iran. The leader of Iran is the Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Supreme Leader. The president of Iran has the power he has because he is granted it by the Ayatollah. The Ayatollah grants him his power as long as he goes out, spews his bile of lies AND gets a reaction from the West. President A currently holds a whopping 20 percent approval rating in his country and is generally loathed by most citizens, largely due to the fact that the economy is in the tank.

By reacting to him the way the conservative fake outrage machine has in the past few days, they have GIVEN, not taken away, power from him. They have demonized him to biblical (pun fully intended) proportions, comparing him to Adolph Hitler (as if!) and launching him onto the world stage and limelight....a stage he is all too willing to occupy for lengthy periods of time. Even more farcical is that fact that it has been President Bush's own policies in Iraq that have led to the hard line factions of Iran further cementing their power in the region, thus making Iran the larger enemy today than it was six years ago when reform seemed to be on the horizon.

Oddly, the outrage has been directed at President A's visit to Columbia but not to his speeches earlier in the day at the National Press Club or the Council on Foreign Relations. I wonder why this is so? (I know the answer...just want to see if y'all do :))

Anyhoo, it has been a truly remarkable day for myself as well as other people in this country that know a thing or two about Iran, to see an already semi-scary guy fully "made" into the enemy that conservatives want him...or actually NEED him to be. Ah, well, just another example of what Army Sargent Ben Busch called a "childish understanding of the region."

America is Not Fighting WWIV

Steve Chapman, columnist in the Chicago Tribune, had a great column in the Sept 16the Edition. Click here if you'd like to read it.

Some quotes with which I agree completely:

"to equate our current challenges with the Nazis and Soviets is to grossly misunderstand our enemies."

"Osama bin Laden must rejoice to be depicted as endangering our entire culture and way of life."

"The vision of a monolithic Islamic movement hostile to everything we value is equally warped. We usually associate the religion with Arab militants, but the world's biggest Muslim populations are in Indonesia, Bangladesh, Pakistan, India and Nigeria, not the Middle East. Some Muslim countries, such as Turkey, Indonesia and Senegal, are free and democratic. The others vary greatly in political openness and personal liberty -- sort of like non-Muslim countries."

"Radical Islamic elements pose a danger to our security that will demand vigilance, resources, and in some instances, military action. But let's not make it more than it is."

Yes, let's not make it more than it is because to do so would be costly mistake that will, in fact, make things worse.

Blinding Me With Science! SCIENCE!!!

You know what? When I was in school, I should've had more respect for science. All those years ago, I would thumb my nose at science and math geeks with their fancy schmancy numbers and dorkwad experiments. Little did I know at the time that it would be science that would save the day and answer the question that has confounded me from the very first day I started this blog. In fact, as if by some heavenly intervention, my question from last week regarding the giant chasm between conservatives and liberals has, at last been answered.

Why DO conservatives think the way the do? Why do liberals think the way they think? Well, now I know. Sadly, I also know that my quest to build bridges may be in vain. I have to say, folks, that it's over. It's all over......

Conservatives think the way they do because their brains are different. It's just that simple.

According to a new study from scientists at New York University and UCLA, published in the journal Nature Neuroscience, liberals were 4.9 times as likely as conservatives to show activity in the brain circuits that deal with conflicts, and 2.2 times as likely to score in the top half of the distribution for accuracy.

The jounral reports that participants were college students whose politics ranged from "very liberal" to "very conservative." They were instructed to tap a keyboard when an M appeared on a computer monitor and to refrain from tapping when they saw a W.M appeared four times more frequently than W, conditioning participants to press a key in knee-jerk fashion whenever they saw a letter. Each participant was wired to an electroencephalograph that recorded activity in the anterior cingulate cortex, the part of the brain that detects conflicts between a habitual tendency (pressing a key) and a more appropriate response (not pressing the key).

Liberals had more brain activity and made fewer mistakes than conservatives when they saw a W, researchers said. Liberals and conservatives were equally accurate in recognizing M. Researchers got the same results when they repeated the experiment in reverse, asking another set of participants to tap when a W appeared.

Now, does all this mean that conservatives have smaller brains? Not enough synaptic connections? Are liberals actually smarter than conservatives?

No. What it shows that is that conservatives brains are wired to be more resistant to new ideas or change. Liberals, on the other hand, are more open to new ideas and the parts of their brain that deal with conflict are more active. This is not necessarily a good thing for liberals as they could be more open to (dunh dum dah!!) conservative ideas. Speaking for myself, I wish that I had the same synaptic connections that conservatives do so I could filter out bullshit as well. :)

This explains sooooo much, doesn't it? I mean, look at President Bush. I have always wanted to know why he is so stubborn and now I do. His brain is made that way. He can't process information that doesn't conform with his existing brain patterns. His mind is set...quite literally.

Think of all the debates we have had here over the years that have ended in frustration. Well, there is no need to be frustrated anymore. We have the proof! We have the evidence! I don't know about all of you but I take a great amount of comfort now in knowing that there is absolutely nothing I can do. It's impossible to physically change someone's brain.

Well, unless your last name is....Frankenstein. (Cue chilling organ music), (maniacal laughter)...Hah Hah Hah Ah Ha Ha Ha Ha!!!!!!

Colonel Wilkerson Offers Wonderful Pearls of Wisdom

"My view all along has been that this is a War of Ideas. And not a war of bombs, bullets, and bayonets. And therefore to lead with a military instrument-and I'm 31 years into that instrument-is the wrong way to go. We should be leading first and foremost with our ideas which I think are much more powerful and better than bin Laden or Ayman el Zawahari's ideas. And we should be leading with other instruments of power such as our economics, our financial might, our law enforcement, our intelligence capabilities, and so forth. The military should be the last instrument we're using.

As we use that instrument, we do, in fact, give bin Laden a recruitment mechanism."

Larry Wilkerson, Colonel, US Army (Retired)

Dave and Kevin, I would appreciate your thoughts on this as it responds directly and eloquently to what you wrote in comments.

A Profound Divide

It is has been roughly six years since I started this online community of ours and we have, once again, come around to that time of year again that calls for reflection, pause and taking stock in the tapestry that is Notes From The Front. I am speaking of course, of September 11th. Rather than go into to my usual anti-Bush Co tirade, I thought I would turn the magnifying glass on ourselves as a citizens and ask the question:

How did WE end up so far off track? I mean, I already know why Bush Co is so far off track and how they have been able to do it but what about us? You and I?

Six years ago our country stood as one. Every American stood together proud and strong, not weak and bickering like we are now. The world, aside from the usual crazies, was markedly pro-American and they had our backs. People loved us and we loved each other. We held each other and cried at the depths of the tragedy on September 11th and we gave each other support. We had a moment where Carpe Diem should have been our battle cry. Instead, we pissed it all away. Today, we are right back to where we were on September 10th-a collection of assholes..lazy, fat, selfish, ignorant, afraid, partisan, psychotic and narrow minded. At times, I have to admit, I include myself in some of these categories and it is for this reason that, over the course of this year, I have done some serious self actualization.

I have spent some time making a concerted effort to figure out how people of the conservative mindset truly think and feel. I had the hope (and still do) that I could maybe build a bridge or two...even mend some fences. Possibly figure a way out of this mess? I also wanted to take the advice of some conservative posters, who write here on a regular basis, and go to a blog where I am in the minority, as they are here....just to see how it feels.

It just so happened that when I wrote a column about the Jim Zumbo deal a while back (click here if you want to re-read it), a blogger by the name of Kevin Baker came to the defense of the gun lobby. He posted some comments here that made me think and, I must admit, altered my view. I came to the realization that, while I will never get off on guns, they are, in fact, a personal liberty just as anything else is in this country and if I am going to be against things like the Patriot Act, then I have to be against gun control. Besides, it's not guns that are the problem anyway. It's Americans that are the problem. And Americans like Kevin, and the others that post on his site, are very responsible gun owners.

He wrote on here:

I'm going to disagree with you on a lot of things. This is good, because you learn much more arguing your case with someone who disagrees with you than you do preaching to the choir.

I agree completely. You know that I love all of you but the most interesting discussions are when PL, Crab, Dave, Sarge, the rev, and joe Anonymous get in the mix. I believe with all of my heart and soul that raising the level of debate in this country gets people to think. That's why I think it IS polite to talk about politics. Preaching to the choir is a fucking bore and I would have shut down this site long ago if we didn't have the wonderful ragers we have had here.

So, it was with that spirit I began posting on his blog...the only other blog I post on regularly other than this one. I really felt like if we could come together on the gun thing maybe there could be other things on which we could find common ground. I was buoyed by Kevin's (and others that post there) intelligence, unbiased interpretation of facts and law in regards to the gun issue so I really felt there might be some hope.

But each time the issues of September 11th come up...well...to say I get frustrated would be the understatement of the year. There is, as Kevin himself recently called it, "a profound divide" between the left and the right in this country when it comes to 9-11, Iraq, Islam, terror...the whole deal.

To be honest, it makes me fucking weep.

To truly illustrate what I am talking about, go and read Kevin's post from Sunday, September 02, 2007 entitled Yeah, Hollywood Has Our Back. Click on the comments section and read the ensuing discussion. (Sometimes a click on Refresh is required to get Comments to show up)

A profound divide? It's more like a deep chasm. I am really trying hard to find some merit in what they have said here--and I realize there is some slight variety--but good Lord, their hatred of the left has completely clouded their judgement to the point of insane irrationality. It is THEIR way or....we are all on the side of terrorists. And do you know what the worst part about it is?

They are wasting their time on a phantom enemy (the evil liberals) when the real bad guys are still out there. Let's take an abbreviated look at some of the more salient comments made about yours truly..

...add Markadelphia to the list which includes Rall and DePalma. And I'm quite serious about that. The apologist for a terrorist is but a terrorist. and the apologist's apologist is but a REMF-ing terrorist. Markadelphia is as the mud which clings to a soldier's boots, dangerously slowing him in combat. (Jim from Texas)

...you're guaranteed to become someone else's tool. Tool, Markadelphia, You oughta think about that. (geekwithA.45)

Now here is an apt punishment for DePalma and his ilk. Click here (Yosemite Sam)

Mark, et al...actively propagandizing on behalf of your country's enemies is most certainly treasonous. DePalma has made it absolutely clear that that is exactly what he is doing. (Stephen Rider)

The elites in this country will finally go too far and they will then be removed from power by military force. It will happen quickly and will be overwhelmingly supported by the public at large.(Yosemite Sam)

So, I am a terrorist who is being manipulated by the evil left wing cabal? I should be tarred and feathered as a traitor, giving aid and comfort to the enemy? Others who think like me will soon perish as well? Remember the conversation I had with the nephew of a friend of mine who had just gotten back from Iraq? Remember he felt that it was his mission to kill Democrats as they are responsible for all the wrongs in this country? Several of you told me his was an isolated view.

All of you were wrong. I offer as proof the people listed above.

Now, I didn't respond to these people at the time because apparently I made Kevin so angry with what I wrote that he wanted me to take a break for awhile. I have since come back and am happily posting there again but, after a week's reflection, I realized that how I'd like to respond is virtually the same as what I wanted to talk about on this year's anniversary of Notes From The Front. The answer to the question "how did we end up so far off track?" is quite evident when you consider this:










This is the picture (above top) that was put up, in Kevin's comments section, of a man being tarred and feathered in a public square as an example of what should happen to liberals in this country They all laughed about it. Take a look at the picture directly below it.

Who are the bad guys again?

Well, apparently it's me, Brian DePalma, and the rest of the elitist liberals in this country that even slightly question this administration. It's the media who, anytime they are critical of anything conservative, are giving aid and comfort to the enemy. But it's never EVER anything that THEY are doing. THEY are always right or RIGHT.

The level of denial these people are at is stunning. And I submit it is THE main reason why we are so far off track. In a nutshell, this is why we are losing.

And by losing, I mean everything. We are so blinded by ideology that we can't see that our country is quite literally being destroyed. It's not because we don't support the troops, or are making films about GIs raping Iraqi girls. It's because a group of ideological lunatics have taken over our country and have quite effectively preyed upon the emotional psyches of at least 30 million people in this country.

Most of you who post here know me well. Two of you that post here went to Iraq and came back. In that time, did you every feel like I was "mud which clings to a soldier's boots?" The very idea that I, and the millions of others that think like me, are traitors because we don't subscribe to a psychotic and fervently false ideology is completely and utterly offensive.

This ideology is terribly deluded by rage. These folks are so far gone that they can't see that they are becoming their enemy. They are advocating a state that hides the truth. They want a population that receives an education whose sole focus is to portray the United States as the eternal saviour of the free world. They want the radio we listen to, the TV we watch, and the films we go and see to be "approved" by the "Patriot Police" before it is distributed. They will actively seek out and re-frame any thought or expression that does not fall line with their ideology and label it as traitorous. They foment anger by erroneously accusing liberals of doing exactly the same things that they, in fact, do.

What do you call a state like that?

They can't see this and continue to accuse people like me of being a traitor. A traitor because I don't fall in line and salute what I know to be a completely fabricated answer to a sham of a question, "Why do they hate us so much that they attacked us on September 11th?" They didn't attack us because we "love freedom" and they didn't attack us because they want to take over the world. Would everyone here like to know why they attacked us? Go read this:

Why.

These are bin Laden's words and they seem quite clear to me. We have been fucking around in their land for too long and they got sick of it. So they hit us. It ain't rocket science folks. It's pretty plain to me. You dick around in someone else's Holy Land and, being the psychotics that they are, they are going to fight back.

Ask yourselves this question, wouldn't we do the same if, say, the Islamic Army came into Pittsburgh and started running the steel industry?

Many conservatives are quite fond of telling me to listen to our enemy. Well, I am listening and it's never been more clear to me that in order to defeat these guys, we need to change. I wonder if Kevin, geek, Jim, Yosemite, Stephen et al are listening? Read the link above again and accept the fact that our foreign and economic policies have helped to create these monsters. Take some fucking responsibility for your country's actions for crying out loud instead of thumping your chest and crying "Hulk is always right, traitorous liberals weaken Hulk." Please stop creating an enemy that doesn't exist in this country -an enemy that you have created out of your anger, insecurity, ignorance, and fear.

People fear what they do no understand. And in today's culture, people only want to take the time to understand what's easy and comfortable for them. They don't want to do the hard work i.e. the change that is necessary to eliminate terror as a tactic. They would rather just accuse people like me of being appeasers, continuing to live in their deluded bliss that all "liberals" think the same way. Do all conservatives think the same way? They are so horribly mistaken that it is sad really and quite depressing.

Imagine what would happen if the folks that posted on Kevin's blog lead with their intellect to learn more about the Muslim world and used their words to expose the psychosis that is Islamic extremism. Imagine if like minded conservatives "swift boated" bin Laden and his ilk rather than remaining trapped in tired ideological rhetoric, continually ripping every "liberal" or "progressive" that comes along-damning them to hell for giving aid and comfort to the enemy.

Until we can figure out a way to break through this ideological barrier, we are doomed. Doomed to repeat the same mistakes that empire after empire has made throughout time when the only conviction they had was their own vanity in believing that they were always right. God, we are soooo there right now. Now the question becomes how do we get back on track? I've got some ideas but honestly, folks, I don't know if I have any real answers.

Do you?

Smiles All Around

Last week, I was extremely heartened to see this article:

The Des Moines Register.

The judge has since stayed his order, thus prohibiting masses of gay people from around the country to get married in Iowa. But this couple, picture courtesy of CBS News, made it and got married.

I think the judge made a smart move though, because, hey, this is Iowa after all! I'm sure the cry of "activitist judges" will be heard long and loud for the next few weeks but to me it comes down to the letter of the law in the state. You can't discriminate against someone based on their race, sex, or creed. Gay people don't have the same rights as straight people. Period. There is no way around this fact.

All I know is that it if it can happened in Iowa, for cripes sake, it can happen anywhere. I guess it's time for me to stop with the Iowa jokes as they are one step ahead Minnesota on this one.

Well, Maybe Not....

Maybe Larry Craig is not going to resign after all. Arlen Specter, senior Republican Senator form Pensylvania, has offered support for Craig. A spokesman for Larry Craig said that they are trying to get the guilty plea reversed.

Based on the audio tape released last week, it's possible that might happen. I think there is a lesson from all of this.....what it is I'm not quite sure yet :)

Just Be Gay

I feel sorry for Larry Craig. I have watched the last week of his life and, quite frankly, feel an intense amount of pity for him.

For those of you who don't know, Senator Larry Craig, Republican senior senator from Idaho, resigned on Saturday because he was caught last June soliciting sex from a male police officer in the men's room at the Minneapolis St. Paul airport. He plead guilty and now is trying to retract (?) it since it become public early last week. Apparently, Senator Craig made several "hand gestures" and "foot taps" in between two stalls in the bathroom-a sign, I guess, that he wanted to have sex.

Rather than feel anger at his hypocrisy, I felt sadness, actually, that is come to this in our culture. Many blame Senator Craig for this illicit behavior but I say that it is a product of our society. A society, that rather than embrace the differences that we all have in regards to sexuality, we force it into hiding-putting layer upon layer of guilt onto generally decent people until they behave in an irresponsible fashion. Why can't he just be gay?

Side Rant- (And why can't we find a new word for gay so when I call someone gay it is
completely NOT derogatory towards homosexuals and is, in fact, a cool term to use to signify that someone is LAME! Let's all try to remember that the original definition of gay was happy and the British definition of fag is a cigarette. Words can mean different things. Can we take the word gay back? Please!!? I could understand if the original definition was homosexual and people were pissed but it wasn't. How about from now on we just call gay guys "dudes" Dudes are cool. )

Anyway, had Larry Craig lived in a culture that was not warped by an outdated, narrow minded, and bigoted belief system-a system that has so perverted the original intent of Jesus Christ-he would've been able to enjoy his feelings with a fellow consenting adult in a more open fashion. He could've been a dude without the bias dudes get in our society. Instead, his mind was at war with what he naturally felt, pummelled incessantly by the rigid structure of what he perceived was the "right" or "moral" way to live.

I mean, what kind of a point do you have to get to....fucking or blowing a dude when, more than likely, less then a foot away someone is taking a smelly, disgusting shit? There are few times when I would NOT desire a woman's ass working on my cock in the from behind position....this would be one of those times!

And, just to play devil's advocate, don't the police at the Minneapolis Airport have better people to monitor than bathroom stall gay sex crowd? Like, um, I don't know....maybe take a look at this picture to the left and GET THEIR FUCKING PRIORITIES STRAIGHT!!!!!



Good grief....

Of course, what's good for the goose isn't necessarily good for the gander. Senator David Vitter (R-LA) was recently outed as being one of the biggest clients of the DC Madam. He broke the law by soliciting a prostitute, which, the last time I checked was a worse offense than what Larry Craig plead guilty to doing. Was David Vitter forced to resign in disgrace? No, because he isn't a disgusting fucking homo! Not only was he not forced to resign but he was given encouragement by the national Republicans and told to go to marriage counseling. What lovely hyperbole!

Beneath the hypocrisy, however, lies an even bigger reason why Craig was booted and Vitter was told to stay. Idaho, the state that Craig represents, has a Republican governor who will more than likely appoint a Republican choice to replace him, thus keeping the tally in the Senate at 51-49, Dems over Repubs. Vitter, however, is in a state with a Democratic governor who definitely would appoint a Democratic replacement, tipping the balance even further in the Dems favor. So, it's bye bye Larry Craig and hello to someone who hopefully can hold their ground in an already bleak 2008 election for the Republicans.

So, the mantra I have been hearing all week that Republicans "quickly take care of those in their party who break the law as opposed to the Democrats" is completely bullshit. Yeah, they take care of them quickly when they don't meet their unrealistic expectations of what they erroneously believe constitutes morality AND when it is politically convenient for them. Sorry, Larry, but I guess we are going to continue to fuck you up even more.

The Republican Party need to have some very serious introspection and return to the values that started us out. And that is individual liberties and a live and let live policy when it comes to people's private lives.

-Michelle Laxalt, Republican strategist, Larry King Live August 28th, 2007

Can't we just let dudes by dudes?

-Markadelphia, Dean of Minneapolis and co-founder of the Association to Replace the Word "Gay" with the word "Dude," thus enabling myself and others to refer to homosexual men as something mega cool and totally awesome like dude as opposed to the word "gay" which is....well...fucking GAY, dude.

.....punctuated by Insanity

You can always rely on Dick to take it that one extra step for "national security." Last June, his office refused to hand over confidential documents to the Information Security Oversight Office, or the ISOO. The ISOO is is responsible to the President of the United States for policy and oversight of the Government-wide security classification system and the National Industrial Security Program. The ISOO is a component of the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) and receives policy and program guidance from the National Security Council (NSC).

It's chief goals are:

1. Promote and enhances the system that protects the national security information that safeguards the American Government and its people.

2. Provide for an informed America public by ensuring that the minimum information necessary to the interest of national security is classified and that information is declassified as soon as it no longer requires protection.

3. Promotes and enhances concepts that facilitate the sharing of information in the fulfillment of mission-critical functions related to national security.

4. Provides expert advice and guidance pertinent to the principles of information security.

In June of 2007, Dick decided that he didn't have to hand over documents to the ISOO any longer. The head of the ISOO, Bill Leonard, told Rep. Henry Waxman that Cheney had asserted that his office was not part of the executive branch (!!!???) and was not required to follow certain rules, set forth in presidential orders, regarding the disclosure of classified documents or submit to routine required inspections. In a letter to Cheney, Rep. Waxman asserted that Leonard had inquired after the documents twice, after which Cheney attempted to get rid of the ISOO altogether.

Former Cheney aide Ron Christie said that the legal rationale employed by the Office of the Vice President is that it is not "an entity within the Executive Branch, " due to the fact that the Vice President also serves as the President of the Senate. At the same time, Cheney has used his "executive privilege" to deny congressional information requests. In late June–July of 2007, a number of mainstream media outlets such as TIME Magazine and CBS News began focusing on whether Cheney had created a "fourth branch of government" that was subject to no laws.

Well, isn't that great? Dick seems to think that laws don't apply to him. I wonder why that it is? And why is it that when it comes to the office of the VP turning over documents relating to the NSA wiretapping program that we see stuff like this?

The Vice President isn't in the Executive Branch.....please......what's next? Maybe he'll shoot someone and get away with it...

Establishing Character.....`

I think when you take a look at a man's life you need to look at his past convictions. What drives this man, pictured at left in this sexy shot from 1989 during his tenure as Secretary of Defense, and what makes him tick?

Well, I think this quote sums it up. When asked in an interview in the April 5, 1989 issue of the Washington Post about his FIVE deferments he received in the 1960s during the Vietnam Era, he replied,

"I had other priorities in the '60s than military service."

Hmm. So basically Dick talks a good game about the necessity of military action but doesn't really want to place himself in harm's way. My buddy Matt, just back from Iraq this month, has a word for that. It's a word that folks in the military use quite a bit.

Chickenhawk.

Click here for a further explanation.

The Week of Dick

This week, I thought I would spotlight our Vice President. Each day I am going to put up a short post and/or video which will illustrate the glory, the power and the passion of Dick.It is my hope that kicking off the week with this video from 1994 will really get the ball rolling in the right direction.

I want to go on record and say that I am in complete agreement with everything Dick says in this clip. Not a hoax. Not a joke. Bobby Ewing will not be coming out of the shower and it’s all a dream.

This video is real and I stand with my Vice President shoulder to shoulder.

Another NIE

Here is another National Intelligence Estimate which paints a bleak picture of the current situation in Iraq. Skip to pages 7-10 for the specific report

National Intelligence Estimate Report of August 23, 2007

And, purely for its comic value, here is the Daily Standard's (i.e. the Bushie's view) of the same report and situation in Iraq.

Daily Standard Joke of the Week

What color is the sky in their world? More importantly, how many more of our armed forces have to die because an ever shrinking group of single minded incompetents can't admit when they are wrong?

Still Waiting

I am still waiting for someone in the Minnesota State Government to accept repsonsibility for the 35W bridge collapse. Carol Mornau still has her job and everyone up there is saying that they had no way of knowing what would happen.

Hmm....this all sounds familiar somehow.

Oh, and it's all the fault of the stinkin' liberals who wanted light rail.

Hmm....this all sounds familiar somehow.

Happiness Is A Warm National Intelligence Assessment

Ah, summer. Take a stroll down Main Street USA and soak in the sights. Children playing baseball, convertible cars cruising down the highways, and, of course, bikini clad women with the honey in their hips swaying me into perfect bliss.

What's that I smell, though, on the grill? Could it be hamburgers? No. Could it be hot dogs? No. Is it corn on the cob? No, it is not. It is the sweet smell of vindication in the glorious form of our recent National Intelligence Assessment. The assessment, culled from the various intelligence agencies in our government (CIA, Homeland, DOD, FBI etc) basically states what I have been saying for the past five years: The Bush Administration's policies have failed to stop Al Qaeda. In particular, the administration's policy in Pakistan, a country long written about on this blog, has been so poor that Al Qaeda leadership has basically re-established itself with bases and operations, located in the largely autonomous and Federally Administrated Tribal Area (FATA) of Pakistan, fully capable of carrying out attacks on American soil. The report goes on to say that the United States is actually losing ground to extremism. In fact, "Al Qaeda has used the Iraq conflict to energize the broader Sunni extremist Community, raise resources, and to recruit and indoctrinate operatives, including for Homeland attacks."

Well, well well. That certainly puts a damper on things, doesn't it? People in President Bush's very own Executive Branch saying he has done a poor job? Ineffective? Al Qaeda is back? Wonderful...

And there are still some of you that think that our president is doing his best to protect us? That the war in Iraq is actually helping us? Good God....what in the hell is the matter with you people? Seriously, I want to have some of what you are smoking so I can be so mind numbingly retarded that life is that simple blur of an outmoded and narrow minded belief system. Remember all that talk a while back from President....."If you are a country that harbors terrorists, then you will be considered terrorists?"

Hmm..let's see here...Pakistan harbors terrorists...Saudi Arabia (15 9-11 hijackers from there) harbors terrorists....UAE (2 hijackers from there) harbors terrorists and oh, is also the new home of Haliburton...Egypt produced Mohammed Atta...Lebanon (1 hijacker from there) harbors terrorists. All are allies...all had Al Qaeda in their respective countries on 9-11-2001 and what did we do? We:

a. Did a half ass job in Afghanistan so we could

b. Do a worse ass job in Iraq, a country that had less Al Qaeda in it than Florida did in 2001.

But the best part, dear readers is this.

Fox News Story

Lovely! Let's give arms to all of these countries and give Pakistan 2 billion dollars a year (!) to "handle" the problem. More mind boggling than this is the 200 million dollars or so we have given tribal leaders in Waziristan in the hopes of winning them over. Hee hee. Sorry, I just have to stop here for a minute and laugh for a second. Bwah Ha Ha Ha !!! HEE HEE!! HOO HOOO! HO HO HO! Our government is giving money to people that are harboring the man behind the 9-11 attacks in the hopes that we win their hearts and minds? How mind-numbingly naive can our leaders be?

Apparently, their buffoonery knows no bounds because guess what else happened? The Defense Department has "lost" 194,000 AK-47 assault rifles in Iraq which now, according to Defense Secretary Robert Gates are in the hands of the people trying to KILL US!!! And they are trying to tell us that things are getting better over there.....good Lord.

Folks, help me out here, please. Is it possible to fire President Bush and Vice President Cheney for dereliction of duty? They have completely and utterly failed to protect us. They have made a bad situation worse and sadly, the only thing that is going to convince the 30 odd percent of you out there of this is another attack on our soil courtesy of the single minded baboons we have leading us.

Coming soon to a theater near you!!

My sources for this article (and for your further reading) were:

The Department of National Intelligence

The New York Times

The Christian Science Monitor

From The Godfather

An intrepid reader pointed me to this little tidbit on Ralph Kauzlarich, one of the officers involved in the Tillman cover up.

Lieutenant Colonel Ralph Kauzlarich is the commander of a U.S. Army battalion called the 2-16 -- the 2nd Battalion, 16th Infantry Regiment of the 4th Infantry Brigade Combat Team, 1st Infantry Division. He was the Army officer who directed the first official cover-up of the circumstances that led to the death of Pat Tillman.

Kauzlarich was the commanding officer who chose to split Tillman's unit in two, resulting in the fratricide. He was later the officer assigned to investigate Tillman's death. Later, when asked about Tillman's death in an interview, Kauzlarich said the reason Tillman's family was having a hard time dealing his death was that they were not Christians, and later referred to Tillman as "worm dirt."

Rep. Henry Waxman, D-Calif., suggested in an oversight hearing to military officials on April 25, 2007, that Colonel Kauzlarich's remarks should be punished as conduct unbecoming of an officer. The military has yet to take disciplinary action against Kauzlarich.

References:
Finkel, David (2007-02-25). Washington Post-“Eleven days till Baghdad”
Fish, Mike. An Un-American Tragedy. ESPN.com. Retrieved on 2007-02-25.

The same reader also sent me a link to a very detailed report on Pat Tillman's death. Here it is.

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/eticket/story?page=tillmanpart1

They Don't Want Heroes

I spend a fair amount of time posting on fellow blogger Kevin's site, The Smallest Minority. Kevin raison d'etre mainly is gun rights but he does post on a wide variety of subjects. Naturally, when the subject of Iraq or terrorism comes up, I chime in.

He recently put up a post titled "It's Good To Know Our Hollywood's Back." He had just gone to see The Bourne Ultimatum and was outraged at the political bent of some of the films that were previewed befoe the film. Essentially, to him, Hollywood is filled with "America Haters" bent on destroying our country through their traitorous stories. Any film that depicts America in a negative light is another example of "civil suicide." In his piece, Kevin lamented the good ol' days of the films Sands of Iwo Jima and Strategic Air Command when men were men, loved their country, and never, ever questioned authority.

Aside from the usual frustrations I have with this line of thought, something in his words resonated with me. I wrote some of my usual responses to the "America Hater" rhetoric, trying vainly to grasp whatever it was that was nagging at me...gnawing at me like a festering wound. And then two words floated into my mind...

Pat Tillman.

Pat Tillman was Sgt. John M. Stryker and Lt. Col. Robert 'Dutch' Holland all rolled into one. He walked away from millions of dollars in the NFL to join the armed forces and defend his country after the 9-11 attacks. Thing is though...ahem....small problem....Pat was a "liberal" who didn't go to church, read Noam Chomsky, and had hippie degenerates for parents. His entire life was spent on a journey or a quest, if you will, to become a man of knowledge (see Carlos Castenada). He would not be confined to the stifling, narrow mindedness of bigoted religions and political intolerance. He was a free thinker.

But he still went to fight because he believed, as did I and most Americans, in the war in Afghanistan. He believed our country was wrongfully attacked and that Al Qaeda was very dangerous to our safety as a nation. As time went on in Afghanistan, he began to notice that things weren't quite right. Why can't we finish the job here, he wondered? Why is our attention on Iraq? Why is Pakistan, our supposed ally, allowing bin Laden and Co. to flourish there?

Pat began to voice his concerns to his fellow troops. Even his commanding officer. He was quoted several times as saying that Iraq was a "fucking illegal war" and a distraction from the fight against the people who actually attacked us. He was, in the mind of some conservatives, an America Hater. As a result, on April 22, 2004, he was fragged.

In case you don't remember, I wrote about Pat last April on this blog. I speculated on the unanswered questions surrounding his death on the fateful day in April of 2004. First they said it was enemy fire, then friendly fire and now? Here is what has come out in the last two weeks.

1. On July 27 of this year, documents were released from the Army that plainly state that the doctors that performed the autopsy suspected that Tillman was deliberately murdered. These doctors told the investigators that Pat's wounds suggested murder and urged them to launch a criminal investigation. Supposedly, the Pentagon did launch an investigation but "quickly" found nothing.

2. It has been revealed that there were never-before-mentioned US snipers in the second group that encountered Pat's squad.

3. There has never been evidence of enemy fire found on the scene, and no members of Tillman's group had been hit by enemy fire.

4. The three-star general responsible for withholding details of Tillman's death from his parents for a number of months, told investigators "he had a bad memory, and couldn't recall details of his actions" on more than 70 occasions.

5. Army attorneys congratulated each other in emails for impeding criminal investigation as they concluded Tillman's death was the result of friendly fire, and that only administrative, or non-criminal, punishment was indicated.

Bottom line, on April 22, 2004 he was deliberately murdered by his fellow troops for being a "traitor." The commanders in charge of these men knew it was coming and let it happen. Or they simply turned a blind eye to what they knew happened because they didn't care. To put it simply, these men are actively engaged in furthering a warped sense of patriotism wrapped in a sea of lies. Pat was killed because, like any hero, he questioned the world in which he lived.

Our current leaders aren't interested in people like Pat Tillman defending our country anymore. They don't want heroes. They are interested in brainless golems or snivelling sycophants who say "Yes" no matter how damaging the results could be to our country. As I told Kevin in the comments section of that post, Sgt Stryker and Dutch Holland have gone the way of the dodo, to be sure, but it wasn't Hollywood that killed them. It was us.

We have allowed the people that are currently running our executive branch to tell the story, to frame the picture, and guide our feelings. It's easier that way. We have too much going on in our lives, right? Jobs, the cabin, and laying on our ass all day accomplishing nothing takes up a lot of time. Isn't it easier not to think, just download, and do as we're told.?

Sorry, Pat, but America isn't about heroes anymore.

The Golf Guy

My favorite scene in Sicko is the one with Larry, the golf guy. Larry is a Canadian and an avid golfer who took a trip to the US that ended up costing him thousands of dollars in health bills because he hurt his arm.

The two of them are sitting on a golf cart talking about the differences between US Health Care and Canadian Health Care. The conversation went something like this.

Moore: So, how do you feel about your tax dollars going to help other people--with their health care?
Larry: Well, everyone needs help from time to time. That's kinda what our country is all about.
Moore: Wow. You sould pretty liberal there. I don't know how your attitude would fly in the US.
Larry: Well, actually, I'm conservative--and, y'know, people get sick. Who's going to help them? I don't mind. That's what being conservative is all about, right?

.........

They Pity Us

Here is a scene from the film Sicko that we have been talking about all week. Pay attention to the couple that have just had the baby and how they chuckle about America.

I think the most telling part of this film is how people from other countries and Americans living in other countries bascially feel sorry for us that we have to pay so much for health care.

We see Americans living in Paris lamenting their insured relatives who get mammoth bills from their HMOs. We see citizens shaking their head in fear at our health care system--strangely in the same way we do when the subject of socializd medecine comes up.

It's a hard thing to swallow: We're aren't number one anymore.