Around the Intertubes Again

Because there's a lot out there.

• The WaPo writes about Iran ascending. Ah yes, the problem of unintended consequences. I am reminded of that which constantly keeps me humble when shooting pool: You can strategize the most brilliant run in the history of mankind but you've still got to make the first shot. If you miss it, not only is your brilliant strategy worthless... you may have just handed someone else the game.

• Big Pharma and the battle of the lobbyists. Although the fact that we've allowed lobbyists and special interests to dictate public policy makes me sick, this is an interesting dilemma. The science that gives us the cervical cancer vaccine is amazing and I'm grateful for it but to make the vaccine mandatory by government decree seems like an overreach. On the other hand, there really are people out there who so abhor the idea of human sexuality existing outside of the teeny tiny box they've allocated for it that they want death to be a punishment for "immorality". It's insane. If I had to choose between governmental overreach and letting the morality clowns win, I know which way I'd go.

• As an outspoken critic of the Emperor-in-Chief, I wonder if I'm in the database. I know, I know... we all want to think we're special.

• What a coincidence, Michelle Malkin disgusts me too! I know it's mean to keep picking on the blogosphere's short bus riders, but damn -- she really knows how to pin that bullseye on her ass.

• Fighting them over there... here... there... whatever. Anyway, while I'm grateful for the work that thwarted this terror attempt, I hope the sheeple are starting to reconcile the inanity of Bush's version of the War on Terra. Terrorism is a method, not an enemy, and war isn't going to stop it. And just when you think you know who to bomb, think again.

• Yes, yes, yes, yes, a thousand times yes. Brilliantly played - this is how you handle Fox News. Why is it so hard for other Dems to figure this out? I swear to GAWD I want to marry this man and have, like, a million of his babies (don't tell my husband).

• Oh.My.God. This Youtube wedding day drama is hysterical... and so is the bride.
  

• A Daily Kos diarist attends the National Review Institute's 2007 Conservative Summit as a mole and reports back to us. It's everything I hoped it would be. Part 2 is here. I'll update with part 3 when it's done.
  

Around the Intertubes

• Funny faux Obama on Youtube (h/t Daily Kos).

• BarbinMD tries to cut through the spin regarding the battle in Najaf. Juan Cole provides a lot of info and his two cents.
  

• Why don't more people get freaked out by stuff like this? Is it just me or does it seem like the people who constantly scream about 'big government' are the ones who are most actively trying to pervert it?
  

• Don't bother yourselves to read about this one, girls. If it's important, your husband will let you know. Just go back to your People magazine and let the men folk figure it out.

• Obama has a plan. Pretty dang ballsy of him to put it out this early. I'm diggin' it.
  

• Meanwhile, Glenn Greenwald explores Congress' war powers. And Russ Feingold is setting the stage for congressional intervention? It's almost like the Dems have a strategy!

• I look forward to expressing my religious freedom... like soon, maaaaaaaaan.

• What the hell is the matter with these people? First they jailed the rape victim, then a member of the local Talibaptist chapter refused to let her take the second dose of her prescribed plan B contraceptive. What next, stone her for adultery?
  

Malkinized

Michelle Malkin, frequent Fox News contributor and cause celeb for conservative wingnuttery, has been on fire lately. Ever the vigilent media critic, she's insisting that an AP news source in Iraq, Jamil Hussein, is a made up person... is an actual person but a lying tool of the liberal media... is possibly exaggerating about the immolation of six Sunni and destruction of four mosques in order to sabotage the U.S. war effort.

Sadly, No! smacks down the perpetually sneering Malkin here. Pretty amusing, if I do say so myself.

Observations

• The embarrassment of realizing, 2 miles down the road, that you've left the bar without paying your tab is surpassed only by the relief you feel when you discover, upon returning, that your cocktail waitress never noticed you left.

• You can be forced by your husband to watch Braveheart 16 times and still manage to cleverly avoid ever seeing William Wallace's evisceration.

• The children's menu at Chili's is WAY BETTER than the children's menu at Applebees (so sayeth Ryan).
  

Thanks Kirsten, Now I'll Be Singing This All Day

The Emo Video.

Iraq's Very Bad Day

There is no military solution to this mess.

I grow weary of Bush's "those who don't support the surge are emboldening our enemies" talking point, as well as the "don't criticize the surge if you don't have a better plan" cop out.

Think about the enormity of that steaming pile of bullshit for a moment. The fact is that our enemies are emboldened because Bush stupidly started a war that we cannot win. Speaking those words isn't emboldening our enemy any more than saying "We're going to win!" is going to make them crawl back under their rocks. They are emboldened by the mere reality of the situation.

I am sorry that it's a bad outcome for us and that a lot of good people have died for it and that we've lost credibility in the world and that we've probably endangered our children's future in ways Bin Laden could only have dreamed of. Perhaps if more people had spoken the truth in 2002-2003, and if more people had listened, we could have spared ourselves the horrible situation we're in now. But not for one minute am I going to accept responsibility for it.

BD

Brad DeLong ruins a perfectly good shirtless Paul Newman moment with his health care despair.

Happy Friday!

Paul Newman (Leo Fuchs, 1963)

Indeed.

Things and Stuff

• What Republican politicos love most about Adam Smith is using him to justify the continuous invisible hand job they've been legislating since Reaganomics turned greed into a virtue. These are people who know full well what eliminating the federal minimum wage would mean for many, many working Americans but they're not going to be happy until they've created a peasant nation over which to rule.
  

• Same with Bush's attempt to uncouple health care from employment by changing the tax rules. Paul Krugman penned a pretty good response column. To get around the NYT subscription wall, here it is via Truthout (he also started the year with this). Matt Stoller makes some excellent points here.
  

• Barack Obama comes out for universal health care. It's a good but obvious start... I'll be interested to hear the details.
  

• Speaking of Obama, he's hitting back at Fox News. FINALLY it occurs to a Dem that taking the high road doesn't pay with these people. If you ignore it, not only doesn't it go away, the smear becomes a conservative Known Fact. I'm sure there are going to be many more smears against Obama, both ignorant and malicious. It's good to see him come out swinging.

• More interesting than Joe Wilson Vs Karl Rove: Scooter Libby Vs Dick Cheney.

• Question: If an administration makes anti-gayness part of its platform, incites homophobia as an election strategy, and calls for a constitutional ban on gay marriage, does the VP have a right to say questions about his publicly gay daughter (who also does work for the administration) are out of bounds? Jon Stewart cracked me up tonight (I paraphrase): "How dare you apply my party's cruel and intolerant policies toward families against my own family!"
  

The Source of My Gray Hairs

Cute little critters, though -- ain't they?

Evening Service

Donnie Davies says, "God hates fags."

If we at Think, Dammit! were inclined to speak for God, we'd say that what He really hates is crappy music (and painfully lame music videos).

State Of The Union Blogging

The WH has provided an advanced copy of their SOTU talking points.

A quick sniff of the blogosphere makes me think that nobody is happy with the new health care proposal Bush intends to deliver (liberals and conservatives alike seem to be resisting the idea that their insurance plans are "gold plated" in a way that merits taxing).

His new theme of bipartisanship should be entertaining to hear. I mean, I'm all for bipartisanship but I think he should be made to squirm for at least a few months after rubbing the collective Dem nose in its minority status for the past 6 years. Call me vindictive.

What I'm really curious about, though, is the Dem response from Webb (D-Va). It'll be interesting to see if he resonates. Sometimes these rebuttals seem so carefully scripted that the delivery falls flat. Webb is one of the party's new wunderkinder so I'm hoping for something slightly more inspired.

UPDATE:
I was working while watching so I have to admit I didn't catch every detail. Bush seemed in better form than he has recently... I do believe he is sincere about winning in Iraq, if not sadly wishful. I detected BS in most of the rest of his chosen SOTU topics. I also thought Jim Webb did well... a very direct, purposeful rebuttal. None of the cheesy blah blah blah we've heard in years past.

What did you think about it?

CNN Report: Obama Is Not A Terrorst

CNN Does some journalisming and discovers that Obama is not a terrorist. Surely Mrs. Obama and the Obama children are quite relieved.

So what are we to make of this madrassa brouhaha. Was it just a few Foxtards enjoying some irresponsibly misleading, ill-informed banter? Was the story part of the vast right wing conspiracy? Or has Hillary created the ultimate vast bi-partisan conspiracy?

Update:
Via Crooks and Liars, the Foxtards blame their despicable lack of journalistic integrity on Insight just before reminding us to tune in for Fox's 2008 coverage. Try to watch it without hurling.

Fighting The Terr'ists Over There... And Over Here

ABC News reports that documents discovered six months ago indicate that al Qaeda in Iraq is trying to slip terrorists into the US to commit acts of terror on American soil. Apparently the terrorists didn't get the memo regarding Bush's "we're fighting them over there so we don't have to fight them over here" strategy.

As far as strategy goes, I always thought it was a bad one anyway. To think that the same cause that inspired 19 men to kill 3,000 innocent Americans (and themselves) is going to remain focused on blowing up mosques in Iraq is just foolish. It took eight years for al Qaeda to regroup after the first WTC bombing. Trust me, they'll be back... in multiples. The 'real' al Qaeda and its wannabe offshoots.

I remember going out for beers with a magnificently educated friend of ours just prior to the 2004 election. Specializing in nuclear medicine, this is a guy who has spent more years in school since high school graduation than in all the years leading up to it. When I asked him how he was leaning, Bush or Kerry, he said he was on the fence but was more inclined to vote for Bush. When I asked him why, he said something to the effect of "his policies must be working because there haven't been any terror attacks on the US since 9/11." He refused to budge from that position despite my impassioned, slurry attempts to remind him that correlation does not imply causation. I think it was a case of wishful thinking, for him and many others.

I made fun of Pat Robertson a while back for gleefully predicting a significant act of terrorism in 2007 but in reality I think it will eventually happen. Not because God is punishing secular progressives for their tolerance of homosexuals (or punishing Christianists for their tolerance of secular progressives), but because there are now too many lunatics running around out there to stop them all.

Da Bears Are Going To Da Superbowl

Gregory Shamus/Getty Images

Bear down, Chicago Bears, make every play clear the way to victory;
Bear down, Chicago Bears, put up a fight with a might so fearlessly.
We'll never forget the way you thrilled the nation with your T-formation.
Bear down, Chicago Bears, and let them know why you're wearing the crown.
You're the pride and joy of Illinois, Chicago Bears, bear down.

Fox News Alert!

Obama rhymes with Osama. Coincidence?

We report, you decide.

Fox News: An Oxymoron

Accent on moron.

Fox and Friends -- normally insipid, often inane -- does more in ten minutes to demonstrate how the Fox Republican Noise Machine works than I could have articulated in a five thousand word essay.

Kos captures the whole disgusting episode fairly well here.

Taking advantage of an audience that doesn't know any better, Fox plants the seeds they're hoping will grow into conventional wisdom (as so many of their smears often do): Obama = muslim = terrorist. "Fear him! He's a scary muslim! Obama is a scary, scary muslim!! And we all know what that means, right? A vote for Obama is a vote for terrorism! We would never say it out loud, of course. We only lay out the insinuations and innuendo. That's how it works... we report, you decide."

Except Obama isn't a muslim. Ooops.

Think, Dammit! prediction: Look for lots more "oops" moments on Fox in the next 23 months.

China

China is not our BFF.

While we've been strutting around the Middle East challenging everyone to a duel, it appears China has taken a page from the Reagan playbook of quietly amassing military technology and striving for big stick superiority.

Some News Coverage Here, Please

• The Ethics Bill is DOA. Disgusting. UPDATE: Not DOA afterall.
  

• And what is the matter with John McCain? Dear Mr McCain, James Dobson and his minions are never going to support a man of reason for president. Please don't betray your principles and start pandering to them... It's demeaning and it's just so icky to watch.

• Finally (I should just link to the entire TPM blog instead of piecemeal references but, dang, they're on a roll!), I hope someone in the media is paying attention to Bush's systematic replacement of US Attorneys. Apparently -- get this -- Republicans managed to get a last minute provision slipped into the Patriot Act to allow US Attorneys to be replaced without Senate oversight. They did this by making a last minute change during "a select Republicans-only meeting after the House and Senate had voted on earlier versions." Think about that for a minute, please. They slipped this into the f*ing Patriot Act. You remember that one, right? It's the if-you-don't-support-it-then-you-hate-America bill. Otherwise know as the the-government-would-NEVER-abuse-its-power bill. Otherwise known as the screw-the-constitution-and-your-civil-liberties-or-we're-all-going-to-die bill. Jesus H Christ, the irony hurts my brain.

Improvements!!!

• BushCo has reversed itself on domestic spying, deciding (conveniently, after the Democrats took control of congress and all of its oversight responsibility) that perhaps FISA could, after all, fit reasonably into our counter-terrorism program. It's a relief to those of us who have always suspected that our civil liberties and our survival are not mutually exclusive concepts.
  

• The infamous no-fly list is being updated! While I think the no-fly list is generally a good idea, I have never understood the guilty-even-when-proven-innocent policies that make getting off of it extremely difficult to do. There were known cases of babies making the list -- obviously mistakes do happen. When we take extraordinary (and necessary) precautions like maintaining a no-fly list, we need an extraordinary process for correcting mistakes as we find them.
  

Obamapalooza

An Obama round up.

• Obama almost announces his candidacy. Almost yay!
  

• The Washington Post races to stir up some controversy with Obama's Illinois Legislature record, which reveals - shock! -- he's a Democrat who takes Democratic positions and has a thing for bi-partisanship and clean government.

• The UK takes an interest in Obama, which I wouldn't have bothered to note at all except that the Telegraph ran the headline, "Young, Gifted, and Black," which I recognized immediately as a song written and performed by Nina Simone (actually "To Be Young, Gifted, and Black" but who cares - I just love Nina Simone).
  

• Everyone is all blah blah blah about Obama Vs Clinton. I honestly believe the press corp is hoping for a battle royale just to keep them awake for the next 12 months.

• Shorter Rush Limboob: If Americans really are tired of nasty partisanship then I'm in big trouble. Where's my oxy??? Wahhhhhh!

• Obama, Lieberman, and McCain teamed up to introduce a tri-partisan bill to cap greenhouse emissions in phases. I find it hard to get excited about the ultimate 2050 deadline but who knows, maybe these guys can actually get 'er done.
  

• That bastion of radical wild-eyed liberals, The Daily Kos, did an unscientific reader poll the other day for favorite presidential candidate. With over 22,000 respondents, the winner was Dennis Kucinich. Hah -- just kidding! It was Hillary Clinton. Hah -- got you again! The winner was John Edwards, Obama was second, Wes Clark was third. Hillary got 4% of the vote. Goddamn pinko commie freaks.

• The righty bloggers are beside themselves trying to figure out this whole Obamanon. Personally I think they are writhing with jealousy since their entire 2008 line-up is looking a bit tired. The one bright spot is McCain and the creepy religious right loathes him. Anyway, I have read several popular righty bloggers comment about how the secret to Obama's success is that he's (shhhh!) black. The theory, such as it is, is that the left -- afflicted with some kind of politically correct OCD -- feels compelled to vote for him because he's black. It makes them feel good about themselves to vote for a black man. This amuses me since my Obamamania has as much to do with Obama's color as my dislike of Hillary has to do with her sex (i.e. nothing). If I was really moved by some ultra PC desire, you'd think I'd be all for seeing a fellow woman in the oval office. But ewwwww... really.
  

• Perhaps the most common narrative on Obama's popularity is that he's a blank canvas of centrist charisma. Now in this there may be some truth. I think it shows that people are sick of watching the partisan power grab dominate everything in Washington, dominate the news, dominate the cable networks. 9/11 Created an emotional political climate that is, I think, starting to exhaust the country. Obama has never really been a part of that; I read and listen to him quite a bit and even his rhetoric is generally free of diatribe. But in the end, while he may be a centrist, he's definitely a Democrat. If anyone is looking at him to be something else, they'll likely end up disappointed.
  

An Open Letter

A friend sent me this link... first laugh-out-loud moment I've had in days.

A Reason to Like John McCain

Because James Dobson doesn't.

I became pretty disillusioned with McCain after his snuggle-fest with Jerry Falwell. I realize that even an independent like McCain has to play his politics correctly if he hopes to be prez but I was hoping McCain might be the one to break this Republican dependency on the so-called (and inappropriately named) "Moral Majority." Maybe Dobson will force the issue... I sure hope so, anyway. It's time to get these crazies out of politics.

Jim Webb Quietly Provides REAL Support for the Troops

Jim Webb (D-VA) demonstrates what it really means to support the troops with his Post-9/11 Veterans Educational Assistance Act of 2007. The bill will provide veterans with benefits similar to what was provided in the WWII era GI Bill.

After the backdoor-drafty IRR callup and involuntary rotation extensions, etc, it's nice to see a politician for whom "Support the Troops" is more than just a campaign slogan.

Rene Simoneau dit Sanschagrin

The patriarch of the Simoneau family (or at least the first recorded entry in my particular branch of it) is Rene Simoneau dit Sanschagrin, presented to the church in Ile de Bouin, Vendee, France, for baptism in 1664.

I spent all night reading through the various web pages of data, looking at the names of my far-and-away distant relatives, trying to piece together life stories based on nothing more than birth dates and marriage dates and death dates. What a sense of history it gives you! I'm sure young Rene, an uneducated French villager with an apparent sense of wanderlust, could hardly imagine that within a few hundred years he'd have scores of descendants scattered throughout the "new lands" of Canada and America

The beginning of the family tree is here although it looks like this one branches off in a different direction. I have found my own branch here (scroll down to find "Adlore Willie Simoneau" and link back to Rene). Someone did a nice little summary of Rene's life here (main page here) and there's also one here and here.

The Simoneau family has its own genealogy forum here.

The Illogic of Destroying An Idea In Order to Preserve It

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the republic for which it stands: One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

That's a phrase I recited a lot in my early elementary education years, back when school children started their day with it (they still should, in my opinion). I probably would have disagreed with President Eisenhower's addition of "One nation under God" in 1954 but I can appreciate that it's intended to reference this country's inherent moral compass. It's a simple and profound statement. During the cold war, it was to be a reminder of what separated us from our enemy.

After viewing this Gitmo video over at Andrew Sullivan's blog, I think we need another reminder.

I'm all for executing justice; for locking up the bad guys and tossing away the key. I sure don't feel any imperative to 'rehabilitate' those who would like to kill us. But surely what is happening at Guantanamo Bay is indefensible. I have no idea who's guilty at Gitmo and who's not but that's exactly the problem... nobody seems inclined to find out. It's easy to call gitmo a necessary evil, or to dismiss the non-American prisoners who are stashed there in our care as collateral damage in the war on terror, but that is the antithesis of what we've declared ourselves to stand for. Actually, it's the antithesis of what we're fighting so hard to defend.

I think Barack Obama probably said it best from the Senate floor in his defense of habeas corpus. From the transcript:

Now, the vast majority of the folks in Guantanamo, I suspect, are there for a reason. There are a lot of dangerous people. Particularly dangerous are people like Khalid Shaikh Mohammed. Ironically, those are the guys who are going to get real military procedures because they are going to be charged by the Government. But detainees who have not committed war crimes--or where the Government's case is not strong--may not have any recourse whatsoever.

The bottom line is this: Current procedures under the CSRT are such that a perfectly innocent individual could be held and could not rebut the Government's case and has no way of proving his innocence.

I would like somebody in this Chamber, somebody in this Government, to tell me why this is necessary. I do not want to hear that this is a new world and we face a new kind of enemy. I know that. I know that every time I think about my two little girls and worry for their safety--when I wonder if I really can tuck them in at night and know that they are safe from harm. I have as big of a stake as anybody on the other side of the aisle and anybody in this administration in capturing terrorists and incapacitating them. I would gladly take up arms myself against any terrorist threat to make sure my family is protected.

But as a parent, I can also imagine the terror I would feel if one of my family members were rounded up in the middle of the night and sent to Guantanamo without even getting one chance to ask why they were being held and being able to prove their innocence.

This is not just an entirely fictional scenario, by the way. We have already had reports by the CIA and various generals over the last few years saying that many of the detainees at Guantanamo should not have been there. As one U.S. commander of Guantanamo told the Wall Street Journal:

Sometimes, we just didn't get the right folks.

.

You're Kidding, Right?

So with all the actual serious stuff going, this is what passes for controversy in our media? Fox News naturally leads the pack, and I'm sure it'll be it'll be all over tonight's fake news show rotation.

Maybe they should whip up a little fake outrage for Laura Bush, too, while they're at it. Courtesy of AMERICAblog:

In fact, Barbara Boxer never said anything that First Lady Laura Bush herself hasn't already said. When speaking of Condi as a possible presidential candidate, Mrs. Bush said the following to People Magazine just a few weeks ago:

"Dr. (Condoleezza) Rice, who I think would be a really good candidate, is not interested. Probably because she is single, her parents are no longer living, she's an only child. You need a very supportive family and supportive friends to have this job."

Honestly, I don't know whether to laugh or cry.

True enough, Boxer's comment is debatable in the greater scheme of things. I'd put it in the same category as the question of whether or not a President who has never been in the military is qualified to command it. But is the "outrage" and media coverage really proportionate to the comment or is the outrage machine just happy to have a snarky little distraction from real world events?

Not An Auspicious Start For Dems

Disappointment.

Shame on you, Harry Reid. Shame on you, Dick Durbin. You couldn't even hold it together for the first 100 hours.

TPMmuckraker writes about the earmark reform legislation debacle here. C'mon guys... I'm sure you owe a million favors after 12 years of not being able to dish out hardly any but this is your chance to start climbing out of the Washington cesspool.

Thank God for the nine honest Dems who broke from the herd. Obama was, of course, among them. Money quote:

But Democrats sought to block DeMint's amendment, with an effort led by Sen. Dick Durbin (D-IL). They failed, due mostly to nine Democrats, including Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL) and freshmen Sens. Jon Tester (D-MT) and Jim Webb (D-VA), who crossed the aisle to vote with the Republicans, along with Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT). Here's the roll call tally.

The Republicans are only keen on earmark reform because the pork power now belongs to the Democrats. After 12 years of pork orgies it's laughable to think they're suddenly interested in transparency. But KUDOS to the Democrats who had the guts to step up. Obama, Tester, and Webb, etc... looks like it's up to those guys to start raising the bar.

Iraq Exit Strategy: Attack Iran

Sure is starting to look that way. Steve Clemons at The Washington Note ponders the idea here and here. Juan Cole addresses it here. Andrew Sullivan captures my attention here.

I was wondering after Bush's speech on Wednesday just how the heck we are going to extricate ourselves from Iraq if this "surge" doesn't work. Now I think I'm starting to understand the plan. The plan is that we're going to blame Iraq for the mess in Iraq and then turn our attention to Iran.

I'm still a bit undecided on what kind of action I'd support on Iran. I'm trying to educate myself on the topic. Certainly their behavior in the Iran-Iraq war is an interesting study. I just hope -- and I mean really f*ing hope -- that this time we the people will demand a logical analysis of the situation instead of merely biting down on the emotional flag waving/scare mongering bait we were fed in 2002-2003.

I mean, looking back to the Iraq run-up there were all kinds of people pointing out the tribal/cultural identity issues in Iraq, as well as the religious zealotry, and estimating that we would require a large occupational force for a decade or more. Colin Powell, General Shinseki, and a parade of career military personnel were all shouted down. Hans Blix, Scott Ritter, and Joe Wilson were absolutely demonized for trying to tell us there were no WMD. We need to be smarter this time. We need to talk openly about all risks and consequences. We need to allow dissent and test the conventional wisdom. Maybe military action is the best move or maybe it's not but we need to be smarter about how decide.

If You Think You Know What's Happening in Iraq...

Read this from Juan Cole and see if you still think you're right.

In Which I Am Not Wowed

The Decider has spoken.

Bush plans to send 21,000 troops to surge in rotations that probably cannot be sustained for very long. Not the remainder of the 300,000 troops that General Shinseki originally spoke of, or even the recent neo-con request of 32,000. We're relying on 21,000 to change the course of Iraq.

There's nothing in this new plan that's new strategy... we'll attempt to quell the violence and then try to hand it over to the Iraqis to manage. We've futzed around with a few of the tactics, of course. This time instead of holding the Iraq government accountable for progress benchmarks, we're going to hold them really, REALLY accountable, for real! And Maliki has FOR SURE promised to get Sadr under control. And we're not kidding around anymore, guys -- this time we'll TOTALLY create an Iraqi Army that will actually show up and take orders!

I hope it works this time but I'm nowhere near close to believing it will.

What bothers me most is that I still -- still! -- can't tell what our end game is. How do we know when we've won? Are we really going to stick around indefinitely until the militias (or as Bush quaintly referred to them, "tribal forces") voluntarily relinquish their power? Or until the various tribes and sects learn to embrace their inner nationalist? I mean, who are we rooting for in this mess, anyway... the Shia are just as barbaric as the Sunni! It's all so.... surreal.

Probably more persuasive than Bush was McCain, who reminded us what would happen if we failed in Iraq. An excellent point actually, and one that should serve to anger everyone who heard it. This was a foolish war to begin with, executed with awesome incompetence, and there's still a very good chance that this surge isn't going to win it for us. We may well be on our way to the horrible loss already. What will we do next if this fails? Withdraw. Maybe it makes sense to try one more time but you know what? I'd go absolutely batshit crazy if my kid was the last one to die for a lost cause.

It makes me sick to think of what we've gotten ourselves into here.

Go Ahead, Mr President -- Wow Me

The Decider has apparently made his decision. Since I don't believe Iraq is going to pull itself together anytime soon without the benefit of a cultural lobotomy, I admit I'm curious to hear what he's come up with. Maybe he'll wow me.

Gratuitous

Gratuitous pic for my profile update.

Liberal or Conservative?

Via Andrew Sullivan, take the quiz.

I scored a 16, falling between Bill Clinton and Colin Powell. Interestingly, when asked "Who do you trust more?" I tended to distrust the more powerful entity. The more focused power is, the more likely it is to corrupt itself. So while I'm sure the proper conservative choice between trusting the US Postal Service or trusting the Pentagon is, for example, the Pentagon... I find the Pentagon to be less trustworthy.

If the question were phrased to emphasize efficiency instead of trust, then I might have answered differently.

If a Tree Falls in the Forest With Nobody There to Hear It, Does It Make a Sound?

The Bush Administration continues to bet on "No."

Last spring, Bush declared that White House visitor logs (the same ones that entertained us all with data on Monica Lewinsky and Marc/Denise Rich during the Clinton years) are now private Presidential property. To be fair, he only did it because it might have implicated some of his staffies in the Abramoff scandal. But still.

Following the links, I was appalled to read through this list of disappearing public information... and hopefully you are too.

It just goes to show how stupid Clinton truly was. If only he'd thought to destroy, hide, or discontinue any public information that might cast a negative light on his policies or activities, his legacy might be looking a bit spiffier today.

The Ashley Treatment

Such a sad story.

It would be nice if the condition from which Ashley suffers, static encephalopathy, did not exist. It's uncomfortable to imagine what that means to Ashley -- a perpetual 3-month old child -- and to her parents. It's uncomfortable to imagine what it would mean to love, nurture, and care for a child like that, in a practical sense. It's much more pleasant to gloss over the details and consider the situation in some abstract way. To make it an ethical dilemma.

The fact, however, is that the condition does exist. And what's merely uncomfortable for us to imagine is someone else's reality. It takes a lot of balls to try to dictate what someone else should do in a situation that is clearly ugly and uncomfortable no matter what the decided course of action is.

Yes, it's horrible to physically alter a child to stunt her growth. It really is. But you know what? It's horrible to insist that the body of an adult must house the brain of an infant. This is not about making a good choice vs a bad choice. There is no good choice to make. This is about trying to make a better outcome for Ashley.

What is Ashley being deprived of, exactly? The transition to adulthood? The ability to have babies? Adult relationships? She'll never have those things -- they're already lost to her.

What does Ashley gain? Physical comfort. More family interaction. The ability to receive better care.

If this were just about her family's convenience, Ashley would be languishing away in some profit-driven, long term care facility being presided over by minimum wage staff. Obviously her parents love her and care about her quality of life. They're trying to do the right thing for her. Let's quit demanding that they become fodder for the "moral outrage" machine. The real moral outrage would be letting some casual observer turn it into one.

Obama's Shiny New Year

Obama rings in the new year with a WaPo op-ed:

We must stop any and all practices that would lead a reasonable person to believe that a public servant has become indebted to a lobbyist. That means a full ban on gifts and meals. It means no free travel or subsidized travel on private jets. And it means closing the revolving door to ensure that Capitol Hill service -- whether as a member of Congress or as a staffer -- isn't all about lining up a high-paying lobbying job. We should no longer tolerate a House committee chairman shepherding the Medicare prescription drug bill through Congress at the same time he's negotiating for a job as the pharmaceutical industry's top lobbyist.

Think he doesn't mean it? Of course you don't. You're probably numb to the endless litany of bullshit pouring from the mouths of politicians. You probably didn't think he meant this, either, until the Colburn-Obama Transparency Bill actually passed last September:

Mr. President, I rise today to speak about the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act, which passed the Senate last week. This is an important bill that will bring badly needed transparency to Federal spending. The bill creates a user-friendly website to search all Government contracts, grants, earmarks, and loans, opening up Federal financial transactions to public scrutiny. By helping to lift the veil of secrecy in Washington, this website will help make us all better legislators. It will help make reporters better journalists. And it will help make all Americans more informed voters and more active citizens.

And don't think the rank and file were too happy to see this pass, either. There were secret holds placed on the bill by not one, but two Senators, including Ted Stevens (R- Alaska) and Robert Byrd (D - West Virginia). The holds were only released when a combined lefty-righty blogosphere effort smoked out the anonymous Senators and shamed them into submission.

If you continue to expect the worst from your congressmen, that's what you'll continue to get. Start demanding the best! I'll say it again to all you non-believers: Obama Ba-ROCKS.

Michael Totten Hangs With Hezbollah

Reporting from Lebanon, Michael Totten is fascinating as usual. And as usual, I got as much a kick out of the commentary as I did from the blog post itself.

Nuttier Than a Fruitcake

Pat Robertson has finished losing his mind.

In what has become an annual tradition of prognostications, religious broadcaster Pat Robertson predicted hoped Tuesday that a terrorist attack on the United States would result in "mass killing" late in 2007.

"I'm not necessarily saying it's going to be nuclear," he said during his news-and-talk television show "The 700 Club" on the Christian Broadcasting Network. "The Lord didn't say nuclear. But I do believe it will be something like that."

Robertson said God told him during a recent prayer retreat that major cities and possibly millions of people will be affected by the attack, which should take place sometime after September.

Five Principles for Happiness in 2007

An interesting article I saw on Yahoo regarding the five principles for happiness. Principle #2 is to get connected with your truth:

• What makes you happy at work?
  
• What makes you happy at home?
  
• What makes you happy with your friends and family?
  
• What makes you happy when you're by yourself?
  
• What do you love to do?
  
• What would you do with your life today if you weren't afraid of failure?
  
• What's not working in your life?
  
• What are you currently doing that prevents you from experiencing joy?
  
• What's working in your life?
  
• Who's not working in your life?
  
• Who in your life is subtracting value from and adding misery to it?
  
• Can you fix any of these relationships, or should you let them go from your life?
  
• What relationships are working in your life?
  
• If we were getting together one year from today, what would have to happen for you to be able to tell me that you now have more joy in your life?
  
• What's the single most important thing you've learned about yourself as a result of answering these questions?

Ugly Betty

I have spent nearly the whole morning watching the Betty Bowl on the Soap Network --- it's an Ugly Betty marathon. Betty is divine! What a great show, I love it.