Bush's Time Horizon

No timetable, but a time horizon is....on the horizon. Conservatives have insisted that the US cannot give a timetable for getting out of Iraq. President Bush disagrees and is now proposing a "time horizon" to get our troops out of Iraq. Just don't use the word timetable and everything changes.

“Why would you say to the enemy, you know, here’s a timetable, just go ahead and wait us out? It doesn’t make any sense to have a timetable. You know, if you give a timetable, you’re — you’re conceding too much to the enemy.” [Bush, 6/24/05]

“I believe artificial timetables of withdrawal would be a mistake. … I will strongly reject an artificial timetable withdrawal and/or Washington politicians trying to tell those who wear the uniform how to do their job.” [Bush, 4/23/07]

Bush Appeasement on Iran?

We haven't seen this reported in the US liberal media yet, but the UK Guardian claims that the Bush administration will announce the opening of a "US Interest Section" in Iran next month.

The US plans to establish a diplomatic presence in Tehran for the first time in 30 years as part of a remarkable turnaround in policy by President George Bush.

The Guardian has learned that an announcement will be made in the next month to establish a US interests section - a halfway house to setting up a full embassy. The move will see US diplomats stationed in the country.

The news of the shift by Bush who has pursued a hawkish approach to Iran throughout his tenure comes at a critical time in US-Iranian relations. After weeks that have seen tensions rise with Israel conducting war games and Tehran carrying out long-range missile tests, a thaw appears to be under way.

So is this any different from the "appeasement" that conservatives claim Barack Obama was offering Iran? Or, is it wise diplomacy because it is being done by a Republican administration. Always questions.

PS Let me add that if the report by the Guardian is correct, thank-you President Bush. After 7 long, tiring years, you finally seem to be getting it.

UPDATE: New York Times confirms Bush appeasement of Iran.

Another Big Republican Lie

Republicans, including John McCain are telling us that not a drop of oil was spilled due to hurricane Katrina.



Now, because it's John McCain and other Republicans making this claim of "not a drop of oil spilled", I have to admit I could not take their word for it. I already knew it wasn't true that not a drop of oil was spilled. But were they just referring to oil spills in the Gulf of Mexico from oil platforms? Maybe that detail was true, even though they were being disingenuous. Seaching the internet, I came up with this website and the government information they link.

What it boils down to is that John McCain is lying to "his friends". Here is what a report by the U.S. Minerals Management Service concluded:

As a result of both storms, 124 spills were reported with a total volume of roughly 17,700 barrels of total petroleum products, of which about 13,200 barrels were crude oil and condensate from platforms, rigs and pipelines, and 4,500 barrels were refined products from platforms and rigs. Pipelines were accountable for 72 spills totaling about 7,300 barrels of crude oil and condensate spilled into the [Gulf of Mexico]. Response and recovery efforts kept the impacts to a minimum with no onshore impacts from these spill events.

17,700 barrels of oil corresponds to 743,400 gallons which is classified as a major spill by the Code of Federal Regulations used by the EPA and Coast Guard to evaluate oil spills.

How about satellite pictures? Yes, we have them.



How about known pipeline damage? We've got that too.



So I'm sorry to say that at the very least John McCain is being disingenous somehow. At the worst, he is lying to "his friends". I'm sure his friends will not follow the advice of their god Ronald Reagan to "trust, but veryify".

Obama Hits It Again

Unfortunately I spent the morning and afternoon explaining to a group of students how the respiratory system works so I didn't get to here Obama's speech on Iraq. I did read it however. Here is the part that first caught my eye:

Imagine, for a moment, what we could have done in those days, and months, and years after 9/11.

We could have deployed the full force of American power to hunt down and destroy Osama bin Laden, al Qaeda, the Taliban, and all of the terrorists responsible for 9/11, while supporting real security in Afghanistan.

We could have secured loose nuclear materials around the world, and updated a 20th century non-proliferation framework to meet the challenges of the 21st.

We could have invested hundreds of billions of dollars in alternative sources of energy to grow our economy, save our planet, and end the tyranny of oil.

We could have strengthened old alliances, formed new partnerships, and renewed international institutions to advance peace and prosperity.

We could have called on a new generation to step into the strong currents of history, and to serve their country as troops and teachers, Peace Corps volunteers and police officers.

We could have secured our homeland--investing in sophisticated new protection for our ports, our trains and our power plants.

We could have rebuilt our roads and bridges, laid down new rail and broadband and electricity systems, and made college affordable for every American to strengthen our ability to compete.

We could have done that.

But then again, no one really thought the Iraq War would last this long or cost this much, at least that's what Republicans will tell you. I remember it a bit differently, but then again I'm a liberal, commie, surrender monkey and unpatriotic to boot. See, I'm willing to actually question our government.

Americans have quite a simple choice to make where it concerns Iraq. Elect Barack Obama and leave Iraq or elect John McCain and stay in Iraq for many more years - or until we win ( still no definition of win however).

I just signed a heating oil contract at $4.799/gallon. Lucky for me, we just got our "stimulus check" which should cover about one-third of the bill. Like Barack Obama, I honestly believe that the $10 billion a month we are spending on Iraq could be better utilized.

George Bush has been a disaster as a President, as a commander-in-chief and as a world leader. I doubt John McCain will be much different - perhaps a bit smarter....but I'm really starting to wonder about that too. It is time for a change and John McCain promises no change whatsoever.

McCain Flip-Flops Again

Republicans have got to be sorry they ever started this flip flopping criticism of John Kerry during the last Presidential election.

John McCain has now adopted Barack Obama's position of Afghanistan. Democrats have been calling for more troops to fight in Afghanistan for at least 4 or 5 years now. All of a sudden, John McCain agrees. This after insisting that Iraq was the "central front" of the war on terror. McCain has even gone so far as to say that the Iraq War has not been detracting from the war in Afghanistan.

McCain talks big about following Osama bin Laden to the gates of hell, but he has given few details about how he will capture bin Laden. Barack Obama has said we need to follow bin Laden into Pakistan if necessary, but McCain says he need permission of Pakistan strong man Pervez Musharraf before he will go into Pakistan after bin Laden.

"If we have actionable intelligence about high-value terrorist targets and President Musharraf won't act, we will," he (Obama) said in a Washington speech last August.

McCain evidently disagrees. McCain says "you don't broadcast that you are going to bomb a country that is a sovereign nation". I guess Iraq and Iran are exceptions in McCains mind.

New Yorker Satire

The blogosphere is alive with talk about the cover of the latest New Yorker Magazine (seen above). The New Yorker claims it is only satire - making fun of the way conservatives view Barack Obama and his wife. My question is....how exactly is it satire? If the cartoon were in a balloon coming out of McCain's mouth I could see the satire. I can't wait to see the cover satirizing John McCain and his wife. We won't see that though because it is un-American to criticize John McCain.

John McCain has criticized the New Yorker cover. Probably because he is fearful of how the New Yorker might "satirize" him and his wife.

Tax Cuts for Whom?

Under whose tax plan will you do better - Obama's or McCain's? The answer to that question depends on how much you make. Fortunately, the Tax Policy Center has provided tables that show the effect of the McCain and Obama tax plans on representative families.

As expected, the McCain plan provides nice tax cuts for the rich - and for the less rich...not so much. For example, a married, two earner couple with no children, making $75,000 a year get no tax break from the McCain plan. From the Obama plan they get a tax cut of $1,049. Where the difference lies is in those whose incomes are over $500,000. McCain's plan provides no tax cut for these individuals, but Obama would raise their taxes by $6,727.

Thus, I recommend that if you are wealthy, you vote for John McCain. If you are not so wealthy, do yourself a favor and get a tax cut.

Classroom Puppies

One of my students was concerned her dog was going to give birth any second last Thursday. So the dog came to my Anatomy and Physiology II class. It wasn't long before we heard the first squeaking. By the end of class we had 4 new puppies (one quite a bit runty). Mom and puppies did fine the whole time.

SL Antique Boat Show

Thanks to Spencer Boatworks!

Bush Shows World USA is #1

Bush finally announced to fellow World leaders that the USA is #1 in something.

His final words to the likes of British Prime Minister Gordon Brown and French President Nicolas Sarkozy: "Goodbye from the world's biggest polluter."

What he actually proved is that the American people elected a complete idiot at least once in the last 8 years. The whole world will be better off when this clown retires.

Iran Shows Off

Here is one hell of an awesome picture...scary too. Iran giving the World a demonstration of their military might. Now let me say they wouldn't have a chance against the US Military. Iran has no navy to speak off and can't come close to the military technology that the US could use against them. But by now we should understand that military power alone does not win wars. Remember also, during the Iran Iraq War of the 80's, Iran had no qualms about using boy soldiers to clear mine fields by ordering them to run into the field. Who won the Iran Iraq War anyway?

Mike Oot for Congress

Mike Oot is now running unopposed for the Democratic nomination to represent the 23rd Congressional District of New York. If you are a Democrat Mike is your man. If you are an Independent, do yourself a favor and visit Mike's website. I'm sure you will agree with many of his positions. If you are a Republican, and you are sick of the Iraq War, think something has to be done about health care and want to hear real straight talk about our energy problems, it might be best if you join the rest of us in retiring Rep. John McHugh. After all, Mr. McHugh did promise us he would only serve six terms in the House of Representatives.

A Message From Dan Francis

Dan Francis was running for John McHugh's Congressional seat (NY-23). Unfortunately, Mr. Francis was unable to collect enough signatures on a nominating petition. Here is Dan Francis entire post to the citizens of NY-23:

Message to the Citizens of NY 23rd Congressional District

This is a history-making election year. We still face two wars with no end in sight and success fleeting.

* Our economy is on the verge of collapse.
* Congress spends wildly and has sustained a deficit of $700 billion, along with record foreign borrowing, and a national debt if $9.4 trillion.
* We face a recession that government can't seem to handle, and most now serving in office are plainly are out of touch with reality. Yet most of them will be reelected from campaigns built on huge expensive coffers, slick Ad and gimmicks, as well as a lot of fear and hype.
* The status quo has clearly failed the public they swore to serve.
* This Congress has a job approval rating of less than twenty percent. That number speaks volumes for the condition of our ship of state: leaderless, rudderless, and adrift on a sea of red ink that is gridlocked and awash in rabid partisanship that benefits no one except those serving in office.

As I looked around me over the past year or so, what I saw was not the America I grew up in, or the one I wanted for today, or even the one that I had served my whole adult life as a Marine and then as a DOD civilian employee all over the world. It is not the country that I fought and bled for years ago in Vietnam. What I saw was government out of control, abusive and an electorate hungry for leadership that in this district that in my view did not serve each and every person in this district.


I reached the conclusion that it was time to run for the seat and send Mr. McHugh into retirement. I figured I had the best background in positions that prepared me to make tough decisions that he never made regarding war and peace, torture, rational economic policies that impact not only this district, but also the country as a whole, and bold leadership.

I wanted to be a new voice because I believed that a lot of voices in this district were not been heard. I believed that I represented the values and views of a lot of people – but reaching a lot of them in this vast district is an awesome task, and I simply did not have the resources and support that my opponent has. I could have tried to raise a lot of outside money, like Mr. Oot did, or as Mr. McHugh always does, but that would offer surrender on my staunchest principle – to represent the people and not big outside money.


I wanted those things, but I was wrong.

The fact of the matter is that I badly misjudged the power and influence of the Democratic Party county chairs in this vast, 11-county district in my assessment of what they wanted vs. what I offered. I came up short in the required number of signatures on petitions required to gain ballot access for a September 9 primary against Mr. Oot. I am disappointed, but not angry, or cynical. This is still my country and my district and I will continue to speak out on serious issues.

My campaign for public office ends with this effort. I had the chance to meet new friends and see old ones. I enjoyed every single moment of this campaign. I had asked only two things from the people: to give me a fair look and an honest evaluation, and if they thought I was worthy, to give me their help and support. I fell short in that regard.

I sincerely thank everyone who supported me and signed a petition nominating me. That means a great deal to me and I will always be grateful for that effort. I will call or email each one of them and personally thank them. I wish Mr. Oot the best of luck in this campaign. May the best candidate win and then stand tall to represent us better than we have seen in the past. We certainly deserve change.

Sincerely,

Danny M. Francis

The Afghanistan War - How's it going?

I've accepted that I'm a "surrender monkey" and a member of the "tear down America" group but has anyone else noticed that things in Afghanistan aren't going so well. The above chart from Nukes and Spooks proves that a picture says more than a thousand words.

Success for Bush!

Well, Bush did have at least one success according to the above graph from the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. So what if GDP, consumption, investment, net worth, wages and salaries and employment were all down during the period of 2001-2007. Look at corporate taxes. At least someone was making some dough.

Liberal Agenda vs Conservative Beliefs, Principles and Convictions

Why do liberals have an "agenda" and conservatives have beliefs, principles and convictions? What exactly is so wrong with the liberal "agenda"? Maybe I'm not fully aware of exactly what is in the liberal agenda.

Is the liberal agenda based on the idea that all people, at least most people, have some good in them versus the conservative idea that all people are out to screw you? Maybe the problem with the liberal agenda is that it allows the "unworthy" to be treated the same as the "worthy". I'm sure one problem with the liberal agenda is that it costs too much. Forget the fact that most of the National Debt has been acrued by conservative Presidents and we are currently fighting wars that cost billions per week.



So what are some Liberal principles? First the rule of law and the Constitution always come first. Explain to me how you can have a democracy with a President that claims the law does not apply to him. That sounds more like a monarchy to me. You cannot give up even one of your freedoms based on the argument that it will keep you free. Liberals believe in Liberty - that's where the word liberal comes from. The liberal agenda is based upon human rights, equality, individual freedom, free and fair elections and the rule of law.

"You're either with us or against us" isn't included as a Liberal principle. First of all it's a false dilemma. There should be more choices than "with us or against us". What is wrong with "with you, but let's try to do it this way". There is always a spectrum of possibilities and we should not be forced into ignoring other possibilities. Is it unpatriotic to want your country to live up to its extraordinary ideals? Liberals believe individuals have a right to participate in free and open debate. Being opposed to torture shouldn't be viewed as "tearing the country down".

Tolerance, respect, dignity, justice, liberty, and freedom aren't just words to liberals. We believe the United States should strive for perfection concerning these values.

Jesse Helms RIP

President Bush: "Jesse Helms was a kind, decent, and humble man and a passionate defender of what he called 'the Miracle of America.' So it is fitting that this great patriot left us on the Fourth of July."[here]

Helms, known as "Sen. No" opposed:

Martin Luther King Day (King was a communist)
AIDS research and treatment (because every single case was due to sodomy)
Civil Rights
Voting Rights
United Nations

The truth of the matter was that Jesse Helms was a bigot and a homophobe but speaking ill of the dead is just not done I guess. You can read about the real Jesse Helms in this article published by Fair and Accuracy in Reporting.

Much, much more on Jesse Helms here.

Patriotism

Today, the 4th of July is reserved for talking about patriotism and what it means to us. For many, it's all about flying the Flag, wearing flag pins, hanging magnets on their vehicles and watching fireworks. None of these things seems particularly patriotic to me, but that's just me. I'm all about the Constitution of the USA and the Bill of Rights. Patriotism to me is believing in the Constitution and working towards fulfilling it's promises. Hoping that someday its promise of equal justice for all will be forth coming.

This is a presidential election year, which typically means the Republicans proclaiming that Democrats and liberals are not patriotic. Republicans follow Reagan's belief in "unambivalent National pride". In other words, where patriotism is concerned there is no room for self-criticism or humility. The world needs to know that the USA is #1, populated by God's chosen people and if the USA does it....by definition it is the right and moral thing to do. It has always confused me that many Republicans proclaim their love for their country while at the same time stating how much they dislike it's government.

We have already seen questions from Republicans concerning Barack Obama's patriotism. But by now we should be used to that. I'm sure the attacks are just begining.

Patriotism is not saying the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag, it is not singing the national antham or flying the Flag on holidays. Patriotism is born of love of country. But to me, the Constitution defines the USA, not a flag or a song or a pledge. Forget about handing out flags on the 4th of July. How about giving every person a pocket copy of the US Constituttion?

Gillibrand - It's not retroactive immunity

A couple weeks ago I criticized Kirstin Gillibrand for being in favor of Telecom immunity by voting for the FISA Bill. She doesn't see it that way. Here is part of her return email explaining her vote:

Second, the revised law did not provide retroactive, blanket immunity to the telecommunications companies that conducted searches of phone calls and emails at the behest of the administration without warrants, which I stand strongly against.

This is confusing to me. If you are strongly against retroactive immunity for telecoms, why would you vote for this bill? Rep. Gillibrand goes on:

In addition, Title II of the bill rejects blanket immunity for telecom companies and instead directs federal district courts to determine whether "substantial evidence" supports civil protection for telecom companies that aided the government after 9/11. The administration wanted full retroactive immunity from lawsuits and so putting the onus on the telecoms to prove their innocence represents a fair compromise that ensures oversight of the executive branch.

Oh, now I understand. The Bill doesn't give telecoms retroactive immunity. But from everything I've read, what the Bill does give the telecoms basically results in immunity. The telecoms do not need to prove their innocence, they only need to show evidence that the President requested that they help out with warrant less spying.

One thing I must say however, is that Rep. Gillibrand has responded to every email I've ever sent her.

The 7 Year National Nightmare

What are the ten worst moments of the Bush administration? There are so many, it's really hard to narrow it down to only ten worst moments. But Brad Reed of Alternet has published his version here in an article called The 10 Most Awesomely Bad Moments of the Bush Presidency.

For those who don't want to click the link, here they are in a very short form:
10: Bush Gets Re-elected
9: Alberto Gonzales’ Congressional Testimony
8: North Korea Conducts a Nuclear Test
7: Colin Powell’s Bogus WMD Presentation at the U.N.
6: The Terri Schiavo Affair
5: Bush and Condi’s Excellent Gaza Adventure
4: “Brownie, You’re Doing a Heckuva Job”
3: Abu Ghraib
2: 9/11
1: “Mission Accomplished”

Keep in mind this doesn't include outing CIA agents, warrantless wiretapping, signing statements, fake turkey, groping of German Chancellor Angela Merkel, extraordinary rendition, support for junk science, no bid contracts, bin Laden still at large, etc. etc. etc. But Clinton did lie about having consensual!