Daily Headliners--Bush's "Vietnam" speech, McCain's new Straight Talk bus, Police using provocateurs to incite violence,

I've been a little busy the last couple of days trying to catch up on the news, and still there is even more crazy news going on today. So let's get into the Daily Headliners....

Bush's Iraq speech to hit on Vietnam: I saw part of President Bush's speech comparing Iraq with Vietnam on MSNBC today, and even I couldn't believe the delusions of this incompetent fool. Bush tried to compare Iraq with the Second World War, Korea, Vietnam--did he include Grenada? I'm going to go through the speech later tonight, and perhaps post some more on it. But with this USA Today story, I found something interesting:

With Congress in recess for the summer, the debate over Iraq policy has moved from the Capitol to the airwaves with direct appeals to the public through multimillion-dollar advertising campaigns.

Freedom's Watch, a conservative group, plans to launch a $15 million advertising campaign in 20 states today. The group's spokesman, former Bush press secretary Ari Fleischer, says the goal is to tell people that the buildup of U.S. troops in Iraq is working.

"We want to get the message to both Democrats and Republicans: Don't cut and run, fully fund the troops, and victory is the only objective," Fleischer says.

This is especially interesting here. We've got a conservative group, whose spokesman was a former Bush administration press secretary, that is targeting Republican congressmen with a $15 million ad campaign to keep these congressmen continuing to goose-step behind this administration.

Now The Politico has some interesting details regarding Freedom's Watch:

A new group, Freedom’s Watch, is launching Wednesday with a $15 million, five-week campaign of TV, radio and Web ads featuring military veterans that is aimed at retaining support in Congress for President Bush’s “surge” policy on Iraq.

"For those who believe in peace through strength, the cavalry is coming," said former White House Press Secretary Ari Fleischer, who is a founding board member of the group.

The big ad buy, funded by high-profile Republicans who were aides and supporters of President Bush, reflects a furious public relations battle that will unfold as Congress debates the crucial progress report by Gen. David Petraeus, which is due Sept. 15.

“There was a large vacuum on the conservative side,” said Bradley A. Blakeman, who is president and chief executive officer of Freedom’s Watch. “People decided that the time has come to fight back. This is a grass-roots campaign aimed at ensuring that Congress continues to fully fund the troops with the ultimate goal of victory in the war on terror.”

[....]

Organizers said the ads will run on Fox News Channel, CNN and elsewhere, with radio versions airing nationally during the conservative talk shows of Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity.

[....]

Freedom's Watch aims to do for the GOP what the MoveOn political action organizations have done for Democrats. Blakeman, who was a member the White House senior staff in Bush’s first term, said Freedom’s Watch is designed as “a never-ending campaign – a stable, credible voice of reason on generational issues that won’t rise and fall with election cycles.”

The board consists of Blakeman; Fleischer; Mel Sembler, a Florida Republican who was Bush’s ambassador to Italy; William P. Weidner, president and chief operating officer of the Las Vegas Sands Corp.; and Matt Brooks, executive director of the Republican Jewish Coalition.

The donors include Sembler; Anthony Gioia, a Buffalo businessman who was Bush’s ambassador to Malta; Kevin Moley, who was Bush’s ambassador to the U.S. Mission to the United Nations in Geneva; Howard Leach, a former Republican National Committee finance chairman who was Bush’s ambassador to France; Dr. John Templeton of Pennsylvania, chairman and president of the John Templeton Foundation; Ed Snider, chairman of Comcast Spectacor, the huge Philadelphia sports and entertainment firm; Sheldon Adelson, chairman of the Las Vegas Sands Corp. and ranked by Forbes magazine as the third-wealthiest American; and Richard Fox, who is chairman of the Jewish Policy Center and was Pennsylvania State Chairman of the Reagan/Bush campaign in 1980.

This is fascinating. We've got a conservative political organization that is trying to emulate Moveon.org, with a supposed grass-roots PR-campaign here. But the problem with Freedom's Watch is that it is not a grass-roots political organization. This is a top-down political organization, founded and funded, by former Bush White House staffers. These Bush staffers are using this organization to conduct a PR-campaign in supporting the Bush administration's war in Iraq. This is completely opposite of the grass-roots organization of MoveOn.org.

So what does this all mean? We know that the American public wants the U.S. out of Iraq, as seen by the public opinion polls. We can see that the American public isn't really listening to the Bush administration's PR-campaign in continuing the Iraq war, which can also be seen indirectly through job approval ratings on President Bush. This is really where Freedom's Watch is going to be in trouble here with their own PR-campaign. This organization is taking a top-down, pro-war side with the Bush administration on Iraq, even as the American public is overwhelmingly against the war. What is more, Freedom's Watch is targeting Democratic congressmen, but Republican Congressmen. "There was a large vacuum on the conservative side....People decided that the time has come to fight back. This is a grass-roots campaign aimed at ensuring that Congress continues to fully fund the troops with the ultimate goal of victory in the war on terror." This is what Freedom's Watch president Bradley Blakeman said in the Politico article. Blakeman is correct that there is a vacuum on the conservative side here. But that vacuum has occurred among the conservatives because of the contradiction between the news reports showing the deteriorating situation in Iraq and the Bush administration's happy PR-talk of the U.S winning the war in Iraq, or holding the position on Iraq, or stabilizing, or needing to stabilize, or any other White House talking point in order to keep the war going until after Bush leaves office in January 2009. The only people who have decided that the time has come to fight are former Bush White House staffers and supporters, who have created this top-down, MoveOn-wannabe in order to pressure GOP congressmen to continue supporting this Bush war even at the expense of their own political careers.

The new McCain gang still paying bills: I found this New York News and Features article through Carpetbagger, and I just had to smile a little. According to the New York News, McCain's campaign manager Ricky Davis feels that the current Straight Talk Express bus doesn't "jibe with McCain’s image as a frugal-minded maverick." The bus has such frugal amenities as 'flat-screen televisions and elaborate "art wrap"—the cellophane-y stuff that’s used to cover the bus with an image.' So Davis is in the market for a cheaper Staight Talk Express bus--one that Davis calls “A piece of shit.” Gee, Mr. Davis--would this be an appropriate replacement bus for the Straight Talk Express?

Is this John McCain's New Straight Talk Express?

Police accused of using provocateurs at summit: I found this strange story through Shakesville, and I'm not sure what to say. Now according to the Canadian paper The Star:

OTTAWA – Protesters are accusing police of using undercover agents to provoke violent confrontations at the North American leaders' summit in Montebello, Que.

Such accusations have been made before after similar demonstrations but this time the alleged "agents provocateurs" have been caught on camera.

A video, posted on YouTube, shows three young men, their faces masked by bandannas, mingling Monday with protesters in front of a line of police in riot gear. At least one of the masked men is holding a rock in his hand.

The three are confronted by protest organizer Dave Coles, president of the Communications, Energy and Paperworkers Union of Canada. Coles makes it clear the masked men are not welcome among his group of protesters, whom he describes as mainly grandparents. He urges them to leave and find their own protest location.

Coles also demands that they put down their rocks. Other protesters begin to chime in that the three are really police agents. Several try to snatch the bandanas from their faces.

Rather than leave, the three actually start edging closer to the police line, where they appear to engage in discussions. They eventually push their way past an officer, whereupon other police shove them to the ground and handcuff them.

Late Tuesday, photographs taken by another protester surfaced, showing the trio lying prone on the ground. The photos show the soles of their boots adorned by yellow triangles. A police officer kneeling beside the men has an identical yellow triangle on the sole of his boot.

Kevin Skerrett, a protester with the group Nowar-Paix, said the photos and video together present powerful evidence that the men were actually undercover police officers.

"I think the circumstantial evidence is very powerful," he said.

The three do not appear to have been arrested or charged with any offence.

Here is the YouTube video. I'm just posting this as is:



This Canadian news broadcast has a little more details, saying that the three individuals may have been undercover officers.

Friday Fun Stuff---Naked TV news stripped of subsidy, carries on

That is the actual Yahoo News headline. And here is the Yahoo News story:

TOKYO (Reuters) - An embarrassed Japanese government has cut the subsidy, but a Tokyo TV company said on Friday it would carry on making a striptease news show with sign language for hearing-impaired viewers.

The government made grants totaling 400,000 yen ($3,500) to help cover production of the weekly five-minute program on satellite TV, which features a newsreader who removes her clothes between news items that she delivers in sign language.

The funding dried up when the government, under fire for supporting "Naked Sign Language News," changed funding guidelines for programming aimed at the disabled to exclude pornography, local media reported.

"Of course we will continue making the program," said Shinichiro Fukuyama, a spokesman for makers Paradise Television. "We weren't doing it for the subsidy, we just wanted to make something viewers would enjoy."

Most people who had contacted the station about the program were supportive, saying deaf people had the right to enjoy the same programs as other people, he added.

The Japanese may be on to something here. Maybe we should have our news anchors--both male and female--strip in between each news stories. It might just increase the American public's interest into the news.

Of course, do I really want to see Michelle Malkin or Ann Coulter strip on Faux News?

Tommy Thompson drops presidential bid

Well, it appears that Tommy Thompson is out of the GOP race for the White House. This is from MSNBC News:

MILWAUKEE - Former Wisconsin Gov. Tommy Thompson said Sunday he is dropping out of the race for the Republican presidential nomination after finishing sixth in an Iowa straw poll.

"I have no regrets about running," he said in a statement released Sunday evening by his campaign.

"I felt my record as Governor of Wisconsin and Secretary of Health and Human Services gave me the experience I needed to serve as president, but I respect the decision of the voters. I am leaving the campaign trail today, but I will not leave the challenges of improving health care and welfare in America."

Thompson realized that the game was up--right after all the millions Mitt Romney spent buying votes in the Ames straw poll. According to this August 9, 2007 Washington Post story:

One candidate, former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney, has assembled an unrivaled operation for the event: a statewide corps of 60 "super-volunteers," who have been paid between $500 and $1,000 per month to talk him up; a fleet of buses; more than $2 million in television ads in Iowa; a sleek direct-mail campaign; and a consultant who has been paid nearly $200,000 to direct Romney's straw poll production, which will include barbecue billed as the best in the state.

Facing off against this are a half-dozen candidates whose combined Iowa expenditures through the end of June did not match the $1 million Romney had spent by that point, not including his many TV ads. Tommy Thompson, the former Wisconsin governor, advertised in the Denison Bulletin & Review at a cost of $297. Kansas Sen. Sam Brownback has been luring voters to Ames by sending out "brown bracelets" to wear around town ("a great conversation starter with friends and neighbors"). Rep. Tom Tancredo (Colo.) is offering a tour of Washington -- dinner included -- to anyone who brings 25 friends to Ames.

[....]

Romney is waging what amounts to a one-sided financial war, bidding himself up against candidates who have raised less money during the entire campaign to date than Romney is likely to spend just for the straw poll.

Former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee had raised $766,000 by June 30, according to the Federal Election Commission. Brownback and Tancredo had each raised $1.4 million. Texas Rep. Ron Paul brought in $2.37 million. Rep. Duncan Hunter (Calif.) and Tommy Thompson raised $814,000 and $487,000, respectively.

They are waging spirited campaigns. Brownback has used inflammatory automated telephone calls to capture attention. Huckabee and Brownback have sparred about religion and abortion. And all have been to Iowa in buses, cars and even the occasional plane.

But Romney's money gives him a huge advantage in a contest that is less about persuading undecided voters and more about bringing warm bodies to Ames. Officials with other campaigns have complained privately that some local party activists have said they would like to support their candidate but felt compelled to back Romney because of the stipends he was offering.

The reality here is that Mitt Romney outspent every other GOP candidate, essentially buying up the Ames votes. Thompson raised only $487,000 by June 30--of which a good portion of it was probably spent trying to buy up some Thompson votes in Ames. I'm guessing that the Thompson campaign went for broke on the Ames straw poll, and came up very short of the campaign's expectations. So Thompson had to bow out.

So we now have the first casualty for the GOP presidential candidate. Who is next? I'm guessing either Duncan Hunter or John McCain will drop out after Iowa, unless either of them will get a strong showing in the Iowa caucus. And the reason is simply money. Duncan Hunter ended up in ninth place on the Ames straw poll results--if he can't move up in the Iowa caucuses, then he is not going to get the money he needs to continue his campaign. And as for the McCain campaign, well they're just about flat broke. The McCain campaign avoided the Ames poll to probably keep their operations going through the Iowa caucus. And McCain needs a big showing in Iowa in order to stay alive as well. So the race is getting interesting here.

Karl Rove resigns, will leave White House at end of month

Well, Karl Rove is now out of the White House. This is off MSNBC News:

WASHINGTON - Karl Rove, President Bush's close friend and chief political strategist, announced Monday he will leave the White House at the end of August, joining a lengthening line of senior officials heading for the exits in the final 18 months of the administration.

On board with Bush since the beginning of his political career in Texas, Rove was nicknamed "the architect" and "boy genius" by the president for designing the strategy that twice won him the White House. Critics call Rove "Bush's brain."

"Karl Rove is moving on down the road," Bush said. "We've been friends for a long time and we're still going to be friends. Bush looked grim, standing with Rove on the South Lawn. "I would call Karl Rove a dear friend," Bush said, noting that his own term is running down. "I'll be on the road behind you here in a bit."

Rove, his voice quivering at times, said, "I'm grateful to have been a witness to history. It has been the joy and the honor of a lifetime."

"At month's end," Rove said, "I will join those whom you meet in your travels, the ordinary Americans who tell you they are praying for you."

A criminal investigation put Rove under scrutiny for months during the investigation into the leak of a CIA operative's name but he was never charged with any crime. In a more recent controversy, Rove, citing executive privilege, has refused to testify before Congress about the firing of U.S. attorneys.

I'm guessing here that the political heat of the congressional investigations into the U.S. attorney scandal, and the possibility of the Congress issuing inherent contempt citations against Rove is a big reason for his stepping down now. Does Rove see the "lame duck" writing on the wall here for President Bush? President Bush's domestic agenda is pretty much shot; he's fighting the congressional Democrats on the subpoenas, the U.S. attorney scandal, and in keeping the incompetent Alberto Gonzales as his attorney general. And let's not forget about the Iraq war, and the thousand paper cuts it is inflicting on Bush. Does Karl Rove finally realize that his dream of a "permanent Republican majority" is now nothing more than a pipe dream, and that now is the time to get out of this administration?

Rove's departure is going to be devastating for President Bush. Karl Rove was the chief political adviser to Bush--he was Bush's brain. He was the guy to go to in order to "politicize" policy. I'd say that was the genius of Karl Rove. And I don't see how any two or three or four people in the Bush administration can take Karl Rove's place there. The second aspect that is probably going to be devastating to the country is that Karl Rove may have been a counterweight to Vice President Dick Cheney. I'll admit that I don't completely understand the inner workings of this Bush White House. But I would guess that if there was two people who had the president's ear at all times, they would be Dick Cheney and Karl Rove. These two individuals would have had the greatest influence on President Bush, perhaps even countering each other on policy issues. But now that Karl Rove is leaving the White House, this gives Darth Cheney even greater power to influence President Bush on such issues as...oh...invading Iran?

The Bush White House is sinking, while MC Rove plays karaoke among the deck chairs.

Monday Schoolhouse Rocks--The Tale of Mr. Morton

For today's Monday Schoolhouse Rocks, I present the Tale of Mr. Morton. Yes, Mr. Morton is the subject, and what the predicate says, he does. Music and lyrics are by Lynn Ahrens, performed by Jack Sheldon. From YouTube:



Now Mister Morton is happy
and Pearl and the cat are too

They're the subjects of the sentence
and what the predicate says, they do

Blogging will be light next week....

I'll be house-sitting at my parents place for next week, so blogging will be especially light. I'll be back on Friday. Have a good week.

Romney wins Ames straw poll--what else is new?

I should say something about Mitt Romney's win in the Ames straw poll. From the De Moines Register:

Ames, Ia. — Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney emerged on top at Iowa GOP’s straw poll Saturday in Ames.

The win boosted the former Massachusetts governor’s standing as the party’s frontrunner in Iowa, although attendance at this first show of Iowa campaign strength appeared to fall short of expectations.

Romney, who heavily outspent his opponents preparing for the fundraising event, received 4,516 votes or 31.6 percent.

Roughly 30,000 to 33,000 Republicans attended the state party fundraiser on the Iowa State University campus, short of organizers’ goal of exceeding the crowd of 38,000 who attended the most recent straw poll in 1999.

A factor in the lower turnout was the absence of some of the field’s better-known candidates — former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani and Sen. John McCain of Arizona, and likely candidate Fred Thompson, a former U.S. senator from Tennessee.

Former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee had said his campaign’s future depended on a strong showing in Ames. He finished in second place, with 2,587 votes or 18.1 percent. Sen. Sam Brownback of Kansas placed third with 2,192 votes, 15.3 percent after campaigning aggressively to be the choice of the Iowa GOP’s influential social conservatives.

And the Chicago Tribune has this interesting little detail regarding the poll:

In many respects, the event appeared to be on a much smaller scale than the last straw poll eight years ago. The 14,302 total ballots cast was down substantially from the 23,685 cast at the last straw poll in 1999, potentially reflecting the unsettled field of Republican candidates as well as what polls have shown to be a large bloc of Iowa GOP voters undecided and dissatisfied with the current list of contenders.

The Republican Party of Iowa made strict assurances about the credibility of its voting procedures, including requiring voters to show a photo ID and dip their thumb in purple ink as was done in Iraq. Still, the results were delayed more than 75 minutes after one of 18 optical-scan machines malfunctioned. More than 1,500 ballots had to be hand counted, said Mary Tiffany, an Iowa GOP spokeswoman.

Mitt Romney spent perhaps $2-3 million in this straw poll, only to get 4,516 out of some 14,000 votes cast--not that good of an investment here. I found it even more interesting in that the votes cast in this poll were substantially smaller than the votes cast in the 1999 straw poll, by around 9,000 votes here. The Republican Party is clearly hampered by the albatross of this sinking Bush presidency. I would also guess that while Mitt Romney may have won this poll, there are probably still a huge number of undecided votes in Iowa--remember the University of Iowa poll showing a third of Republican voters are still undecided. So to me, it appears that this Romney "victory" in the Ames straw poll is very hollow.

Rapid response to the endless war and Bush's draft

I found this through Americablog here. Late last night, I wrote a couple of posts on General David Petraeus' hint that the Iraq war could last for a decade or longer, and President Bush's war czar Army Lt. Gen. Douglas Lute's endorsement of a return to a military draft to make up for the Army's shortfall of troops in Iraq. Well, the folks over at Americans Against Escalation in Iraq have quickly produced a political commercial criticizing both of these Bush yes-men general's statements. From YouTube:



This is a pretty rapid response to both of these stories. This is probably going to get some serious press time over next week, especially as these two stories are digested by Americans over the course of this weekend.

Saturday Morning Cartoons--Hillbilly Hare

This is just a classic Bugs Bunny cartoon--Hillbilly Hare. This is one of those cartoons that I especially remember being aired during the Bugs Bunny Show on ABC during Saturday mornings in the 1970s.

Wikipedia has this interesting detail regarding Hillbilly Hare:

Because of the easily imitatable gun and fire gags (and the actions in the square dance song stanza shown above), this short was heavily edited on some TV channels, specifically ABC, until it was banned outright in the mid-1990s. It has been shown (with offending parts intact) on Cartoon Network and now on the Golden Collection DVD set (volume three; disc 1).

I didn't know that this particular cartoon was banned outright in the mid-1990s because of the guns and the actions in the square dance stanza. I wonder if that is censorship overkill here? There were only three scenes involving gunfire, when each hillbilly fired his gun at Bugs, plus the one scene where Bug's carrot is shot off on both ends. In fact, there is more gunfire taking place in Chuck Jones masterful "Hunter's Trilogy" of Rabbit Fire, Rabbit Seasoning, and Duck! Rabbit! Duck! than what you would find in Hillbilly Hare. As for the square dance sequence, its violence is still an absurd violence, similar to the stuff you would see in any other Warner Brother's cartoons, or even in any Tom and Jerry cartoon. Maybe it was the combination of both that scared the networks into banning this cartoon.

Here is HillBilly Hare on YouTube:



And now you're home;
Bow to your partner,
Bow to the gent across the hall,
And that is all.

Bush war czar considers draft "on the table"

If you thought Petraeus' hinting of the U.S. war in Iraq to be lasting for 10 years or more, this story is going to make you search for those Zippo lighters. This is the second story I found off Americablog, with the original source story from The Guardian:

WASHINGTON (AP) - Frequent tours for U.S. forces in Iraq and Afghanistan have stressed the all-volunteer force and made it worth considering a return to a military draft, President Bush's new war adviser said Friday.

``I think it makes sense to certainly consider it,'' Army Lt. Gen. Douglas Lute said in an interview with National Public Radio's ``All Things Considered.''

``And I can tell you, this has always been an option on the table. But ultimately, this is a policy matter between meeting the demands for the nation's security by one means or another,'' Lute added in his first interview since he was confirmed by the Senate in June.

President Nixon abolished the draft in 1973. Restoring it, Lute said, would be a ``major policy shift'' and Bush has made it clear that he doesn't think it's necessary.

The repeated deployments affect not only the troops but their families, who can influence whether a service member decides to stay in the military, Lute said.

``There's both a personal dimension of this, where this kind of stress plays out across dinner tables and in living room conversations within these families,'' he said. ``And ultimately, the health of the all-volunteer force is going to rest on those sorts of personal family decisions.''

The military conducted a draft during the Civil War and both world wars and between 1948 and 1973. The Selective Service System, re-established in 1980, maintains a registry of 18-year-old men.

Rep. Charles Rangel, D-N.Y., has called for reinstating the draft as a way to end the Iraq war.

Bush picked Lute in mid-May as a deputy national security adviser with responsibility for ensuring efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan are coordinated with policymakers in Washington. Lute, an active-duty general, was chosen after several retired generals turned down the job.

Okay, I'm going to play devil's advocate here--Let's bring back the draft! I'm 43 years old, so the Bush administration will never draft me in the military. The real reason I'm all for instituting the draft here, is that this draft will turn young people angrily against President Bush and this war in Iraq. You want to get people out protesting in the streets? Have King George The Deciderer draft you and ship you to Iraq. A military draft will bring this Iraq war directly into every American's home, with a young American in prime fighting age. The Vietnam anti-war movement started with high school, and college-age American kids putting their feet down and exclaiming, "No, I will not fight in this unjust war!"



Chuck Rangle is right--the fastest way to end this Iraq war is to institute a draft.

Petraeus hints the U.S. war in Iraq may last a decade more

I found a couple of late night stories off Americablog. First up, the American military commander in Iraq, General David Petraeus, is quietly telling congress members that the U.S. will be in Iraq for 9 or 10 years. According to The Hill:

Gen. David Petraeus told a congressional delegation visiting the Middle East that success in Iraq will require a U.S. military presence there for about a decade, Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D-Ill.) said Friday.

The commander of U.S. troops in Iraq, who will deliver a highly anticipated progress report next month, said the U.S. “will be in Iraq in some way for 9 or 10 years,” according to Schakowsky. The general also highlighted progress in Anbar province, where former Sunni insurgents have turned against Al Qaeda extremists in recent months.

"It was pretty upbeat from his point of view,” Schakowsky said. “He said he wanted to be frank and honest. But still we would have to be there for some time -- for a long time.”
The lawmaker added that she believes that the American public would “not tolerate” such a continued presence in Iraq.

A co-founder of the House Out of Iraq Caucus, Schakowsky chaired a bipartisan delegation of six Representatives that traveled to Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan. The visit included lunch in Baghdad with Petraeus and U.S. Ambassador to Iraq Ryan Crocker.
The delegation also included Reps. Tom Allen (D-Maine), Thelma Drake (R-Va.), Jeff Miller (R-Fla.), Jack Kingston (R-Ga.) and Phil Gingrey (R-Ga.).

Schakowsky said she came away from the trip convinced that the United States was fighting the wrong war, calling Iraq “a huge distraction from the real war on terror” in Afghanistan and Pakistan.

“Because of our engagement in Iraq we can’t afford to give [fighting al Qaeda leaders and a resurgent Taliban] the kind of attention that we need to,” she said. “We know what the mission is there.”

It is all a part of a PR-campaign by the Bush administration to convince Congress that the U.S. will be fighting in Iraq well after President Bush leaves office, and allow Bush to dump the entire Iraq mess on his successor. Bush is using Petraeus to sprinkle these hints in an attempt to soften any Democratic congressional outrage, when Petraeus gives his report in September. It is an endless war.

Friday Night Music--Dire Straits' Money for Nothing

How about some music after today's busy news day? Here's Dire Straits' Money for Nothing--and your chicks are free! From YouTube:



I want my MTV!

Bush set to break the presidential vacation record

I found this through Think Progress, which sourced this Houston Chronicle story:

President Bush tries to set an example for Americans whenever he can, in terms of physical fitness, faith, optimism and a certain overall moral rectitude. He also sets an excellent example on taking vacation.

On Thursday, Bush left for a weekend in Kennebunkport, Maine, and his family's summer compound, Walker's Point. On Monday, he heads to his Crawford retreat, where he has spent all or part of 418 days of his presidency, according to Mark Knoller, a CBS News White House correspondent and meticulous record-keeper.

[....]

Bush's August sojourn will be his 65th trip to Crawford, according to Knoller.

The 1,600-acre ranch has proved a durable haven for Bush, who often disappears into its varied landscapes for days or weeks at a time without public appearances. He has an attractive stone house, shaded swimming pool, miles of rugged bike trails and law enforcement at every entry point keeping people out.

"I fell in love with it the minute I saw it," Bush said of his ranch in 2001. "I like being out here. I like spending a lot of time outside."

The presidential vacation-time record holder is the late Ronald Reagan, who tallied 436 days in his two terms. At 418 days, and with 17 months to go in his presidency, Bush is going to beat that easily.

[....]

Still, all this governmental time off is more than most Americans are taking. A recent survey by Yahoo Hot Jobs found nearly half of American workers did not take all of their vacation days last year.

So, you wanna take bets to see if President Bush will take 500 days of vacation?

Daily Headliners, Part Deux--AT&T censors Pearl Jam, Giuliani backpeddling, We need another 9/11, RNC's sleazy mass mailing, GOP bigotry

Is it my imagination, or are we seeing a huge news dump of crap today? I've got a Daily Headliners, Part Deux for you.

AT&T censors Pearl Jam: I found this LA Times story through Americablog, and in one sense, it doesn't surprise me. AT&T certainly has to protect King George The Deciderer from criticism by a rock band, since the company is probably spying on that band on behalf of the king. From The Los Angeles Times:

In a prominent nod to one of the festival's lead sponsors, the logo for this year's Lollapalooza concerts in Chicago includes the tag line, "delivered by AT&T." But Sunday's headliner Pearl Jam complained that AT&T delivered less than the band's full performance during its Lollapalooza webcast. The powerhouse telco turned off the audio during the song "Daughter" while singer Eddie Vedder was railing against President George Bush. That bit of censorship -- which AT&T says was a mistake -- gave a bit of fuel to the forces arguing for "Net neutrality" regulations.

The missing lines -- "George Bush, leave this world alone" and "George Bush find yourself another home" -- are benign compared to some of Vedder's more pointed critiques of Bush and the Iraq war. This isn't exactly "I'm ashamed the president of the United States is from Texas" territory. So you have to wonder what the person who pulled the plug on Vedder was thinking -- or not thinking, as the case may be.

AT&T spokeswoman Tiffany Nels said the company goofed. Its Blue Room website is open to Internet users of all ages, so it tries to block "excessive profanity" from the broadcasts. It hires contractors to monitor the performances, and the broadcasts are delayed slightly to enable monitors to bleep off-color material. But those monitors aren't supposed to edit songs, just the stage patter between them, Nels said. "It's not our policy" to censor performances, Nels said, "and we regret the error." She added, "There was no profanity. It was a mistake."

AT&T wants to post an unexpurgated version of the performance on its Blue Room Lollapalooza page, but it will have to obtain permission from the copyright holder (which would be Pearl Jam, I believe). The band, meanwhile, says it will post the video on its own site soon.

Translation--OOPS! We goofed! But then again, our little mistake certainly did help out our King George, who will protect us from those pesky lawsuits being filed by the states against our participation in the King's spying program.

Giuliani misspoke about Ground Zero: I found this through Carpetbagger, where the original source is from an Associated Press story, through CBS News:

(AP) Republican presidential hopeful Rudy Giuliani said Friday that he misspoke when he said he spent as much time, if not more, at ground zero exposed to the same health risks as workers combing the site after the Sept. 11 attacks.

"I think I could have said it better," he told nationally syndicated radio host Mike Gallagher. "You know, what I was saying was, 'I'm there with you.'"

The former New York mayor upset some firefighters and police officers when he said Thursday in Cincinnati that he was at ground zero "as often, if not more, than most of the workers."

"I was there working with them. I was exposed to exactly the same things they were exposed to. So in that sense, I'm one of them," he told reporters at a Los Angeles Dodgers-Cincinnati Reds baseball game.

Fire and police officials responded angrily, saying Giuliani did not do the same work as those involved in the rescue, recovery and cleanup from the 2001 terrorist attacks, which left many workers sick and injured.

On Friday, Giuliani said he was trying to show his concern for the workers' health.

"What I was trying to say yesterday is that I empathize with them, because I feel like I have that same risk," he said.

Translation--OOPS, I goofed! What I really meant to say was that I was with you in my heart as you were working on Ground Zero, even though I was spending more time at press conferences and PR-spin in selling myself as "America's Mayor." Carpetbagger has a great list of the denunciations against Giuliani by these same rescue workers here.

To save America, we need another 9/11: This Philadelphia Daily News column by Stu Bykofsky is popping up all over the blog sites. I've seen it on The Carpetbagger Report, Daily Kos, Shakespeare's Sister, Crooks and Liars, News Hounds, and Boing Boing. Bykofsky bemoans the fact that America has politically splintered itself because we don't know who the enemy really is in the Great War on Terrorism. And because we have so splintered ourselves, Bykofsky wishes for another 9/11 terrorist attack to rally the American people around the flag, and around President Bush's Great War on Terrorism. According to Bykofsky;

Remember the community of outrage and national resolve? America had not been so united since the first Day of Infamy - 12/7/41.

We knew who the enemy was then.

We knew who the enemy was shortly after 9/11.

Because we have mislaid 9/11, we have endless sideshow squabbles about whether the surge is working, if we are "safer" now, whether the FBI should listen in on foreign phone calls, whether cops should detain odd-acting "flying imams," whether those plotting alleged attacks on Fort Dix or Kennedy airport are serious threats or amateur bumblers. We bicker over the trees while the forest is ablaze.

America's fabric is pulling apart like a cheap sweater.

What would sew us back together?

Another 9/11 attack.

The Golden Gate Bridge. Mount Rushmore. Chicago's Wrigley Field. The Philadelphia subway system. The U.S. is a target-rich environment for al Qaeda.

Is there any doubt they are planning to hit us again?

If it is to be, then let it be. It will take another attack on the homeland to quell the chattering of chipmunks and to restore America's righteous rage and singular purpose to prevail.

Excuse me Mr. Bykofsky, but the reason why we've splintered over this war is because President Bush and the PNAC neocons is because President Bush shifted his attention away from fighting the real terrorists of Osama bin Laden in Afghanistan, towards invading Iraq and deposing Saddam Hussein in order to enact the PNAC Doctrine of controlling the Middle East oil supplies and exerting American military and imperial power in the Mideast. In other words, Bykofsky, Bush screwed up in sending us into this disastrous war. The Bush administration lied to Congress and the American people through their selling of false intelligence as a means to market their war. The Bush administration did not have enough troops to completely occupy Iraq. The Bush administration screwed up in the reconstruction of Iraq--from disbanding the Iraqi army, not having enough troops to guard the weapons depots, the corruption, the shoddy workmanship in projects--the list goes on. Bykofsky fails to understand this, even as he makes this meaningless call for unity with an administration that is responsible for dividing us in the first place. It is disgusting.

RNC Voter "Audit" Letter Raises Questions: This is just a WOW of a TPM Muckraker story;

What 83 year-old William Sidwell of Queen City, Missouri found in his mailbox last week scared him. It was a letter from the Republican National Committee, but it seemed to bear grave news: "Our records show that you registered as a member of our Party in Schuyler County, MO," the letter said. "But a recent audit of your Party affiliation turned up some irregularities."

Audit? Irregularities? Was he in trouble? Were they threatening him? Sidwell went immediately to his ask his son, Dennis, a licensed public accountant, for advice. You can see the letter, and the accompanying "Voter Registration Verification and Audit Form," right here. Particularly puzzling to the both of them, Dennis told me, is that his father is a life-long Democrat.

The letter, it turns out, is just a misleading pitch for a contribution to the RNC -- one of the "irregularities" cited in the letter is that "I cannot find a record of you taking a single action in support of the Republican Party -- not locally, not nationally!" A contribution, the letter suggests, would help set the record straight.

The letter is signed by Bill Steiner, the director of the RNC's Office of Strategic Information, a title Steiner assumed at the end of July. His responsibilities "include managing the RNC’s national voter file and Voter Vault, the committee’s highly touted micro-targeting operation," Roll Call reported last month. And indeed, the voter "audit" requests detailed information about the voter's voting history and current opinions on the 2008 presidential race.

It's unclear how many similar letters (tens of thousands? millions?) have been sent by the RNC. The RNC did not respond to our requests for comment.

The letter "appears to be in a gray area," David Becker, Director of People for the American Way's Democracy Campaign and a former voting rights attorney at the Justice Department, told me. "It could potentially run afoul of the law if it led an eligible voter to believe they're no longer eligible to vote." The letter, Becker said, "appears designed to give that mistaken impression."

That is the key point here. The Republican Party is trying to target key Democratic voters into giving up their own voter information to a GOP database under the guise of an "audit." And the people the GOP are targeting are either the elderly Democrats, or poor working-class Democrats, who may not understand that this a political sales pitch. This letter has been designed to elicit fear among the elderly voters, and to extort these voters into contributing to the Republican Party in order to "set your record straight." This letter campaign is both slick, and especially sleazy.

GOP bigotry rises its ugly head: This story is also moving up in the liberal blogosphere, with postings on Crooks and Liars, Daily Kos, Talking Points Memo, and Orcinus. It has to do with Idaho GOP Rep. Bill Sali attacking the U.S. Senate for allowing the first Hindu prayer to open the Senate's session. If you recall, the Hindu prayer was disrupted by three Christian fundamentalists protesting against the event. Well, Sali decided to present his own bigoted view on this issue through The American Family News Network;

"We have not only a Hindu prayer being offered in the Senate, we have a Muslim member of the House of Representatives now, Keith Ellison from Minnesota. Those are changes -- and they are not what was envisioned by the Founding Fathers," asserts Sali.

Sali says America was built on Christian principles that were derived from scripture. He also says the only way the United States has been allowed to exist in a world that is so hostile to Christian principles is through "the protective hand of God."

"You know, the Lord can cause the rain to fall on the just and the unjust alike," says the Idaho Republican.

According to Congressman Sali, the only way the U.S. can continue to survive is under that protective hand of God. He states when a Hindu prayer is offered, "that's a different god" and that it "creates problems for the longevity of this country."

Incredible. Is this guy the new face of the Republican Party?

Mitt Romney attempts to buy off Ames straw poll

This Washington Post story is just incredible:

DES MOINES, Aug. 9 -- As thousands of Republican activists prepare to descend on Ames, Iowa, tomorrow for the straw poll meant to gauge support for the GOP's presidential contenders, the event has all the markings of a historic mismatch.

One candidate, former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney, has assembled an unrivaled operation for the event: a statewide corps of 60 "super-volunteers," who have been paid between $500 and $1,000 per month to talk him up; a fleet of buses; more than $2 million in television ads in Iowa; a sleek direct-mail campaign; and a consultant who has been paid nearly $200,000 to direct Romney's straw poll production, which will include barbecue billed as the best in the state.

Facing off against this are a half-dozen candidates whose combined Iowa expenditures through the end of June did not match the $1 million Romney had spent by that point, not including his many TV ads. Tommy Thompson, the former Wisconsin governor, advertised in the Denison Bulletin & Review at a cost of $297. Kansas Sen. Sam Brownback has been luring voters to Ames by sending out "brown bracelets" to wear around town ("a great conversation starter with friends and neighbors"). Rep. Tom Tancredo (Colo.) is offering a tour of Washington -- dinner included -- to anyone who brings 25 friends to Ames.

It was not supposed to play out this way. Romney's vast investment in the straw poll was designed to outmuscle former New York mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani and Sen. John McCain (Ariz.) in the GOP's first real contest of the election, and to give Romney a needed early boost as he works to build national recognition. But his preparation may have been too impressive for his own good. Watching Romney spend so much, Giuliani and McCain dropped out of the straw poll in June. Romney plunged ahead anyway, setting up a mismatch of almost Gulliverian proportions.

What the heck was Romney thinking of here? Romney is spending $1 million plus to win this Republican straw poll that really won't mean much of a difference now since both Giuliani and McCain have dropped out of the poll. I can understand Romney's strategy here--spend the money to win the poll, and use the poll results to build a nation-wide campaign. But with Giuliani and McCain not participating, Romney's victory in the Ames poll will probably be a hollow victory--we're probably going to see more political pundits talking about Giuliani's absence from the poll, and whatever result Giuliani gets in the poll, rather than Romney's in-depth adulation of his victory. The key here is that Romney needed Giuliani to fight him in this poll, in order to increase its significance. Instead Giuliani is sitting this poll out, deciding to continue his own fight against Romney, in Iowa, after the Ames poll.

There are a couple of other interesting details to talk about regarding this story. The first detail is the amount of money Romney is spending in this poll. According to the WaPost:

But with so much money flowing, it is becoming harder to justify the straw poll as a reflection of voter sentiment, said Dave Roederer, the chairman of McCain's campaign in Iowa. Last year, when he was deciding whose campaign to join, he met with Giuliani, who was aghast at the practice of campaigns paying the state party for the $35 tickets that voters need to enter the poll.

" 'In New York, we call that a shakedown. What do you call it here?' " Roederer recalls Giuliani asking. "And I said, 'Well, I guess we call it a fundraiser.' "

Romney, a former venture capitalist and multimillionaire who has lent his campaign $9 million of his own money, has hired buses to travel the state, picking up supporters. It will cost his campaign hundreds of thousands of dollars to pay the entry fee when they arrive. Romney snared the prime spot for his tent -- space at the event is auctioned off by the state GOP -- reportedly by bidding $10,000 more than rivals.

[Rival] campaigns report seeing multiple, glossy -- and expensive -- mailings during recent weeks. "Glossy, big, die-cuts," one staffer said. "Autopen stuff. Really high-quality, high-class mail. They are filling Iowans' mailboxes."

A PowerPoint presentation prepared by Giuliani advisers predicts that Romney could draw as many as 24,000 people and beat his nearest competitor by 8 to 1. "The Iowa staff is massive compared to others competing in Ames," the presentation states, "and the addition of staff and volunteers from around the country will make this a massive effort."

A Democratic source who has tracked Romney's ad buys said Romney had spent about $2.4 million on TV ads in Iowa, beginning in February and running consistently since May. The source estimated Romney had spent an additional $2.5 million on campaign materials other than television in the state.

[....]

Romney's money gives him a huge advantage in a contest that is less about persuading undecided voters and more about bringing warm bodies to Ames. Officials with other campaigns have complained privately that some local party activists have said they would like to support their candidate but felt compelled to back Romney because of the stipends he was offering.

The Ames straw poll has become more of a contest on how to buy Iowa votes, rather than how to convince undecided voters to choose one particular candidate over another. What is happening here is that Iowans are happily taking Romney's money, and they may happily vote for Romney in the Ames straw poll, but are they willing to stick with him in through the caucus? If the Ames straw poll, or any Iowa poll afterwards, still shows a significant number of undecided Republican votes until January 2008, then all that money that Romney has spent in Iowa was wasted. According to this University of Iowa poll, there is still a third of self-identified Republicans who are undecided as to who to support. If the Ames straw poll also reflects this one-third of undecided GOP voters, then Romney is going to have a tough time trying to explain why he couldn't convince this significant block of undecided voters to choose him, even after spending all that money trying to buy their votes. This is also going to bring up the issue of candidates trying to buy votes here, especially since Romney was so willing to pay 60 of these "super-volunteers" a $500-a-month stipends to Iowans in return for their support. This Romney $500-a-month stipend is new to me. I can understand how candidates will use money to buy votes through television and radio ads, or even direct mail ad-campaigns, where the candidates will send autographed 8x10 glossy photos of themselves with form letters asking you to send them campaign contributions. But this is the first time I've ever heard of a modern presidential candidate offering cash to a voter in return for that voter's support of that candidate (I'm sure there are some historical references in U.S. presidential elections here). Are these "super-volunteers part of the Romney campaign staff? What specifically does the Romney campaign expect from these "super-volunteers" in exchange for their stipend? I would be curious to see how this relationship of Romney's paying his "super-volunteers" is reflected within the Ames straw poll results. Because again, if we still see a significant percentage of undecided GOP voters, then why did Romney embark on this spending spree when the polls were consistently showing a large percentage of undecided votes? Did Romney expect he could buy those votes?

The second interesting detail is that one-third of undecided Republican voters. If the Ames straw poll shows one-third of Republican voters are still undecided, this is bad news for all of the Republican candidates. It shows that the Republican candidates are completely out-of-touch with their constituents, who may be worried about the serious problems this country faces in Iraq, the volatile economy, the housing meltdown, and even the health care crisis. These candidates are oblivious to these issues. This can be seen through this large, undecided block, which is really nothing more than a "None of the Above" choice.

The poll results will be coming.

Daily Headliners--Cold War is back, Giuliani 9/11 exaggerations, Cheney urging attacks on Iran, 'Separate but equal' latrines in Iraq

How about another day of Daily Headliners? This is going to be fun....

Russian strategic bombers resume Cold War sorties: Wait a minute--I thought we already won the Cold War? This is from Reuters News;

MOSCOW (Reuters) - Russia's strategic bombers have resumed their Cold War practice of flying long-haul missions to areas patrolled by NATO and the United States, a Russian general said on Thursday.

A Russian bomber flew on Wednesday over a U.S. military base on the Pacific island of Guam and "exchanged smiles" with U.S. pilots scrambled to track it, said Major-General Pavel Androsov, head of long-range aviation in the Russian air force.

"It has always been the tradition of our long-range aviation to fly far into the ocean, to meet (U.S.) aircraft carriers and greet (U.S. pilots) visually," Androsov told a news conference.

"Yesterday we revived this tradition, and two of our young crews paid a visit to the area of the (U.S. Pacific Naval Activities) base of Guam.

"I think the result was good. We met our colleagues - fighter jet pilots from (U.S.) aircraft carriers. We exchanged smiles and returned home," Androsov said.

What a wonderful feeling--going back to the good ole Cold War days. Remember this?



There was a turtle by the name of Bert
and Bert the turtle was very alert;
when danger threatened him he never got hurt
he knew just what to do...
He ducked!
And covered!

Giuliani Says He is Equal to 9/11 Recovery Workers: Why do I get the feeling that our mainstream newspapers are looking more like the front pages of The Onion these days? This is from ABC News;

ABC News' Jan Simmonds Reports: In Ohio on Thursday, Republican presidential candidate Rudy Giuliani R-NY handed his critics new ammunition regarding his role surrounding 9/11.

Speaking to reporters in Cincinnati, Giuliani said: "I was at ground zero as often, if not more, than most of the workers. ... I was there working with them. I was exposed to exactly the same things they were exposed to. So in that sense, I'm one of them."

Michael Palladino, head of the Detectives Endowment Association, the union of NYPD detectives, told the Associated Press that the mayor's record can't compare to those who spent 12 months sifting through toxic debris for evidence and human remains.

"As a result of their hard work, many are sick and injured. The mayor, although he did a fine job with 9/11, I don't think he rises to the level of being an equal with those men and women who were involved in the rescue, recovery and cleanup," Palladino said.

Here is the YouTube video of Giuliani's exaggeration through TPM Cafe:



How do you respond to such an exaggeration? Carpetbagger dryly notes that Guiliani couldn't have been at ground zero as often as the rescue workers since Giuliani "was busy doing press conferences. He couldn’t possibly have been exposed to the same toxins the workers were exposed to, unless Giuliani is prepared to argue that he was sifting through debris and human remains for 40 hours a week for a year." So Giuliani is either lying his bald head off, or he has so deluded himself into this fantasy of America's Mayor becoming America's President, that he will say the most asinine comments in order to get elected. Of course, Carpetbagger has even more Giuliani exaggerations here.

Cheney urging strikes on Iran: This McClatchy story shouldn't be too surprising for anyone. President Bush is beating his chest, accusing Iran of arming and training insurgents into killing U.S. soldiers, while threatening action if Iran continues to persist. At the same time, there is a back story of Darth Cheney continually whispering into the president's ear that the U.S. should attack Iran....The U.S. should attack Iran....The U.S. should attack Iran.

Haven't we've had enough of this?



At U.S. base, Iraqis must use separate latrine: I just don't know how to comment on this McClatchy story, except to say it is time to get out of Iraq. We've gotten rid of "separate but equal" facilities from the United States in the 1950s, only to see it now reemerge in Iraq. From McClatchy;

FORWARD OPERATING BASE WARHORSE, Iraq — The sign taped to the men's latrine is just five lines:

"US MILITARY CONTRACTORS CIVILIANS ONLY!!!!!"

It needed only one: "NO IRAQIS."

Here at this searing, dusty U.S. military base about four miles west of Baqouba, Iraqis — including interpreters who walk the same foot patrols and sleep in the same tents as U.S. troops — must use segregated bathrooms.

Another sign, in a dining hall, warns Iraqis and "third-country nationals" that they have just one hour for breakfast, lunch or dinner. American troops get three hours. Iraqis say they sometimes wait as long as 45 minutes in hot lines to get inside the chow hall, leaving just 15 minutes to get their food and eat it.

It's been nearly 60 years since President Harry Truman ended racial segregation in the U.S. military. But at Forward Operating Base Warhorse it's alive and well, perhaps the only U.S. military facility with such rules, Iraqi interpreters here say.

It's unclear precisely who ordered the rules. "The rule separating local national latrines from soldiers was enacted about two to three rotations ago," Maj. Raul Marquez, a spokesman for the 3rd Brigade Combat Team of the 1st Cavalry Division, from Fort Hood, Texas, wrote in an e-mail. That was before his brigade or the 3rd Stryker Combat Brigade of the 2nd Infantry Division, from Fort Lewis, Wash., the other major combat force here, was based at Warhorse.

The madness continues on....

Friday Fun Stuff--How about some lovely music?

I found this through BlueGal, and it is just wickedly funny. The musicians were playing normally, and then suddenly...



Don't take your cell phone to a concert when these guys are playing....

McCain polls behind Obama in Iowa

I found this story through Carpetbagger, and even I couldn't believe it. Carpetbagger found a University of Iowa poll that shows the McCain campaign to be in a complete collapse of support by the GOP. According to this University of Iowa poll:

Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney appears to have taken a commanding lead in Iowa among registered Republican voters and Republican caucus goers, according to a new University of Iowa poll released today, Wednesday, Aug. 8. Poll results also indicate that former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani has lost support, and support for Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., has collapsed well into the third tier of candidates.

[....]

The changes among Republican voters since March are dramatic. Romney is now the preferred candidate at 21.8 percent -- double his March support.

Giuliani's support, 10 percent, decreased by almost 8.5 percent. McCain's support has collapsed in Iowa. His support among registered Republicans dropped from 14.4 percent in March to 1.8 percent in July-August. UI political scientists note that McCain has been passed in popularity not only by former Sen. Fred Thompson, R-Tenn., who earned 5.2 percent support, but also by a Democratic challenger, [Barack] Obama, who is supported by 6.7 percent of Republicans. No other candidate received more than 3 percent support.

Fewer Republicans are undecided now (34.8 percent) than in March (39.9 percent). Still, the percentage of undecided Republicans is nearly 12 points higher than the percentage of undecided Democrats.

The PDF file of the poll results can be found here.

This McCain support of 1.8 percent is the poll of registered Republican voters selecting both Democratic and Republican candidates here. What this means is that 6.7 percent of Republicans polled here would choose Barack Obama, while 1.8 percent of Republicans polled would choose McCain. Even worst for McCain, he is practically tied with Democrat Hillary Clinton, who polled 2.1 percent of registered Republicans. Barring a miracle from God, the McCain campaign is practically history. The campaign has around $2 million left in its coffers, and the campaign has bee plagued with staff resignations and layoffs. The Straight Talk Express is running on fumes here. What is more, the McCain campaign is facing a Romney campaign that has around $14 million in the bank, and a Giuliani campaign that has $17 million. McCain doesn't have the money to fight against Romney or Giuliani. In a sense, this drop in the Iowa poll really shows the desperation that John McCain is probably feeling as his campaign sinks. McCain has already backtracked away from his sunny optimism of winning the war in Iraq, saying that he's "not positive we can win this fight." His strategy of aligning himself to an even more pro-war position than President Bush, in order to court hard-lined conservatives, at a time when the American public has turned against the war, has completely failed. Republican voters are starting to turn towards Romney, even though there is still a significant number that would like to choose a different candidate. According to the Iowa poll:

Caucus goers of both parties were asked to name the candidate they intend to support. They were not given candidates' names as a prompt. Participants were asked questions about the top candidates in their own party: the extent to which each candidate is the party's strongest candidate, and whether each candidate is electable. Republican caucus goers were also asked a series of questions about the Straw Poll in Ames.

Of the caucus sample of 787 voters, 303 self-identified as Republicans. The margin of error for this subsample is +/-5.5 percent.

Nearly a third -- 31.1 percent -- of the self-identified Republican caucus goers remained undecided. With 26.9 percent, Romney led his nearest competitor, Giuliani (11.3 percent), by more than 15 percent. Thompson was third with 6.5 percent, followed by Rep. Tom Tancredo, R-Colo., and Sen. Sam Brownback, R-Kan., both at 4.2 percent. With 3.2 percent, McCain was the only remaining Republican with more than 3 percent.

Now this poll question is asking Republicans who they would support of their own political party's candidates. John McCain polled behind Romney, Giuliani, Thompson (who has not yet declared his candidacy), Tancredo, and Brownback. If John McCain remains in sixth place at the end of the Iowa caucuses, I doubt that he will continue campaigning through New Hampshire. McCain may either bow out after Iowa, or he will continue to run a skeletal campaign through New Hampshire (Or South Carolina, if the money holds out) in order to gain whatever delegates he can to play spoiler during the Republican National Convention. It is all going to depend on how much money McCain can raise after Iowa, and how fiscally tight the campaign can be in spending. But at the moment, a McCain presidency appears to be pretty much finished.

Gibson radio producer: Edwards comments "a poor choice of words"

On August 7, 2007, I found an interesting story where a Fox News radio producer for John Gibson claimed that 'Democratic presidential candidate former Sen. John Edwards (NC) "whored his wife's cancer as a fundraising gimmick."' You can listen to the comment here on YouTube. Well, Media Matters has a little update on this story:

On the August 7 edition of Fox News host John Gibson's nationally syndicated radio program, the show's executive producer, known on air as "Angry Rich," described as "a poor choice of words" his August 3 statement -- documented by Media Matters for America -- that Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards "whored his wife's cancer as a fundraising gimmick."

Angry Rich did not apologize for the remark and went on to say of Edwards: "That doesn't mean he's not duplicitous, which he is."

After Gibson asked him to "be specific about what [he] meant," Angry Rich read from an April 5 New York Post article that stated, "Democrat White House hopeful John Edwards' team has been collecting email addresses from supporters who've sent his cancer-stricken wife, Elizabeth, notes -- and using them for fundraising requests, aides acknowledged yesterday." Gibson said that Angry Rich's comment was "unfortunate," but then asserted that Angry Rich was nonetheless "on high ground" because his remark had come in response to the Post report.

During the discussion, Gibson never quoted Angry Rich's original "choice of words" -- that Edwards had "whored his wife's cancer as a fundraising gimmick." Rather, he said that Angry Rich had "made some offhand comment about Edwards and the way Edwards has, shall we say, employed his wife in the campaign," and later described the remark as follows: "[Y]ou said that Edwards was using his wife in the campaign in a certain way."

You've got to love the spin here. So instead of whoring his wife's cancer as a fundraising gimmick, Angry Rich really meant that Edwards "employed his wife in the campaign." Excuse me, but how does "whoring his wife's cancer as a fundraising gimmick" become transformed into "employing his wife in the campaign?" Because in that first statement, Angry Rich is specifically stating that Edwards is using his wife's cancer in order to raise campaign contributions. Now Angry Rich is changing his statement by saying Edwards employing his wife in the campaign--without using any references to Elizabeth Edwards' cancer. Angry Rich is trying to admit that he practically slandered Edwards and his wife (and perhaps even his wife's cancer as well) without having to admit it as well. And forget about having Angry Rich or John Gibson apologize to Edwards for this guttural character attack against him. And even after Angry Rich admits that it was a "poor choice of words" he still attacks Edwards for using his wife's cancer as a fundraising gimmmick. Consider this from Media Matters:

ANGRY RICH: This is from the New York Post on April 5. "Democrat White House hopeful John Edwards' team has been collecting email addresses from supporters who've sent his cancer-stricken wife, Elizabeth, notes and using them for fundraising requests, aides acknowledged yesterday."

GIBSON: Ah. So if you were, let's say, [conservative radio host] Laura Ingraham, who wouldn't be a John Edwards supporter but would have a great deal of sympathy and sort of simpatico and sisterhood feelings toward Elizabeth Edwards because they're both cancer victims --

ANGRY RICH: Right.

GIBSON: Laura went through her episode, and Elizabeth Edwards is going through hers. If Laura Ingraham sent Elizabeth Edwards a, you know, "stay strong, get well" note, they would use that as a campaign fundraising mail piece, expecting somebody like Laura Ingraham to cough up some bucks for --

ANGRY RICH: They admitted to turning those emails around and soliciting cash, yes.

GIBSON: So, your remark --

ANGRY RICH: -- was about that.

GIBSON: While unfortunate --

ANGRY RICH: It was a poor choice of words, sure.

GIBSON: -- was about that. And so, in fact, you were on high ground.

ANGRY RICH: Right.

GIBSON: Correct.

ANGRY RICH: That doesn't mean he's not duplicitous, which he is.

GIBSON: He is, yes.

It is rather ironic that Angry Rich sources his little rant against Edwards using his wife's cancer from the New York Post, which is a newspaper that is owned by News Corporation's Rupert Murdoch. Guess what else Murdoch owns--Fox News Corporation, which provides syndicated radio services through Fox News Radio, that happens to host The John Gibson Show. In other words, Rupert Murdoch is both John Gibson's and Angry Rich's employer! Talk about self-generating spin here! We're talking about a Murdoch-owned newspaper publishing a negative story attacking Edwards, which is then picked up by a Murdoch-owned radio program to continue regurgitating this negative attack. And yes, it is regurgitation here. The NY Post story came out on April 5, 2007--four months ago! It is stale news now.

But it really doesn't matter to the wing-nuts now. They still can't debate John Edwards on any issue, not when they have been cheer-leading a Bush administration that has so screwed up this country with Iraq, Katrina, the economy, intelligence scandals, erosion of civil liberties, the debt, the attorney scandals, the health care crisis--the list goes on here. The only weapon the Right has are these malicious character attacks as a means to instill fear within the American people. It is what Gibson and Angry Rich are doing now, even as they supposedly admit their "poor choice of words," by still clinging to the notion that Angry Rich is on "the high ground" as he continues attacking Edwards by using this four-month-old NY Post story to support his guttural remark from last week. This mindless hatred and vitriol is just amazing.

Daily Headliners--Romney flip-flops, McCain flop-flips, Bush on accountability, President Woody cuts taxes

How about some Daily Headliners here.

Good God Mitt Romney sucks: That's the title for this incredible Americablog story. Americablog lays out a strong case of GOP presidential candidate Mitt Romney lying (or is the politically correct term flip flopping?) on the issues of abortion and illegal immigration. What is even more amazing is how Romney is using these latest lies to attack his fellow GOP candidates Rudy Giuliani and John McCain on the issue of illegal immigration. Mitt Romney has become the latest GOP candidate to say or do anything in order to get into the White House.

After Four Years of Certainty, McCain ‘Not Positive We Can Win’ In Iraq: This ThinkProgress story is a big admission on Senator John McCain's part;

“I’m not positive we can win this fight,” he told about 150 people at a $50-a-person fundraiser in a Highland Township barn. “But I believe we’re winning. The Anbar province is dramatically better and Baghdad has some neighborhoods that are much more secure.”

John McCain has been a big backer of the Bush administration's failed war in Iraq, even going to the point of calling for more American troops in Iraq than President Bush was proposing. The McCain campaign strategy was to court the hard-lined conservative base that is still supporting the Bush war by making McCain even more pro-war than Bush was. That strategy has backfired badly, sending the McCain campaign into a tailspin. I'm wondering if McCain is scrambling to shift his extreme pro-war views as a means to capture GOP votes that have been going to the Romney or Giuliani campaigns.

President Bush on accountability: This is just amazing. President Bush flat-out lied to the Washington press corps. Here is the transcript of the president's press briefing. Here is the YouTube video;



President Bush gave Scooter Libby a Get-Out-Of-Jail-Free card just after a U.S. Court of Appeals judge rejected Libby's request to postpone his incarceration. Having Scooter Libby spend one day in jail was just too much for President Bush, who then commuted Libby's sentence, saying that a $250,000 fine was punishment enough. Of course, Libby (Or should I say The Scooter Libby Defense Fund) quickly paid the fine off. President Bush praised Libby, even as Libby resigned from his position as chief of staff for Vice President Cheney. And Alberto Gonzales--look at how many times he has lied to Congress! President Bush holds no one accountable in his administration, even as he consistently lies about "accountability" in his administration.

Bush May Try to Cut Corporate Tax Rates: With the Dow dropping over 380 points on investor fears of credit crunch, the Bush administration has decided that its economic policy to calm Wall Street investors is....Another round of tax cuts! Only this time it is cutting corporate tax rates. Reading this story, I'm reminded of an older post I wrote about the similarities between President Bush and a certain Toy Story character. I think it would be useful to resurrect that post again:

President Woody was a somewhat satirical essay that I had written for a friend. When the 2000 elections were underway between Al Gore and George Bush, I noticed an interesting similarity between the Republican presidential candidate, and a certain well-known Toy Story character. Hence, the idea for writng a little satirical essay had sprouted within my mind. I wrote it, sent it off to my friend, then just about forgot about it. Until now.

And this weekend seems like a perfect time to publish this little essay. The essay was written just after the invasion of Iraq, although the idea has been within my head since 2000. Enjoy it for a good laugh. E.H.

President Woody

In examining how badly the current Democratic leadership is self-destructing with their failure in developing a coherent opposition strategy against the Bush Administration, I would suggest that the top Democratic officials (Tom Daschle, Nancy Pelosi, Terry McAullif), resign from their positions in politics and enter into a business venture of producing toys. One of the hottest toys they could produce this year could be The President Woody doll.

That’s right—The President Woody doll. President Woody would be a one-foot high doll, with the face in the likeness of President George W Bush, while dressed as the character Woody in the Pixar movie Toy Story. President Woody. He would have an empty gun holster, a shiny gold star emblazoned with the presidential seal, and a highly technological drawstring, which when pulled, would provide the American voter a recording of such Bush witticisms as:

“The government has a surplus—We must cut taxes!”

“The United States is in a recession—We must cut taxes!”

“A giant killer asteroid is heading towards the United States—We must cut taxes!”

Of course, if the Democratic leadership can act now, a new 2004 version of President Woody—The Commander-In-Chief Edition can be produced. Our hero President Woody—dressed in cammo fatigues—can carry the fight against the dangers of world terrorism. Pull the drawstring and President Woody could proclaim:

“We must invade Iraq because Saddam has amassed weapons of mass destruction!”

“We must invade Iraq because Saddam is harboring terrorists!”

“We must invade Iraq because Saddam is a bad guy!”

“There’s a snake in my boots—Oh, I’m sorry. It’s just Dick Cheney!”

Yes, President Woody. It can become a surprised hit in the toy industry. If market studies show that half the American public either loves George W Bush or hates George W Bush, the President Woody doll can be marketed equally on both sides of the political spectrum. Democrats could buy the President Woody doll to show their anger and cynicism of the current occupant in the White House, while Republicans can buy President Woody since he reiterates the same dull tired statements that the current president will say. The dolls can be manufactured here in the United States—thus providing jobs for unemployed Americans. By entering into this new toy venture, Democratic leaders could possibly open their eyes and see the example of cut-throat, dog-eat-dog, capitalistic hard-ball, business tactics which exists in the United States and use those lessons in the 2008 election. Republicans use those tactics all the time. And finally, all proceeds from the sales of the President Woody doll can be used to fund the 2008 Democratic presidential election for Hillary.

And coming soon in 2005—President Woody: The Space Cadet Edition, where our hero is dressed in a Buzz Lightyear Spacesuit!

Order your President Woody Doll Today! Hurry--While supplies last!