A Message to Loyal Readers of this Blog...

Hello Loyal Readers,

Just a quick note to let you all know that I am on the road - currently accessing the internets from the Tillamook Public Library (a loverly facilty, I might add - fund Public Libraries!!!). I wanted to also let you know that I am having trouble with my laptop. "Bad pool header" is the message I am getting whenever I try to log on, and I don't think that that is a good thing. I'll be back in Tulsa on Sunday evening and have my laptop into Geek Rescue on Monday, so I hope to be back online by Monday evening - please stay tuned... And I'll leave you all with a beautiful shot of the Oregon Coast to dance around in your heads while I am away.

In Praise of Librarians

I am in Portland, Oregon attending the American Association of Law Libraries Annual Meeting and being in the company of fellow librarians (not all of whom are radical and militant, but many of whom are) I would like to point out and praise one brave member of my chosen profession who stood tall this last week and had the audacity to express a fairly innocuous sentiment (McCain = Bush) and was escorted off the premises for her simple expression of free speech. The librarian's name is Carol Kreck and she has blogged about her experience on the Huffington Post. Not only is this a curious sentiment to object to (McCain = Bush) as it would seem that any good Republican would not only welcome a comparison between a sitting president and his own party's candidate for the same office, but also it is curious that any self-respecting Republican would find fault with a sign that merely compares two prominent party stalwarts. It was even more strange that this sign caught the attention of the local police department who saw fit to escort Ms. Kreck away from an event that candidate McCain was about to appear. The event at which McCain was about to appear was being held in a public building - Denver Center for the Performing Arts. The irony apparently lost on the police who, under orders from the McCain campaign, removed and ticketed Ms. Kreck for attempting to enter the McCain campaign event.

Life Without Dogs

The house is so empty when I open the door at the end of a working day, there are no creatures scratching at the door or whining (just a little bit ) from Dillie-doo-doo or Tulsey-loo-loo. I MISS MY BOYZ :( Who wouldn't miss these sweet faces?

Tulsey & Dylan

Meanwhile, Over in Afghanistan...

Today in Afghanistan not only is there yet another report about a suicide bomber that killed over 40 people, but also there are reports of more civilians killed by the U.S. military in this war-torn country. That turns out to be just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to problems that are faced in this neglected war in Afghanistan (remember the first war after September 11, 2001, the one that the rest of the world all understood, why we would want to go after the very men who planned and atacked the US on that fateful day). Despite what Fred Barnes says, most experts agree that the war in Afghanistan is every bit as important, if not more so, than the war in Iraq.
It is not just the resurgent Taliban that demonstrates the price we have paid for taking our eye off the ball in Afghanistan, but the poppy crop has exploded as the Taliban uses the revenue raised from growing poppies to keep their group alive and thriving. Along with a resurgent Taliban is the danger of Al-Qaeda working with other militant groups along the Pakistani/Afghan border to reconstitute terrorist cells that send suicide bombers to Kabul and shake up the already unsteady government of President Hamid Karzai, the government that is being propped up by the Bush/Cheney administration.

"While Pakistani militants with links to the Taliban have bolstered their strength in the border areas, the Taliban in Afghanistan have clashed with international troops in the worst summer fighting since the Taliban fell seven years ago. The Taliban have resurfaced strongly in the southern and eastern parts of the country." (NYTimes, July 7, 2008)

So thanks loads, Bush & Cheney (& Condi and Gates), for letting Osama Bin Laden get away, and diverting troops and resources from the real war against those who actually attacked us on 9/11, and leaving a huge mess in your wake. But hey, that's what you're good at, it's the only thing you've ever done during your tenure in office - make a huge mess. And in this mess, like so many of your other messes (Katrina, Iraq, the mortgage crisis, the energy debacle, etc...) people have been hurt and thousands of people have died. Thanks, thanks for nothing, George & Dick.

Major Insurgent Attacks in Afghanistan Since 2001 (NYTimes, July 7, 2008)

A Note to Loyal Readers of this Blog

I just wanted to apologize and explain why I haven't added a new post in almost a week. On Thursday, I drove from Tulsa to Jamestown, Indiana to celebrate my Mom's birthday (and the 4th of July) and to leave my doggies (Tulsey & Dylan) at "summer camp." The house is now entirely too quiet and feels empty, but I will drive back to Jamestown (about 620 miles) at the end of July and pick up da boyz. They will no doubt be leaner when I see them next; in fact, my brother-in-law noticed that Dillie has gotten rather chubby, so we whispered that this was "fat camp" for Dylan ;) Anyway, here's a little something for you all to watch and listen to. I hope that this eye candy (Willie or Sheryl - whichever way you swing) makes up for the lack of posts.

Sheryl Crow & Willie Nelson - On the Road Again (Dedicated to RB :D )

Tacking Right - Governing Left

Tacking Right – Governing Left

I have been mulling over the political moves, statements and actions that Senator Barack Obama has made over the last week or so and I think I’ve made some kind of peace with myself and with him about the various stances that he has taken. He is no doubt tacking to the center (some may even accuse him of going to the right, but I think that that is little bit of hyperbole). Here are the statements that have caused me concern over the last week: First, Obama’s response to the Supreme Court's only decent ruling at the end of this term – the one that ruled that the death penalty was not appropriate for child rapists. I agreed with this opinion, primarily because I am not in favor of the death penalty in any circumstances and even if I were, I think that children are notoriously unreliable witnesses, and are so malleable and easily influenced that little stock can be put in their testimony. So I was truly disappointed that Barack Obama came out with a statement critical of the Court’s decision. Obama said that he thought that the Court had gotten it wrong and that the decision as to whether a crime qualified as a capital crime should be left up to the states. The old "states' rights" gambit is often heard on the right when those on the other side of the political aisle feel that the Federales have interfered too directly in a right that they value (abortion and education come to mind here, although I also must point out that the “states' rights” argument doesn’t seem to apply when a state votes for assisted suicide or medical use of marijuana).

That was the first sign that Obama was looking for issues onto which he could take a more conservative stand and hopefully slide under the radar of his progressive base. But we are watching vigilantly and we notice just about every move our candidate makes, and although few of us faulted him for foregoing public campaign financing, some of his other stands of late have us shaking our heads. For instance, he not only challenged the Supreme Court decision on the Death Penalty, but he also (and I believe that this is a much more troubling stand) reneged on his promise to filibuster the FISA bill that offers retroactive immunity to telecom companies that have by all accounts broken the law.

But as Jason Rosenbaum wrote at HuffPo in an article entitled The Obama Problem:
“But the only way to hold a Presidential candidate in the general election accountable once the general election season comes around is to work for their defeat or otherwise endanger their victory. For most of us, given the alternative of four more years of deadlocked government and a stubborn, hyper-aggressive President McCain, that is not an acceptable option. I see occasional commenters writing about not lifting a finger to help Obama now that he's screwed us on FISA or other issues, but I don't think very many of us in the progressive movement are there. Am I bummed, am I pissed that Obama and most of our Democratic leaders caved in on FISA? Absolutely, and there's nothing wrong with saying so. But am I going to "hold Obama accountable" for this action? Well, no, frankly. I don't think there's a way to do that without doing something far worse. It's the nature of the American political system: winner take all, no instant runoffs, no fusion voting (except in a few states). In the months before a Presidential general election, I can't think of another alternative re the Presidential race other than doing everything I can do to help Obama win.”

So be it an unwelcome lesson in pragmatism or a cold slap in the face, we must stand by our candidate for the alternative is so horrible that we cannot or will not imagine it. I will not live in a country that continues the horrendous policies of the current Bush/Cheney administration. I could not abide the election of John McCain, so I will fight my heart out for Barack Obama and hope against hope that he is a practical person, too. And that once he gets into office he will lead again with his good heart and his fine mind and get this country back on track. It seems to me our not our only but also our best hope. Viva Obama. Si se puede! Yes, we can and we must. Peace out, everybody. (Another version of this post appears at FourFreedomsBlog)

The Guardian in U.K. Gets Obama right (Daily Kos, June 28, 2008)

Obama Supporters Take His Middle Name as Their Own (NYTimes, June 29, 2008)

Another Day...Another Report that Confirms Our Worst Fears

"When it comes to the hiring of nonpartisan career attorneys, our system of justice should not be corrupted by partisan politics. It appears the politicization at Justice was so pervasive that even interns had to pass a partisan litmus test. ''
Representative John Conyers (D - MI)

So, surprise, surprise, the Department of Justice has been playing politics when hiring (and promoting) attorneys and interns. It took yet another report to confirm our worst fears about this deceitful Bush/Cheney administration. Surprise, surprise, Alberto Gonzalez (and John Ashcroft before him) politicized his department from the top down through the ranks of attorneys across the country. Those who were charged with hiring new attorneys were told to look out for "liberal" words such as "social justice" and "liberal associations" like the mention of an environmental organization on an applicant's resume. The problems is that this kind of action - so proven - is illegal.

Here is the law as it is spelled out it the Code of Federal Regulations:
"It is the policy of the Department of Justice to seek to eliminate discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, sexual orientation, national origin, marital status, political affiliation, age, or physical or mental handicap in employment within the Department and to assure equal employment opportunity for all employees and applicants for employment."
28 CFR, Section 42.1(a)

So will this administration be held accountable for another dereliction of duty, another blatant refusal to obey the law, another situation in which they smugly lied and expect to get away with their fraud? The answer, from what we've seen so far, is unfortunately, "no, no, they won't." Imagine working in an environment that was so politically charged that if you couldn't reminisce about your law school days at Regent University College of Law where you were president of the Federalist Law Society, or if you even mentioned that summer you worked for Greenpeace, you could lose your supposedly nonpartisan job.

"[Y]ou should know that there's a lot of people who believe that these deselections are either irrational or so irrational that they are motivated by politics, and that's a problem, you know. Whatever the truth of it is, when this many people in a Department are this unhappy about something, it's going to be an issue."
Peter Keisler, the Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Division, as quoted in An Investigation of Allegations of Politicized Hiring in the Department of Justice Honors Program and Summer Law Intern Program

Yes Virginia, America Does Torture

"This report demonstrates that the permissive environment created by implicit and explicit authorizations by senior US officials to 'take the gloves off' encouraged forms of torture even beyond the draconian methods approved at various times between 2002 and 2004. In an environment of moral disengagement that countenances authorized techniques designed to humiliate and dehumanize detainees, it is not surprising that other forms of human cruelty such as physical and sexual assault were practiced. The fact that these unauthorized torture practices happened over extended periods of time at multiple US detention facilities suggests that a permissive command environment existed across theatres and at several levels in the chain-of-command. This climate allowed both authorized and unauthorized techniques to be practiced, apparently without consequence."
From the Executive Summary, Broken Laws, Broken Lives

This week the Physicians for Human Rights released a study entitled "Broken Laws, Broken Lives." The report details the findings of the Physicians for Human Rights' study that focused on several former inmates/insurgents who were incarcerated at Abu Graib, Iraq or Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. The medical examinations revealed numerous pieces of evidence that corroborated the stories of the suspected-terrorists/torture-victims.

The wounds, excluding the obvious Post-Tramautic-Stress-Disorder with the accompanying depression, anxiety, inability to sleep, and problems controlling anger, include a permanent hole in a man's cheek (from being stabbed with a screwdriver), numerous shoulder injuries from being made to stay in stress positions, to any number of injuries sustained after mutliple beatings, kickings, and sexual violations. I encourage all Americans to read at the very least the executive summary of this important report and ask yourself if you are proud that money you supplied to your government in the form of taxes was put to this use. If you are half as appalled as I am then you need to contact you senators and representative and even your lame-duck president and insist that they follow the Geneva Conventions and stop torturing people in the name of keeping us safe from terrorism.

Pharmacological Integrity, Anyone?

SAFE SEX NO MORE...

Imagine you are a young woman, whose boyfriend had too much to drink the night before and came over to your house and insisted on violating you. You are in high school, you cannot support a baby, and after being on hold for over an hour the next morning, you get a doctor to prescribe you a dose of RU486. The doctor thoughtfully called the 'script into the closest pharmacy to the young woman's home. But it turned out to not be a real pharmacy but rather a place where religious beliefs reign supreme, where there is another calling other than the oath that the pharmacists agreed to, where it is more than okay - it is necessary - to refuse to fill this particular prescription. Imagine this scenario and then close your eyes and imagine that it is your daughter or your niece or your sister or your friend, or that, god forbid, it is you. Imagine that you live way out of town, a good half hour's drive from the closest store, the closest drugstore. Imagine this scene...

Something has been stuck in my craw for a few years or so, but on Monday I saw an article in the Washington Post that addressed this issue and has prompted me to pen this post. The issue is one of pharmacists who refuse to fill a legitimate prescription because it somehow violates their religious beliefs. To most of these "professional pharmacists" it matters not whether the prescription is for a woman who was raped by her uncle the night before and finally was able to get in touch with her doctor and got him to call in a 'script for RU486 so that she wouldn't have to live out this crime (of which she was an innocent victim) for the rest of her life (and the potential child's life). Or it matters not to these "pharmacists" whether the woman is married or single, whether she wants to buy birth control pills or condoms, whether she is sleeping with an unfaithful husband, or whether she must deal with her husband's demands with a houseful of children already under foot.

Yet these same people ("pharmacists"), who must obtain a state license to dispense medication, have no problem filling prescriptions for Viagra or Cialis. How in the world can a pharmacist reconcile this horrible hypocrisy? What in the world do they think will happen after a man takes Viagra or Cialis (although with Cialis I understand that it may not happen for up to 36 hours)? A man will look to have sex with a woman. So why prevent a woman from protecting herself from whatever disease this man may carry or from the possibility of becoming pregnant? What if he isn't completely honest with his partner? What if he is on the down-low? What if his sexual repertoire includes furtive interludes with other men in public restrooms? Or worse yet, what if the advances are unwelcome and unwanted, yet he insists on "doing it" anyway.

This article from the Washington Post, details not only the rationale behind these "pharmacists," but also presents a tale of a new chain of drugstores that are being built across the country that will allow, encourage, ney, require, that pharmacists NOT fill prescriptions that the owner of the chain of drugstores finds morally objectionable. It is an outrage, and that is why I am using this small soap box that I have to alert women and concerned men to write to their state representatives and senators and also copy the federal equivalent on your letter or e-mail or text message. Tell them that religion has no place when it runs counter to accepted medical practice and opinion, tell them that pharmacists are free to practice whatever beliefs they may hold on their own time, but that they cannot bring those beliefs to work, they cannot use those beliefs to refuse to do a significant portion of their jobs and still expect to be hired to do their jobs. If they cannot do the work, don't plan to take this profession on as a career - period.

Tulsa Pride 2008

Tulsa Pride 2008 at Centennial Park, Saturday, June 14, 2008

Happy Father's Day!

Happy Father's Day, Dad!

Today is a day set aside to send cards and ties and stamps and t-shirts to our Dads. It is a day to celebrate the most important man in many of our lives, to, at the very least, give him a phone call. That is if you are lucky enough to be like me and have a wonderful man as a father and to have a father who is still alive. (Condolences to the family of Tim Russert). Unlike so many of my friends my age who have lost their fathers at ages way too young, I am lucky to still have my Dad with me here on this planet, only a phone call away. There is nothing more reassuring than hearing the voice of my Dad on the other end of the phone.

My father is a great human being - in so many ways, he is an excellent father, grandfather, husband, brother, uncle and he was a dutiful son. He is known for his frugality - "Bargain Bob" is a nickname that holds much credence for my Dad, as he has always been a coupon user, a bargain bin hunter, a sales watcher and through his life he has no doubt saved thousands of dollars which he has invested wisely and now is enjoying the fruits of his frugality, by carefully spending the money he so assiduously saved.

My Dad got up every morning of his working life and scrapped the ice off the windshield of his used high mileage cars in the winter and rode to work in the heat of the summer in cars that rarely had air conditioners. He is a true conservative, and I mean that in the best sense of the word - he conserves water, gas, food, electricity. He takes great joy in reviving plants that have been put out in the sun at the end of the planting season as lost causes, he buys them for a song then brings them home and watches them grow, bloom, and blossom. He loves to garden and he grows amazing tomatoes, green beans, and corn on the cob - add a couple spoonfuls of cottage cheese and you have a great summer supper - a meal that always makes me think of my Dad when I fix it far away from Indiana.

My Dad has lived most all of his life in Indiana, except when he was in the service (Army) when he spent time at Fort Dix in New Jersey and Fort Huahuca, Arizona and a brief stint at Shell Oil Co. in Houston, Texas after he graduated from Purdue University with a degree in Chemical Engineering, but he always came back to the state where he was born - he is a Hoosier (although my brother would argue that Dad is a Boilermaker, but I beg to differ).

My Father was reared as a member of the Society of Friends (Quakers) and he chose to rear his children in that faith. That faith imbued me with a strong sense of social justice and that to work for peace is perhaps the highest calling we can do on this earth. My Dad is a great guy and I love him with all of my heart and I thank my lucky stars that I landed in his family and that I am his "Margaret Faye." Happy Father's Day, Dad! Sorry your gift, such as it is, will not arrive until tomorrow.

Steph Serves as Grand Marshallof LA's Gay Pride Parade

Stephanie Miller served as Grand Marshall to the Los Angeles Gay Pride Parade, riding on the float with Steph was our own Rebekah Baker. Stephanie's outfit could be described as follows:

1. A tranny at a 4th of July picnic.

2. Liz Taylor while she was still drinking.

3. A rip-off of Mean Jean Schmidt's exploding patriotic outfit.

4. Sparkle meets Geraldo and Billo's sex dungeon.

5. Steph's Gay Ray in action.

If you would like to watch the entire parade (Stephanie's float shows about 2 hours and 6 minutes into the video), check it out.

The Good Old Days???

Happy Loving Day!!!

It was exactly 41 years ago today that the Supreme Court of the United States ruled that Virginia's anti-miscegenation law was unconstitutional. The case that prompted this ruling was Loving v. Virginia - a case in which an African-American and Native American (Rappahannock) woman, Mildred Delores Jeter, married a Caucasian man, Richard Perry Loving, in the District of Columbia. They got married in DC in order to avoid the Racial Integrity Act, a Virginia state law banning marriages between any white person and any non-white person.

Fortunately only sixteen states had anti-miscegenation laws in 1967. They were: Alabama, Arkansas, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, North Carolina, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia, and West Virginia. So had Barack Obama's parents met in another state and tried to marry in one of these sixteen states, they would have been stopped in their tracks. These are the good old days - yeah right.

Let's celebrate the progress that we've made, and understand how far we have to go, to see each and every person as an equal part of humanity. And let's work to keep the government out of the business of who we love and how we love them. Let's work for true marriage equality.

Yes, She Can & Yes, She Did!!!

"We must work with optimism and confidence" - perhaps a more sophisticated version of "Yes, we can."

Jim Bourg/Reuters

I truly hope that this post will be accepted by the Hillary Clinton supporters in the manner in which it is offered, with sincerity and gratitude. Thank you Senator Hillary Clinton. Your speech was graciousness personified, especially the parts in which you embraced and endorsed Senator Barack Obama.

Even before she struck her first line, she began to do her characteristic "clap, clap, point, clap, clap," but she caught herself and stopped after one point and went back to a rousing applause before launching into her speech with a witty, yet-not-too-cute opening remark: "This isn't the party I planned, but I sure like the company." Every note was hit right for the occasion, every word rang true, every phrase was joy to the ears of Democrats across the country who yearn so desperately for the unity that Mrs. Clinton expressed and encouraged today.

Thank you Senator Clinton for your inspirational words that sought to encourage each and every one of your supporters to get behind Barack Obama and make sure that this momentous opportunity at this historic moment in time is not wasted by a lack of unity, a failure to come together as a single party, a failure to rise as one voice coming out of the crowd, chanting "Yes, we can." ("We must work with optimism and confidence.")

The blogosphere is abuzz with congratulatory remarks on Clinton's historic speech, with a few bloggers even suggesting that one of the points negotiated on Thursday evening in Dianne Feinstein's living room was the loaning of a speech-writer or two to help Clinton craft what was easily the best speech she has given during this campaign, perhaps ever given. Congratulations Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton - and thank you for your service, service that you have already given and the service that you have yet to give. Thank you, Hillary, thank you.

Here's the transcript of Hillary Clinton's Speech (Washington, D.C., June 7, 2008).

How Will Hillary Bow Out?

Will Hillary Clinton embrace Barack Obama?

The Longest Good-bye.

Okay, we (Obama and his supporters - of which I count myself) have been magnanimous, although I'm sure our magnanimity has been perceived as condescension to the Clinton Camp. We've waited patiently for Hillary Clinton to take her time, to gather her thoughts, to collect her troops, to envisage her next move, but come on already. It's time to say good-bye, good-bye to the campaign trail, good-bye to the debates, the town halls, the meet and greets. It is time to say good-bye to the dream of becoming president of the United States. It is a lofty goal and to say good-bye to a dream so large is something I cannot imagine, although it is time to admit that this woman's dream is nearly as impossible as my dream of becoming an Indian when I grow up. That is not to say that a woman cannot seek and ultimately gain the position of Commander-in-Chief, but for this woman - it was not to be. There are myriad reasons why it just didn't work out - poor planning, ill-advice, stupid comments - many of these mistakes were not made by the candidate herself, but by her surrogates, her husband, her campaign manager, and other supporters (think Geraldine Ferraro). Nevertheless, it is past time to say good-bye, past time to endorse the only hope the Democratic Party has for reclaiming the White House in 2009, past time to concede that the race is over and somebody else won.

I am holding my breath, hoping beyond hope that Hillary Clinton will find it in her heart, her mind, her soul, to do today what she did not do on Tuesday night. That is find a way to graciously exit this contest with some of her dignity in tact. It is now completely up to her, up to the words she chooses, the signals she sends to her supporters, the path she takes. Because, just because Hillary Clinton is no longer in the race, does not mean that she is inconsequential in the role that she will play in getting us where we need to be. Her role in making sure that Barack Obama is our next president cannot be minimized or marginalized. Her supporters have been described as rabid, vehement, even slightly crazed (think Harriet of YouTube fame), but it is certain that they are looking to their leader, Hillary Clinton, and will take their cue from her as to how to proceed, how to work for a Democratic victory in November, whether to back Obama as the Democratic nominee.

Will Hillary Clinton speak the words to the older white women (a demographic that includes me) who have been her stalwart supporters that echo the words that she spoke to the American Israel Public Affairs Committee when she endorsed Barack Obama with the words "I know Senator Obama will be a good friend to Israel"? Will she say that "Barack Obama will be a good friend to America, a good friend to women, a good friend to soldiers and working class people" as indeed he will be? Will she say "I endorse Barack Obama for president and you should, too"? Will her endorsement ring true or will it come tinged with the sour grapes from which so many of her supporters are feeling the stinging juice? Can she bridge the gap between experience and change? Will she back off enough to allow Obama the room he needs to make his very best choice of a vice presidential candidate? We will know the answers to these questions and more that I haven't thought to pose here, in just a little over an hour. Vamos a ver.... vamos a ver, indeed.

Eulogy for a (Clinton) Campaign

Well, the post I started to write last night was entitled "It's the Delegates (Not the Popular Votes), Stupid!" But that seemed too harsh, and I never ended up finishing it, and I obviously did not post it.

Tonight I am writing a different post altogether - a conciliatory post if you will. It sucks to lose. I know what it feels like to have your back up against a wall that you did not build. I know what it feels like to be painted into a corner especially if you did the paint job. I can only imagine the hard feelings that are welling up in Hillary supporters tonight. But the jubilation that the rest of us are feeling at the fact that this country, this Democratic Party, has finally nominated a person of color is equally, if not, more momentous. I have goose-bumps on my arms, not unlike the goosebumps I felt when I first heard Barack Obama speak at the 2004 Democratic Convention. I said to myself then and there that we just heard from the first Black president of the United States. Here's a link to a transcript of that speech. Yeah.

This is from a blogger who uses the moniker "Scoopster" who blogs over at Four Freedoms Blog: "I've got my cola, I've got my ice cubes, I've got my smooth-sippin' rum...But most of all, I've got some great company with all of you here.. not just to witness some serious history but also in a celebration of what is destined to become the turning point of this country - away from some of the darkest times we have ever experienced. Tonight is truly the beginning of the end of the Bush criminal enterprise."

That is the most wonderful part of this evening - we, the people, will end the terror of the Bush/Cheney administration, we will end it on November 4, 2008, we will end it with a candidate who truly represents what America is all about. We will end it with a new beginning, a fresh start, a clean slate, with a man - a man whose mother was white, whose father was African, who was raised by his single mother and her parents, who lived for a while on food stamps, who attended public schools, but who earned his way into Harvard Law School where he was editor-in-chief of the prestigious Harvard Law Review, he who can captivate an audience with a handful of carefully chosen words, who inspires us to be better human beings, to be better Americans, to just be better. Thank goodness for Barack Obama for being in our world right here, right now, right on to the White House.

Transcript of Obama's Victory Speech in St. Paul, Minnesota.

My Head Hurts - updated June 2, 2008

New Total Delegates Needed to Secure Nomination - 2118

Watching the coverage on MSNBC of the DNC's meeting in Washington, D.C. is giving me a major headache. Why must we give in to the Clinton camp and count every vote all the while ignoring the caucuses? What are the caucuses, chopped liver? It seems so disingenuous to scream about "counting every vote" while ignoring all the voices that were registered in the only way that residents of those states who hold caucuses rather than primaries have to register their political voices. I don't understand how the states of Iowa, Nevada, Alaska, Colorado, Nebraska, Washington, Maine, and Wyoming can be so easily discounted by a campaign camp that claims to care so much about hearing every voter. How can Clinton claim to have more popular votes when by every machination of every analysis except her own she does NOT have more votes, she has fewer elected delegates, fewer super delegates, and fewer states? Her argument that she can win states that Democrats must win in order to win in November doesn't make any sense in that most of the states that she won, are states that Obama can also win, for example, California, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Florida. We may lose West Virginia, Kentucky, and Oklahoma, but it is likely that Democrats wouldn't carry those states anyway. Obama has strength in western states like Colorado, New Mexico, Nevada, Oregon and Washington. Oy vey, I've gotta go take some extra-strength Excederin, my head hurts!

I'm back after taking a short break to sweep my floors, I forgot to mention in the earlier part of this post, how in the world can anybody say it's fair for Clinton to count Michigan as it was exercised without Barack Obama's name even on the ballot? Clinton herself stated back in October of 2007, regarding the Michigan primary: "It's clear. This election they're having is not going to count for anything." Now she is screaming to "County every vote." Well, what about the uncommitted votes? At least 40% of the votes recorded in Michigan were cast "uncommitted," against a sole name that was on the ballot, (although I thought Kucinich was also on the ballot in Michigan - just to be accurate), so how in the world can she claim a victory in this primary? It just boggles my mind!!!

Here are a few pithy thoughts from long-time feminist and Obama supporter, Susan Blesener:

"For the life of me, I cannot figure out how 'feminism' moves ahead so long as we constantly have to be worried about 'hurting' Clinton supporters' 'feelings.' As I recall, Obama's so-called misogynist 'likable enough' comment followed Hillary's assertion that it 'hurt her feelings' that people didn't think she was likable. Spare me the victim again."

"Clinton opened herself up to potential sexism when she used the moniker 'Hillary' as her campaign slogan. I have always been dismayed that commentators and such refer to both Clinton and Obama by their first names--a classic means of ranking individuals--like children. (I cannot think of a time I have heard McCain referred to as 'John.') However, in Clinton's case, she INVITED the sexist reference and set the tone. And then she used it to foment her victim argument."

"I was pleased that Donna Brazile and another woman talked about the people who DIDN'T vote because they reasonably believed it wouldn't count."
Susan Blesener, May 31, 2008.

Remembering Paula Gunn Allen

It will be thirty years ago this August when I first had the honor of meeting Paula Gunn Allen. I was a new student, transferring from Indiana University to Fort Lewis College in Durango, Colorado, ready to begin my sophomore year in the fall of 1978. I was all of nineteen years old, and I remember distinctly sitting down in Professor Allen's class - I believe it was called American Indian Philosophy and being blown away by her presence. I had chosen Fort Lewis College because of its strong Native curriculum and was eager to learn all I could about Native culture, poetry, literature and art. Professor Allen supplied many excellent lessons in Native culture, philosophy, literature and poetry. It is with great sadness that I learned yesterday of her death from lung cancer.

After two years at Fort Lewis College I transferred back to Indiana University to finish my degree in English literature, but I stayed in touch with Paula. We met in New York City after I graduated and took a job with People magazine. I went to a poetry reading that Paula did in NYC, and I still have a treasured signed copy of one of Paula's first books of poetry - A Cannon Between My Knees - in which she wrote "To Faye, who I think is a twin of the psychic kind, Paula."

It is thirty-one years since she directed the MLA-NEH Summer Seminar on Contemporary Native American Literature, held in Flagstaff in 1977. She edited the volume that came out of that seminar: STUDIES IN AMERICAN INDIAN LITERATURE: CRITICAL ESSAYS AND COURSE DESIGNS (1983), the first book on teaching this literature. Her SACRED HOOP: RECOVERING THE FEMININE IN AMERICAN INDIAN TRADITIONS (1986) influenced many scholars. A very talented creative writer, Paula published several volumes of poetry and a novel, THE WOMAN WHO OWNED THE SHADOWS (1983). She also edited collections of Native American literature. Her most recent book was POCAHONTAS: MEDICINE WOMAN, SPY, ENTREPRENEUR, DIPLOMAT (2003).

Paula Gunn Allen died on May 29th at 10:43 p.m. She will be buried in Fort Bragg, California. Those who wish to memorialize her are encouraged to make donations in her memory to the Lannan Foundation; last year, it gave her a two-year fellowship.

Here's a link to a biography and a bibliography of Paula Gunn Allen and her work.

If you would like to visit Paula's memorial page, please see Paula Gunn Allen Online Memorial.

Meet Kevin Killer

Meet Kevin Killer, a young, dedicated, passionate member of the Oglala Lakota Nation who is running for the South Dakota House of Representatives District 27. I had the honor of meeting Mr. Killer at Campaign Camp 2007 - a week of training offered by INDN's List that took place at the Morongo Band of Mission Indians in Cabazon, California, August 2007. (see older posts on this blog: Prez on the Rez). During that intense week of training, support and building comraderie for Native candidates and their staff we all bonded together behind a common goal - that of electing progressive Native candidates to local, state, and national political offices. Mr. Killer stood out among a crowd that included several other impressive candidates (among them Diane Benson - running for Congress from Alaska, Denise Juneau, candidate for Montana Superintendent of Public Instruction, and Ed Iron Cloud who is also running for the Democratic seat in District 27 in South Dakota). Mr. Killer has been endorsed by INDN's List and has the support of many of those who attended Campaign Camp.


Ed Iron Cloud & Kevin at Campaign Camp, Morongo Band of Mission Indians, August 2007.

INDN’s List is a Tulsa-based national not-for-profit organization that is the only grassroots political organization devoted to recruiting and electing Native American candidates and mobilizing the Indian Vote throughout America on behalf of those candidates. Since its founding in 2005, the organization has experienced an impressive 79% win rate of its endorsed candidates, with 22 of 28 being victorious in 2006 and 2007.

Information about Kevin Killer:
His campaign web site.
Article about Kevin in Indian Country Today.
Announcement of Kevin's candidacy in RezNet.
INDN's List endorses Kevin Killer for SD District 27.

Somber Memorial Day

Today is Memorial Day, the day that we all don't have to go to work, instead we sit around in our backyard, grilling hot dogs and hamburgers (no steaks this year, given the paucity of cash in our pocketbooks). But behind the back yard BBQs, there is an haunting thought that we are forgetting something, someone - somebody who should be there but is not, not because they weren't invited, but because they are dead. There I said it, "dead" - a word that most Americans would rather ascribe to a mosquito or a squirrel along the roadside, not to brave young soldiers who have fought and died for our country. Their deaths are all the sadder today, because so many of their deaths were unnecessary. We didn't need to invade Iraq, we shouldn't have invaded Iraq. Iraq was invaded based on lies told by an administration that knew it was lying when they were making the case for war, but made the case anyway and off to war we/they went.

To date I believe that 4080 soldiers have died in Iraq, but that doesn't begin to tell the story of how tragic this illegal and immoral occupation of a sovereign country actually is. Scores of soldiers made it back to the States alive, but are so grievously wounded that their lives are changed forever. Many returned with wounds that may not be obvious, but turn out to be just as deadly as a runaway infection or a fatal disease. They came home with Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), a result of what they witnessed over there in Iraq, what they were called upon to do over there, what they remembered from watching their fellow soldiers get blown to smithereens. And so they bring these indelible images home with them to their families who missed them so much while they were away, only to have those same family members wonder who this stranger is that has returned to their home. Who is this guy who flies off the handle so quickly, who sulks around his children, who bangs his fist through doors and walls?

And saddest of all the results of this god-awful war are the numbers of suicides that have increased daily - the stories of those who came back, but just couldn't live with themselves anymore, and decided that enough is enough and ended it all. That is what Chad Oligschlaeger, age 21, decided to do this week at the Twenty Nine Palms base in California.

"We sent these kids over there, we're putting them through things that we'll never see in our lifetimes. Things we see in the movies that are not real, it's real to them," said Christine Judan, a family friend of the Oligschlaegers.

My thoughts go out to families who have lost a loved one in war and my wish is that human beings would evolve to the point where we no longer need to kill each other in order to address our differences, conflicts, and arguments.

In case you are curious, here's a link to political leaders who served and those that did not. You'll notice that those who are so keen to get this country involved in war are the ones who did not serve (mainly Republicans), while those who are eager to get us out of Iraq and warn us against starting another war in Iran are Democrats. Just an interesting observation, don't you think?

OMG! - WTF? Hillary's Toast

Why in the world would a candidate who is fighting for her political life invoke the 1968 assassination of Robert F. Kennedy in a rather lame attempt to explain why she is still in a race that she likely will not be able to win? That is a very good question, and one that has left my jaw dropped gaping with amazement at the thoughtlessness and recklessness of a remark that is wrong on so many levels: her mention of a Kennedy assassination when a Kennedy brother is fighting an inoperable brain tumor, her mention of assassination in the context of a political fight in which her opponent has had numerous threats on his life, her mention of RFK's assassination in defense of her own stubborn determination to stay in a race that is clearly over and has been for some time, this is just the tip of the iceberg of what is wrong with Senator Clinton's assertion. The rest is too gruesome to even consider.

Before the unconscionable remark was even uttered, there were rumors on the internet of a "girlcott" of Barack Obama because of his "condescending, sexist treatment of Hillary Clinton and her supporters." Excuse me, but aside from the predictably stupid comments by the likes of Chris Matthews, the Clinton camp has given as good as it has gotten, trading sexist comments for racist comments in a tit for tat fashion that has made neither camp look good. And as I've said before - if these Clintonistas are really ready to sacrifice their party, their country and the planet on the altar of Hillary Clinton and hand the election to "Grampy McSame" then they can kiss good-bye any future support for Hillary for any run for dog-catcher or for whatever future position she may contemplate running.

This was posted yesterday on FourFreedoms blog before Clinton's unfortunate remark: I would like to direct your attention to a comment posted at Slate and was sent to me by a long-time friend who is one of the strongest feminists I have ever known (and who BTB is an Obama supporter). It is from yesterday's Slate, written by Dahlia Lithwick and I think it is right on.

I don't think anyone disputes that hideous instances of sexism have been stirred up in this campaign. Nor does anyone dispute that Ms. Clinton is entitled to address it, which she has done very deftly at times. The question is whether she's entitled to reduce her entire failed campaign to sexism, which has the practical effect of splitting women into those-who-are-angry-about-sexism, and those who what? Think it's acceptable? There's one other practical effect that warrants mentioning, and that is that it reduces a complex, brilliant, and talented candidate to a big whomping cliche. My friend Susannah writes: "I find it increasingly unbearable to watch Hillary. It feels like she has become the archetype I find most painful to see in women, a high-maintenance, delusional, and 'difficult' woman who feels entitled to do whatever she likes. ... Meanwhile, Obama is forced to tiptoe around essentially just humoring her. There is a pathetic 'Yes, dear' quality to the way he is forced to react to her these days."

This mirrors a sense I've had that we might have finally crossed the Hirshman line. Linda Hirshman argued persuasively that all powerful, ambitious women are at some point dismissed as "hysterical" or "insane." Too true. The problem now is that when Clinton behaves irrationally, we can't call her out for it because it would be sexist. If we can't call irrational behavior irrational because the character in question is a woman, then it's a short hop from here to a Tennessee Williams play...

I have felt for some time now that we are heading toward a potentially tragic ending in this primary race and the one who could prevent this tragedy is the one who is bringing it about (I am, of course, referring to Hillary) . Your thoughts and comments on this post are, as always, appreciated. I think it's time for Momma to utter her infamous line from A Streetcar Named Desire - "Blanche, it is time to go." Carry on mis amigos...

Barack Obama Visits Crow Agency, MT

Coming off a rally that drew 75,000 people in Portland, Oregon on Sunday, yesterday Barack Obama did something that Hillary Clinton and John McCain have not done, he went to a reservation, specifically the Crow Nation (Crow Agency, Montana). While he was there he talked about his understanding of Tribal Sovereignty (a true government to government relationship). He also talked about honoring treaty obligations, specific legislation that he supports that will address ongoing issues in Indian Country - issues such as health care, education, veterans' benefits and ways to resolve the trust fund litigation. "My job as president is to make sure that Washington starts focusing on you, on your hopes, on your dreams, on your concerns...You have been forgotten - I want you to know that I will never forget you - you will be on my mind every day that I am in the White House."

How to Solve the Michiorida Mess...

Shepard Fairey's Obama Posters

"Hillary's campaign is 21.5 million dollars in debt, making hers the most expensive Fantasy Camp ever."
David Letterman, The Late Show, May 15, 2008

Rachel Maddow's word of the Day - "vituperative" - Using, containing, or marked by harshly abusive censure.

This is a comment from the SMS live blog, left by a rabid Hillary supporter, written on Friday, May 16, 2008:

Good morning SWEETIES
Any of you know how Obama and Dean are going to address the ugly, festering sore that will be Florida and Michigan at the convention?
Or do you all just want to work hard to win 48 states?
No Obamaniac here has SATISFACTORILY answered that question except to yell in the most child-like way, “Hey, it’s the rules!!”
Hillary will bring this question up, I hope, just before the official nomination voting. Someone should.

I'll bring it up because it doesn't freakin' matter anymore - go ahead and count all of the delegates even those earned by Hillary Clinton in Michigan where Barack Obama's NAME WAS NOT EVEN ON THE BALLOT, and Florida where neither candidate campaigned, honoring an agreed-upon plan made before the primary vote. Go ahead and count all the freakin' votes of those who you all are so eager to enfranchise. What about the disenfranchisement of all of the voters who didn't bother to go to the polls because they were paying attention and understood the votes that they cast on Tuesday, January 15th (Michigan) or January 29th (Florida) would not be (should not have been, promised not to be) counted?

Also how can you ignore the caucuses? All of those people who turned out on a cold winter night in Iowa should just be dismissed? Likewise the folks who stood in school cafeterias in Nevada, Alaska, Colorado, Nebraska, Washington, Maine, and Wyoming - think about it. It comes down to basic fairness, simple justice, doing what is right/correct. By any measure, except those concocted by the Clinton camp (like ignoring the caucuses, or counting Michigan and Florida as if they were normal primaries) Obama has the lead - in popular vote, in elected delegates, in superdelegates, in states won - by any measure, he is the winner. Congratulations Barack!

If you'd like to pass a few wasted hours and you are a total political geek then visit the following site where you can change the electoral college map in any configuration and try to figure out how the Democrats can lose the election in November (I spent hours a few Sunday afternoons ago and had a hard time seeing how the Dems could possibly lose this one).

Election Guide 2008: What the Democratic Candidates Need to Win

Edwards Endorses Obama!!!

Last night John Edwards endorsed Barack Obama for president of the United States. Here's the transcript of Edwards endorsement: Edwards’s Endorsement of Obama. It was, needless to say, a coveted endorsement and coming as it did on the heals of Obama significant defeat by Hillary Clinton in West Virginia (see post below), it carried even more weight than it might have otherwise. Timing is everything, and the timing of Edwards endorsement couldn't have been better - with the Kentucky primary looming around the corner (next Tuesday, May 20th), I can't help but believe that Edwards will help Obama with those "Hard-working White Americans," Hillary Clinton as quoted in an oft cited AP article that came out after her triumphant victory in West Virginia. Good on ya, John Edwards, good on ya. Even though Edwards himself has downplayed the importance of endorsements in general, his endorsement is most welcome in an Obama camp that must have given at least pause at the trouncing that Barack took in the Mountaineer state. On to the White House for Obama!!!

For information on how Edwards' delegates will help the Obama Campaign, please see 2008 Democratic Convention Watch.

As West Virginia Goes, So Goes the Confederacy...

White voters shun Obama as Clinton wins West Virginia

"As West Virginia goes, so goes the nation." I substituted "Confederacy" for "nation," anyway, I didn't say it. I am merely echoing a phrase uttered by Hillary Clinton last night during her victory speech which I must confess, even though it was billed by Terry McAuliffe as the greatest speech ever, I dozed off during her riveting delivery of what sounded to me like rehashed campaign cliches and recycled slogans. I say shame on West Virginians and their racist selves - forgive my bluntness, but I've heard too many reports from W.V. that say that it was out-and-out racism that kept Mountaineers from even considering voting for Obama. So I say screw WV - I am much more impressed that a Democrat won Trent Lott's seat in Mississippi - way to go Dems. Ain't nothin' gonna stop us now. Apologies to the handful of good folks who live in West Virginia who did step outside their comfort zone and cast a vote for the Democratic nominee, Barack Obama. We don't need no stinkin' racists helping us get to the White House, so just stay home or vote for Ron Paul or Bob Barr or even David Duke (not sure that he's running, but I bet a little cold coin could change his mind).

Where are the Union Coal Miners of old? Where are the folks who empathized with the downtrodden? (because they were them). Where are the mothers who understood that pride is not too hard to dismiss when your kids are hungry?

"Even though racial lines were not so stringently enforced in West Virginia as they were in the Deep South, or even in neighboring central Appalachia, social life in the Mountain State was segregated by custom and management design. Nevertheless, race relations were unique. Perhaps the key to understanding the distinctive qualities of race relations in southern West Virginia was the freedom of expression enjoyed by blacks. Only in education and intermarriage was integration specifically barred by statute."

The aforementioned excerpt is from the Mine Safety and Health Administration web site as is the above featured photo.

Still the War Grinds On

Moqtada al-Sadr

Fighting Forces Residents to Flee Sadr City

As we here in this country place bets on when Hillary Clinton will end her bid for the Democratic presidential nomination, halfway around the world a war that this country started roars on. Lives are being lost, children are being maimed, soldiers are being blown to smithereens and the astronomical costs keep soaring. When will we say enough is enough? I ask each and every one of you to send one e-mail next Monday or Tuesday to your (House) Representative. Please jot off a quick e-mail asking your representative to vote against more funding for this god-awful war in Iraq and urge your representative to cosponsor The New Diplomatic Offensive for Iraq Act (H.R. 3797). Please if enough of us write - they will spend the money anyway, but maybe, just maybe, a few of the spenders/deciders may not sleep as well as they have in the past. The Friends Committee on National Legislation has a nice and easy page that you can just fill in the blanks. Or you may make a phone call (FCNL). There is a little box in which you type in your zip code and, voila, there is your representative and her/his contact information. So please fill in a few blanks or pick up the phone and let your representative know that you want the war in Iraq to end, the sooner the better. Thank you very much :)
Best,
mfaye

Sadr City Residents Told to Flee Homes
(From DemocracyNow!)

In Iraq, residents of the Sadr City district of Baghdad say they’re being warned to flee their homes in advance of an intensified US-led assault on Shia fighters. Sadr City has seen relentless violence in a nearly two-month campaign against followers of Muqtada al-Sadr. UNICEF says around 6,000 people have already been forced to flee. Up to 150,000, half of them children, are said to be cut off from aid in areas isolated by the US military. Medical care has declined following Saturday’s US missile strike that damaged several ambulances at Sadr City’s main hospital. At least four people were killed and thirteen injured in fighting overnight. At the White House, the veteran correspondent Helen Thomas questioned Press Secretary Dana Perino about the killing of innocent Iraqis.

Dana Perino: “Helen.”

Helen Thomas: “Yesterday, according to the New York Times, we dropped a bomb on a home in Sadr City and burned alive a pregnant woman and her children. How long is the siege of Sadr—how long are we going to keep bombing Iraqis?”

Perino: “Well, I’m not aware of that particular report. I have not—I’ve not seen it.”

Thomas: “Well, it was pretty buried in the stories.”

Perino: “OK. Well, the operation against the militias in Sadr City will continue until they root them out. And that is expressly in order to protect people like you just mentioned.”

Thomas: “Root who out? The Iraqis? In their own country?”

Perino: “It is Prime Minister Maliki’s government which is going after the militia, which is appropriate.”

Thomas: “Why are we bombing these people?”

Perino: “Any time anyone that is an innocent civilian is hurt in a conflict, we obviously regret it, and we go out of our way to make sure it doesn’t happen.”

Once Again the Numbers (& Voters) Let Hillary Down

North Carolina said loud and clearly that Senator Barack Obama is their choice for president, and Indiana came close to agreeing with North Carolina. I really thought that Lake County might put Obama over the top in Indiana. Obama came very close in Indiana, but Hillary Clinton likely did pick up a couple more delegates than Obama from Indiana. I like the image of Terry McAuliffe and Mark Penn (you know that guy is still hanging around) and other die-hard Clinton supporters calling Hillary into a hotel room, asking her to put down the Crown Royal, and holding an intervention - not to get Hillary to admit that she has a problem with alcohol, rather to get her to admit that she no longer has a chance to win the Democratic nomination for the president of these United States. Please see the excellent post on Four Freedoms Blog, by BobR entitled R.E.S.P.E.C.T. See also the headline on today's Huffington Post: Obama vs. McCain. Also on the Huffington Post is an interesting piece on McCain's Rough Night, pointing out that the republican presumptive nominee is still having trouble winning over the hearts and minds of the GOP base.
But I will miss Kay to the Jay to the Eye El in da Hizzie saying "Hirrary." :D Kim out!!!

For a somber take on last night's results, see Scoopster's post on the Daily Kos - On trust, forgiveness, and our common future.

Kalyn Free Endorses Obama!

The anticipation was making me crazy, but finally the word is out and the word is Obama! Kalyn Free, Superdelegate extraordinaire, Super Attorney, and Super Director and Founder of INDN's List, has endorsed Senator Barack Obama for president

"As a member of the Choctaw Nation of Oklahoma, I am proud of what it means to be an American Indian," Free said in her announcement of support for Obama. "I am proud Barack Obama is committed to our unique issues and willing to tackle our toughest problems, from historical inequities and injustices to contemporary issues, like protection of our right to tribal self-determination, access to health care for our elders, and education for our children."

"For centuries the First Americans have had politicians talk to them, not with them. That kind of politics-as-usual leadership hasn't worked for Indian Country, and it isn't working for America. Senator Obama will forge a new era for the First Americans by looking for answers in Indian Country, not from Washington lobbyists. I am proud to stand in solidarity with another DNC Indian superdelegate Frank LaMere (Winnebago) in support of America's best hope for a better tomorrow, Senator Barack Obama."

Senator Obama said, "Kalyn is an effective and compassionate leader in the Native American community, and I'm proud to have her support. I admire the work she has done to build a grassroots movement, elect Native Americans to public office, and mobilize voters in tribal communities to become part of the political process. And as President, I will work with tribal leaders and Kalyn to ensure that they have a true partner in the White House. With Kalyn's support, we're going to bring about real change not just for the Native American community, but for all Americans."

Feliz Cinco de Mayo

Top Five Ways the Stephanie Miller Show Crew can Celebrate Cinco de Mayo

5. Stephania invites her yard guys in for a !siesta fiesta!

4. Momma supplies margaritas and chips and salsa for breakfast para todos (gratis!).

3. Steph wears a sombrero while appearing on Larry King tonight.

2. Do a shot of tequila every time Steph (or Jim or Chris) says "bark park."

1. And the number one way that Momma and the mooks can celebrate Cinco de Mayo - All Sanchez (from Montebello) in Hora Tres (Hour 3)!

Hillary Clinton High on 'Shrooms :)

Last night on Jon Stewart's Daily Show yet another young comedic talent, Jason Jones, jumped out of the TV. Mr. Jones did a bit about Hillary Clinton as an elite toddler running around in her socks with the ruffles. Even if Hillary was guilty of wearing socks with ruffles (and really who hasn't - I can certainly see Stephen Colbert of the Reporrrr prancing around in his ruffle-topped socks - lavendar, powder blue, or if he was lucky - black), she certainly wouldn't want it to leak out that she was once high on 'shrooms and drove a tractor over a man... Pure speculation , but once it's out there, it's out there.

Socks with the Ruffles video (The Daily Show, May 1, 2008)

This is a spoof (rather it is a report of a spoof) - not intended as a source of actual news.

We Must Not Bomb Iran!

[At the end of these articles is an entry I posted over six months ago. At that point, the idea of a US attack on Iran was still considered by many to be a distant nightmare.]

METAFUTURE: Iraq, Iran and Permanent War
by Troutfishing
Sunday, April 27, 2008

The appointment of David Petreus to be head of CENTCOM is part of an ongoing, quiet purge by the Bush Administration of anyone in the US military leadership with more than a shred of moral conscience, and I am utterly convinced that if the Bush Adminstration can attack Iran it will.

I am not the only one concerned:
Petraeus' rise lets Cheney loose on Iran

WASHINGTON - The nomination of General David Petraeus to be the new head of the US Central Command ensures that he will be available to defend the George W Bush administration's policies on Iran and Iraq at least to the end of Bush's term and possibly even beyond.

It also gives Vice President Dick Cheney greater freedom of action to exploit the option of an air attack against Iran during the administration's final months.
Gareth Porter

Questions Linger on Scope of Iran’s Threat in Iraq
MARK MAZZETTI, STEVEN LEE MYERS and THOM SHANKER
New York Times, April 26, 2008

" For weeks, Mr. Bush, Vice President Dick Cheney and the top American officials in Iraq have portrayed Iran as a significant and growing threat to the American war effort in Iraq.
In particular, they have cited an intensified barrage of Iranian-made rockets hitting the Green Zone in Baghdad — including attacks during a visit by Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice — that have killed Americans and Iraqis.

...in recent weeks the administration has sought to emphasize the threat by citing new evidence. The interrogations of four Iraqi Shiite militia commanders, for example, have provided new details about the extent of training conducted by the Quds Force of Iran’s Revolutionary Guard, officials said."

Here's Jim Lobe, for IPS News:
POLITICS-US: Hawks Resurgent?

Add the promotion of Gen. David Petraeus, the U.S. commander in Iraq who has overseen the past year's "surge" of U.S. troops, to take over the U.S. Central Command (Centcom) this summer, as well as the increasingly harsh charges against Iran's alleged interference in Iraq that have been coming out of the Pentagon in recent days.

All these developments are seen by some as an answer to the prayers of neo-conservatives, in particular, who had largely given up hopes that Bush could be persuaded to attack Iran's nuclear facilities before leaving office.

In his testimony about the surge earlier this month, Petraeus had repeatedly blamed allegedly Iranian-sponsored and directed Shi'a "Special Groups" for attacking Iraqi government and U.S. forces in Basra and Baghdad, describing them as "the greatest long-term threat to the viability of a democratic Iraq"...

...there appears little question that the rhetoric here has become considerably harsher in recent weeks. The shift became particularly evident in February, when the former Centcom commander and the man whom Petraeus will replace, Adm. William 'Fox' Fallon, abruptly announced his resignation following the publication of a profile in Esquire magazine that depicted him as opposing key administration policies and as the one man standing between Bush and war with Iran.


Petraeus promotion an ominous sign of possible war with Iran
Salt Lake City Tribune, April 26, 2008
Farrah Hassan

The promotion of Gen. David Petraeus is another ominous sign that the Bush administration may attack Iran. President Bush is nominating Petraeus, commanding general of the Multi-National Force in Iraq, to replace Adm. William Fallon as head of Centcom: U.S. Central Command, which oversees the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. Fallon was forced to resign last month after his outspoken opposition to an attack on Iran. Petraeus, by contrast, has been heating up the rhetoric against Iran. "Iran has fueled the violence in a particularly damaging way through its lethal support to the special groups," Petraeus testified to Congress in early April. Those special groups (meaning, the militias) pose the biggest threat to the United States, he added. He blamed Iran for the rocket attacks on the Green Zone, and he warned, "We should all watch Iranian actions closely in the weeks and months ahead." Petraeus' boss issued a warning of his own. "The regime in Tehran also has a choice to make," Bush said April 10. "If Iran makes the right choice, America will encourage a peaceful relationship between Iran and Iraq. If Iran makes the wrong choice, America will act to protect our interests, and our troops and our Iraqi partners."

Here's what I wrote over three years ago, January 2005, on the Daily Kos:
What the Bush Adm. may actually be aiming at - as a politically serendipitious blowback from strikes on Iran - would be another major terrorist attack on US interests or US soil.

Al Qaeda now exists more as an ideological franchise than an organization. But Hezzbollah on the other hand.... Hezzbollah is an actual organization, more like a ministate, which has both military and terrorist capabilities and which has close ties to, and receives funds from, Iran: The organization has missiles and drones, and demonstrated considerable military capability in driving Israeli forces from Lebannon. One cannot assume, for that matter, that the organization does not possess one or two portable nuclear devices.

In going to war against Iran, the Bush Administration will be inviting Hezzbollah retaliation. That might not come immediately, but it would be an underestimation, I feel, to discount the possibility that some of the most outrageous of the many Bush Administration generated US PR debacles surrounding the Iraqi invasion and occupation were wholly unintentional. The gratuitiously offensive nature of the sexual humiliation tactics used at Abu Ghraib, while disastrous at one level, also serve the interests of some in the Bush Administration who need a more significant Causus Bellum now that the sting of 9-11 has ebbed somewhat.

The overall effect of US behavior since the invasion of Iraq has been to polarize Islamic attitudes - this is surely happening within such subcultures as Hezzbollah, and so I have to wonder - when will the Bush Administration's Trotskyite rolling "permanent war" in the Mideast cause the voices of hotheads to prevail, against the voices of caution, in the call for strikes against US interests ? And, would the Bush NeoCons be blindsided, or would they have been expecting such an attack ? It would be a mistake to assume that the growing world hatred of the US was unanticipated or undesired by the Bush Neocons and their Dominionist and Rapturist Christian allies - such world hatred, and subsequent terrorist attacks on the US, would, indeed, serve to advance both the domestic and geopolitical aims of the NeoCons.

Of course, such attacks would provide a pretext for US actions against Syria and Iran. Domestically, however, they would be at least as useful for the Bush NeoCons and the new US Right (AKA the religious right ).

Another strike of magnitude comparable to or larger than the September 11, 2001 attack - "9-11 redux" - or even several much smaller attacks, would provide George W. Bush, the NeoCons, and the Christian right - especially with the likely escalation of conflict and mayhem in the Mideast - with sufficient pretext for substantial crackdown - under the rubric of "national unity -quashing domestic dissent. Frenzied demonization of Islamic-American groups with a subsequent widespread outbreak of hate crimes and perhaps the interment of Muslims and certain ethnicities of Mideastern origin may proliferate. Also, expect a crackdown on political and cultural dissident groups - outspoken voices on the left, gays, and so on. Some on the US right have long planned and yearned for something like this, the transformation of US government into an authoritarian security state.

Beyond harshly repressive domestic political measures, further terrorist attacks within the US would enable the "toughening up America", and full mobilization of America's war-fighting capability - by way of a reinstituted draft, privatized military services, or both. In fact, this has been underway in a low grade way since September 11, 2001, and it should be noted that one of the side effects of the Iraq conflict has been a dramatic expansion in the number of battle hardened US Army and National Guard units. This may have been unintentional, but it lays groundwork for future war and is congruent with an overall Spartanization of an American that has come to be viewed by some as grown dangerously soft.

The upshot of this train of events will be a "Spartanization" of America, under a new, embattled and combatitive mentality, and - meanwhile a rolling, graduated blitz through the Mideast which, conveniently, could have the effect of destabilizing Saudi Arabia - and that, in turn, would demand US led "stabilization" measures. Iraq, Iran, Saudi Arabia - one down, two to go, and the US will achieve direct control of something on the order of 1/2 of the World's oil. That control can be, in turn, used to exert pressure on nations opposed to the new US hegemonic order.

Tuesday, September 4, 2007

NO War with Iran!!!
Faye Hadley

Rumors of war abound, and nothing could be more frightening than the thought of this derelict, incompetent administration launching yet another unnecessary war against a country that is at least three times the size of Iraq with nearly three times the population. Having learned absolutely nothing from the fiasco that is Iraq, the Bush administration is planning on attacking Iran. Or that is the buzz in the blogosphere anyway - I hope against hope that this prediction is wrong, but at this point, I've become so cynical and disillusioned that I wouldn't put any devious dastardly action past Darth Cheney or any of his minions (and I include Georgie Bush in that group).

Here are a few blog posts that have me worried:
Home Alone, Dick and George Desperately Scheme for War
Post Labor Day Roll Out - War with Iran
Do We Have the Courage to Stop War with Iran?
THE NEXT WAR? by Arnaud de Borchgrav, Benador Associates
Staging Nukes for Iran?

Here is a web site that gives me hope: StopIranWar.com

Here is an essay that explains much about why we are where we, as a people, are in time and war: Iraq, Iran and the Moral Rot Infecting the Soul of America