StudioGlyphic

If you've never seen these, take a gander. They're very well done.

While you're at it, you may want to check out this RunAriannaRun.com. It's run by some people who think Arianna should run for Governor of California.

The new 6 series has been unveiled at Top Gear, and true to the new design regime at BMW, it's ugly.

Jeb Stuart Magruder, who was Nixon's deputy campaign director, says he heard the president tell John Mitchell, who was running Nixon's re-election campaign in 1972, to go ahead with a plan to break into the Democratic Party headquarters at the Watergate complex and bug the party chairman's phone.

This is great. The Republicans have tried the Texas redistricting move again, and the Democrats have left for New Mexico. This redistricting plan is completely screwed up. Bravo to the Democrats for taking this stand.

Wow. This $250,000 fundraising drive started Friday night at 11 Eastern to match the money that Cheney was going to raise today with his private $2000 a head luncheon. 7,902 Dean supporters have not only matched that goal, but have nearly doubled it in a day (the first goal was met last night around 10:30 Eastern). The average donation is $52.59, just 2.6% of the donation amount for the luncheon attendees. Incredible.

Also, listen to "All Things Considered" this afternoon for a story about the Dean campaign.

I just came back from the Venice boardwalk where I was manning the Dean tent. Lots of strange people in Venice... had a few people come up to learn more about Dean, while others come to talk about how much they disliked Bush. Got at least one person to sign up for Dean information, which is pretty good, considering how light traffic was... this afternoon should be pretty good. It's a beautiful day.

The fundraising this weekend to beat Cheney is going very well: "As of 2pm ET, supporters have raised $130,572.50 online in the Dean Team vs. Bush-Cheney Challenge, with 2,319." That's just $56.31 per person! Compare that to the $2000 per person Cheney will raise in SC. We're halfway to the Monday midnight goal, which is great. The number of contributers have tripled since last night, and the total has more than doubled in value. Now money isn't everything, of course, but this shows the kind of widespread support this campaign has. With the money, the campaign will be able to open offices in more cities and get in touch with people who aren't connecting via the websites.

I'm going to hold off on my contribution until Monday, when they'll update the numbers every half hour.

I'll be out on Venice Beach on the boardwalk tabling for Dean tomorrow morning. Come by the boardwalk if you want to say "Hello" or check out our propaganda. We'll be located at Rose and Ocean Front Walk.

Dick Cheney is holding a fundraising luncheon this coming Monday in SC. The Dean campaign has decided this would be a good opportunity to match Cheney's numbers. The luncheon will cost $2000 per person (the contribution limit). So that's 125 people. As of midnight ET, the Dean campaign has raised $50,379.53 from 743 contributors. That's an average of only $67.81 per person! If you want to contribute, any amount is welcome. I'll probably give them another $25 this weekend.

Kerry's my second choice at this point. However, he's probably a good second choice. Tonight a number of Kerry supporters will be meeting at Britannia Pub in Santa Monica, just off the Third Street Promenade. Let me know if you want to join me for a Guinness (I'm wearing my Guinness shirt!) and meet some Kerry supporters. If it's anything like the Dean MeetUp, there won't be anything exciting going on, but you'll be able to talk to people about why they support Kerry, what's wrong with Bush, etc., etc.

Heh. I think Bill Maher compared Kerry to Treebeard, the "living, walking tree-shepherd" from The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers.

Updated September 14.

California lieutenant governor Cruz Bustamante announced today that governor Davis will face a recall election October 7.

I dislike Davis as much as the next guy. He's a bland Democrat whose specialty seems to be raising money for his campaigns. In terms of policy, he's a reluctant progressive who doesn't seem to have any strong stances on the issues facing the state. He's far too beholden to his donors. However, he is at worst a mediocre executive, and that is not a sufficient reason to hold a recall election.

Now we're going to hold an election estimated to cost $30 million to $35 million—money the state doesn't have. Furthermore, the state constitution states that "A state officer who is not recalled shall be reimbursed by the State for the officer's recall election expenses legally and personally incurred." Davis has a large war chest, and he'll use it.

A bigger concern about the upcoming election is the fact that few voters will likely participate. A good number of those who do will be recall supporters. Davis has few supporters in the state, and they may decide to stay home. If the recall effort is successful, the state may have a Republican governor that was elected by a very small minority.

Let me repeat: the state may have a Republican governor that was elected by a very small minority. Even if you dislike Davis, I can tell you that Tom McClintock or Arnold Schwarzenegger will be worse. McClintock is a very conservative politician whose views are way out of line with the views of most Californians. Schwarzeneggar is more of a "centrist" but lacks the experience and knowledge to run a state that boasts the world's 5th largest economy. Would you put Schwarzeneggar in charge of France, China, or Italy? Hell no.

It's very reminiscent of the 2000 Presidential election, where a bland Democratic candidate failed to win his own state and other states that he should have won—thus preventing a decisive victory in the electoral college and giving the Republicans an opportunity to work the Florida election confusion in their favor.

Will a Republican governor be as toxic as the current Republican president? Maybe not in terms of California politics, but let's not forget how the Republican governor of Florida was able to use his office to purge voters from the registration lists, intimidate voters, and influence election officials.

If the recall effort is not successful, the low voter turnout will still be a problem. Issa and the others will be able to try again within 6 months at a lower expense, since the petition "must be signed by electors equal in number to 12 percent of the last vote for the office." It is likely that a second recall effort would backfire and incense voters against the recall effort and any person behind it. It would not stop another recall election from being held, however, provided that enough signatures are gathered. Another $35 million down the drain.

So what can be done? Register to vote. Online or offline. Register everyone you know to vote and let them know what's going on. Persuade them to tell their friends. And most importantly, vote on October 7.

What's with the two part recall?

There are two parts to the recall:

1. Yes or no on whether to recall Davis.

2. Vote for your preferred replacement.

Please vote no for the first part... this is a vote of principle in favor of representative democracy. Then vote for your favorite on the second part.

I'm happy to report that the bluefunkstress has registered to vote after following the link off on the right there. That's a key strategy to taking back the country---getting people to vote. The way things are in this country, a minority can make decisions for the entire country. It's hard to believe, especially when you think of how many people struggled and died to get the right to be counted. I guess one of the good things to come of the current political situation is that it's bad enough to get people to do something about it.

After this week, I'll be taking a month off to relax before school starts. Really looking forward to it...

Joseph Wilson, the former ambassador whose New York Times Op-Ed piece started the Niger uranium controversy, is being made into an example. Wilson's wife, an undercover CIA agent who deals with weapons of mass destruction, was exposed by Washingon columnist Robert Novak, citing "two senior administration officials."

This is serious. After the column came out, Wilson did not confirm or deny the allegation, but he did outline the potential consequence of this revelation.

"If what the two senior administration officials said is true," Wilson said, "they will have compromised an entire career of networks, relationships and operations." What's more, it would mean that "this White House has taken an asset out of the" weapons of mass destruction fight, "not to mention putting at risk any contacts she might have had where the services are hostile."

It seems that some in the administration will stop at nothing.

Now that the news channels are flooded with stories about the killing of Hussein's sons, it's about time to make a public apology that no one will hear. Or so thinks the White House. Stephen Hadley, President Bush's deputy national security adviser, and top aide to National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice, apologized for not removing the 16 words in the State of the Union address. He admitted that CIA had sent two memos to him and White House speechwriter with their reservations before Bush's Cleveland, Ohio speech 3 months before the State of the Union address. So why was it still in the State of the Union address? Hadley says:

"I should have recalled (the issue) at the time of the State of the Union address. ... If I had done so, it would have avoided the entire current controversy."

In other words, he forgot.

Yet this is another non-admission admission. The question is not "Who didn't remove the 16 words?" The question is "Who added the 16 words?" Was it Hadley the deputy security adviser? Gerson the speechwriter? Perhaps Robert Joseph, named in the Senate Intelligence Committee hearings? And on whose authority?

Last week, Robert Joseph, assistant to the president in charge of nonproliferation at the National Security Council, was named as the White House official advocating for the original Niger uranium claim to be used in the address. He then argued with CIA officials that the re-written 16 word statement (attributed to the British, and without specifics) was factually correct. But why did Joseph want to use the information in the first place? Why did he persist when he was told that Hadley had been convinced not to use the information 3 months earlier?

Everything points to an intent to use faulty intelligence and pressure to keep it in. This admission by Hadley should not stop the investigation process.

Updated.

US forces raided a home in northern Iraq today, killing its four occupants in a firefight. US officials announced that Saddam Hussein's two sons, Uday and Qusay, are among the dead. The raid was prompted by intelligence that Uday and Qusay were hiding in the house.

I have to wonder why the military decided to kill the occupants instead of capturing them. After all, high ranking officials would be able to identify the sites of hidden WMDs. If these men are indeed Hussein's sons, it's likely they knew about these sites.

There are two possibilities: 1) The soldiers wanted revenge for the attacks and casualties that have occurred over the past two months. 2) There are no weapons to be found, and capturing two of the men who would know where the weapons are would increase pressure to find the MIA WMDs.

It's time to see the doctor! This event is taking place in San Francisco on Thursday, July 31st. That's next week. I'll post more details when I have them. I'm definitely planning to be there for the event. If you want to join me for the trip, let me know.

Oct. Report Said Defeated Hussein Would Be Threat

The declassified sections of the NIE were offered by the White House to rebut allegations that the administration had twisted prewar intelligence on Iraq's nuclear weapons program. The result, however, could be to raise more questions about whether the administration misrepresented the judgments of the intelligence services on another basis for going to war: the threat posed by Hussein as a source of weapons for terrorists.

During the lead-up to and execution of the war, former Gingrich supporter and current anti-SUV/corporate greed activist Arianna Huffington frequently brought up on Left, Right, and Center the CIA conclusion that Iraq would pose a bigger threat if attacked. Former Bush speechwriter and Canadian David Frum repeatedly denied there was any documentation on this. Left, Wrong, and Misled has a nice ring to it.

Heh. A while back I posted about SmartSelect... well, I've finally gotten around to taking the test myself (I know, I know), and it says my candidate should be Kucinich!

Here are the results:

1. Kucinich, Cong. Dennis, OH - Democrat (96%)
2. Dean, Gov. Howard, VT - Democrat (90%)
3. Kerry, Senator John, MA - Democrat (84%)
4. Sharpton, Reverend Al - Democrat (80%)
5. Edwards, Senator John, NC - Democrat (75%)
6. Lieberman Senator Joe CT - Democrat (74%)
7. Gephardt, Cong. Dick, MO - Democrat (74%)
8. Moseley-Braun, Former Senator Carol IL - Democrat (70%)
9. Graham, Senator Bob, FL - Democrat (63%)
10. Libertarian Candidate (49%)
11. Bush, George W. - US President (12%)
12. Phillips, Howard - Constitution (8%)
13. LaRouche, Lyndon H. Jr. - Democrat (0%)

Interesting that two people rank lower than Dubya.

"Using the Google Internet search engine, books on Niger and interviews with Iraqi and Nigerien officials, International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) experts determined that the [Niger uranium] documents were fake."

They don't know who made the fake documents, but maybe Judicial Watch can drag that info out of some resistant bureaucrat, too.

Oh, and the article's about the fact that State Department officials had the forged documents 3 months before the State of the Union address, contrary to administration claims that they received them afterward.

Not only that, but the administration official who pushed for the Niger sentence was "Robert Joseph, an assistant to the president in charge of nonproliferation at the National Security Council (NSC)." In other words, Condi's boy.

It's time to write to the Senators involved in this investigation to push Joseph and others to reveal how far up the food chain this goes. Among the Senators are Sen. Richard J. Durbin (D-Ill.), Intelligence Committee Chairman Pat Roberts (R-Kan.), and Sen. John D. Rockefeller IV (W.Va.). Tell them we want the truth!

How stupid does the administration think the American public is? As the media shitstorm reached hurricane status this week, the scaremongers decided it was time to pull another threat out of their collective ass. This time it's Syria, who is "pursuing the development of biological weapons." Ah, but having been burned before, the CIA and other intelligence agencies have decided to block the scaremongering. Good for them.

Iraq, of course. Cheney's Energy Task Force, which met behind closed doors far in advance of 9/11, consisted of oil and energy executives whose advice on US energy policy, I'm sure, held the best interests of Americans at heart. Documents requested by JudicialWatch.org and finally released under court order under the Freedom of Information Act show detailed plans of Iraq's oil fields, pipelines, refineries, etc.

One of the effects of living with Mr. A Carter is that we get a lot of calls for Aaron Carter, the teen pop star.

"In almost any other industrialised country, Dean's campaign platform would sound boringly middle-of-the-road. In Bush's America, it verges towards the liberal extreme."

The Guardian: In the running

Go to Google. Type in:

Who will be President in 2004?

Do not hit enter-- instead, click "I'm feeling lucky."

The oracle has spoken.

"We need to accept responsibility for America's unique role in preserving and extending an international order friendly to our security, our prosperity, and our principles."

Statement of Principles
June 3, 1997
Project for the New American Century

It is America's unique role since only the United States would be looking out for its own interests. Duh. This neo-colonial self-important blather was signed by Jeb Bush, Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, and Paul Wolfowitz. Sound like a neo-conservative administration we know? If there were any doubt that Dubya was the dummy to Cheney's ventriloquist, the stuff on this site should make it exceedingly clear. Brother Jeb fixed the election, Dad's appointees fixed the result, and Dick told him who to hire. Yet I don't believe Dubya completely buys all this New American Century crap. I think he actually believes that invading Iraq was a good, presidential thing to do, and would make America safe from terrorism. I'm not convinced that he sees the world as something that needs to be absorbed into an American sphere of influence.

But someone has to answer for the lies and deception. An independent investigation into the intelligence used to justify the war must be started. At the end of the day, I think we'll find these same signers of the Statement of Principles implicated in this hood-winking of the public.

"This is not only a possible breach of national security; it is a potential violation of law. Under the Intelligence Identities Protection Act of 1982, it is a crime for anyone who has access to classified information to disclose intentionally information identifying a covert agent. The punishment for such an offense is a fine of up to $50,000 and/or up to ten years in prison."

The Nation: A White House Smear by David Corn

"We know where they are. They're in the area around Tikrit and Baghdad and east, west, south and north somewhat."
Donald Rumsfeld, Secretary of Defense
ABC Interview
3/30/2003

"I think the burden is on those people who think he didn't have weapons of mass destruction to tell the world where they are."
Ari Fleischer, Press Secretary
Press Briefing
7/9/2003

Read these and other quotes with documentation on Lunaville.org.

On news of another American casualty and more attacks on American forces, CNN spoke with General Wesley Clark on the situation in Iraq. Excerpts:

"I think the president has to look at the overall requirements. He has got to listen to the commanders in the field. But in the broader sense, Paula, we have got to recognize the truth about this mission.

"We're in there without the kind of legitimacy we need. We need top cover. We need top cover from the U.N. And we need to get other international-based forces in with us to help carry the burden that we're shouldering almost alone in Iraq.

"I want the United States to be totally successful at home and abroad. I want the economy to improve. I want our soldiers safe. And I want this mission in Iraq to be successful. But from the beginning, I have had my doubts about this mission, Paula. And I have shared them previously on CNN. I never could connect the dots between the fact that Saddam Hussein was a bad guy and had aspirations for weapons of mass destruction with the urgency of putting U.S. troops in there in that mission

"There was a hunger in some quarters to go after this fight. It was as though using force was a reward in itself, that, by putting our forces in there and showing our power, we would somehow solve our problems in the international environment. And I think the opposite is the truth. I think you should use force only as a last resort."

"This was no case of petty corruption of the kind that forced Vice President Spiro Agnew's resignation. This was a matter of war and peace. Thousands have died. There is no end in sight."

Full text of the letter on Salon. You'll have to click through a few times to get the Premium Day Pass, but it's worth reading.

From the Washington Post:

"Bush said the CIA's doubts about the charge -- that Iraq sought to buy 'yellowcake' uranium ore in Africa -- were 'subsequent' to the Jan. 28 State of the Union speech in which Bush made the allegation. "

This isn't true. Tenet had the administration remove the charge from an earlier speech in October.

"Defending the broader decision to go to war with Iraq, the president said the decision was made after he gave Saddam Hussein 'a chance to allow the inspectors in, and he wouldn't let them in.'"

Everyone knows this isn't true. The inspectors left days before the American offensive. The funny thing about this remark is that it's utterly indefensible, yet it's the latest in a line of constantly changing reasons for war: violation of UN resolutions, imminent threat, terrorist connections, humanitarian reasons—all of which have been less than convincing.

Walter Pincus also provides a good summary of the "dwindling intelligence" on Iraq's alleged nuclear program.

This neo-conservative administration has been pushing for the invasion of Iraq since the end of the Gulf War. None of this should be surprising.

We no longer have separate bathrooms, water fountains, seating, and all the obvious signs of racism, but that doesn't mean it doesn't exist. It's become more subtle and yet it's just as bad as ever.

Jerald M. Lentini had a great post at the Dean blog, blogforamerica.com. He's given me permission to repost it here:

Racial profiling in arrests hits several important policy venues, including drug policy, prison policy and voting rights. I was initially reluctant to discuss this on this post, but I see that I will never have a better opportunity than this.

In Tulia, TX, America witnessed first-hand how law enforcement can be corrupted by racially-biased practices. What we continue to ignore is that it happens in every state, on a regular basis, and there is a very good reason to be worried about it (in at least 10 states, anyway, as I shall discuss further).

Arrest statistics show a highly disproportionate number of African-Americans are booked on drug-related charges. While surveys suggest that the black community uses drugs at a level proportionate to their population size (i.e. at about the same rate as white Americans), blacks are much more likely to be arrested for drug crimes. After their arrest, blacks are more likely to be charged with a felony than to receive a lesser charge, thus increasing the disparity between the races. At trial, blacks are less likely to be offered plea agreements for lesser charges, due in no small part to the fact that, because of socioeconomic realities, blacks are more likely than whites to have to rely on indigent defense. Lastly, blacks receive harsher sentences than whites for identical crimes (for trafficking, the average black convict receives a full year longer than the average white convict). These statements can be confirmed by groups ranging from the ACLU to the Drug Policy Alliance to NORML to the Bureau of Prisons.

Here's where those 10 states come in.

Remember the discovery that Florida had purged thousands of eligible voters, mostly black, from its voter rolls in 2000? This was done as part of the practice of felon disenfranchisement, a politically sensitive yet widespread practice. Florida, along with 9 other states, permantently (sic) prohibits anyone with a felony conviction from voting, whether or not they've served their sentences or had their civil rights restored in other states.

The stated intent of such laws: to preserve the "purity" of the ballot box.

The actual effects of felon disenfranchisement: nearly 4 million otherwise qualified Americans cannot vote for state, local and federal offices, referrendums, (sic) or changes to state constitutions.

The beauty of this practice is that the people being affected by it have essentially no recourse to stop it: how can you vote against allowing something to remain illegal when you are not allowed to vote? Remember prohibition? What if every American found in violation of Prohibition were to have been disenfranchised? Would we still have an Eighteenth Amendment?

The ballot is the coin of the realm in a democracy, as Thurgood Marshall pointed out. In the case of felon disenfranchisement related to racial profiling, that coin is being stolen from one particular part of the country--the worst form of wealth redistribution imaginable is still considered a legitimate policy.

What can President Dean do to correct this? Plenty. In 1982, the Voting Rights Act was amended by the Democratic Congress to provide for instances where discrimination might be present but unintended (in short: motive does not matter when voting discriminiation (sic) occurs). The Voting Rights Act has its roots in the 14th Amendment, which authorizes Congress to pass appropriate legislation to enforce the Amendment. Were the Justice Dept. to follow a policy of challenging on Constitutional grounds states that continue the practice of permanent disenfranchisement, we could see a real change happen. Not only would this serve to strengthen the idea that someone who has completed a prison term has "paid their debt to society,"--a notion long embraced by law-and-order types of all parties--it would have a direct positive impact on civil rights in America by demonstrating that the federal government would not let second-order consequences of their actions go unnoticed. And, as if it needed pointing out, most of those subject to disenfranchisement of this sort belong to demographics that traditionally vote Democratic, making it just as important for the Republicans to fight any change to the practice. In all honesty, felon disenfranchisement is just as responsible as hanging chads for putting George W. Bush into office.

I apologize for the length of this post, but this nation should apologize for the duration of this injustice. In the quest for true racial unity in the U.S., we must not forget that the task will be both nuanced and arduous. We must also remember, however, that it is a task of monumental importance, for ourselves and our posterity.

"I will follow that system of regimen which, according to my ability and judgment, I consider for the benefit of my patients, and abstain from whatever is deleterious and mischievous." -c.400 B.C., still true today.

Yours in Peace,
Jerald M. ("J.R.") Lentini

My friends and I have discussed the language of fear, but here is a good article by Clinical Psychologist Renana Brooks on the subject. A candidate who therefore uses a mixture of crisis and hope language may gain an edge.

Maybe when this is all over we can put out a book called "Winning the Presidency ...for Dummies."

Turning Tables
http://turningtables.blogspot.com/

A soldier blogs from one of Saddam's palaces.

Jacqueline Salit, political director of The Committee for a Unified Independent Party, defines independent voters: "They are independents because they believe there is something wrong with the existing political order. They believe politicians and government have been corrupted. They're looking for a "way out," a way out of special interest-driven politics." Recently, CUIP sent questionaires to all the political candidates. The only posted responses thus far come from Reverend Al Sharpton, Senator John Edwards, and Governor Howard Dean. As Salit says in her Seattle PI article, "Pols ignore independents at their peril." A USA Today/CNN/Gallup poll shows 35% of Americans as independents, making them as large a block as the Democrats or Republicans. Given their past support for candidates like Nader, Perot, and McCain, a candidate that comes out strongly in favor of political reform will likely tilt the balance in his favor.

'Robertson has launched a 21-day "prayer offensive" directed at the Supreme Court in the wake of its 6-3 June vote that decriminalized sodomy.' Man, that word is so loaded. We need to stop using it, especially since the Texas law was talking about "deviate" behavior. Anyway, back to the constipated minister: on TV and in direct mailings, Robertson is asking people to pray for 3 of the justices to step down. Though none are mentioned by name, they are described:

"One justice is 83-years-old, another has cancer and another has a heart condition. Would it not be possible for God to put it in the minds of these three judges that the time has come to retire?"

USA Today: "Online, off and running: Web a new campaign front" Probably the most intelligent thing I've heard about it, though it's not particularly insightful. Most of the readers of this blog (yeah, both of you! Hi, Mom!) understand the "power of the Internet" as it relates to this political campaign, but also understand why so many of the other candidates can't replicate the results. It's funny how so many pundits just don't understand what it all means. Since the Dean campaign actually follows the posts, utilizes the ideas, and addresses the concerns raised, it will likely be able to sustain interest among followers and supporters, versus burning out as the "fire" fades.

Congress.org has an online voter registration form. New Hampshire, North Dakota, Wisconsin, and Wyoming don't allow you to register this way, but apparently everyone else does.

The Federal Election Commission also has this Voter Registration Application that can be used in all the States in PDF form.

All weekend, Spin Dr. Rice was hard at work, trying to staunch the bleeding resulting from the possibly fatal accusation of deception surrounding the State of the Union address:

Check out the 2004 AMERICAN PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE SELECTOR at SelectSmart.com.

Lord, this is funny: Smirking Chimp

"Ask not at whom the chimp smirks -- he smirks at you."

Tenet has taken ultimate responsibility for the 16 words: "'The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa." In a statement released Friday, the CIA director gives a version of events in which the CIA never conclusively proved that the attempt had been made, but did not excise the words from the State of the Union address.

It seems a harmless oversight, but when the consequence of such an oversight is the invasion and occupation of a state at the cost of hundreds of American lives, thousands of Iraqi lives, and tens of billions of dollars, this oversight is far from harmless.

Tenet's words near the end of his statement are particularly telling:

In a followup article on the Tenet statement, CBS News Correspondent David Martin says, "Whoever deserves the blame, it appears the White House, in its desire to make the strongest case possible against Iraq, tried too hard to get the statement into the speech, and the CIA did not try hard enough to keep it out."

The article continues to say:

It is time to create an independent commission to investigate the Bush administration's possible distortion of evidence of Iraq's WMD programs. Thirty years ago, another popular administration overstepped its bounds and committed politically motivated crimes. At that time, a bi-partisan Senate established the Select Committee on Presidential Campaign Activities to investigate the events surrounding the break-in. Serious as these crimes and the subsequent cover-up proved to be, a preemptive war premised on deception and distorted facts would be a scandal that surpasses Watergate by any measure.

It is time for the American people to know the truth.