"I DON'T TRUST THIS PRESIDENT"
Rep. Pete Stark (D-CA), on fire - here is part of his statement delivered on the floor of the House Wednesday:

"Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to this resolution (authorizing military force against Iraq). I am deeply troubled that lives may be lost without a meaningful attempt to bring Iraq into compliance with U.N. resolutions through careful and cautious diplomacy.

"The bottom line is I don't trust this president and his advisors.

"Make no mistake, we are voting on a resolution that grants total authority to the president, who wants to invade a sovereign nation without any specific act of provocation. This would authorize the United States to act as the aggressor for the first time in our history. It sets a precedent for our nation -- or any nation -- to exercise brute force anywhere in the world without regard to international law or international consensus.

"Congress must not walk in lockstep behind a president who has been so callous to proceed without reservation, as if war was of no real consequence.

"Let us not forget that our president -- our commander in chief -- has no experience with, or knowledge of, war. In fact, he admits that he was at best ambivalent about the Vietnam War. He skirted his own military service and then failed to serve out his time in the National Guard. And, he reported years later that at the height of that conflict in 1968 he didn't notice 'any heavy stuff going on.'"

"So we have a president who thinks foreign territory is the opponent's dugout and Kashmir is a sweater.

"What is most unconscionable is that there is not a shred of evidence to justify the certain loss of life. Do the generalized threats and half-truths of this administration give any one of us in Congress the confidence to tell a mother or father or family that the loss of their child or loved one was in the name of a just cause?

"Is the president's need for revenge for the threat once posed to his father enough to justify the death of any American?

"I submit the answer to these questions is no.

"Aside from the wisdom of going to war as Bush wants, I am troubled by who pays for his capricious adventure into world domination. The administration admits to a cost of around $200 billion!

"Now, wealthy individuals won't pay. They've got big tax cuts already. Corporations won't pay. They'll cook the books and move overseas and then send their contributions to the Republicans. Rich kids won't pay. Their daddies will get them deferments as Big George did for George W.

"Well then, who will pay?

"School kids will pay. There'll be no money to keep them from being left behind -- way behind. Seniors will pay. They'll pay big time as the Republicans privatize Social Security and rob the Trust Fund to pay for the capricious war. Medicare will be curtailed and drugs will be more unaffordable. And there won't be any money for a drug benefit because Bush will spend it all on the war.

"Working folks will pay through loss of job security and bargaining rights. Our grandchildren will pay through the degradation of our air and water quality. And the entire nation will pay as Bush continues to destroy civil rights, women's rights and religious freedom in a rush to phony patriotism and to courting the messianic Pharisees of the religious right.

"The questions before the members of this House and to all Americans are immense, but there are clear answers. America is not currently confronted by a genuine, proven, imminent threat from Iraq. The call for war is wrong.

"And what greatly saddens me at this point in our history is my fear that this entire spectacle has not been planned for the well-being of the world, but for the short-term political interest of our president.

"Now, I am also greatly disturbed that many Democratic leaders have also put political calculation ahead of the president's accountability to truth and reason by supporting this resolution. But, I conclude that the only answer is to vote no on the resolution before us."

Thank you, Mr Stark.

IT JUST KEEPS GETTING BETTER
[/sarcasm]
Bush Backs Emissions Law Opponents. Bonehead.

Automakers opposed to California's requirement that a percentage of passenger vehicles sold in the state achieve zero emissions - meaning reliance on all-electric cars - have won the support of the Bush administration.

Federal law overrides any state effort to regulate fuel economy for cars and trucks, the Justice Department said. "The Energy Policy and Conservation Act provides that when a federal fuel economy standard is in effect, a state or a political subdivision of a state may not adopt or enforce a law or regulation related to fuel economy standards," the department argued. "So f*ck you, and f*ck the environment."

Things are so much easier when you're a dictator.



THANK YOU, SIR, MAY I HAVE ANOTHER?
Scott Ritter, American Hero, bitch-slapped Tucker Carlson and Arizona Republican Congressman John Shadegg on last night's Crossfire. It was beautiful - my jaw hit the floor when he told 'Mr' Shadegg he was "so pathetic".

RITTER: That simply shows your ignorance, sir. They have agreed to a resolution that says that palaces can be inspected. It's in the memorandum of understanding.

SHADEGG: No they have not.

RITTER: Look, you're lying to the American public if you're saying that. They have said they will agree to inspections under existing Security Council resolutions. And Resolution 1154 clearly states that the memorandum of understanding, that it was agreed upon between Kofi Annan and the Iraqi government, allows inspectors in.

[.....]

CARLSON: ...But to express that, to attack the government of the United States within the walls of the Iraqi national assembly at a time when Iraq is firing at American aircraft, don't you think that's kind of offensive?

RITTER: No, I think it's important that the American people understand the sham that's being perpetrated by the president, by Congress right now. And whether I can say that -- frankly, with all due respect, Tucker, if I tried to get on CROSSFIRE and say that before I went to Baghdad, you wouldn't have had me on. You have me on today because I went to Baghdad. That was the only place I could go to get the media to pay attention.


And f*ck you!

NOW WATCH THIS DRIVE ...
The Washington comPost's Mike Allen seems a bit cranky:

"President Bush will hit the road for 14 straight days before the Nov. 5 elections, stopping in as many as four states a day during a taxpayer-subsidized campaign spree that appears unconstrained by preparations for war."

And from the same article, we learn that in these dark days before we bomb the bejeezus out of another country, Bunnypants will be hopping about this one and throwing a party at his pseudo-ranch, the Lazy W, for Chinese President Jiang Zemin. Maybe they'll dress up in Roy Rogers suits.

Chimpy's nannies say that in the coming weeks many of the AWOL Wonderchimp's stops will consist of rallies designed to draw favorable local news media attention to republican candidates. I don't know about you, but when I hear "rallies" the first thing I picture is the one in Nuremberg.

White House officials say taxpayers will be stuck with the costs, on the theory "that Bush is the president wherever he goes" (gawd), though repub state parties and campaigns will reimburse a portion of the cost, including hall rental and hotel rooms for staff. No mention on who pays for the backdrops, however. Some Dems are a bit peeved that the Golfing Goobhead always seems to combine his political rallies with an official event, to defray even more of the party's cost and to stick it to the taxpayers.

Democratic officials said they will try to make an issue of the Fratboy F*ckup's taxpayer-subsidized travel in districts and states where he stops. Sen. Harry M. Reid (D-Nev) wrote to budget director Mitch Daniels on Sept. 26 to ask for an accounting of the government cost of Bush's political trips. As of yesterday, the White House had not responded.

Reid's letter began by noting Bush's commitment to restraining the federal budget. "Spending taxpayer money on political campaigning and fund-raising is the type of frivolous spending I thought President Bush vowed to curb," he wrote. "During a time of war and deepening recession, are these appropriate expenditures to American taxpayers?"

A White House aide would not comment on the letter beyond saying, "We're reviewing it."

Yeah. Like Dick Cheney's energy task force files.

BUNNYPANTS BITCHPADDLED, KUDOS TO CARTER
OSLO (Reuters) - Former U.S. President Jimmy Carter was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize today by a committee whose head called the decision a deliberate slap in the face for the current U.S. government over its policy on Iraq.

The five-member prize committee praised Carter, 78, for "decades of untiring effort to find peaceful solutions to international conflicts, to advance democracy and human rights, and to promote economic and social development," for an "outstanding commitment" to human rights and for everything from his battle against tropical diseases to his help for developing nations.

The chairman of the committee, Gunnar Berge, used the prize to make a scathing attack on 'president' Bush's campaign to topple Iraqi President Saddam Hussein.

"With the position Carter has taken...(the award) can and must also be seen as criticism of the line the current U.S. administration has taken on Iraq," Berge said.

Asked if it was a "kick in the leg" at Washington, Berge said: "Yes, the answer is an unconditional 'yes."' A "kick in the leg" is a Norwegian phrase meaning "a slap in the face," or a big "up yours, douchebag!"

Congratulations to Pres. Jimmy Carter!

UNCHECKED POWER
Snipped from Harvey Wasserman's column, here.

With his TV talk of war, George W. Bush has blown smoke over what's really at stake today: the future of democracy. Not in Iraq; here in the United States.

Never in US history have we ever been closer to an unchecked one-man one-party rule than right now. And as the world's sole military super-power, we have made the crisis truly global. The structure of our basic rights is as tenuous under George W. Bush as under many of the third world dictators installed by his father when he was head of the CIA. Any shreds of counter-balance left in the system will disappear if the Republicans keep control of the US House and retake the Senate.

Globally, that extends to a Bush Doctrine touting the "right" to intervene in any country, and remove any ruler it does not like, regardless of national sovereignty or international law.

This anti-Iraq hysteria is about an aggressive, unelected US regime aiming to to complete the coup d'etat it began two years ago.

America's domestic economy is shattered, its stock market in free fall. Unresolved multi-billion-dollar scandals still taint Bush from Harken Energy and Vice President Dick Cheney from Halliburton. Under this regime, joblessness has skyrocketed and the quality of life has plunged.

The Bush remedy has been tax breaks for the rich and relentless assaults on organized labor, gays rights, women's rights, minority rights and the natural environment. His foreign policy has been to trash international treaties on atomic testing, missile defense, global warming, international justice and more.

A real war against this particular Saddam Hussein could cost $100 to $200 billion the current US economy can't afford. It could destabilize global oil supplies and infuriate much of the muslim world, 1.2 billion strong. The real costs could include skyrocketing oil prices, economic collapse, and terrorism escalated beyond our wildest nightmares, with the final demise of liberty and peace.

The Republicans are running out the clock on the November election. They are winning their bet against Democrats too timid to oppose a war that has no clothes, and a declaration of global empire with no legs. After that comes an endless procession of Orwellian enemies, conjured at will, a permanent pretext for martial law.

DISILLUSIONED VOTERS DISS DEMS
Discontented donors: 'drop dead!'

With the House and Senate elections less than four weeks away, several Democratic officials cite a troubling drop in contributions from disaffected groups and they fear a sluggish Election Day turnout from minorities, women, suburban professionals and others.

'Our liberal base wants us to stand up and challenge Bush on the war,' said Donna Brazile, who runs the DNC's Voting Rights Institute. She said loyal Democrats in low-income areas and black neighborhoods, along with many women and liberal suburbanites, are bitterly complaining that 'no one is talking to us, no one is addressing our issues' on the economy and preparation for war. 'There is a real danger out there.'

Direct-mail donations to the DNC took a nosedive in August and September, party officials acknowledge. Several of them say a major cause is discontent over the acquiescence of many Democratic leaders to Bush's preparation for war with Iraq. If Democrats can't energize their base - especially liberals, many of whom want stronger opposition to Bush on Iraq - their chances of holding the Senate or taking over the House will diminish.

One Democratic strategist familiar with the situation said, "Democratic donors want the leadership to fight harder on Iraq. Instead, people see Democrats are not raising questions." - From the Washington Post.

PITBULL PEES ON PREZNIT PRETZAL'S PANTLEG
Rep. Jim McDermott Says Bush Is Trying to 'Become An Emperor'

On Sunday, Rep. Jim McDermott (D-Gonads) broadened his attack on Bush's war plans yesterday, saying Emperor Snippy is threatening military action in Iraq as part of a plot to crown himself emperor of America.

McDermott, a Seattle Democrat, was back in his district telling cheering supporters that Bush is planning a war to distract voters' attention from domestic problems, such as the collapsing stock market and other problems at home.

"It is the oldest game in the book," he said. "They found this war very convenient to obscure people's views about what is happening domestically."

"This president is trying to bring to himself all the power to become an emperor - to create Empire America," he said. And he warned his supporters, "If you go along like sheep that is what will happen."

He said Bush is trying to "submarine" efforts to restart weapons inspections in Iraq to give him a pretext for starting a war, in part to bolster U.S. oil interests. "And what we are dealing with right now in this country is whether we are having a kind of bloodless, silent coup or not," he said. He also talked about what oil companies could gain from a war and said, "I'm not going to connect the dots exactly, but I think a dotted line certainly seems within the realm of possibility. Oil is certainly a part of it but I don't think it's the underlying issue." The underlying issue, he said repeatedly, is a fight over the Constitutional power to declare war. - From
The Seattle Times.

Spent all day yesterday with my family in the hospital, while my mom had cancer surgery. Depending on the results, she may or may not have to go back for more. She seemed to be in good spirits when we left last night, though pretty sore. I'll be going back over there in a couple of minutes. Thanks to everyone who sent their good wishes! It really meant a lot to us.


IT'S A PERFECTLY CROMULENT WORD...
"Let me tell you my thoughts about tax relief. When your economy is kind of ooching along, it's important to let people have more of their own money." - the Oaf of Office, Boston, 10/4/02.

'Kind of' 'ooching'?!? Try tanking. Or in the crapper. How about dying, or being pulled into a black hole, or maybe in the cellar? You clueless moron. And how is giving tax breaks to your filthy rich pals going to help the rest of us?

This just in: Chickenhawks, lapdogs give Bunnypants go-ahead to start the war with Iraq. And possibly anyone else.

WHEN CHIMPS SPEECHIFY
I watched part of Bush's TV appearance last night, and almost drove my martini olive-spearer into my eyes. It probably would've not only been less painful, but it would've made more sense.

Where the fook is the proof, idiotboy????????

Some takes on the podiumpap, culled from news sources today before I was forced to get the hey off the internet and get back to work:

"I thought the speech was more of a tactic to instill fear than any reasonable or logical process," said Jose Perez, 27, a member of an unofficial campus group, Students Against War. He also called Bush's comments 'coercive'.

"There have been so many contradictory things coming from the administration, such as whether or not there is a clear and present danger, that until the information gets sorted out, we really should not go after this war," said Ed Templeton, a paralegal. "I'd like to see a smoking gun before we send our own bullets."

Echoed office clerk Takako Mizushima: "I don't support it. The Iraqis said they're going to let the inspectors in. Bush hasn't shown us the proof." - from the LA Times.

"To listen to Mr Bush in his daily diatribes on the stump, you would have no inkling that the stock market is at a five-year low, that the US economy is teetering on the edge of a double-dip recession, and that half of Americans worry that someone in their family will be out of a job within a year." - via SmirkingChimp.com.

"'We refuse to live in fear,' President Bush said in his speech Monday night in Cincinnati, referring to the American people. And of course he is right, but there are fears, and then there are fears, and the top one on most Americans' list today is not Iraq, the focus of the president's remarks, but the safety of their jobs, of their pensions, of their health care. On those subjects, their president has been missing in action for many months now, and the people do not know quite why." - from a Minneapolis Star-Tribune Editorial. 'Cause he's a dumbass? Because it's easier to start a war in order to get reelected than it is to fix our domestic problems?

"Saddam may be as crazy as George W, but he isn't near as stupid," said Rufus T. Firefly, a political science major. "There's no way he'd use WMDs against this country, but he may just use them in his own if our servicemen and women are close to capturing his ass."

WHEN CHIMPS SPEAK
"I was proud the other day when both Republicans and Democrats stood with me in the Rose Garden to announce their support for a clear statement of purpose: you disarm, or we will." - the Oaf of Office (talking about Saddam Hussein?!) , Manchester, N.H., 10/5/02.

Can we start with the anthrax killer first?

"One of Iraq's cabinet ministers suggested Bush and Hussein duel with pistols. Bush is from Texas. He'd like that. A game of Scrabble is what would scare him." - Leno


DOGGIES IN TUTUS
Protesters jeer Gephardt in Kennedy Park, God bless 'em.

As U.S. House Democratic Leader Richard 'Fluffy' Gephardt stepped away from the crowd Sunday in Kennedy Park, the crowd followed. It was not the crowd that showed up to support Democrat Mike Michaud in his run for the House, it was the crowd unhappy with members of Congress, especially Gephardt.

“Gephardt, Gephardt has no spine! He just follows Bush’s line,” the crowd loudly repeated, holding signs and banging drums, standing a few feet away from the high-ranking Democrat. The age of protesters ranged from college students to middle-aged parents to white-haired seniors.

The protesters were angry that Gephardt and other congressional leaders signed off on a resolution giving Bush the authority to use military action against Iraq. That resolution is expected to be taken up in Congress this week.

Protesters angrily said agreeing to the resolution is not how Democrats should behave.

“Things that are central to many of us in the Democratic Party, he just signed off on it,” Chuck Lidz said of Gephardt before the rally. “He’s put a lot of pressure on fellow Democrats who tried to raise questions about the war. In Democratic Party politics we try to do things internationally, with the cooperation of our allies. Bush is not doing that, and Gephardt just signed off on that.”

Bates sophomore Nathan Harrington agreed. “They’re supposed to be the opposition party but they don’t oppose,” he said.

"What the hell is wrong with the Democrats?" businessman Haywood Jablowmie asked. "When are they going to start listening to us, instead of spinelessly humping Bush's leg every chance they get? For petessake, I may as well just write my damn dog's name on the ballot this November."

Crap. I've been running back and forth trying to calm down both my dad, who's worried and depressed, and my sister, who's worried and psycho, over my mom's cancer surgery on Wednesday. I don't know how I got the reputation for being so calm and levelheaded...though maybe it's like that line from Spinal Tap: I'd be a lot more upset if I wasn't taking so many antidepressants.

I'm exhausted. I never did get my blog-burst letter out, and for that I'm very sorry. I just can't think right now.

BREAKING NEWS!
Supreme Court Allows New Jersey Ballot Switch
Mon Oct 7, 3:46 PM ET

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday allowed New Jersey Democrats to switch Senate candidates on the Nov. 5 ballot, handing them a huge boost in a key race that could help determine control of the U.S. Senate.

The high court rejected a Republican challenge to a state court ruling allowing Democrats to dump Sen. Robert Torricelli, who abruptly dropped out of the race last week amid a political gifts scandal, and replace him with former Sen. Frank Lautenberg.

The high court's action, on the first day of its new term, came nearly two years after the Supreme Court, by a 5-4 vote, halted recounts of ballots in Florida, handing the presidency over to their pal Poppy's Widdle Poophead. This time, the Supreme Court decided to stay out of the politically charged battle.

In the one-line order, the justices said the emergency application for the stay had been referred from Justice David Souter to the entire nine-member court and "is denied."

Yeah!!!!!


ROUGH DRAFT OF MY BLOG-BURST LETTER
I haven't gotten very far. I'm having a bad day.

Dear Neutered Democrats,

George W. Bush's agenda for a war in Iraq is all about "regime change." Regime change in America, that is. If Bush is so concerned about America's security, why did he start his drive for war two months before an election that will determine the course of American history during an acute period of political, economic and diplomatic crisis? Why did he wait until after a month-long vacation and a summer of fundraising?

REMINDER!! IT'S TIME!!
Info on The Open Letters BlogBurst, from Ampersand:

This is a reminder to everyone else to write a letter to your chosen Congresscritter or to your local daily paper - or both - sometime today. Once you've written your letters, please post them on your blog or website, along with a link to the Open Letters page: http://www.amptoons.com/openletters/. I'll post links to each letter on the Open Letters page, so interested readers can see what other folks are doing and (I hope) be inspired to write letters of their own.

Additionally, PLEASE remember to email me with the URL of your letter(s) once they are posted! Also on the Open Letters page, you'll find resources to help you write your letter: Current proposals in congress you might consider supporting, advice on writing letters, links to websites that automate the letter-writing process, how to find congressional contact information, and information about using the internet to send faxes for free (so your letter gets there faster).

Thanks for participating, folks. I'm looking forward to reading all your letters. - Ampersand, at www.amptoons.com/blog/. Open Letters: www.amptoons.com/openletters/

ECONOMY IN CRAPPER WHILE BUNNYPANTS FUNDRAISES, CHEERLEADS FOR WAR
Public Says Bush Needs to Pay Heed to Weak Economy

The New York Times - A majority of Americans say that the nation's economy is in its worst shape in nearly a decade - and that Daddy's Little Doofus and Congressional leaders are spending too much time talking about Iraq while neglecting problems at home, according to the latest New York Times/CBS News poll.

The poll found signs of economic distress that cut across party and geographic lines. Nearly half of all Americans are worried that they or someone in their household will be out of a job within a year.

The number of Americans who said they believe the economy is worse than it was just two years ago has increased markedly since the summer. The number of Americans who approved of the way Mr. Bush has handled the economy 41 percent was the lowest it has been in his residency. Many people said they worried that a war in Iraq which most Americans view as inevitable would disrupt an already unsettled economy.

As Congress prepares to resume debate on a resolution supporting the use of force in Iraq, Americans said they thought members of both parties were trying to manipulate the issue for their political advantage.

"Bush is spending way too much time focusing on Iraq instead of the economy, and he's doing it as a political move," said Gladys Steele, 42, a homemaker from Seattle who is a political independent, in a follow-up interview yesterday. "He thinks keeping us fearful about going to war will distract us from how bad the economy is."

Geoff Crooks, 44, an independent who lives in Lincoln, Neb., said: "We are paying way too much attention to Iraq. Meanwhile, the stock market has fallen 25 percent and tons of people are unemployed including myself."

"Thanks to that unelected, AWOL idiot" said Haywood Jablowmie, 56, "I not only have to worry about being laid off, but about my kids getting blown to smithereens in Iraq. Thanks, dumbass."

I wish I could remember who created this.


NAPOLEON BONEHEAD: MY WAY - END OF DISCUSSION
Bush kicks poodle: his veto on Middle East talks is a humiliating rebuff for Blair initiative.

Tony Blair's drive for Middle East peace talks has suffered an embarrassing setback at the hands of Emperor Snippy, only days after the prime minister flagged up his plan at the Labour party conference in Blackpool.

Mr Blair is pushing for a resumption of Israeli-Palestinian talks, backed by an international conference, before the end the year. He has told colleagues that, with war looming in Iraq, he regards it as essential to deal with one of the main causes of Arab resentment against the west.

But the Guardian is reporting that Mr Bush has blocked the initiative and has made it clear to Mr Blair that he does not want such talks to be held in the near future.

Mr Bush's rebuff highlights a fundamental division between the US and Britain over the Middle East: the Boob of Kennebunkport says 'f*ck everyone - let's bomb Saddam,' while Britain sees the Israeli-Palestinian conflict as the priority, either to be tackled first or, at least, alongside Iraq.

A Whitehall official, describing the US and Israeli attitude towards a resumption of talks as "cool", said: "The lack of progress is poisoning everything in the region."


Meanwhile, back at Castrati Central....

WELL ISN'T THAT SPECIAL
Daschle: Congress Will Approve Iraq Resolution

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Facing a chorus of support in the Senate for action against Saddam Hussein, Majority Leader Tom 'Isadora' Daschle rolled onto his back like a pathetic little lapdog predicted on the eve of a public appeal by pResident Evil that Congress would give overwhelming approval of a war powers resolution.

"This is the first preemptive, unilateral authorization of the use of force that we've ever passed," Daschle said. The Senate leader said he was inclined to support the resolution, although he would make clear any objections he had to the wording, but believed the Democrat-controlled Senate would approve it by a wide margin with a vote in the range of 75-25.

"It will pass and I suspect that there will be a broad bipartisan coalition in support of it," said Daschle, the only top congressional leader who had held off supporting a resolution. "Now, if you'll excuse me, I have more 'presidential' leghumping to do."

BTW, Sen. Edward Kennedy on CBS "Face the Nation" said he would not vote for the resolution and that senators should be debating whether to go to war against Iraq, not just the resolution. "The president hasn't made the case .... A war ought to be the last resort, not the first resort," Kennedy said.

"Anyone seen any Democrats lately?"
Whines Thomas L. Friedman of the New York Times.

Well, excuse me, you obsequious asshole. You must have been in an undisclosed location swilling gin with Lucy the Bat when Al Gore, in two powerful speeches, ripped the Bush misadminstration a new cornchute. Oh, but wait, you and your pals have dismissed as being "irrelevant."

Perhaps you were sleeping during Sen Robert Byrd's impassioned speeches on the Senate floor in the past week where he out and out called the Iraq war a bald-faced attempt to divert the public's attention from domestic ills. Maybe you missed Byrd's appearance on Donahue when he railed on the un-Constitutional actions of the court-appointed administration, and accused Congressmen of abdicating their Constitutional DUTIES by passing bunnypants' ill-intended resolution.

And maybe you had your head up your ass during Bill Clinton's kick-ass speech to the British Labour Party, where he wowed everybody with his vision, statesmanship, intelligence and compassion.

Perhaps you were looking the other way during Rep. Dennis Kucinich's news conference in Washington, his visionary speech on the House floor, or his probing questioning in House hearings on Iraq.

And I guess you slept through Dave Bonior and Jim McDermott's impassioned attempts to find a way to keep us from starting a war with Iraq.

When Sen. Tom Daschle, a veteran, speaks out against having his patriotism questioned by people like GW Bush and Tom Delay who avoided military combat themselves, Maureen Dowd and others write columns making it seem like he merely had a hissy fit.

When Paul Krugman accurately speaks of the huge conflict of interest and criminal activities of Army Secretary and former Enron executive Thomas White, the NY Times editorial board demands an inordinately high level of fact confirmation, and even when he meets that standard, is still forced to print a retraction.

Perhaps you can't even be bothered to get your information by watching Crossfire where Dems Carville and Begala - as well as their many Democratic guests - rail against an unelected misadministration and their disastrous policies on a nightly basis. Nah. You'd much rather just sit back and get your talking points handed to you by Karl, or Rush the Pigboy, or the propaganda ministry at Faux Nooze. Where are the Democrats, you ask? Right where they have been placed: in the center of an open field with everyone shooting at them, and decried whenever they try to fire back. And the national media, for whatever reasons, has helped put them in that position.
- - - Thanks to SmirkingChimp.com, Joseph Vecchio, and stopbush.

JEBBIE FASHIONS 'AIR QUOTES' INTO NOOSE, HANGS SELF
This is getting to be a regular feature.

Jeb!, during that same Wednesday meeting at the Capitol when he cracked jokes about lesbians to Pensacola lawmakers, also told them that "I've got a couple of devious plans'' to derail a constitutional amendment voters are expected to approve in November that would mandate smaller class sizes.

Even Bush supporters were befuddled by his comments on Wilson's caretakers. "That's just dippy,'' said University of West Florida political scientist James Witt. "That kind of statement is beneath the station of the governor.''

"This is the kind of good ol' boy, wink-wink, country club stuff, which is where he comes from,'' said Rep. Bob Henriquez, D-Tampa. "There's no excuse for insensitive comments. It's unbecoming a governor.''

There really is a place where the forest almost looks like that - Cawdor, in Scotland. Amazing.

How about some weird stuff first?
Jeb Bush, in another insane display of fratboy


CITIES FOUND ON THE MOON?
From Pravda:

“NASA scientists and engineers participating in exploration of Mars and the Moon reported the results of their discoveries at a briefing at the Washington National Press Club on March 21, 1996. It was announced for the first time that man-made structures and objects have been discovered on the Moon.” The scientists spoke rather cautiously and evasively about these objects, with the exception of an UFO. They always mentioned that the man-made objects are possible, and stated the information was still under study and official results will be published later.

"It was mentioned at the briefing as well that the Soviet Union used to own some photo materials proving the presence of such activity on the Moon. And, although it wasn’t identified what kind of activity it was, thousands of photo- and video materials from the Apollos and the Clementine space station showed many parts on the lunar surface where this activity and its traces were perfectly evident. The video films and photos made by US astronauts during the Apollo program were demonstrated at the briefing. People were extremely surprised why the materials hadn’t been presented to the public earlier. NASA specialists answered: “It was difficult to forecast the reaction of people to information that some creatures had been or still are on the Moon. In addition, there were some other reasons to it, which were beyond the control of NASA.” [....]

"When the Apollo-12 crew landed on the lunar surface, they saw that the landing was observed by a half-transparent, pyramidal object. It was hovering just several meters above the lunar surface and shimmered with all the colors of the rainbow against the black sky.

"In 1969, when the film about astronauts travelling to the Sea of Storms was demonstrated (the astronauts saw the strange objects once again, which were later called “striped glasses”), NASA finally understood what consequences such kind of control could bring. Astronaut Mitchell answered the question about his feelings after his successful return: “My neck still aches as I had to constantly turn my head around, because we felt we were not alone there. We had no choice but to pray.” Johnston, who worked at the Houston Space Center and studied photos and video materials made during the Apollo program, discussed the artifacts with Richard Hoagland and said that the NASA leadership was awfully annoyed with the great number of anomalous, to put it mildly, objects on the Moon. It was even said that piloted flights to the Moon might be banned."