Mission Accomplished, Part II

We gave them democracy and all we got was this crappy genocidal theocracy….

or how about:

We give them a little democracy and look what they do with it….

As BushInc. and Co. can’t seem to get straight, elections don’t necessarily equate to democracy. Jeez. You’d think they’d know that by now. They are perfect object lessons in that fact.

Juan Cole points out the bit that Shrub and his pals seem to have missed in liberating Iraq, and the downside to the election of Hamas.

Democracy depends not just on elections but on a rule of law, on stable institutions, on basic economic security for the population, and on checks and balances that forestall a tyranny of the majority. Elections in the absence of this key societal context can produce authoritarian regimes and abuses as easily as they can produce genuine people power.

Well, Mr. President, MISSION ACCOMPLISHED.

9/11.

Mission accomplished, Part I

USAid reports that Iraq is out of control. I would seriously hope this fact comes as no surprise to anyone, notwithstanding the sunny portrait that the bush propaganda brigade tries to push through the msm.  What is most interesting to me is that the conflict assessment, attached to an invitation to bid on government contracts, was made by a governmental agency.  Obviously this was a holdout from Emperor Georgie’s regime of sunshine and roses reporting about Iraq.  Just think of all the schools being built, and the six hours of water and electricity per day available to the residents of Baghdad.  So there’s the beginnings of ethnic cleansing and genocide between the Sunnis and the Shites – every society has its little blemishes.  We gave them democracy for gosh sake – the right to elect themselves a theocracy….
See insightful comments regarding this story, which I learned of through Alternet.

George, the Domestic Spy

I am quite hoping that Georgie’s illegal wiretaps set the stage for his impeachment. It would serve his arrogance right.

It astonishes me that there are those individuals who would sacrifice basic civil liberties upon the alter of a false sense of security, especially since nothing the bush administration has done has really made us any more secure. In fact, by making some information obtained through illegal wiretaps fruit from the poisoned tree (i.e., impermissible in a criminal proceeding), bush has probably done more harm than good in the fight against terrorism.

I believe I am paraphrasing Molly Ivins correctly here when I say, “Making ourselves less free does not make us more safe.” What do we have that is worth safeguarding if not our civil liberties anyway? How is Georgie’s breaking the law making us safer? Safer to do what? Speak freely? Talk without fear of a government wiretap on our phone?

Further, if we do give up some of our rights and freedom in the name of security, then haven’t the terrorists won? Isn’t it their goal to make us afraid? How can they not take glee when the American people distrust their President for acting in a corrupt and illegal manner? Georgie took out Saddam – a dictator who tortured and spied on his own people. There’s some irony in that. It is George who hates freedom. Why does George W. Bush hate America? Why does George W. Bush want to take away the freedoms of American citizens? Isn’t it George who is offering aid and comfort to the terrorists by playing right into their hands?

See Elizabeth de la Vega’s excellent piece (no, she doesn’t say that George is a terrorists’s tool) on TomDispatch.

9/11.

Deliberately misleading.

Alberto Gonzales, and Scott McLellan coming up the rear, smears Al Gore for calling for an investigation of Emperor Bush’s illegal wiretaps. Gonzales insinuates that Clinton authorized a similarly illegal search of Aldrich Ames. The problem with Gonzales’ logic is that the search conducted under Clinton was, at that time, legal. This begs a certain question. Isn’t the argument that Gonzales is making in effect, “Clinton did it, so why can’t we?” First, as noted, the particular factual circumstances and legal standards were different then. (With Ames it was for a physical search instead of a wiretap, and no warrant was required.) Gonzales, normally so quick to point out the finer nuances of the law in regards to things like what constitutes “torture” obviously knows this. This kind of purposeful dissembling by Gonzales is done to mislead and deceive. Second, if Clinton had done something as facially illegal as a search in violation of the laws and express intent of Congress, the right wing would have been all over him in a heartbeat. As it was, they had to fabricate and stretch lame non-stories such as Whitewater to try to get something to pin on him. Third, even if Gonzales’ insinuation was true, that the searches under Clinton were illegal, and they were conducted without a warrant, it would not make Georgie’s illegal listening any less illegal.

Finally, how dumb do Gonzales and McLellan think we are? You’d think they’d be aware by now that pretty much every insinuation or statement they make is going to come up for factual verification by not just the msm, but the blogsphere. At this point they’re just insulting our intelligence.

9/11.

Fair Warning.

So help me God, if you smoke outside the door of my apartment one more time, I will hunt you down and beat you to death with my can of Lysol Neutra Air.

On again, off again….

You think this is bad, this is what I’m like when I’m on my medication.

Why I like WordPress

The reason I like WordPress so much is because I hate blogs that look like crap.