today u.s. house speaker nancy pelosi made a donation to the campaign of her rival cindy sheehan. cindy is running for congress, running for the 8th district of california, for the seat currently held by nancy pelosi.

apparently nancy pelosi is tired of being in congress but doesn't have the guts to quit so instead she's decided to try to lose. she'd rather be known as a loser than a quitter but she will always be known as a pelosi and that may be the greatest shame of all.

cindy's running on the point that, among other things, nancy is not representing the 8th district.

and nancy's not. she's walked away from support for abortion rights and lgbt rights - rights strongly supported in the 8th district. she's refused to use her power to end the illegal war and taken to blaming her own failures on the senate leadership. nancy does not stand up.

nancy donated to cindy's campaign by proving just how true that was. from ayesha rascoe (reuters):

Democratic lawmakers in the House of Representatives unveiled legislation on Wednesday that, if passed, would significantly expand domestic oil production by permitting offshore drilling at least 50 miles from U.S. coasts.
The package gives all U.S. states the option to allow drilling between 50 and 100 miles off their shores. Areas further than 100 miles from the coast would be completely open oil exploration.

gone is nancy's big talk that she will never allow such a vote to come to the floor. gone is her b.s. of how she will protect the coastlines. she's revealed herself as some 1 who stands for nothing.

she will buckle for any reason.

she will never stand.

some 1 who is standing up is ralph nader. c.i. passed on a bad article (and noted it as such) but pointed out it has the transcript of ralph on cnn. from the bad article:

BLITZER: OK. Let's bring in Ralph Nader. What's your goal right now? You're not going to be elected president of the United States. You know that, Ron Paul knows that. What is your goal in aligning yourself, in effect, with Ron Paul?
RALPH NADER, INDEPENDENT PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: Well if we're in the presidential debates, it might be a Jesse Ventura, three-way race. But-- yet today, we put together --
BLITZER: Three presidential debates, but the Presidential Debate Commission has set a bar that's pretty hard for you to overcome.
NADER: Yes, since it's controlled by the two parties, as you know.Today I think is an historic day because we, Ron Paul and the candidate for the Green Party, the candidate for the Constitutional Party, and me, and Bob Barr, agreed on four major areas: foreign policy -- get the soldiers back, end the war in Iraq, stop being imperialistic, privacy, deal with the repeal of the Patriot Act; the revision of FISA -- Military Commissions Act and you know, get rid of torture; and a third is the national debt. Deficits are now used for reckless government adventurism. The --BLITZER: The national debt has nearly doubled over the last --
NADER: Yes, and the Iraq war is financed from deficit spending.
BLITZER: And the fourth issue?
NADER: And the fourth issue is the Federal Reserve is now a government within a government. It is totally out of control. Congress doesn't control it. It's funded by the banks. And we either have constitutional government or we don't because of this. Well -- here's the question: Is there anything left for the American people to decide about their country?
BLITZER: Here is what the CNN Opinion Research/"TIME" magazine poll shows in two key battleground states right now. In Michigan, 45 Obama,42 McCain, Ralph Nader, 6 percent, Bob Barr, 2 percent, Cynthia McKinney, 1 percent. In New Hampshire, another battleground state, Obama 48, McCain, 43 percent, Nader, 4 percent, Bob Barr, 2 percent.You know the accusations, Ralph Nader, that were leveled against you in 2000 that you stole the election, in effect, from Al Gore. He would have carried Florida if you had not been a candidate. He got 90,000-plus votes in Florida. He lost by 500 votes.What do you say to those people who are saying you're just trying to spoil this election right now for Barack Obama?
NADER: I say two things. They're factually wrong about 2000. If you asked Al Gore why he lost, he'll say it was the Electoral College because he won the popular vote and it was stolen from him in a whole variety of ways before, during and after Election Day from Tallahassee to the five politicians on the Supreme Court. Now, I have news for you. The last four major polls, when they poll Obama and McCain, and then they poll Obama, McCain and they put Nader/Gonzalez in the poll, McCain does worse. Does worse.
BLITZER: But you think your presence hurts McCain more than Obama?
NADER: That's what the polls say, and it's explained on our Web site, votenader.org.

let's close with c.i.'s 'Iraq snapshot:'

Thursday, September 11, 2008. Chaos and violence continue, at least 23 Iraqi deaths are reported today, cholera continues to grip Iraq, Japan says bye-bye, distrust remains between the "Awakening" Council and the puppet government, and more.


Matt Brown (Australia's ABC) observes, "The general in charge of American soldiers in Iraq has given a mixed assessment of progress in the country." That's Gen David Petraeus on his way out as top US commander in Iraq as he moves on to take over CENTCOM. And his remarks on BBC's Newsnight (click here for BBC text summary of the interview and a brief clip). BBC reports, "When asked if US troops could withdraw from Iraqi cities by the middle of next year, he said that would be 'doable'." Withdraw from Iraq cities, not withdraw. They'll move to those bases US House Speaker Nancy Pelosi insists aren't "permanent basis" because, philosopher Nancy points out, nothing is permanent. BBC also notes that Petraeus stated there would be no declared victory in Iraq. That might strike some as 'enlightened' because there is no victory in Iraq and the US long ago lost. But that wasn't what Petraeus meant as he made obvious by immediately referring to the "long struggle" he sees in the future for Iraq. The illegal war hits the six year mark this March and Petraeus sees what to come as a 'long struggle'? Exactly what does he think has gone on thus far?

Yesterday the US House Armed Services Committee held a hearing at which US Secretary of Defense Robert Gates testified and offered that the US would remain in Iraq for many "years to come -- although in changing and increasingly limited ways." Petraeus' interview echos the view of Gates that the illegal war is no where near an "end game" (Gates used that term yesterday) and that it will continue for many years to come.
There were a lot of lies told to start the illegal war and for it to continue a lot of lies continue to be told. Among the big liars today, the editorial board of The Detroit Free Press which isn't content to play dumb with War Hawk Barack Obama's remarks, they 'improve' (lie) about them. Lying through their teeth, they offer: "Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Barack Obama wants to get all American forces out of Iraq within 16 months of taking office and focus more on Afghanistan. Leaders of the Iraqi government have said such a timetable could work. But Republican candidate Sen. John McCain believes a large-scale pullout would come at the risk of the current hard-won but fragile stability in Iraq." Not even aged groupie Tom Hayden lies like that for Barack today.

During the Democratic Party primaries, Barack did use the "16 months" figure. He did not use for "all American forces." He stated "combat troops" and always stated that US service members would remain in Iraq for "training" and "terrorism" activities. He never said "all America forces out of Iraq" and that an editorial board doesn't know that is beyond belief so the term is "lie." Campaigning in Houston, Texas, Barack suddenly dropped the timetable down to "ten months" but he was still referring to "combat forces" only. That was his campaign 'promise' but it wasn't a promise. Dropping back to the June 6th snapshot:

The Press Trust of India reports that Barack told CNN he would "not rule out the possibility that conditions on the ground could alter his policy of immediately beginning a troop withdrawal and that Barack insisted of his 'pledge' to end the illegal war, "Well, you know, I'd never say there's 'nothing' or 'never' or 'no way' in which I'd change my mind." Confronted with his statements on withdrawal policy, He spoke of "broader perspective"s and offered praise for Gen David Petraeus. It's shocking only if you've trusted the liars of Panhandle Media. Barack has changed his position on the Iraq War repeatedly. While running for the US Senate, he told Elaine and I at a big money, private fundraiser that he didn't favor withdrawal. His attitude was that the US was in Iraq now and had to win. (Neither Elaine nor I contributed to his run. We both immediately walked out of the fundraiser.) At that point he was a myth of the radical left, an "anti-war" candidate. The press picked up on that and he became the "anti-war" Senator which required ignoring not only his public statements (his many public statements) but his continued voting for the illegal war once he got into the US Senate. Throughout the campaign, he has signaled (and sometimes stated) to the mainstream press that his stance is far from it's portrayed. "Hopelessly Devoted To Barack" Tom Hayden made a real ass out of himself doing a quickie write up of an NYT article co-written by Michael Gordon. The reality of what was in the transcript of the interview which the paper posted online. In February, after his advertsiments where he robotically declared that his mother died of cancer, the campaign went into overtime with an advertisement that played like the Pepsi Generation (truly, it was the late 60s and early seventies Pepsi generation commercials). To a bad 'rock' guitar, the commercial opened and featured quick shots of Barack barking out sentences while groupies swooned. "We want . . ." he barked over and over, a laundry list of demands. The Iraq War was on it. But Barack wasn't running to be "we," he was running to become the nominee of the Democratic Party and then the president. There were no "I will end the Iraq War." All he did was offer what "we" wanted. It got the psychos in Panhandle Media excited. Of course, were he serious about ending the illegal war, his campaign would have stolen not the Pepsi commercials of that period, but the Coke commericals: I'd like to teach the world to sing, in perfect harmony . . .

There was no "pledge" or "promise" made to end the illegal war, despite the groupies like Tom Hayden going bug-eyed crazy in their efforts to pretend otherwise (a fleeting sentence delivered in Houston, TX, as ginned up by Hayden into a new plan for Iraq). Then came the crash and burn of his advisor (a counter-insurgency supporter and War Hawk) Samantha Power. The pathetics in Panhandle Media made themselves laughable -- and include John Nichols, Davey D and BuzzFlash at the top of that list. Poor Samantha "fired" (Power resigned) for calling Hillary Clinton a "monster." Poor sweet Sammy. No, she resigned because of the damage she did with the press in England. The "monster" insult was the trivia the MSM pumped out. On that same trip, she insulted Gordon Brown, Prime Minister of the UK and presumed ally of the next US administration regardless of who becomes president, and she gave an interview (that Panhandle Media refused to cover) to the BBC where she explained that Barack would be not be held accountable, if elected president, to any 'pledges' about Iraq he's making on the campaign trail. She explained, as an advisor to Barack and a campaign insider, that any plans about what to do in Iraq would be decided only after he entered the White House. Had that interview gotten the attention it should have, Barack would have faced tough questions. That didn't happen. It wasn't of interest to the corporate media (which still wants the illegal war) to give it much traction and the rejects of Panhandle Media are in love with Barack because of his 'connections' (his using of) Saul, Bernardine and Bill. They deluded themselves into believing he was a Socialist when he is just a user who will use anyone regardless of political ideology in his efforts to climb to the top.

It was never a promise, it was empty words offered on the campaign trail as Samantha Power revealed to the BBC in an interview taped while she was a foreign policy advisor to Barack and aired after she left the campaign (she has since come back -- no one's supposed to notice that either). Had there been any adults, Samantha Power's statements would have immediately led to reporters questioning Barack non-stop about his advisor's statements. Had the press not been in the tank for Barack, his own statements on CNN June 5th would have led to hard grilling because he had clearly led the American people to believe he was making a promise when, in fact, it was no promise on his end. Everyone played dumb. From the July 4th snapshot:

Arab News notes, "For Obama, who recently changed his positions on campaign finance and a wiretapping law, the suggestion that he was also changing course on a central premise of his candidacy holds particular peril. While Obama has long said he would consult commanders in the field when withdrawing troops, that point might have been lost on many Democratic primary voters who supported his call to end the war." What's going on? A bit of reality on War Hawk Barack. Suzanne Goldenberg (Guardian of London) puts it this way, ".Barack Obama was yesterday fending off charges from right and left that he had abandoned the core premise of his candidacy - the withdrawal of all US combat forces from Iraq within 16 months of taking office - in an attempt to attract voters from the political centre." Suzanne's a little out of it. So were Katrina vanden Heuvel and Arianna Huffington on ABC's This Week last Sunday. Withdrawal in 16 months? That's 'so January 2008.' Barack promised withdrawal of all (combat) troops within 10 months in a speech in Houston, Texas. Always one to carry water for Barack, Tom Hayden immediately penned "End the War in 2009" (which popped up online at The Nation, Feb. 20th and elsewhere a bit later). Hayden: "In his victory speech in Texas Tuesday, Barack Obama promised to end the Iraq war in 2009, a new commitment that parallels recent opinion pieces in The Nation. Prior to his Houston remarks, Obama's previous position favored an American combat troop withdrawal over a sixteen-to-eighteen-month timeframe. He has been less specific on the number and mission of any advisors he would elave behind." (The Texas primary was in March. Barack was in Texas campaigning, for any more confused than usual by Tom-Tom's bad-bad writing.) Texas community members saw the 10 month 'promise' pushed in advertising as well as on the campaign trail. Those were his words (and Tom-Tom notes 'words matter') so let's all drop the nonsense that Barack's plan was 16 months (or at least leave the lying to Katrina who's become so very good at it). Goldenberg's uninformed, ignorant or lying -- take your pick. In her piece (dated tomorrow), she traces the uproar to Thursday when Barack said he might 'refine' his Iraq 'plan.' If that's when the uproar started, is Arianna Huffington psychic? Arianna was calling him out for 'refining' on Iraq Sunday on This Week. More water carrying from the allegedly 'independent' Guardian of London (which never wrote about the Downing Street Memos because 'independence' did not include informing people that Tony Blair lied England into an illegal war -- no time for 'truth-telling' while Blair was in office at any rate.) CNN reports that presumed GOP presidential candidate John McCain and the RNC are calling Barack a "flip-flopper" and they quote Barack's 'clarification' where Barack lies and says he has always said 16 months. No, Barack, you went to ten months in February. AP reports he celebrated the 4th of July in Butte, Montana (Kansas, he's done with you, he got what he needed) eating a hot dog. Tom Baldwin (Times of London) observes, "Grassroots activists whose energy and donations have helped to propel Barack Obama towards the White House are suddenly choking on the bitter pill of disillusion.
In less than a month since clinching the Democratic nomination, he has performed a series of policy pirouettes to assuage concerns about his candidacy among a wider and more conservative electorate." Geoff Elliott (The Australian) points out, "Barack Obama has started a dramtic reversal of the policies that helped him defeat Hillary Clinton for the presidential nomination, softening hardlines stances on the Iraq war and troop withdrawals.
Campaigning in North Dakota, Senator Obama said that while the US could not sustain a long-term presence in Iraq, his trip to the Gulf nation this month might prompt him to "refine my policies" on the war." John Bentley (CBS News) quotes Brian Rogers of the McCain campaign stating, "Today, Barack Obama reversed that position, proving once again his words do not matter. He has now adopted John McCain's position that we cannot risk the progress we have made in Iraq by beginning to withdraw our troops immediately without concern for conditions on the ground. Now that Barack Obama has changed course and proven his past positions to be just empty words, we would like to congratulate him on taking John McCain's principled stand on this critical national security issue. If he had visited Iraq sooner or actually had a one-on-one meeting with Gen. Petraeus, he would have changed his position long ago." Jonathan Weisman (Washington Post) terms it Barack exploring "the possibility of slowing a promised, gradual withdrawal from Iraq". NPR has two audio reports here. How bad it is? A friend just called to laugh at ____'s latest nonsense. In place of a now killed feature for Third, we may address ____'s latest nonsense and his plethora of lies throughout the campaign. Poor ____, it's even harder to airbrush out reality today than it was following his expulsion from the Red Family commune in his "smash the state" days (when he fancied himself Chris Jones in Wild In The Street).

Despite being publicly insulted and dismissed by Barack ("Tom Hayden Democrats"), Hayden made the year (and most of 2007) all about cheerleading and lying for War Hawk Barack. On July 4th, he showed up at Aging Socialite's Cat Littler Box with a meltdown column ("Obama's Position on Iraq Could Put His Candidacy at Risk"") short on facts as he tried to pretend no one could have guessed what was then going on with Barack (saying he could change his 'plan' for withdrawing combat troops). Desperate to maintain his already strained credibility, Tom-Tom sought to lash out others and pin the blame on them:

The most shocking aspect of Samantha Powers' forced resignation earlier this year was not that she called Hillary Clinton a "monster" off-camera, but that she flatly stated that Obama would review his whole position on Iraq once becoming president. Again, no one in the media or rival campaigns questioned whether this assertion by Powers was true. Since Obama credited Powers with helping for months in writing his book, The Audacity of Hope, her comments on his inner thinking should have been pounced upon by the pundits.

First, here's the BBC interview on Iraq:

Stephen Sackur: You said that he'll revisit it [the decision to pull troops] when he goes to the White House. So what the American public thinks is a commitment to get combat forces out within sixteen months, isn't a commitment is it?Samantha Power: You can't make a commitment in whatever month we're in now, in March of 2008 about what circumstances are going to be like in January 2009. We can't even tell what Bush is up to in terms of troops pauses and so forth. He will of course not rely upon some plan that he's crafted as a presidential candidate or as a US Senator.

In his column, Tom-Tom pinned the blame on the media and rival candidates but, note, he grabbed no slice of the blame pie for himself. Tom doesn't have internet access? He missed the interview in real time? He had a hand cramp and couldn't write about it March when it took place or later in June when Barack made similar statements on CNN? Some in the US media did cover it in real time. The Washington Post covered it and you can click here for only one example of them covering it as the news broke (March 7th). Rival campaigns? Hillary Clinton's campaign called it out repeatedly but the trash in Panhandle Media wasn't about to stop their non-stop sliming of Hillary long enough to note reality.

The day after the news broke, March 8th, the Clinton campaign issued "MEMO: Obama's Iraq Plan: Just Words:"Once again, it looks like Senator Obama is telling voters one thing while his campaign says those words should not be mistaken for serious action. After months of speeches from Senator Obama promising a hard end date to the Iraq war, his top foreign policy adviser that counseled his campaign during that period is on the record saying that Senator Obama will 'not rely on some plan that he's crafted as a presidential candidate or a U.S. Senator. Voters already have serious questions about whether Senator Obama is ready to be Commander-in-Chief. Now there are questions about whether he's seriou about the Iraq plan he's discussed for the last year on the campaign trail. Senator Obama has made hard end dates about Iraq a centerpiece of his campaign and has repeatedly attacked Senator Clinton for not being clear about her intentions with regard to troop withdrawal. It turns out those attacks and speeches were just words. And if you can't trust Senator Obama's words, what's left?

The Clinton campaign has since taken down the bulk of the campaign website (can't be critical of Barack!) but you can google the title and you will find it, you can google the title and almost any community site and find it running in real time. That wasn't the only press release from the Clinton campaign on that Power's statements re: Iraq. They repeatedly tried to raise the issue and Panhandle Media attacked them for it while rushing to defend counter-insurgency guru Samantha Power. July 6th, Third offered "Letters to An Old Sell Out: Iraq" to Tom-Tom about all the cover ups that went on 'independent' media and how Tom-Tom was part of the cover up but he was far from alone:


So did John Nichols. C.I. called out John Nichols nonsense on Saturday March 8th (the day after Power's remarks were known) when Johnny Five-Cents was lamenting "Samantha Power and the Danger of Gotcha Politics." Not only did John Nichols cover for Samantha Power (his post at The Nation is labeled "03/07/2008 @ 11:28 pm" meaning his article went up that Friday hours and hours after the "Iraq snapshot" calling out Power did -- isn't Johnny Five-Cents supposed to be a 'journalist'?), so did you. You want to show up on July 4th and blame the lack of attention to this story on the MSM when The Washington Post was blogging about it as the story broke, when they would go on to do a print report on it and yet Panhandle Media couldn't even be bothered with it? Like Nichols, they were all lying. Davey D would go on to lament -- on KPFA's The Morning Show -- that Samantha "Powers" (it helps to know the name of the person you're broken up about, Davey) had left the campaign for (he said) calling Hillary a "monster." But let's stay with The Nation where Tom-Tom sits on the board. It never got into The Nation and he damn well knows that. Not on March 7th, not on March 8th. March 20th, Eric Alterman would feel the need to weigh in Power's leaving the campaign in "The Ritual Sacrifice of Samantha Power" and though he would note "monster" and "NAFTA," he never said a DAMN word about the BBC interview that entered the press cycle March 7th. He didn't say one DAMN word. It didn't stop there. Michael Massing's "The Power Conundrum" (published online May 22nd and in the June 9th issue of The Nation) found time to recount the "monster" remark which was rather strange since he was reviewing Power's book on the UN involvement in the Iraq War. Wouldn't the better thing to have referenced when reviewing a book on Iraq have been Power's remarks on Barack's so-called "promise"? June 12th, John Nichols was back on the scene ["Students for Hillary, er, McCain (or McKinney)" -- what a wit and joy he must be for the others at the SciFi conventions] quoting a missive that referred to the "monster" incident. No need on his part to enlarge the topic and note Power's interview to the BBC. March 12th -- five days after the Power remarks were in the news -- FIVE DAYS AFTER -- Air Berman was offering "It's Okay to be Intemperate!" (at The Nation's blog Campaign '08) and yet again recounting Samantha Power's 'unjust' departure over the "monster" remark (when not licking Hendrick Hertzberg's aging sack). Never once -- FIVE DAYS AFTER -- did Berman mention Power's remarks to the BBC. He would conclude his sad eulogy to Sammy (and presumably devote full attention to "Rick") with this, "Thanks to the events of the past week, campaign officials will be even more guarded when dealing with the media, and I don't blame them. It's an outcome that benefits no one." Apparently Ari thought he could help fight that trend by not telling readers what Samantha Power said about the Iraq 'promise'? It needs to be noted that the day the news broke, Ari Berman attempted to distract from Power's statement by filing "Clinton Does McCain's Bidding" which was nothing but his rummaging through old chat & chew transcripts in an effort to discredit Hillary on Iraq. Needless to say, he said nothing about Power. [As we noted in our March 9th in "Editorial: The Whores of Indymedia."] What we got from the alleged 'independent' media (including The Nation) and from the alleged 'independent' web was inane defenses of War Hawk Samantha Power that avoided her Iraq remarks. Check out Josh Michah's Marshy & Hairy Butt Crack where Greg Sargent posted "New Hillary Campaign Video Seeks To Revive Samantha Power Controversy." It's a March 19th post and what does Sargent conclude of the commercial featuring Power revealing that Barack's 'promise' isn't a promise? A snippy: "Given that this is weeks-old story, the timing of its release is pretty obvious: The Hillary camp is hoping to use it to overshadow Obama's big Iraq speech today." That's from mind reader Greg Sargent and even then (and terming the commercial an "attack video"), check out the reaction of Josh's groupies (conditioned to salivate at the mention of Barack's name): "Ah, Hillary. Desperation becomes her," purrs one while Patagonia and das2003 lead the sizeable number who are offended and outraged that the video was even posted at Joshy's site.
Over at Mother Jones, David CornNuts kind-of sort of covered it (as C.I. noted March 10th) huffing ("An Ugly Moment for the Clinton Campaign," March 10th) that the campaign "took the unusual step of convening a second conference call of the day for reporters. And it was a sorry spectacle." (CornNuts, you went nuts.) Davey C writes "the Clintonites pounced on the comments" -- comments, pay attention Tom Hayden -- that Davey C immediately dismissed: "In other words, a campaign proposal is just that: a proposal. And only a fool would think that a military plan would be applied to reality unchaged a year after it was first devised." That's what happened Tommy Hayden -- AS YOU DAMN WELL KNOW -- Panhandle Media mainly ignored it and then the CornNuts crowd excused it and attacked Hillary for raising the issue. They lied repeatedly and we can outline that (mainly because we already have -- starting with John Nichols' LIE that Samantha Power and Hillary knew each other very well when Power told Charlie Rose they'd only met once). C.I. led on this at The Common Ills, but we all called it out at community sites and we didn't do it for one day or one week. We stayed on the story. The one Tom Hayden couldn't bother to write about until July 4th -- even though it took place March 7th. The Washington Post, The Boston Globe and others in the MSM did cover it and the response was silence from 'independent' media and attacks from the Barack groupies in comments and e-mails to the outlets.

Tom Hayden is a flat out liar who has disgraced himself. July 4th he wanted to claim that Real Media ignored it (they didn't) and that the Clinton campaign didn't attempt to highlight Power's interview when they did (and got slammed for it by Panhandle Media over and over). Tom Hayden and many others provided non-stop cover for Barack. They refused to call him out and then want to act shocked today that he's not the man they repeatedly lied to assert he was. Today The Detroit Free Press chooses to join the Liars Club by insisting that Barack has promised to pull all US troops out from Iraq in 16 months. It's exactly all this covering and looking the other way for Barack that goes to how he has never been vetted and how his 'anti-war' credentials are nothing but hype.

That's not how the media is supposed to work -- Real Media or Panhandle Media. But all this time later, it's still the story. A few voices explore the reality (Robert Fisk, John Pilger, Glen Ford, Bruce Dixon are among the few). Last week, there was another voice speaking the truth but no one wanted to explore that, no one rushed to book him on Panhandle Media programs, no one rushed to explore his observations. From Chris Floyd's "Surge Protectors: Obama Embraces Bush-McCain Spin on Iraq" (Baltimore Chronicle): "But it is Obama's surrender on the Iraq War front -- or rather, the anti-Iraq War front -- that is most striking, and most disheartening. On the very night that John McCain was putting the 'success' of the surge at the center of his campaign, Obama was openly, cravenly laying down one of his chief weapons at the feet of Bill O'Reilly. Obama's cheerleading for the surge -- 'beyond our wildest dreams!' -- surpassed anything that McCain himself has claimed for the escalation." Instead, we pretend we don't see what's before our eyes, instead The Detroit Free Press lies that Barack's promised a complete withdrawal of all US forces from Iraq in 16 months. As bad as Tom Hayden's been this entire election cycle (pretty bad), even he has gone that far to lie. It should also be noted that the Obama campaign has floated the notion that, should Barack be elected, he might keep Robert Gates on as his Secretary of Defense. Change you can believe in?

Wednesday, Michael Abramowitz (Washington Post) noticed that the Bully Boy's Tuesday speech on Iraq and Afghanistan indicated that other countries are leaving the so-called 'coalition': "The presence of other countries in Iraq, even if the troop contribution was modest, has long been used by the Bush administration as a way of deflecting criticism that its actions in Iraq were "unilateral." Now, Bush is portraying their departure as a sign of "return on success," his policy of bringing home troops as conditions improve in Iraq." Today AFP reports, "Japan said Thursday it was ending an air mission in Iraq, wrapping up a military deployment which was historic for the pacifist nation but deeply unpopular among the public."

Yesterday afternoon the Los Angeles Times' Raheem Salman and Ned Parker reported at the paper's blog (Baghdad & Beyond) on the issue of provincial elections in Iraq, noting that the Parliament had created a working body "to strike a compromise" on legislation that would address the issue. The United Nations is working on a proposal they will release at the end of the month or early in October. In the meantime, they've joined the chorus of "Kirkuk Can Wait!" -- that the issue of the oil-rich Kirkuk (whether it remains with the central government or becomes a part of the Kurdish region) can yet again be delayed. The issue of Kirkuk has been delayed repeatedly. Nicholas Spangler and Mohammed al Dulaimy (McClatchy Newspapers) report that Kirkuk Stadium remains filled with Kurdish refugees kicked out of their homes and forced to Kirkuk in an effort to pack the city with pro-Kurdish voters for when the election deciding the fate of Kirkuk is ever held but in the meantime they live in "mud and cinder-block huts beneath the stands, in the parking lots and the luxury boxes, and it's no longer beautiful. It's a dirty, sewage-ridden slum and Rasoul is the unofficial mayor." Stephen Farrell's "As Iraqis Vie for Kirkuk's Oil, Refugee Kurds Becomes Pawns" (New York Times) reported on these conditions back in December and there has been no improvement. But, apparently, Kirkuk can wait. Even as a cholera outbreak grips Iraq. AP reports that Salih al-Hasnawi (Iraq's Minister of Health) held a press conference in Baghdad earlier today to note that Baghdad (and surrounding areas) were now also seeing the outbreak and that the region of Iraq has seend the deaths of 5 from the disease with at least 36 people confirmed as having cholera in the region. Note, that's "Baghdad and sourthern areas." The United Nations notes 10 deaths thus far with "174 suspected cases" and that: "The World Health Organization (WHO) is providing technical support to the Iraqi Ministry of Health, and, along with other UN entities, has been aiding cholera-affected governorates since the disease resurfaced three weeks ago. WHO has taken on a coordination role in efforts to tackle cholera and is working to fortify Iraq's disease surveillance system in identifying new cases. It is also supplying emergency supplies to laboratories to enhance their testing capability."Meanwhile the "Awakening" Council is back in the news. These are the Sunni thugs on the US payroll ($300 a month for males, $280 for females) because, as US Ambassador to Iraq Ryan Crocker told Congress repeatedly in April, paying them off means they don't attack US equipment or soldiers. That's a lot of lunch money to fork over each money to be safe on the 'playground.' Puppet of the occupation, Nouri al-Maliki, has long been vocally opposed to the "Awakening" Councils. That's because he staffed with Shi'ite thugs. The two most extreme segments of Iraq are at war with one another. al-Maliki has made it very clear he has little use for the "Awakening" Councils and his staff has echoed that repeatedly. With US Senators and House Reps loudly objecting to the tax payer monies being spent on this program (one Petraeus hails) last April, there's been a push to have the puppet government (sitting on billions) pay the "Awakening" Council itself. (Senator Barbara Boxer was especially vocal in April asking why the puppet government wasn't paying them.) The new talk is that al-Maliki will begin paying them but distrust remains on both sides.

Nicholas Spangler and Mohammed al-Dulaimy (McClatchy Newspapers) report that despite for-show motions in public on the part of the puppet government, "Awakening" Council leaders remain skepitcal (with one saying after the latest press conference, "I don't trust a word they say") that the puppet government will take charge and pay the 99,000 "Awakening" members or that 20,000 will be absorbed "into the police and army" starting October 1st. Thursday's press conference found Gen Abud Ganbar declaring, "The government has ordered that monthly salaries be paid until we can put (Awakening members) into security forces or ministires. Payments will continue until they find jobs." That leaves "Awakening" leaders skeptical and the reporters quote various voices explaining why including the claim that the puppet government has hired al Qaeda members. Khalid al-Ansary and Waleed Ibrahim (Reuters) report on the puppet government side where grave doubts are repeatedly raised ("But he also expressed distaste for some members of the predominantly Sunni Arab Awakening movement, an aversion shared by some other officials.") as is the argument that there is need "to weed out" certain members. In other words, Thursday's press conference reassured no one and the tensions remain.

Turning to some of today's reported violence . . .

Bombings?

Mohammed Al Dulaimy (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Baghdad roadside bombing that wounded two people and a Baghdad truck bombing that claimed 1 life and left three more wounded. Reuters notes a Mosul car bombing claimed 2 lives and left seven more people wounded, a Baghdad mini-bus bombing that claimed the lives of 3 "civil servants from the housing and construction ministry" and a Kerbala mini-bus bombing that claimed 2 lives and left twenty people injured.

Shootings?

Mohammed Al Dulaimy (McClatchy Newspapers) reports Rokan Al Kayali ("tribal sheikh") was shot dead in Diyala Province along with "his infant son". Reuters notes "a Shi'ite man and his wife and son" were all shot dead in Mosul, that Iraqi police officers shot dead 2 suspects, a Sadiyah home invasion that resulted in the deaths of 5 family members,

Corpses?

Mohammed Al Dulaimy (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 1 corpse discovered in Baghdad. Reuters notes 2 corpses discovered in Mosul.

Turning to the US race for president, independent presidential candidate Ralph Nader promises to end the illegal war. Team Nader notes:

Drop $6 on Nader/Gonzalez.
We're pulling solid numbers in key swing states.
Including 6 percent in Michigan, according to yesterday's CNN/Time poll.
Nobody can say what will happen over the next seven weeks.
What we can say is this:
Independents are now positioned for an historic breakthrough.
Yesterday, Ron Paul appeared with Ralph Nader on CNN.
And together they announced a joint breakaway from the "evil of the two lessers" -- the Democrats and the Republicans.
We need to continue to ratchet up the pressure on the corporate controlled, illegitimate two party system.
To break through the media blackout.
To break through into the debates.
To let the people know --
There is a choice in November.
A candidacy that will deliver full Medicare for all.
A living wage.
A peaceful solar economy.
Reversing U.S. policy in the Middle East.
Nader/Gonzalez.
Let's keep the pressure on.
Don't let up.
Here's one thing you can do.
Donate $6 now to Nader/Gonzalez.
To help meet our goal of $80,000 by Constitution Day -- September 17.
(Remember -- Ralph Nader will appear on Lou Dobbs tonight at 7:00 pm EST.)
Together, we are making a difference.
Onward to November.

iraqchris floyd
michael abramowitzthe washington post
mcclatchy newspapersnicholas spanglerthe new york timesstephen farrellmohammed al dulaimythe los angeles timesraheem salmanned parker

let's open with ralph:

Statement to Ron Paul Supporters

Today, along with other third party candidates, I joined Congressman Ron Paul to endorse a common agenda that stands up for the US Constitution by ending illegal wars, and protecting the privacy and civil liberties of all persons under US jurisdiction. We also jointly called for an immediate halt to the increase in the national debt, an end to corporate subsidies and taxpayer bailouts of corporations, and to start aggressively pursuing prosecution of corporations that commit crimes and frauds.

Both Congressman Paul and I also support holding President Bush and Dick Cheney to account for their transgressions against our Constitution.

Today's coming together of third party candidates marks the beginning of the realignment of American politics.

While Congressman Paul and I do not agree on all things -- such as health and safety regulations and health insurance systems and how to handle areas where the market fails or is not up to the task of getting the best outcomes for the American people -- on the overriding foreign policy, reckless waste financed by deficit spending, and civil liberties issues of the day, we stand together. He is a stalwart who has consistently stood up for what he believes in and never wavered when he is opposed by the legions of commercial interests and lobbyists that swarm the Capitol.

Congressman Paul said today, "the strongest message can be sent by rejecting the two-party system, which in reality is a one-party system with no possible chance for the changes to occur which are necessary to solve our economic and foreign policy problems." He also called on his supporters to vote for Nader/Gonzalez or one of the other non-establishment, principled candidates, who support the joint statement issued today.

For all the millions of people who have broken free from the establishment parties' domination over our dwindling democracy, Nader/Gonzalez presents a clear choice for those who want to support a candidate who will stand up against the war and stand up for personal liberties and privacy that have been trampled on by the notorious, misnamed, PATRIOT Act, the FISA 'snoop' Bill, and the unilateral dictates of the Bush/Cheney regime.

Some unfairly paint the Nader/Gonzalez candidacy as being for big government. Nothing could be more untrue.

Nader/Gonzalez supports a government of the people, by the people, for the people. We agree with Congressman Paul that government is rife with waste and corporate demands, and needs to be scaled back in many areas -- most of all the bloated, wasteful US military budget, which is half of the government's total operating budget.

We are also against big government doling out hundreds of billions in corporate welfare, subsidies, and bailouts to companies.

We support abolishing income tax on the first $50,000 of income to be made up with a fraction of a percent Wall Street speculation tax, especially on derivatives.

Click here to listen to Ralph's remarks at today's press conference.

ShareThisShareThis

so that's ralph. did you hear kpfa this morning? elaine's at c.i.'s this week and she said, 'get online, you won't believe it.' i got online and streamed.

it was liar laura flanders.

laura the self-loathing lesbian flanders.

liar laura who couldn't stand up for gays or lesbians.

liar laur who couldn't say, 'hey barack, i'm a lesbian and i find it appalling that you put a bunch of homophobes on stage.'

liar laura just lying some more.

she was on a kick to call white women republicans and racists.

white women always vote republican, said liar laura.

she just can't beliee that any 1 wouldn't hate themselves as much as she hates herself.

see laura was fine with having her sexuality insulted.

maybe she got off on that?

maybe that's what delights her?

she's just a self-loathing lesbian.

and goodness was she lying on kpfa.

but that's all kpfa offers anyway.

lies and more lies.

philip malderi turns off audiences with his 'i'm so special' act.

apparently kpfa never explained to him that the programs can be streamed anywhere in the country.

there's phil-i'm-so-much-better-than-the-country telling his crap over and over.

he's so wonderful, he's so special, he's not a racist like the rest of the country.

that's what his tired act says: 'i'm better than you are and i think everyone outside of the bay area is garbage and backwards.'

so it was really something to hear them spin about barack today.

they're just idiots and liars.

i can't imagine any 1 that trusts kpfa anymore.

they're not just in the tank for barack, they're flat out liars.

they are the nutsy elitists.

they never grasp how many people they run off with their bad attitude, let alone their lies.

i really think it's time to start filing complaints with both the f.c.c. and the f.e.c. they've turned the station over to barack and that's not how public radio works.

ralph and cynthia mckinney exists on table scraps but every day is a full meal of barack.


let's close with c.i.'s 'Iraq snapshot:'

i'll open with the latest from team nader:

Breaking News -- Nader/Gonzalez on in 45 States!

Drop $11 on Nader/Gonzalez.

Why?

We're celebrating.

At the beginning of this campaign, we made a promise:

Nader/Gonzalez on the ballot in 45 states by September 20.

Today -- Tuesday, September 9, 2008 -- eleven days ahead of schedule -- we declare victory.

We have completed our ballot access efforts and we're set to be on in 45 states.

On in more states than in 2000 (43).

On in more states than in 2004 (34).

On in 45 states.

Now, the American people will have a choice.

To vote for a campaign free from corporate influence.

But, as you probably have figured out by now, we are not a campaign that rests on its laurels.

So, today we are proud to announce the launch of our eight-week Nader/Gonzalez Get Out the Vote drive.

We need to raise $80,000 by September 17.

This money will be used to reach out to Americans throughout this country.

We're planning on deploying 30 full-time field staff.

Ordering tens of thousands of lawn signs.

Printing hundreds of thousands of pamphlets.

And making hundreds of thousands of phone calls.

To inform the American people that they now have a choice in November.

And to get them to vote for Nader/Gonzalez.

Want health care for all? Vote Nader/Gonzalez.

Need a living wage? Vote Nader/Gonzalez.

Want to transform the country to a solar energy economy? Vote Nader/Gonzalez.

Want to reverse course in the Middle East? Vote Nader/Gonzalez.

Help us celebrate this historic opportunity the only way we know how.

With action for a change.

So, donate $11 now to the Nader/Gonzalez Get Out the Vote Fund.

(If you give $100 or more now, we will send to you In Pursuit of Justice, the 520-page book of essays by Ralph Nader -- essays on corporate power, the Constitution, and transforming our country. If you donate $100 now, we will send you this historic collection -- autographed by the man himself -- Ralph Nader. (This offer ends at 11:59 p.m. September 17, 2008))

So, let's start to spread the word.

Nader/Gonzalez on in 45 states.

Time to crank it up.

And get out the vote.

Let's get it done.

Onward to November.

The Nader Team

ShareThisShareThis

there's some nader news. let's turn to the ticket that's got barack running scared, mccain-palin. this is from erika bolstad's 'palin's the no. 1 draw for women at pennsylvania event' (mcclatchy newspapers):


"I like the way she's going to bring Washington down to earth," said Erin Gilsbach, 30, who drove from Allentown with her sister, husband and two daughters to hear the Alaska governor and Republican vice presidential nominee speak here Tuesday. "Everyone talks about it, but I get the feeling she's going to do it."
That's exactly what worries Democrats, who see women in Pennsylvania and other states who might have voted for New York Sen. Hillary Clinton turning to Palin - No. 2 on the Republican ticket led by Arizona Sen. John McCain.

ed rendell, governor of penn (and a democrat) goes on to point out that barack hasn't closed the deal in penn or the rest of the u.s. and he hasn't.

he thought he could take women for granted.

he thought he could use sexism in the primary and get away with it because team obama's general election 'plan' was to then scare women into voting for him by using roe v. wade as a threat. how's that working out for freaky barry?

it's working out great for ed koch. the bush supporting ed koch is back in the news and he didn't even have to get busted in an 'adult' store. all he had to do was insult sarah palin. of courhuge number of people don't even know who ed koch is. that's the thing about new york city mayors, they always think they are the center of the universe, but outside nyc not a lot people pay attention to them. nor should they. and of course for ed koch's 'fame,' you have to go back to the 80s. but he loves getting in the news so i'll assume we can anticipate more attacks from ed koch.

2 more things there, when grace goes looking for karen's porno tape on will & grace and bumps into a former mayor at an 'adult' store, that jokes in reference to ed koch. he provides so much laughter. the other thing is that who would give a damn about ed koch to being with? if you know him, you know he supported bush over john kerry in 2004. so the idea that he's some 1 we should listen to is just a joke.

speaking of jokes, barack tried 1 today: 'lipstick on a pig.' and he's insisting he wasn't insulting sarah palin and the usual barack press love is in play.

they're rushing to his rescue and finding when it's been used by barack and others.

so what?

if john mccain began critiquing barack's plans along the lines of 'he's offering 1/2 of 1 thing and 1/2 of another,' he could try to squeak through like barack is now.

but the fact that barack's bi-racial would make the line a dog whistle. the same way what barack did today was more than just referring to a line that's been used before.

sexism isn't just what's said. it's also about who it's applied to.

let's close with c.i.'s 'Iraq snapshot:'

go sarah! go palin! :) that's Isaiah's The World Today Just Nuts "Barack Running Scared" and palin has barack running scared. oh, poor, little barack.

in the snapshot today, c.i. notes what a pige barack is: 'I assume she wants to be treated the same way that guys want to be treated'. okay, why the hell is the man who used sexism and allowed his surrogates to throughout the primary saying - in his pompous manner - that he 'assumes' sarah palin 'wants to be treat the same way that guys want to be treated'?

that is really offensive and plays like the abusive man that barack obama is.

this is what our feminist 'leaders' are supporting.

they're getting so pathetic, i keep expecting gloria steinem to show up in a wet t-shirt and film her own 'obama girl' video.

i could really go to town there but i cleaned it up because c.i. likes gloria.

i don't dislike gloria but i do not approve of the crap she's pulling currently.

barack used homophobia in south carolina, gloria, there's nothing feminist about that.

i want you to read over what barack said last year and really think about what the assholes doing with his he-assumes-sarah-wants-to-be-treated-like-one-of-the-guys.

i want you to think about how his campaign had a fit throughout the primary any time his race was noted. 'oh it's racism! it's racism!'

why the hell is he bringing up sarah's gender?

we know he didn't do a damn thing to stop the sexism, he used it himself in fact, against hillary. we know he refused to make a speech calling out sexism because the new york times had his florida fembot saying barack had already covered discrimination with his race speech and didn't feel the need to comment on sexism.

and this is the man gloria steinem's tearing sarah palin apart to support?

get f**king real, gloria.

and start thinking how it's going to play out after the election.

people won't be as kind as i've been.

they will grab gloria's bulls**t writing from last week, juxtapose it with her column on hillary and point out just what a hypocrite gloria sounds like. and it will rip apart all the strong work gloria's done in the past.

he said women who have late term abortions are 'feeling blue'. he has no concet of the doe case and no real support for abortion rights.

so what the hell is gloria doing sticking up for that asshole?

we're talking about the man who would not allow michelle to go on a job interview by herself.

he didn't trust her judgment.

that says the kind of asshole barack is and how little he respects women.

and gloria's cheering him on.

gloria's disgracing her own name and undercutting the feminist movement she helped build.

and doing it for a man.

how very sick and disgusting.

again, i am biting my tongue because c.i. likes gloria.

if c.i. didn't, i would be ripping into gloria. (drive-bys may not be aware, but regular readers know the above is mild.)

as for barbra streisand (who's going to sing for barack - but she always sings for me - for mcgovern, for any man) i'm life long barbra fan but she can kiss my ass right now after her crap on sarah palin.

i think we cover the crap in 'Editorial: The Sour Grape Girls' and if you want a big laugh (not in the editorial) c.i. says 1 of babs oldest and dearest is supporting mccain-palin. which 1? if babs or 1 of her friends reads this, the 1 whose oldest grandson gets married in november. they've been close for decades. but babs has no pull with her on this issue. i was furious over babs on friday and called c.i. to vent. c.i. said, '__'s supporting the mccain ticket and doing so for palin.' i was like 'and?' c.i. said, 'let me explain the decades long relationship between __ and barbra.' when it was explained, i laughed so hard.

let's close with c.i.'s 'Iraq snapshot:'

September 8, 2008. Chaos and violence continue, cholera's back, the Iraqi Parliament is going to back into session, and more. Cholera is back in the Iraq news. Sunday Reuters reported that cholera has claimed 1 life and that six more Iraqis have been diagnosed with it ("More than 4,000 cases of cholera . . . were diagnosed in Iraq last year.") Babylon & Beyond (Los Angeles Times) notes of cholera: "The problem raises the question: How can a country with two major rivers -- the Tigris and the Euphrates -- not have sufficient clean water for its people? The problem stems from Iraq's aging water treatment facilities, which were damaged or destroyed during the war and have yet to be replaced or repaired." Mike Sergeant (BBC) reports that the cholera outbreak had claimed 6 lives earlier today (the total continued to rise) and that "Cholera is mainly transmitted through contaminated water and untreated sewage. It can spread quickly in hot weather." And it spread quickly last year. There's no reason for the puppet government in Baghdad to pretend what's happened is shocking or surprising. After last year, it was to be expected. The World Health Organization noted October 3, 2007: "Since the cholera outbreak was first detected in Kirkuk, Northern Iraq, on 14 August 2007, it has spread to 9 out of 18 provinces across Iraq. It is estimated that more than 30 000 people have fallen ill with acute watery diarrhoea, among which 3 315 were identified as positive for Vibrio cholerae, the bacterium causing the disease. A total of 14 people are known to have died of the disease. The case-fatality rate has remained low throughout the outbreak indicating that those who have become sick have been able to access adequate treatment on time." Reuters reports that Babil province is now under a state of emergy due to the outbreak and that 8 people have died "in the past three days in Babil" with at least twenty diagnosed as infected. Gulf News adds that 500 more people are suspected of already being infected. IRIN spoke with Ihssan Jaafar (speaking on behalf of the puppet government) yesterday and he stated, "The health ministry is trying to stop the disease from spreading by early diagnosis of infection and distribution of water sterilisation tablets and also through a pbulic awareness campaign, but with the dearth of safe drinking water the disease will stay around." Again it was completely predictable. Staying with the medical and dropping back to the August 4th snapshot for background: Sunday in Baghdad a press conference took place on the state of health care in Iraq. Iraqis participating were Dr. Essan Namiq (Deputy Minister of Health for Grants and Loans) and Dr. Kahmees al-Sa'ad (Administrative Deputy Minister of Health). For some reason, a medical press conference required the participation of two American generals. We learned that, unlike the United States, Iraq has some form of universal health care (Dr. Essame: "Frankly, Ministry of Health has a heavy weight on the budget of the state for offering free treatment inside Iraq, for sending the patients outside Iraq. Very heavy budget that's affecting the budget of the state. There is no neighboring countries, or all over the world any country . . . there is not country like us that offers free treatment." ). Diyala Province has a shortage of medications (Dr. Essam: ". . . yeah, maybe we are facing a shortage") and there is a serious issue with the limited medications in Baghdad being smuggled out of the medical environments onto the black market (Dr. Essam stated that "we expect to see such problems" and "hope" that a plan to address the problem will emerge at some point by "the end of 2008 to 2009"). In addition there have been problems with "spoiled blood" -- which Maj Gen Mohammed al-Askari (press spokesperson for the Ministry of Defense) intentionally avoided in his response. This was pinned on the people coming into Iraq. Though Iraq's borders are porous, Dr. Essam put forward the laughable claim that anyone crossing the border into Iraq is "going to be tested. This is especially in HIV. The . . . once the passport has been stamped, the person is being tested." Not only did al-Askari avoid that specific issue, he grabbed that question that was tossed to Dr. Essam. July ended and the press gave rah-rah coverage in their end of the month reports when the reality is that the medical conditions in Iraq are a nightmare. For example, Dr. Essam admitted that they did not have the necessary prosthetics for patients who have limbs amputated. Shortages of medication, shortages of prosthetics, shortage of beds and, yes, shortage of medical staff. Dr. Essam floated the laughable claim that "many" Iraqi doctors were about to return to the country -- any day now! -- and when pressed on it, put foward the dubious claim that "more than 80% of the Iraqi doctors, and even in the deterioration of the security situation, they were here in Iraq and working. It is a fact." No, it is not. They were among the first to flee, long before there was a refugee crisis. It was part of the 'brain drain' that first hit Iraq. The number fleeing only increased when they became kidnapping targets and were also targeted with violence. Any doctors that do return will neither be housed in the Green Zone, according to Dr. Essam, nor provided with government protection because, he explained, 2008 is not like 2007. It was revealed that nurses were selling medications and Dr. Essam wanted to remind everyone that "it is not within their job description." Asked about the huge increase in cancer rates in Basra and Najaf since the start of the illegal war, Dr. Essam claimed that was true "all over the world, the number of people afflicted with cancer is increasing." The issue of improving the hosptials (beyond exterior work) was raised (and it was noted that Shahad Adnan Hospital has over 13 floors and only two elevators as well as a bed shortage). Dr. Essam responded that, "It is good for their psychological health . . . it is good to take care of the appearance, to see the building a new, clean." Though that's of no comfort to someone climbing over 13 floors of stairs or doing without a hospital bed, Dr. Essan wanted the reporters to know, "We ourselves face problems with elevators." CBS and AP offer an embarrassing (mis)report but they may be the only outlet that covered the press conference. To read their (mis)report is to grasp that the talking point about "doctors returning!" can be teased into several paragraphs with nothing to back it up and that all the very real and serious problems (brought up by reporters at the press conference) can easily be ignored. 80%? Today Karin Laub (AP) notes that an estimated 8,000 Iraqi doctors have fled their country since the start of the illegal war and that 800 have returned. Both figures are flawed. It is over 8,000 and the exit of doctors (male and female) was not just part of the 'brain drain' it was also the result of doctors (especially females) being targeted. 800 is the puppet government's latest figure and is not independently verified. They say whatever they want and no one bothers to verify it. It's also not true that "Doctors are just a tiny group among Iraq's more than 4 million refugees and displaced" because the doctors (and others) who left during the 'brain drain' are not considered refugees, they had the money to start over and left earlier in the illegal war before the sect divisions became as fixed. Though the figures Laub uses are incorrect, they are supplied by the puppet government and, no, 700 is not 80% of 8,000. The largely ignored August press conference also saw a reporter raise the issue of counterfeit medicine and today Qatar's Peninsula reports that 90% of medicines in Iraq are imported and there are no tests of it leading the Ministry of Health's Inspector General Adel Muhsin to state, "It's not medicine. It's just boxes, and God knows what's in them." On the legislative front, Qassim Abdul-Zahra (AP) reports that the Iraqi Parliament resumes sessions this week and that they hope to address both the issue of provincial elections and the treaties with the US but that provincial elections have been discussed while the the Parliament was on break and trial ballons floated were not embraced ("But weeks of private meetings and contacts among Sunni Arab, Shiite and Kurdish lawmakers have failed to produce any breakthrough on the issue, and it was unclear whether the bill would win speedy approval."). Sunday Erica Goode (New York Times) reported that the UN's special envoy to Iraq, Staffan de Mistura, had met with Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani and that he "said later that in the meeting the two men discussed the problems that have blocked passage of a provincial election law by Iraq's Parliament." When the Parliament's regular session proved unable to pass a law for provinical elections, the United Nations announced they would study the issue, speak with various Iraqis and try to offer a proposal by the end of September of early October. Yet, as noted in the September 4th snapshot, Iraqi's Shi'ite vice president Adel Abdul-Mahdi has declared that provincial elections will take place regardless of whether a law is passed or not. Tomorrow the Bully Boy is expected to announce the latest US troops 'plan' for Iraq. Ann Scott Tyson and Karen DeYoung (Washington Post) reported Saturday, "Senior military officials said the 'consensus' proposal incorporated the final recommendation of Petraeus. He called for withdrawing 7,500 to 8,000 troops from Iraq by the end of January, including an 1,100-man Marine Corps battalion and a Marine aviation squadron of several hundred strong to depart this fall, an Army combat brigade of up to 4,000 soldiers to depart in mid-January, and more than 1,000 support troops, such as logisticians and forces, assigned to handle detainees." Turning to some of today's reported violence . . . Bombings? Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Baghdad roadside bombing that left eleven people wounded, a Baghdad bombing that claimed 1 life and left two wounded, another Baghdad bombing that wounded two people, a Baghdad grenade attack that wounded two people, a Nineveh car bombing claimed the life of 1 police officer and left four people wounded, a Salahuddin Province car bombing that claimed the lives of 2 civilians with four more wounded and a Basra roadside bombing left one person wounded and a home invasion of "Awakening" Council leader Raad Rasheed in Diyala Province in which Rasheed was kidnapped and, in the chase that followed, three Iraqi military members were wounded by a roadside bombing. Shootings? Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Baghdad attack on "a vehicle for the ministry of displace people" which left four employees wounded while (elswhere in Baghdad), the same ministry's guards "opened fire randomly" shooting 1 woman dead and leaving six more people wounded, 1 police officer was shot dead in Mosul and the US military shot dead 1 person whose 'crime' was driving his car in Baquba. Corpses? Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 1 corpse was discovered in Baghdad. Turning to the US presidential race and starting with the pig holler Barack Obama. Shailah Murray (Washington Post) noted his comment last week on GOP vice presidential nominee Gov Sarah Palin "I assume she wants to be treated the same way that guys want to be treated" -- do you assume that? How very 'forward' of you, pig face. What an insulting thing for him to even say. Palin's run a real campaign. She didn't sniff her opponents panties to put them out of the race -- a claim Barack can't make for himself (see Jack Ryan especially). Barack went on to declare that he'd been vetted for 19 months unlike Sarah. Brack Obama vetted? Oh, that's hilarious. The only thing funnier than his claim to have been vetted is watching him nosedive in poll after poll. CNN offers the most optimistic findings from their poll with Opinion Research Corp: 3% undecided, 48% for Barack - [Joe] Biden, 48% for [John] McCain.- Palin. CBS News reports, "Sarah Palin's addition to the ticket probably exceeded her running mate's wildest expectations: McCain has turned an eight-point deficit in the Gallup daily tracking poll into a three-point lead." Dan Balz and Jon Cohen (Washington Post) report the results of the Washington Post-ABC News poll which find the two in a dead heat. Todd Spangler (Detroit Free Press) zooms in on Michigan and studies Public Policy Polling to determine, "From the data, it appears that the Palin pick is clearly helping McCain in the race against Obama in Michigan -- a state the Republican hopes to pick up in order to beat the Democrat." Michigan is, of course, the state Barack refused to have his name listed on the primary ballot and somehow managed -- via the 'rules' committee -- to come out with more delegates than Hillary from the primary she won -- the one he refused to compete in. Scott Conroy (CBS News) repeats the usual dumb ass garbage that concludes with, "Sarah Palin, by contrast, has repeatedly pointed to her son Track's service in the National Guard when making the case that John McCain should be the next president. Track Palin is scheduled to deploy to the Middle East later this week to begin his training for a tour of duty in Iraq." Let's speak slowly for the dumb asses. 1) Joe Biden's children's military service is stated and stretched. 2) Military service is not a private issue. For one thing, you're required to take a public oath. Scott Conroy sounds as idiotic as Jeannie Cummings and that's his own damn fault. And it's that dumb ass 'reasoning' that's going to have a sizeable number of people dismissing any 'scoops' (real or false) the media may come up with on Palin because it still sounds like they're gunning for her. Military service is public service. It is not about anyone's private life and -- unless you get a parental waiver -- only adults can enlist in the US. There's a big difference and Conroy looks like a real ass pretending there's not. PBS' Independent Lens wrote of the now independent presidential candidate, "Ralph Nader was born on February 27, 1934 in Winsted, Connecticut. His parents, Nathra and Rose, were Lebanese immigrants. He received a B.A. from Princeton University in 1955 and graduated from Harvard Law School three years later. In 1963, he abandoned his Hartford, Connecticut law practice and hitchhiked to Washington, D.C. to embark on a lifelong career as a public citizen. He worked as a consultant to the U.S. Department of Labor and founded the Public Citizen research group." That was to promote their airing of the documentary An Unreasonable Man. And they also offered "Where's Nader?" as part of the promotion -- a photograph you could scroll across "to spot 18 things that can be attributed to his work." At the Super Rally last week, he noted "three polls that will tell you that the Nader - Gonzalez agenda is a majority agenda. Inferentially and item by item. 81% of the American people think the country's going in the wrong direction. That's the highest level ever registered. 75% of the people in this country think corporations have too much control over their lives. And 61% of the people in this country in a Gallup poll say that the two major parties are failing." In response to a question regarding impeaching Dick Cheney and the Bully Boy after they leave office, Ralph explained (here for video): Ralph Nader: Well you can't impeach them once they leave office but they're subject on January 21, 2009 for criminal prosecution under federal law and it's possible. One of the most experienced prosecutors in the country, whose now retired, Vincent Bugliosi wrote that bestseller recently on the prosecution of George W. Bush [The Prosecution of George W. Bush for Murder]. Any district attorney, he claims, where a US soldier resideded and lost his or her life in Iraq due to a criminal war based on false pretenses by Bush and Cheney could bring a criminal homicide action and impanel a grand jury to indict both Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld. And it's often misunderstood that presidents and vice presidents do not escape the criminal laws after they leave office. When Nixon was accused of obstructing justice in the Watergate burglary back in the 70s, there was a Watergate task force of government attorneys that was just about to ask for his indictment and prosecute Nixon before [Gerald] Ford pardoned him. So for a one-time obstruction alleged in the Watergate burgalry, the arm of the criminal law was going to move forward. That is like tiny compared to the criminal behavior engendered day after day -- systemic torture, imprisoning thousands of people without charges and without lawyers, the signing statements, hundred of them, where George Bush would sign a bill and say "I will decide whether or not to obey it." Our Founding Fathers fought and got rid of King George III not to allow King George IV to take control of our country. And then of course there's spying in violation of the FISA Act without judicial warant on hundreds of thousands maybe millions of Americans. That's a first-class felony with a maximum penalty of a five-year jail term. And of course, there is the criminal war of aggression in Iraq -- probably the worst violation of international law other than genocide -- is a criminal war of aggression. So the question is: "Are there going to be any district attorneys in the country who are going to begin the process of holding presidents and vice presidents after they leave office accountable for their crimes or are Bush and Cheney going to set a precedent for their successors who then think that they can be above the law, beyond the law, violate the law with impunity?" That's the question that we all have to ask. On Friday, Ralph spoke in Wisconsin and Kevin Bargnes (The Badger Herald) reports, "Nader and his running mate Matt Gonzalez support the establishment of a date for troop withdrawal from Iraq and an end to the imprisonment of nonviolent drug offenders. A large portion of the attendees were University of Wisconsin students, and Nader painted a bleak future for a generation he believes will be worse off economically than its parents. 'You've got to wonder about whether you can get affordable housing, affordable health insurance, whether your white-collar skilled job dealing with software is going to be outsourced to China or India,' Nader said. 'And then in the moments of anxiety you're smoking a joint and you can be arrested and thrown in jail'." Michelle L. Quinn (Post-Tribune) reports on a sit-down interview with Nader and running mate Matt Gonzalez when they were in Indiana over the weekend, "Their platform includes items he says Democrat Barack Obama and Republican John McCain have taken 'off the table,' such as a 6-month, comprehensive negotiated military and corporate withdrawal from Iraq; single-payer, Canadian style free-choice health insurance; a living-wage and repeal of the anti-union Taft-Hartley Act; and a no-nuke, solar-based energy policy supported by renewable and sustainable energy sources. Solar energy is a change he's touted for years, and many utility executives to whom he's spoken prefer wind power as the next energy source, he said." Ralph was also campaigning in Wisconsin over the weekend and among the speakers at Fighting Bob Fest. Matthew Ryno (Baraboo News Republic) reports he "gave a biting speech to kick off the morning's events. He targeted what he called, 'least, worst' voters, or voters who he says cannot tolerate another four years of a Republican as president. 'The question is whether or not we get a Republican in disguise,' Nader said, referring to Democrat Barack Obama. 'We're seeing similar parties.' Nader said. 'Measure the Democratic control of Congress and ask how much of Bush's legislature have they rolled back? Have they even tried to impeach?'" Have they done anything? And what of Barack? Chris Floyd (Baltimore Chronicle) tackled the issue of 'anti-war' Barack over the weekend, "In short, he continued his relentless campaign to purge himself of any of that weak-sister 'anti-war' taint that got attached to him in the early days of his campaign -- which was, of course, responsible for his phenomenal rise in the first place. He rode that wave to national prominence -- trading on the desperate hopes of millions of Americans that the ungodly criminal nightmare in Iraq might finally end -- but it was obvious long ago that he was never going to dance with the ones that brung him. Once it was clear that he might really make it all the way to the top of the greasy pole, he began a dogged campaign to prove to our ruling elite that he would be a 'safe pair of hands' for the imperial enterprise." iraq karin laub the los angeles times qassim abdul-zahra matthew ryno michelle l. quinn kevin bargnes the new york times erica goode mcclatchy newspapers the washington post ann scott tyson karen deyoung dan balz laith hammoudi chris floyd

i was going to write about barbra streisand - the actress and director - tonight but she's trashing sarah palin so i'll just move along.

i'm not supporting palin. i am not voting for mccain. but i'm damn sick of the attacks.

if this confuses any 1, i'll clear it up on monday.

anyway.

instead, let's note this from ned parker and saif hameed's 'iraq politician ahmad chalabi survives assassination attempt' (los angeles times):

A suicide bomber tried to assassinate Ahmad Chalabi on Friday night, killing six of his guards when he rammed his car into the Shiite Muslim politician's speeding convoy, Chalabi's spokesman said.
Chalabi, who has survived at least three previous attempts on his life, was returning to his home in the west Baghdad district of Mansour when the bomber in a sports utility vehicle struck, spokesman Iyad Kadhim Sabti said. At least 17 people were wounded, including nine of Chalabi's guards, police said.

c.i. notes that in the snapshot but i see the los angeles times did a story tonight on it. chalabi's a c.i.a. asset and also a thug. he also helped lie the u.s. into the illegal war.

cnn calls him 'controversial' and offers this:

The politician known for providing false information to the United States about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq was the target of a suicide car bombing Friday, Iraq's Interior Ministry said.
[...]
The controversial Iraqi politician's intelligence on weapons of mass destruction was cited, in part, as the justification for the 2003 U.S. invasion of Iraq.
The Interior Ministry said the car bombing happened near Chalabi's home in Baghdad's al-Mansour district.
At least one of the people killed was a civilian and authorities were uncertain Friday whether the other fatality was a civilian or a member of Chalabi's security detail.

france 24 calls him 'a former pentagon favourite'.

okay, let's note some ralph nader news:

Nader and Gonzalez on Sunday Campaign Swing through Michigan
Friday, September 5, 2008 at 12:00:00 AM
ShareThis
News Advisory
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Contact: Marc Abizeid, 831-818-7736, marcabizeid@votenader.org (Washington); David Switzer (248) 207-5452, switzer@votenader.org (East Lansing); Karen Shelley 248-355-4328, karenshelley@votenader.org (Detroit).
Nader and Gonzalez on Sunday Campaign Swing through Michigan…
THE INDEPENDENT CANDIDATES WILL SPEAK AT NEWS CONFERENCES AND CAMPAIGN RALLIES IN EAST LANSING, DETROIT
East Lansing Event
Independent Presidential Candidate Ralph Nader and Vice Presidential Candidate Matt Gonzalez will host a news conference on Sunday, Sept. 7, 2:30 p.m., in Room 101 of the Kellogg Hotel & Conference Center, Michigan State University, 55 South Harrison Road, East Lansing, Mich. 48824.
Following the news conference, Mr. Nader and Mr. Gonzalez will hold a campaign rally at 3 p.m. in Big Ten room A of the Kellogg Center.
For details, call David Switzer, 248-207-5452, switzer@votenader.org.
Detroit Event
Independent Presidential Candidate Ralph Nader and Vice Presidential Candidate Matt Gonzalez will host a news conference on Sunday, Sept. 7, 7 p.m, and a campaign rally at 7:30 p.m., at the Unitarian Church Sanctuary, 4605 Cass Ave. Detroit, Mich. 48201. For details, call Karen Shelley 248-355-4328, karenshelley@votenader.org.
Michigan Nader/Gonzalez TourThe theme of the Michigan tour, "Open the Debates," reflects the Nader/Gonzalez Campaign's call for inclusive, democratic Presidential debates. Right now, they are limited to the candidates from the two corporate parties. The debates are controlled by the so-called Commission on Presidential Debates, a private corporation which was created by the Democratic and Republican Parties in 1987, which Walter Cronkite called an "unconscionable fraud" because the CPD format "defies meaningful discourse."
In addition, the candidates will speak about the growing, multifarious crisis Michigan residents confront, starting with a tanking economy, increasing environmental pollution and a health care system broken beyond repair. A June 24 article in Business Week, "Michigan: Epicenter of Unemployment," focused on the state as having "the nation's highest unemployment rate," and Census Bureau figures show Michigan to be the only state in the union where incomes fell while poverty rose in 2007, before the onset of the national economic downturn.
According to the Economic Policy Institute, as of 2004, the United States had lost 1 million job opportunities due to the affect of NAFTA on the economy. Michigan alone had a net loss of 63,148 jobs attributed to NAFTA. Nader/Gonzalez would withdraw and renegotiate NAFTA and the World Trade Organization (WTO).
An April 2004 report by the Sierra Club, "Michigan Communities at Risk" found that weakened federal air, ground and water regulations have introduced sever new health risks in Michigan, shifted the costs of pollution abatement from large corporations onto the backs of individual tax payers, and encouraged the use by electric companies of coal over cleaner energy sources.
The Nader/Gonzalez team would fix Michigan's pollution problem and create many new jobs with its crash program to switch the nation to a non-nuclear, non-fossil-fuel, solar-based economy--which is "off the table" for Obama/McCain. Enormous improvements in proven energy efficiencies from consumer, home and building technologies can become the norm if Washington overcomes the energy companies' lobbies that do not want to see their sales diminish. A March 2008 Families USA report, "Dying For Coverage In Michigan" found that in 2006, of the nearly 5,347,000 people between the ages of 25 and 64 living in Michigan, 13.4 percent had no health insurance and that uninsured Michigan residents are sicker and die sooner than their insured counterparts
While Obama and McCain offer health care plans that would enrich private insurance companies at the expense of tax payers, the Nader/Gonzalez Campaign favors a Canadian-style public health insurance system with private delivery and free choice of hospital and doctor. Also "off the table" for Obama/McCain but on the table for Nader/Gonzalez is a "Marshall Plan" to rebuild and repair the Nation's crumbling schools, clinics, roads, bridges and other vital public infrastructure, with funds coming from cutting the bloated, wasteful military budget that devours 50 percent of the federal government's operating expenditures.
Mr. Nader and Mr. Gonzalez will address these and many other critical issues the major party candidates have taken "off the table" that the Nader/Gonzalez Campaign has put on the table, including:- a comprehensive, negotiated military and corporate withdrawal date from Iraq;- a living wage and repeal of the anti-union Taft-Hartley Act;- a carbon tax to deter global warming;- an end to the corporate welfare and corporate crime that has resulted in millions losing pensions, savings and jobs and squandered tax dollars; and,- more direct democracy reflecting the preamble to our constitution which starts with "we the people," and not "we the corporations."
About Ralph Nader
Attorney, author, and consumer advocate Ralph Nader has been named by Time Magazine one of the "100 Most Influential Americans in the 20th Century." For more than four decades he has exposed problems and organized millions of citizens into more than 100 public interest groups advocating solutions. He led the movement to establish the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the Consumer Product Safety Commission, and was instrumental in enacting the Safe Drinking Water Act, the Motor Vehicle Safety Act, the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) and countless other pieces of important consumer legislation. Because of Ralph Nader we drive safer cars, eat healthier food, breathe better air, drink cleaner water, and work in safer environments. Nader graduated from Princeton University and received an LL.B from Harvard Law School.
About Matt Gonzalez
Matt Gonzalez was elected to the San Francisco Board of Supervisors in 2000 representing San Francisco's fifth council district. From 2003 to 2005, he served as Board of Supervisors President. A former public defender, Gonzalez is managing partner of Gonzalez & Leigh, a 7-attorney practice in San Francisco that represents individuals and organizations in mediation, arbitration, and administrative proceedings before state and federal regulatory bodies. Gonzalez graduated from Columbia University and received a JD from Stanford Law School.
About the Nader/Gonzalez Campaign
The Nader/Gonzalez independent presidential candidacy will be on the ballot in 45 states, is polling at 5-6 percent nationally, and a new Time/CNN poll shows Ralph Nader polling 8 percent in New Mexico, 7 percent in Colorado, 7 percent in Pennsylvania, and 6 percent in Nevada -- all key battleground states.
For more information on the Nader/Gonzalez campaign, visit: votenader.org.

so there's some nader news and i wish i had more to post. i was going to post about movies but i'm so sick of this sour grapes b.s. barbra needs to get over it. i say that as a longtime fan. she can criticize palin's positions (there's a lot to criticize) but let's not have tantrums in public, ok?

let's close with c.i.'s 'Iraq snapshot:'

Friday, September 5, 2008. Chaos and violence continue, the US military announces another death, no cutbacks (let alone withdrawals) is the word, al-Maliki pretends his feelings are hurt, Adam Kokesh shares his thoughts at a rally in Minn., and more.

Starting with the news of no 'cutback' (forget withdrawal). Tony Capaccio (Bloomberg News) explains, "Top U.S. military advisers have recommended that President George W. Bush delay futher combat-troop withdrawals from Iraq until early next year, according to two administration officials." Julian E. Barnes (Los Angeles Times) reveals, "Under the recommendation, the current level of about 140,000 troops would remain in Iraq through the end of Bush's presidency in January. Then a combat brigade of about 3,500 troops would be removed by February a senior Pentagon official said, speaking on condition of anonymity because the recommendation has not been made public." Al Jazeera adds: "The recommendation that George Bush withdraw one combat brigade, or up to 5,000 soldiers, from Iraq only early next year was contrary to expectations that improved security in Iraq would allow for quicker cuts." At the White House today, Dana Perino declared, "I don't recall in the last few times when President Bush has worked with, or has gotten recommendations from General Petraeus, that we have gone too far outside. Of course we -- the President gets an update, as he did on Wednesday evening from Admiral Mullen and Secretary Gates. They took Secretary -- I'm sorry -- General Petraeus' recommendation and ran that through the chain of command. And then they presented it to the President. He's obviously talking to his national security team, and we'll be consulting with members of Congress before we move forward." US forces aren't leaving. Two presidential candidates (Barack Obama and John McCain) have no intention of withdrawing US troops. At what point does the Iraqi puppet face the wrath of the Iraqi people (many of whom have already figured out that Obama and McCain are the same on Iraq)?

UPI reports on yesterday's press conference held by Iraq's Sunni vice president Tariq al-Hashimi. The press conference focused on the proposed treaties between the puppet government and the White House and al-Hashimi declared, "I think that we are not in need of an agreement that does not guarantee sovereignty and brings Iraq out from under Chapter VII, and also guarantees Iraqi law as a whole." Which would seem to put al-Hashimi in a better position with the Iraqi people than the puppet Nouri al-Maliki. However, al-Maliki was handed a gift today with advance publicity for Bob Woodward's latest book due out Monday. The book asserts that the White House spied on the puppet. Not a shocking or surprising claim. (A) He is there puppet and they don't trust him (as well as see him as inept). (B) This is the same White House that spied on the United Nations in the lead up to the illegal war. But al-Maliki's trying to turn it into a national pride issue. BBC reports that the puppet government is making noises about being shocked and how, gosh darn it, they think they maybe plan to ask the White House if this is true! Maybe.

At the US State Dept today, Robert Wood (Deputy Spokesperson) handled the press briefing and was asked about the charges made in Woodward's forthcoming book. He stated originally, "I don't have anything to say other than, you know, I read books, but I don't do book reviews, basically." Pressed later, he would state he hadn't read the book and "I'm not going to give you a review of it." The most Wood would offer was, "Well, again, I'm not going to get into the substance of this book and, you know, our characterization of it, except to say that, look, we have a good working relationship, a strong working relationship, with the Government of Iraq. We've worked very closely with Prime Minister Maliki. We'll continue to do so and -- in our efforts to strengthen Iraq's democracy."

Wood was more expansive on the issue of the "Awakening" Council members, stating, ". . . we believe transitioning some members of the Sons of Iraq into the Iraqi security forces, while providing the others with vocational training and other employment opportunities, will be key to sustaining the security gains that have been realized in Anbar and elsewhere in 2007. But I don't have anything beyond that." In other words, "Thank goodness the puppet government might soon start paying the thugs so we don't have to. Liability concerns, you understand." They certainly have the money to pay it since al-Maliki sits on millions and millions while Iraqis suffer. At Inside Iraq, one of McClatchy's Iraqi correspondents contributes "Why Does Iraq Need This Loan" which notes the central government in Baghdad issued a press release Wednesday proclaiming the Italian ambassador and Iraq's Minister of Finance addressed the topic of the "400 million euro" loan:

Until now, everything seems normal and logical. A third world country takes loan money from an industrial country. That would be completely acceptable if this third world country is a poor country but is it acceptable for a country that gained 32 billions dollars only as supplementary budget from the increasing of oil prices?Why does Iraq need this loan? Our government wastes millions of dollar everyday in putting more blast walls, renewing pavements and of course in buying new armored vehicles for the enormous and increasing number of Iraqi officials. We can buy thousands of agricultural machines with the millions that have been wasted for the faked projects. Of course I'm not talking about the millions that had been stolen by the former ministers or even by the contractors.

Puppet al-Maliki better hope he can get some traction with his mock outrage of "The White House Spied On Me! Who Could Have Guessed!" James Denselow (Guardian of London) contemplates al-Maliki, "So how has this situation come to pass and how are things likely to develop? Is Maliki going to detach from his perceived political masters in Washington and be allowed to show independence? Or will such posturing result in Maliki suffering a similar fate to his predecessor, who was replaced when he became too independent?"

Turning to some of today's reported violence . . .

Bombings?

Reuters notes Ahmed Chalabi was the target of an assassination in Baghdad today via a car bombing that claimed the lives of 2 and left seventeen injured (Chalabi was not among the dead or injured).

Shootings?

Sahar Issa (McClatchy Newspapers) reports Dbdulameer Hasen Abbas ("Advisor to the Ministry of Defence") was assassinated in Baghdad.

Corpses?

Sahar Issa (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 1 corpse was discovered in Nineveh Province today (a police officer who was kidnapped yesterday).

Today the US military announced: "A Multi-National Division – Center Soldier died of non-combat related injuries in Baghdad Sept. 5." The announcement brought to 4154 the number of US service members killed in Iraq since the start of the illegal war.

This as Ann Scott Tyson (Washington Post) reports, "Suicides among active-duty soldiers this year are on pace to exceed both last year's all-time record and, for the first time since the Vietnam War, the rate among the general U.S. population, Army officials said yesterday. Ninety-three active-duty soldiers had killed themselves through the end of August, the latest data show. A third of those cases are under investigation by the Armed Forces Medical Examiner's Office. In 2007, 115 soldiers committed suicide." Pauline Jelinek (AP) adds, "As officials have said before, [Brig. Gen. Rhonda L.] Cornum said the main factors in soldier suicides continues to be problems with their personal relationships, legal and financial issues, work problems and the repeated deployments and longer tour lengths prompted by an Afghan war entering its eighth year and Iraq campaign in its sixth."
While the military does keep saying the same thing over and over, it really doesn't hold up. Take the case of Dustin Mark Tucker whom Mary Callahan (The Press Democrat) reported on Thursday. The doctors can't explain the death (kidney failure is suspected -- the cause, no one knows) and his family can't either:

"He has no family history or personal history of any kind of medical issues," said his mother, Cindy Tucker. "He didn't complain of not feeling well . . . He was happy. He was busy. He was excited for his vacation. He was on top of the world."Tucker, 22, was home for an 18-day leave, his first since his March deployment as a gunner with the Army's 7th Squadron, 10th Cavalry Regiment, 4th Infantry Division out of Fort Hood, Texas. He was thrilled to be home, where his family had planned plenty of free time for golf, fishing and other activities. He was fatigued and jet-lagged after days of traveling from Baghdad to Kuwait, then Ireland, Atlanta and Los Angeles before finally flying into San Francisco and the embrace of his family. Despite the lengthy trip, he seemed ready for some fun, they said. Since arriving home Aug. 25, he had visited family and friends, played golf, bought a motorcycle and was looking forward to a family fishing trip at Clear Lake this week. He complained of no pain, discomfort or illness, but did mention being tired Aug. 27 when he decided to hang out with his two brothers rather than go out with friends, Cindy Tucker said.


Dustin Mark Tucker, apparently healthy, got on the couch and died there. And there are no answers. And there doesn't appear to be a great deal of interest in finding out what happened -- the same way they're not all that interested in the suicides. It's a pattern of pass-the-buck that hasn't been deal with despite the scandals of the Walter Reed Army Medical Center.


Turning to the US presidential race. Yesterday's financial goal for the Ralph Nader campaign was to reach $100,000 in the donations for the Nader Media Fund which led to some mocking in the press. Not only did they reach $100,000, the campaign surpassed it, hitting $104,500 via donaors from around the country -- Texas, Wisconsin, Arizona, California, Oregon, Illinois, Colorado, Hawaii and elsewhere. Meanwhile Richard Winger's Ballot Access News reports Ralph Nader is currently on the ballot in 38 states (the Green Party in 31, the Constitution Party in 33 and the Libertarian Party in 42 -- see chart at the top of the page). Hamza Shaban (The Cavalier Daily) observes, "What Democrats have failed to realize is this: Nader is most dangerous when he is ignored. As a politician on the fringe, he does not seek the broadest coalition but makes new ones. If his platform is not integrated into the Democratic party's, then he will relentlessly go after the disaffected and carve out his own demographic. What loyal Democrats call "spoiling," Nader calls a systemic and deliberate boycott." Team Nader notes:

The Invisible Man, song by 98 Degrees - Justin Jeffre and Jeff Timmons.
WATCH THE VIDEO

The revolution will not be televised - but thanks to your help, it will be on youtube.
We passed our media fund goal of $100,000 and brought in over $20,000 yesterday alone!
This video is our highlight reel from the "Open the Debates" super rally in Minneapolis, Minnesota. The rally took place on September 4, at the same time as the Republican National Convention in neighboring St. Paul. I flew to Minnesota to shoot video of this exciting event, then stayed up all night editing - I hope you enjoy the result. Also, because of your generous support, you will see much more coverage of future events.
Please forward this video to your friends & family. Also please help us - subscribe to our youtube channel and rate our videos and comments!
Haven't had a chance to help our media fund grow? There's still time...contribute to our campaign today.
Onward

The RNC wrapped up their convention last night. John McCain is the Republican nominee. Governor Sarah Palin will be his running mate. CBS Evening News' Cynthia Bowers reported on Palin (link has video and text) today. CBS Evening News with Katie Couric found the anchor interviewing Cindy McCain on Wednesday (link has text and video). Barack supporter Hillary Rosen (CNN) shows a stronger grasp of feminism than a number of leaders when she compiles her reasons for not supporting the John McCain-Sarah Palin ticket but first calls out rank sexism, "I am a woman who someone took a chance on several years ago when they gave me a job that had only previously been done by old white guys. Experience? How do you get any if no one takes a chance on you? And the decision to take a chance can be instinctive, as John McCain said. And what about the argument that she is a negligent mother who will be distracted from her important role? I am a mother who constantly feels the pressure from others about whether I am fit to be a parent, whether I put my kids first often enough and whether my children get enough of my attention. Who has the right to judge my family? My grandmother always said, 'You can't tell time on someone else's clock.' Judgments about people's personal lives are better left unsaid and unrealized."

Tuesday night in Minneapolis, IVAW's Adam Kokesh participated in the Rally For The Republic. Kokesh has posted a video of his speech at his website and below is transcription of the remarks he delivered:

Adam Kokesh: Thanks to a few neocon, chicken-hawk draft dodgers I was sent to Falluja in 2004 with the Marine Corps Civil Affairs Team and I found out the hard way that the greatest enemies of the Constitution of the United States of America are not to be found in the sands of some far off land but rather right here at home. It's not enough to understand that the war in Iraq is simply unjust, illegal, unconstitutional, costing us a horrendous amount of money and destroying our military. The issues before us today are a matter of life and death. I continue to serve my country today as a member of Iraq Veterans Against the War, Veterans for Peace and the Campaign for Liberty. It is through the Campaign for Liberty that we will take Ron Paul's message, we will take the torch of freedom that he has borne so well for us, we will take it back to our communities and set brushfires of freedom in the mind of every liberty loving man, woman and child in this great country. I'd like to take a second to recognize the veterans in the room -- if you would please stand -- and any active duty service members please stand. These are the brave men and women who swore an oath with their lives to support and defend the Constitution of the United States of America. And while it is our responsibility now to resist tyranny civily while we still can, there may come a time when we will say to the powers that be "With your blood or ours, we have come to water the tree of liberty." And it is those veterans and myself, we will be on the frontlines. Who will stand with us? Thank you for taking that stand. To all of you loyal soldiers in this new revolutionary army, it is an honor to count myself among your ranks and I salute you. You want a revolution? You better be ready to fight for it. Now I want you all to get back on your feet, take that stance for liberty with me, with all the veterans in this room, make for yourself the same committment with your lives, your fortunes and your sacred honor to our cause and make that pledge from your hearts where the fire of liberty burns that we will not rest 'till we achieve our goals and we get this new revolution in America. Now I want you to stay on your feet for just for just another minute -- you're going to want to stay on your feet for this -- because now I have the great pleaure of introducing on behalf of the Campaign for Liberty, someone you have all been waiting to see, Aimee Allen.

Note, Adam is co-chair of IVAW. He was speaking for himself at the Ron Paul rally as do all IVAW members participating in political campaigns for candidates. IVAW does not endorse any single candidate, they do not belong to or serve one party. IVAW is a diverse group in all ways including politically. Their shared beliefs include an end to the illegal war, reperations for the Iraqi people and that US veterans' service is honored (and promises kept) by the US government.

Green Party presidential candidate Cynthia McKinney has held multiple events in Wisconsin today and has more planned for tomorrow: Today she held a lunch (10:30 a.m.), a town hall (Walden III School, Racine) at one p.m., and a Park Six meet and greet starting at 4:30. Saturday she will be speaking at the Fighting Bob Festival (Baraboo, Wisconsin at 10:20 in the morning and will be hosting another meet and greet this time at High Noon Salloon in Madison beginning at 5:30 p.m.).


NOW on PBS begins airing tonight in most markets. (Check local listings.) On the program this weekend (the above is a web exclusive and not a part of the show), Brancaccio interviews Christine Todd Whitman (billed as a moderate Republican) about the state of the GOP. Bill Moyers Journal brings back Dr. Kathy -- no doubt because America doesn't have enough worthless gas bagging on TV. The program moves into reality with a look at the National Guard members serving in Iraq. Gwen and the gas bags reteam to scare America on the latest installment of Washington Week. The Washington Post's David Broder and Vanity Fair's Todd S. Purdum are the two names that can be mentioned with minimal shudders. The others would produce screaming. In terms of radio, The Next Hour airs on WBAI Sunday (eleven to noon EST) and this week Janet Coleman and David Dozer "appear with yarrow sticks and The Book of Changes." Bill Moyers Journal tackles protests (and, some would say attention getting) so we'll include this section:

Perhaps the most prominent arrest was that of journalist Amy Goodman, anchor of the daily television and radio news program, "Democracy Now!" Police had taken two of her producers into custody as they were trying to cover the news. Goodman went out looking for them, but didn't get very far. She was stopped, slapped into handcuffs, and hauled into a detention center, along with almost 200 hundred other people. They had come to demonstrate, she had come to report on them. Goodman was released a few hours later and back on the job anchoring her daily radio and TV show, a favorite of listeners and viewers who go to her for news they won't find in the mainstream or rightwing press.

Winship is very kind to attention seeking Goody and what she actually offers. The essay is available in full online at Bill Moyers Journal.

iraq
adam kokesh
iraq veterans against the warmcclatchy newspapersthe los angeles timesjulian e. barnes
the washington postann scott tysonmary callahan
the next hourjanet colemandavid dozerwbaiwashington weekbill moyers journalpbsnow on pbs
michael winship

be sure to read elaine's 'I don't support the War Resisters Support Campaign...,' marcia's 'Laura Kaminker: Her own little fan club' and betty's 'The sock puppet master calls.' all 3 posts are wonderful. how about that crazy kaminker, huh? kaminker and her sock puppets. if she didn't have her sock puppets, she wouldn't have any audience, would she?

and exactly how long is the ineffective war resisters support campaign going to use her as a 'face' - it's a scary face, granted, and it's becoming a dangerous face.

i'll move to other topics. let's go to the topic. this is from joan vennochi's 'For Jane Swift, harsh spotlight on Palin has familiar feel' (boston globe):

Jane Swift, the former acting governor of Massachusetts, hopes voters will start focusing on Sarah Palin's record as governor of Alaska and stop focusing on questions about her family.
But Swift is not surprised that, first, "folks are obsessing with the personal aspects of her life."
Swift, an early John McCain supporter, is protective about his surprise pick for running mate, especially when it comes to the media frenzy over Palin's family.
"I wish people showed more discretion with me," said Swift. She wishes the same for Palin.
The focus on Palin's 17-year-old, pregnant, unmarried daughter "is so far beyond the pale of what's appropriate," she said.
To Swift, the harsh spotlight on Palin has a familiar feel. Swift was pregnant with twins when, as lieutenant governor, she took over for Paul Cellucci when he left the governor's office before his term was up. Her personal life was criticized and her qualifications questioned.

i'm going to talk about the above in brief. i'm not going to focus on the daughter.

i'm going to focus on the fact that, until last year, i had multiple pregnacies which all resulted in miscarriages.

had i gotten pregnant at 17, it wouldn't have been the end of my life. my life would have been different.

it wouldn't be what it is today, to be sure.

whether it would be better or worse, i don't know.

and neither does any 1 else.

so when people think the way to make 'political sport' is to go after a 17-year-old girl in public, what they are saying is that they don't think she has a future and that it's more than worthy to humiliate her in order to score a few points for barack.

the 17-year-old girl is living her life and the last thing anyone pregnant needs is to be made the focus of trash talk. there's no reason for it.

this is the 1st and last time i intend to mention it at my site.

but i want all the 1s who are talking trash about that young girl to think about something: i had repeated miscarriages.

i had them and other women can as well. a 17-year-old girl already has enough pressure on herself without you tongue wagging and clucking. it is none of your damn business. and if you add stress to her and, god forbid, anything goes wrong in her pregnancy, you will be partly responsible.

you need to think about that before you trash her again.

it's not about republican or democratic. it is about respecting some 1's privacy. (and for any drive-bys, i am voting for ralph nader.)

let's close with c.i.'s 'Iraq snapshot:'

Tuesday, September 2, 2008. Chaos and violence continue, propaganda continues, the US military announces a death and more.


On Monday, Al Anbar Province was 'turned' over to the Iraqis (don't try to define that term -- it's in dispute) and M-NF (Multi-National Forces) issued a press release officially and unofficially in the New York Times via their backchannel boy Dexy Filkins. There's not a great deal of difference between the two, there never is. The US military spits and Dexy's mouth is open trying to catch it. Nowhere in that overly long article does he even acknowledge that the 'handover' was repeatedly announced and repeatedly postponed. It's all rah-rah from Dexy. Reality, the US military long ago realized that they couldn't have any impact on Anbar. Which is why the "Awakening" Councils (Sunni thugs placed on the US payroll) were originally created. If the US couldn't scare the hell of out of the inhabitants, lets put thugs on the payroll, put them in charge and let that scare the hell out of the inhabitants. It's not a 'success' strategy but, hey, Dexy got to attend a parade and who knows how much praise he'll get from the US military for his 'reporting' this go-round. He certainly got plenty last time and, as Thomas E. Ricks revealed in the Washington Post (after Dexy left Iraq the first time), the US military considered Dexy to be their go-to-guy. As Christian Parenti long ago noted (2005), the reality is that Dexy of the paper and Dexy in person bear no recognizable relationship to one another. As if to prove that point made earlier today, this afternoon The Atlantic has published Jeffy Goldberg and Dexy's dishing in Q&A form and there's Dexy saying "I don't think so" (to whether Iraq is a democracy") and offering this on 'progress' and 'safety': "A couple of days later I went to Sadr City, also at dusk. Sadr City is a vast slum that takes in about three million people. It's the stronghold of the Mahdi Army, the Shiite militia, and it's been the scene of heavy fighting, as recently as a few months ago. I was with some Iraqi friends. It felt perfectly normal. Then one of my Iraqi friends said to me, 'What do you think would happen if you were alone?' And I said, 'What?' And he and the other Iraqis laughed and said: 'You'd be dead in ten seconds'." Go down, Dexy indeed.

In order to sell Anbar as 'progress' a number of facts need to be forgotten such as how many times Anbar was already supposed to have been handed over (last June most prominently). Forgetting is also required of last Thursday's Baghdad press confrence when 'freedom of the press' got a little too 'free' for US Lt Gen Frank G Helmick as he barked "one question, please, at a time" when realities began emerging about Anbar in the questions. Among the many hard-to-find-rah-rah-in-that statements was Iraq's Interior Minister Jawad al-Bulani's insistence that, "We're having a plan to develop the capability of Anbar police through providing them with arms." Good to know you're having a plan, to bad it's a bad plan and one that's not even implemented. AFP quotes US Ambassador to Iraq Ryan Crocker (whom they call "US ambassador to Bagdhad" -- which is certainly more telling) declaring limited success with Gen David Petraeus at the Monday events as the Americans cautioned that they were just withdrawing to their base and would still be around 'as needed' should the need arise. (Think the UK and Basra.) AP quotes US Maj Gen John Kelly at the same ceremonies declaring, "Al Qaeda has not been entirely defeated in Anbar, but their end is near and they know it." And, apparently, so does Psychic John.

No one's supposed to notice that Monday's big to do about nothing was to cover the fact that Iraq is no closer to holding provincial elections (a White House imposed benchmark) before the end of the year. AFP reports that there are exactly two weeks left for Iraqi lawmakers to come to agreement or else there will be no elections until next year,

Turning to the "Awakening" Councils. They are the thugs on the US payroll (men are paid $300 a month, women are paid far less -- and on one lodged an objection to that). They are the thugs who sold their allegience for coin. al-Maliki has surrounded himself with Shi'ite thugs and has always been threatened by the prospect of their Sunni counter-parts. He's made clear that the bulk of them will not be absorbed into any Iraqi body (police or military) and, in fact, has launched attacks on the Diyala Province. Erica Goode (New York Times) reports the al-Maliki government says it will begin issuing payment at the first of October and she quotes "Awakening" commander in Baghdad Ali Bahjet dismissing all the Happy Talk by noting that he has been "assured" by the US military "that 'our contracts will be renewed for the next six months, beginning Sept. 1'" and quotes him adding, "We are sure that the American will continue financing our program because this program . . ."

Turning to some of today's reported violence.

Bombings?

Mohammed Al Dulaimy (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 2 Baghdad roadside bombings that claimed 4 lives and left twenty-three wounded, a Ninevah car bombing that claimed 7 lives and left seven peopl injured and, dropping back to Monday, a Kirkuk roadside bombing that claimed the life of 1 child and left his father and brother wounded. Reuters notes a Mosul car bombing that claimed 4 lives (plus the drive) and left six people wounded.

Kidnappings?

Mohammed Al Dulaimy (McClatchy Newspapers) reports "a mother and her two children" were kidnapped in Nineveh.

Corpses?

Reuters notes 2 corpses were discoverd in Suwayra.

Today the US military announces: "Multi-National Division -- Center reported a non-combat related death in Baghdad Sept. 2." It's the first death M-NF has announced for Septemeber (which doesn't mean it's the first death, especially considering how often they forget to do their job of announcing) and it brings the total number of US service members who have died in Iraq since the start of the illegal war to 4152.

Barbara Starr (CNN) reports US Secretary of Defense "Robert Gates is expected to present proposals to cut U.S. troop levels in Iraq to President Bush, along with proposals for beefing up American forces in Afghanistan". Barring some huge change of direction at this week's Republican Party convention, the two major parties will both be offering the American people cuts and calling them "withdrawal." Turning to the US presidential race, not content to disgrace themselves on the front page of the New York Times today, the press decided to do so at the White House. "One last question for you," a reporter who will remain nameless asks, "because this is another on that you hear a lot -- this issue is raising a lot of questions and sort of prompting a lot of debate about -- the idea of Sarah Palin, mother of five, soon to be grandmother of one, coming to Washington potentially as a vice president, in the most demanding job one could imagine. Any issues raised there about the whole motherhood-work divide?" Pay attention to Dana Perino (White House flack) responding because even WMC blows it (and Feminist Wire Daily still doesn't appear to have noticed a woman had been named as a running mate), " You know, I don't think that those questions would be asked if it was Todd Palin that was the nominee. And I think that Sarah Palin has proven that you can choose as a woman to be a mother and be a strong executive, and to have a wonderful, loving family. And that's what she's chosen to do. And I think that's why the party has rallied around her so fully." Exactly right. Dana Perino got something 100% right today -- a rare thing for her. But not only was it rare for her, it's too much for many 'lefties.' The question WOULD NOT and HAS NOT been asked of a man. But Palin, John McCain's running mate pick if he gets the GOP nomination, is being 'probed' in what should damn well remind many of the crap Kimba Woods and others had to put up with over 15 years ago. It wasn't right then, it's not now. The paper of little record tries to hide behind "Mommy Wars" to 'cover' the non-story. Susan (Random Thoughts) gets right to the point, noting no one gives a damn about Barak's two children while he's on a ticket but Palin is supposed to be uanble to have kids and run for VP: "The article reeks of sexism. The message is clear: If you're a woman and you've just had kids, don't bother running for high political office." Joseph (Cannonfire) notes the garbage that's been thrown at Palin already (false rumors) and where it's coming from: The Daily Toilet Scrubber and Andrew Bareback Mountain Sullivan. Somehow Bob Somerby, covering similar terrain, can only hiss at Andy Sullivan -- well Somerby's always been scared of his own shadow. As for a non-rumor regarding Palin's family that is also non-news, my opinion is here and Anglachel offers her own here. It's a real shame that Stephanie Miller (who wants no one digging through her closets) has chosen to demonstrate just how trashy she is on this topic and it's even sadder that Women's Media Center finds her to be a voice worth quoting in an article. As pointed out here last night, "And 'scoring' a 'win' for Barack via smut only further adds to the perception that he has nothing to run on and no qualifications. Why else would you be tearing into a young girl?"

The RNC is currently holding their convention and will select their presidential nominee (presumably John McCain). Amy Goodman's already found attention getting stunts to get her name in the headlines. She could have pulled the same stunts in Denver and faced the same police treatment. But Denver was about her selling the Democratic Party and Minneapolis is about her tarring and feathering the RNC. (Most years, we generally let the RNC tar and feather itself. But it's CrackPot time these days.) Ava and I addressed Goody's garbage Sunday but two things need to be noted Obama Groupie Patricia Wilson-Smith LIED on air and got away with it. She said early on (sticking with the talking point) that she was for Hillary originally, as she became more heated she wanted the whole world to know about the work she's been doing: ". . . I've been working so tirelessly over the last year and a half for Senator Obama". It's not both ways. Wilson-Smith lied. Get used to it. You'll see a lot more woman trying to tell you they were Hillary supporters at the start and then went over to Barack with the implication being that you can as well! Don't believe liars. Do what you want, but don't believe liars. The second thing is that, as noted, there was no convention bounce for Barack. As Ava and I noted:

The Thursday speech was a whimper (and as we feared last week, no one taught Barack to modulate). The entire week was a Love-In. Only, unlike past love-ins, it wasn't about "us" (however, you define the noun), it was about Barack. Try to get it if you support Barack (we don't) because you (his supporters and the media) continue to hurt his chances of winning in November. Americans want to elect a president to work for them. Americans aren't electing a Love God, a Second Coming, a Homecoming King. James Carville has famously (and rightly) called the first night as a disaster. It was a disaster. The disaster continued all week, with few exceptions. The convention was supposed to bring America on board. What was being sold? It wasn't the Democratic Party. It wasn't a need to make the country better. It was Barack, Barack, Barack, Barack. Over and over. Here's reality that the campaign better start accepting: Barack is not experienced. That's a reality. America will gladly take a chance on a candidate if they believe the candidate has something to offer them. You need to accept the reality and you need to drop the testimonials. If you're serious about getting Barack into the White House (we plan to offer advice when we cover the GOP convention as well), you need to start making it about America and not about Barack. It was a vanity parade. It was grown adults embarrassing themselves like Baby Soxers. It was never about where American can go, only that Barack could lead.
"Change to what?" was the question created during the primaries by the campaign refusing to be specific. "Lead us where?" is the question they replaced it with as a result of the convention. And, just like during the primaries, they had no answer to the question their actions raised. Four nights of non-stop infomercials told you there was a product named Barack and that you should buy it. But no one could ever tell you what Barack could or would do. Now people may buy a number of things from infomercials. They might buy a treadmill or a hair care product or anything else. But the infomerical has to tell you what it does. Repeating "It's great!" over and over doesn't sell the product. And the convention didn't sell to America. It may have picked up a few converts. It didn't provide what Barack needed or anything he could build on. Four percent is what we're told the 'bounce' was. Four percent isn't a bounce and isn't even beyond the statistical margin of error. In other words, four four days, a non-stop infomercial ran and it didn't sell a damn thing.

Yesterday, Cedric's "The polling doth not riseth" and Wally's "THIS JUST IN! CHRIST-CHILD FALTERS!" noted the polls being released reflected no bounce. This is where reasonable take their heads out of their asses and begin to notice there is a problem -- yes, even if they are Barack supporters. Someone who is not a Barack supporter is Eric Patton (Dissident Voice) and he demonstrates how the right plays to win and the left plays to lose

The right wing makes their candidates earn their support. They don't beg and plead. On the other hand, it seems like the only thing liberals know how to do is piss, whine, cry, moan, complain -- and especially beg and plead.
If you have to do a "Progressives for ," instead of doing it after the candidate has wrapped up the nomination, a better strategy -- if you really want to win -- would be to pick a candidate like Kucinich (whom I personally am not enamored with for reasons that go beyond the scope of this essay; however, there is no doubt he was the farthest left of the Democratic candidates, and massive left support for him would not have been, I don't think, a bad tactical move) and get behind him strongly at least two years before the election, if not sooner.
Let's put this another way: Suppose McCain wins, which I think is likely. If you must support somebody, then begin in December 2008 planning for the election in November 2012. Find out if Kucinich is planning on running again. If he is, start your Progressives for Kucinich website then, bust your ass for four years, and see what happens.
So why didn't the liberals behind Progressives for Obama do that? Because for them, it's not about winning change -- it's about electing Democrats. It's about the home team. It's about the gang colors. As Obama was making his expected (by radicals) moves to the right, the phenomenal left-wing writer Paul Street asked Obama supporters how far was too far? Their answer was, in effect, that it made no difference.

Cynthia McKinney and Ralph Nader are running for president and both candidates want a real end to the illegal war, not smoke and mirrors, not word games, just the illegal war ended. At McKinney's website John Judge outlines the differences between the Green ticket and the Democrat ticket:

As the Democratic National Convention continued, Green Party leaders called attention to sharp differences between the Democratic ticket and Green nominees Cynthia McKinney and Rosa Clemente.
Greens congratulated Mr. Obama on his historic nomination as the first African American presidential candidate of an established party in the US. But Greens noted that the nomination of Cynthia McKinney and Rosa Clemente in July is also historically significant -- the first time a national political party has chosen two women of color. Ms. McKinney is African American and Ms. Clemente is Black Puerto Rican.
"There's a whole list of urgent issues that Cynthia McKinney and Rosa Clemente are talking about, while Barack Obama and Joe Biden remain silent," said Cliff Thornton, co-chair of the Green Party of the United States and co-founder of Efficacy, Inc. (http://www.Efficacy-online.org). "The Democrats don't want to discuss the
devastation caused by the failed War on Drugs, or abuses by the police, courts, and Homeland Security authorities. They won't mention the theft of the 2000 and 2004 elections by the Republicans or address the mass displacement of poor and African American people from New Orleans. For Cynthia and Rosa, these are major issues affecting the future of our country."

Meanwhile, the Ralph Nader-Matt Gonzalez ticket files for the ballot in Kentucky tomorrow and their state coordinator, Jim Wiese, will hold a news conference at the Secretary of State's office at three o'clock in the afternoon tomorrow: "A broad range of issues face Kentucky voters this election. Kentucky has one of the nation's highest illiteracy rates, compounded by fluctuating, and sometimes frozen, teacher salaries. Coal strip mining continues in Eastern Kentucky, despite its devastating effects on the environment. Lastly, a universal health care plan is definitely needed in a state which holds a high incidence of diabetes cases. The Nader/Gonzalez Campaign offers solutions to these and many other problems facing the working families of Kentucky that Obama /McCain fail to offer. For example, Nader and Gonzalez will guarantee a decent education for all, ban mountaintop removal and launch a "Marshall Plan" to repair the Nation's crumbling schools, clinic, roads, bridges and other important infrastructure, creating millions of new jobs. Nader/Gonzalez favors a Canadian-style, private delivery, free choice of hospital and doctor, public health insurance system." Team Nader notes:

The general election campaign kicks off today.
To rev up our engines, drop $8 on Nader/Gonzalez now.
That's one dollar a week between now and election day--November 4.
I've worked on all three Nader campaigns--2000, 2004, and 2008.
And trust me on this one. This year, we have the best chance to break through.
Why?
There's a serious and growing independent movement away from the corporate Democrats and Republicans.
We're going to be on more state ballots this year -- 45 states (plus the District of Columbia) compared to 34 in 2004 and 44 in 2000.
We're heading toward double digits in a number of key state polls.
And because we are going to implement a nationwide get out the vote drive that will put 2000 and 2004 to shame.
Translation -- we're shooting for a three way race.
The last sixty days between now and election day will be a blur.
We have our Minneapolis rally coming up later this week. (If we don't all get arrested first -- apparently the police in Minneapolis arrest you for political organizing.)
We're in the process of transferring our ballot access crew over to our nationwide get out the vote drive.
And then it's going to be all out, pedal to the metal --- precinct by precinct drive --- until November 4--to let the American people know that they have a choice.
It's been one helluva year so far.
And it's going one knock down drag out fight.
Bring it on.
But first things first.
Thanks to your help, we have not missed one fundraising goal this year. And we don't plan to start now.
We're entering the home stretch of our most recent drive.
We're at $55,000.
But we need to hit $100,000 in three days -- by this coming Thursday September 4. That's $15,000 a day. It's go time.
So, give whatever you can afford now -- $10, $20, $50, $100.
And remember, if you give $100 or more now, we'll send you three DVDs -- the Denver rally, the Minneapolis rally, and a special debate DVD. (Three DVD offer ends September 4 at 11:59 p.m.)
Onward to November.
And what we hope will be a three-way race.
Jason Kafoury, National Campaign Coordinator

iraq
the new york timeserica goode
dexter filkins
mohammed al dulaimy
mcclatchy newspapers
the third estate sunday review
the daily jotcedrics big mix

that's Isaiah's The World Today Just Nuts "The Softer Side of Narcissism" it went up today and doesn't it perfectly capture michelle obama's appearance on pbs last night. me, me, me.

poor michelle, she really does think the world revolves around her.

today c.i. wrote 'eleanor's smear.' i have known c.i. how many years? i have been a friend for how many years? (first year of college.) and while on 1 level it doesn't surprise me, on another level it blows me away.

it doesn't surprise me because no 1 writes like c.i.

it surprises me because no 1 writes like c.i.

i was lucky and heard it dictated this morning. we were all headed to the first speaking gig on iraq. if you think you love it, read over it again but this time read it out loud.

it is amazing.

there's a part where 'eergh!' needs to be. after amy goodman publishing in hustler there's an 'eergh.'

which isn't me complaining about the friend (i know her) who typed up c.i.'s dictation. she did a great job typing it up.

what a powerful piece of writing.

and done off the top of the head.

we were all ready to go this morning and c.i. was still working on the morning entries. we assumed (wally, kat, ava and i) we'd go upstairs and c.i. would say, 'give me 5 minutes.' instead it was 'i've been stuck in the e-mails. i've got 1 written but ...'

we headed for the car and c.i. explained what was going on. ava and wally filled me on more of it later in the day.

i kind of wish now i had gone with wally, ava and c.i. to see hillary's speech. i just knew i was going to be crying too hard. so kat and i (and flyboy and my baby) came back to the hotel.

women are outraged by what eleanor smeal did. or what she did now.

that woman is pathetic and was born pathetic and died pathetic. she is now post-dead, she is now the undead.

so c.i. has to return 7 calls a.s.a.p. and then we're almost at the 1st place where we're speaking. kat goes, 'we have 5 minutes.'

c.i. says (dialing), 'i can do it, i can do it. just tell me when we're down to 4 minutes and 30 seconds and i'll wrap up.'

and c.i. did it. dictated that in less than 5 minutes.

i was listening with my mouth hanging open.

c.i. captured it perfectly and did an amazing job.

backstabbers is the theme tonight and i'm going with ellie smeal because she is nothing but a democratic party hack.

that is all she ever was. she has never made demands, she has never stood up for women, she has spent years in d.c. 'compromising' with damn little to show for it.

it's no surprise that as soon as the going got tough, ellie bailed on hillary.

that's typical ellie m.o.

and it's no surprise that she would confess to the porcine 'beauty' katha pollitt. oh, let me pull katha in on this.

katha, word to the wise, ugly break ups? not a good idea.

your ex does a wonderful bit about you. i laugh and laugh.

katha is the woman who hates woman and, as c.i. once noted, she's a loud, ugly woman and, due to media stereotypes of feminist, mistakenly assumed to be 1.

katha's nothing but a 20th century closeted communist. her ex does a wonderful bit on katha taking orders from moscow. it's a joke but only slightly.

before cindy sheehan even announced her run for congress, there was 'feminist' katha writing the piece telling cindy not to run.

why?

because she doesn't like women.

like most closet communists of the last decade, katha's all about women's issues matter last.

which is why she wrote nothing on abeer until she was loudly and repeatedly critized. so she tossed in abeer for a 1/2 sentence.

abeer was gang-raped by u.s. soldiers while her mother, her father and her 5-year-old sister were murdered (by u.s. soldiers) in the next room. 3 soldiers took turns gang-raping her and then she was murdered. then there was an attempt to set her corpse on fire. she was 15-years-old.

and katha had nothing to say. nothing to say when it made news.

nothing to say when the article 32 hearing took place.

nothing to say when soldiers entered pleas of guilt.

when she finally wrote it, she was all over the communist promoted story of another woman's death that no 1 knew the reality of (then or now).

but the 15-year-old girl who was gang-raped and murdered? the 1 that 3 soldiers confessed to their role in the conspiracy? she wasn't interested.

and wouldn't have even done a 1/2 sentence on it were it not for the fact that she was being loudly criticized and even alexander cockburn had written about it.

so much for our 'feminist' katha.

red ass katha's all about herself.

she doesn't think media portrayals (or lack of them) matter. so when the naacp called out the networks awful record in casting african-americans in roles, there was katha insisting the naacp was wasting every 1's time.

she only supports barack because his support among the closet communists is legendary.

and, to be clear, barack's not a communist.

but he hung around a lot of wackos and that's good enough for the closet set.

katha was shocked that her hero red betty was meaningless to young women today.

her hero is meaningless because she always was.

my generation had no use for red betty either.

we weren't housewives in suburbia.

and we didn't care for red betty bringing the then party line (communist party) into the feminism movement which would be 'lesbians are sick.' red betty ripped apart lesbians, ripped apart straight women and accused them of being lesbians.

it's largely forgotten today and just remembered how red betty pushed that other feminists were c.i.a. plants but, before red betty (who once made me cry in real life) was repeating that lie, she was running on n.o.w. insisting every woman she hated was a lesbian.

red betty was in a political closet.

and she hated attractive women. i often assume she's katha's hero because, like katha, 'butt ugly' was the only term for her.

that's how i met red betty. c.i. was speaking at a women's liberation event and there i was, still in college and waiting backstage. and red betty didn't want me backstage. red betty thought i was an irritant and a fan of her's.

i didn't recognize her. i just knew some homely woman was ripping me apart.

c.i. came off stage from speaking and saw what was going on and ripped into red betty. c.i. let her have it. i knew c.i. loathed red betty. but that was something to see.

c.i. went over every 1 of red betty's communist publications articles (all vanished from the public record then - they have resurfaced) and all of red betty's meetings and actions in the communist party and told the liar that if she ever spoke to me ('or any woman') like that when c.i. was around, the clipping file (provided by c.i.'s publisher grandfather) would be freely and widely distributed and 'your closeted ass will be cooked.'

red betty was all, 'i'm sorry, i'm sorry. i didn't know she was your friend. i thought she wanted my autograph.' (i hadn't even looked at her until she started talking about how i wanted attention for my tits - 'tits' was the word she used. when she practically screamed that, i looked over to see who the hateful woman dissing me was.) red betty was then telling me she was sorry and trying like crazy to kiss c.i.'s ass.

red betty made a lot of women cry. she was a hateful, hateful person.

she had to be the center of attention and was threatened if another woman was even in the room.

so it's fitting that katha pollitt made red betty her hero.

2 of a kind and all of that.




team nader's super rally took place tonight:

D-Day Denver

D-Day.

Denver tonight 6 p.m.

University of Denver Magness Arena.

Sean Penn, Tom Morello, Cindy Sheehan, Jello Biafra, Ralph Nader and Matt Gonzalez will be there.

Standing up to the corporate two-party controlled debate commission.

Calling for an opening up of the Presidential debates.

If you are in the area, see you at the event.

If you know people in the area, call them, text them, e-mail them -- and give them the details.

Free Speech TV will be streaming the event live on the Internet. (Wednesday, August 27, 7 p.m. Mountain time, 9 p.m. Eastern.)

Just click here to watch.

Also, Free Speech TV will be broadcasting the event live on Dish Network Channel 9415.

If you are home watching convention coverage on cable, watch for Ralph.

He'll be in the DNC belly of the beast at the Pepsi Center today.

He'll be on Fox TV with Neil Cavuto in this afternoon at about 4 p.m.

And MSNBC with Dan Abrams tomorrow morning at about 10 a.m.

Other mainstream media interviews are being nailed down as we speak.

Stay tuned for more details.

The bottom line is this.

The conventions are supposed to be about democracy.

But in fact, they're two big corporate parties.

Talk about corporate crime and corporate power, and you are drummed out of the building.

Talk the happy corporate talk, and they invite you in for a drink.

Thank you Ralph Nader for having the guts to stand up.

For the American people.

Against the corporate takeover of our democracy.

Stand with Ralph today.

If you are in Denver, come on down and join with us at the Magness Arena tonight at 6 p.m.

If you are not in Denver, give whatever you can afford -- $10, $20, $50, $100 -- to help defray the costs of tonight's event. (Renting the arena, sound, lights, stage hands, video crew and equipment, flying in road trippers, printing of 100,000 fliers -- you get the picture.)

By the way, great start on the fundraising drive -- we're at close to $15,000 after just two days. But we have to hit $100,000 by September 4. So, let's get 'er cranked.

Thank you for your ongoing support.

With your help, tonight, we will shake it up.

Onward to November.

The Nader Team

PS: Remember, if you donate $100 or more, we'll send you three DVDs -- the Denver rally, the Minneapolis rally, and a special debate DVD. (Three DVD offer ends September 4 at 11:59 p.m.)

ShareThisShareThisShareThis

we got back to the hotel (kat and i) too late to catch that. we're planning to look for it tomorrow night online. if you caught it, feel free to e-mail.

let's close with c.i.'s 'Iraq snapshot:'