How the Right kidnapped the military --- GOP + USM = CQB

It has become increasingly clear to me that the average conservative supporter of the Global War of Terror knows more about the military, the Iraq war, the missing WMD's, insurgent snipers, Humvees (the ill-equipped ones and the better-equipped ones) than, well, everyone else on the planet. Even those who were virtually disinterested in military affairs have become "synthetic soldiers" in post-9/11 America. Now, I'm not talking about the enlisted soldier, I'm referring to the "next-door neighbor" type who has become enamored with everything military.

You may encounter these individuals in the blogosphere but you may run into them in real life as well. This demographic is the one that found "Shock and Awe" to be orgasmic, the one that would thoroughly enjoy invading another country and showing anyone that "these colors don't run." They use a wide array of acronyms that display their superior knowledge in a field that is apparently useful only in a foxhole or seated in an armored tank.

Here are some general example that you and I could comprehend fairly easily:

SCOTUS = Supreme Court of the United States
POTUS = President of the United States
CiC = Commander in Chief
DoD = Department of Defense
CO = Commanding Officer
HVT = High-value target (probably used for Bin Laden when we were looking for him)

Apparently there are several "initialisms" that to lovers of the military and bombs are really amusing. Such as these:

BOHICA = bend over here it comes again
AWR = Allah's Waiting Room (when insurgents are in a building and an air-strike has been called in)
INI= Intoxication and intercourse (other than throwing puppies over cliffs these are other activities performed when not on duty)
USMC = Uncle Sam's Misguided Children


The list can go on for pages. The bottom line is that this vernacular has ceased to remain within the confines of the military and has spilled over into the general population that is supportive of war. Not only did the Bush Crime Family divide the country in such a way that pitted American vs. American, it also created a sub-culture that is absolutely fascinated and mesmerized by guns, tanks, bullets, bombs, death and destruction. I envision many of them watching movies like Red Dawn and Top Gun on a weekly basis. And to think this all started with 19 geeky terrorists who got lucky one day...

This love for all things military has created alter egos in many of this brethren. I've witnessed countless in the blogosphere who either claim to have fought in Iraq or Afghanistan and in reality have not (but so desperately want to fit in using some of the above acronyms) or claim to have a relative or friend that is in the military and that relative or friend was part of the team that found Saddam or was part of the team that "found the WMD but can't talk about it for 5-6 years...so yes, Iraq had WMD".

These terms and expressions are commonplace for the average right-winger. They use these expressions in forums or in an e-mail or in simple conversation. When the other party is not familiar with the expression, this is the opportunity they've been waiting for. They are all too excited to explain to Mr. or Mrs. Ignorant Civilian what these acronyms stand for or what the expression really means, its origin and how they are intrinsically tied to the expression.

Yes, the right has hijacked the military much like the Bush Crime Family has hijacked our Constitution. This is not a surprise. We've seen it in the past with countries like Germany in the 1930's and Italy in the late 1920's, early 1930's. A steroidal sense of nationalism combined with a dangerous lack of education produces this type of citizen. They are usually the easiest to convince and buy into nearly every form of propaganda.

Those that oppose war as the first option, like myself, will continue to honor the military and the service the men and women so courageously offer.

I still firmly believe, and hopefully will always believe, that the concept of a military is to defend our country rather than to create an empire.

"I wish I knew how to quit you..."

There's something about this photograph that gives me the chills.
It could be the placement of McCain's left hand or the senator's head buried in Bush's neck as a possible effort to smell the strong, sinister scent of that neocon cologne known as "Deception No. 9".

In any case, it's odd that you would find that kind of affection coming from a man who was swift-boated by Bush (Rove) in the 2000 election. McCain appeared to be on course to get the nomination and then ...((((ROAR)))) ...the Neocon lion awoke from his slumber and decimated his prey with a single, fierce blow. There were war plans to execute and nice guy McCain simply lacked the heart (morals, ethics, brains, conscience, soul) to do it. So now that nearly 8 LONG, damaging, divisive, deceptive, murderous, hateful years have passed, the "nice guy" is back and is closing in on a real opportunity to live in the White (Guy's) House for 4 or more years.

But not so fast, Sheriff! The neocons ain't havin' none of that "no torture, think first" kinda attitude 'round here.

McCain has been "waterboarded" by his own Republican (apologies to the man from Dixon, IL) party. I use "Republican" simply as an adjective to describe that political party which is not Democrat. Everyone knows that the Republican party has been hijacked by the neocons (Project for New American Century---William Kristol and the other fascist hobbits) and Jack Bauer is the only one who can save us (if only Kiefer Sutherland didn't get that last DUI and have to do jail time, we'd have been out of this mess a lot sooner). McCain was tortured as a POW in Vietnam. That is why he is against torture now (that will soon change).

The torture his own party has put him through is in the very early stages. His rhetoric has gotten significantly more aggressive; he's mentioned about being in Iraq for 100 + years, going to war with Iran, promising that there "will be more wars" (neocons had to smoke a cigarette after hearing that declaration) and basically underscoring that Bush's policies that have worked so incredibly well will remain in place to ensure the continued destruction of American principles.

McCain has become the "mascot/little brother/kid who will do anything to make friends/water boy" for the neocons. McCain knows he can't get elected without them and he's 71 and not likely to make another run (unless he is going to campaign between the hours of 4am and 4:30pm). At this point, everything is on the table for negotiation: more wars, increased torture, more revoking of civil liberties, ...did I mention more wars?

So what is McCain prepared to do? Well, get ready for the ultimate sell-out. Those who have followed the "Straight Talk Express" (funny name...I mean, what's the opposite? Gay Talk Express?) for many years have become accustomed to the senator's open-mindedness and thoughtful approach to politics. He's known for reaching across the aisle frequently and he's often gone against party lines in hard line issues like immigration.

But that will change now. Pay close attention and you will see McCain ratchet up the war threats, the fear-mongering and he may even let slip out which country will be the 2009 recipient of American democracy (Bombs Away!).

At least in 2000 the neocons got a gift from Texas in the form of a doltish, aphonic idiot who had the "audacity of arrogance" after running numerous businesses in the ground and setting the record for most executions under a governor (experience needed to become president...this is where Obama is lacking).

But in 2008 you will get the chance to watch the metamorphosis of a man who will trade his moral compass and his character for an agenda that is against America, her principles, her forefathers and her Constitution. An agenda that is potentially so catastrophically damaging to this country that many U.S. citizens are making preliminary plans to leave our country until the smart people start running things again.

I'm tired of being afraid and I want my Constitution back.

What difference does it make to the dead, the orphans and the homeless, whether the mad destruction is wrought under the name of totalitarianism or the holy name of liberty or democracy? ---Mahatma Gandhi, "Non-Violence in Peace and War"

Do we even care about truth?

As I inexplicably watch the post-Republican debate discussion on MSNBC as if it were a cheesy '80's movie, I think back to a line I heard today on talk radio. A noted talk radio hostess asked, when discussing the Iraq war, "Do we even care about truth?" The question has circled my mind all day. I began to think about the people I know: friends, family, colleagues. I wondered if they think about this stuff as much as I do or if, when confronted with news of more lies by the White House administration, do they even get curious?
Do they feel anything at all?


What is accepted as fact today is that we illegally invaded and currently occupy the former sovereign nation of Iraq, that this country did not have weapons of mass destruction nor was involved in 9/11, that Iraq did not pose an imminent threat to the United States, and that Iraq was not a sponsor of al-Qaeda. How is it then that few, if any, even give this a second thought?

I often wonder if the age of technology has disengaged the part of the brain that is responsible for the concern for truth. I have often been involved in conversations with friends or family members regarding the Iraq war. I have listed FACTS in bullet-point fashion, with numbers, statistics and data. They simply nod, agree that it's troubling but then shrug it off with a, "Well...whadda ya gonna do? You wanna get a coffee?"(as they send another text message...)

I don't ever remember my parents being terribly concerned with these type of issues, either. My formative years were during the mid '80's when Reagan was president. If you lived in a nice, safe neighborhood with lots of other white people, as I did, life was grand.

I do remember my grandfather though, who when in front of the television would briefly catch something of breaking news or bits of the State of the Union speech, he would listen and watch attentively and then mumble something under his breath. I recall seeing his face many times either with a look of disgust and a shake of his head or with a look of hope followed by a inconspicuous smile.

This period in our history is one in which I would have enthusiastically discussed these matters with my late grandfather. Would he care to know what I have learned regarding this debacle in Iraq? Would he be interested to know how many people have profitted financially from this war? Would he be outraged to see that ExxonMobil has reported the all-time greatest profit recorded by any company since the beginning of time? That President Bush only last week asked Saudi Arabia to increase oil production because, "our citizens are having a bit of a hard time..."? Did my grandfather understand what "war" really entails? Would he be against this war?

When I refer to truth, I am referring to it in the most natural sense: what is considered to be the supreme reality and to have the ultimate meaning and value of existence. Often Republicans like to debate intuition, speculation or "truthiness"(things that a person claims to know intuitively or "from the gut" without regard to evidence, logic, intellectual examination, or facts).

George Piro, the FBI agent who was responsible for interrogating Saddam Hussein, will appear on "60 Minutes". Piro learned during his many conversations with Saddam that the Iraqi dictator did not think the U.S. would seriously attack or invade Iraq. Saddam admitted to Piro that he DID NOT HAVE ANY WMD but refused to admit that to the world because he was fearful that Iran would seize an opportunity to invade Iraq. Wow...talk about not having a way out! The U.S. was going to invade Iraq whether they had WMD or not and Iran would attack if the U.S. didn't. And with us being the world's only superpower, the best we could come up with was to invade, bomb and occupy a country based on "truthiness".


So, my question to anyone reading this is, "Do you care about truth?"

If Iowa is a snapshot of America...

Then we may be able to draw these conclusions....

1) Hillary is under the impression that most people like her when in reality they don't. The cackle, the arrogance, her dogmatic manner in engaging the issues which underscores her feelings of superiority, the fact that she voted for the war --- I believe many people view her as "Bush-Lite" (1/3 less stupid with the same great lack of humility). She was not expecting third place in Iowa. But guess what? I didn't expect a "B" in history my junior year in college.
Advice: Don't fake regional accents, do a self-inventory and see what's not working, change it and work harder. Get a new hair style and add color to it.
Prediction: She will run again in 2012.

2) Barrack Obama is hands-down the front runner for the Democrats. When he speaks he motivates people. No other candidate, on either side, has that flair. His oratorical skills are hypnotic.
To win as an African-American candidate in Iowa is like getting Dick Cheney to smile: nearly impossible. Are there even any African-Americans in Iowa? If he takes New Hampshire, say good-night to Hillary. John Edwards may be Obama's Secretary of State choice, especially with his deep knowledge of African politics. Early prediction: Obama will take Jim Webb as his VP running mate. If that happens, Republicans have as much chance at winning the White House as George Bush does at learning the electric slide.
Advice: Get Spike Lee, Prince and Cornel West to endorse you. You will need the black vote and need it to be present at the polls.

3) John Edwards is trying too hard. His ideas are progressive and attractive. When he goes into long-winded explanations I feel as though he believes we have difficulty understanding the English language. I get it Johnny. The health care issue is killing you. We know that you will fight for health care for all Americans. I'm thrilled, really. Talk more about getting Bin Laden and getting out of Iraq.
Advice: Just be yourself, get that lid messed up once in a while, throw some dirt on those Haggar slacks and eat some ribs, damn it! And get your haircut at an African-American barber shop.
Prediction: When he retires from the race, he will get emotional.

4) Rudy Giuliani is as empty as a beer can at a Friday night fish fry at the Elk's Club in Milwaukee. If the election were based on the person physically closest to the first of the 9/11 attacks, Rudy would win. Thank God that's not the case. He is a one-trick pony. Even the FDNY is not backing him. That says something, especially when you claim you were hunting for survivors next to the brave men and women who actually were there doing it.
Rudy has a deranged foreign policy adviser in Norman Podhoretz, who is not helping the Rudy Train. Norman has been busy praying for war with Iran since the NIE came out which stated that Iran had stopped its nuclear weapons program 5 years ago. (see my other post about this)
Advice: Quit bringing up 9/11 like you're some kind of superhero and just join the Mafia, it's one of the few organizations that could care less how many girlfriends and/or ex-wives you have.

5) Fred Thompson makes me sleepy. In order to be my president, you need more than a cowboy hat and a faint southern accent. I think Fred thought he would show up and dust the other guys off without having to stay up past 6PM. Not quite. Mike "Forrest Gump" Huckabee just handed you your lunch and Mitt Romney will cut it up into smaller bites so you can eat it.
Advice: Lose the cowboy hat, admit that you backed abortion rights as a lobbyist and explain why and get more publicity with old school Republicans like Jim Baker and Nic Brady.
Prediction: Fred will be back to daily 1PM naps by Valentine's Day. Good thing, too, because his wife is going to want more than a box of chocolates. And if Rudy is still creeping around....hey, he could get her free NYPD protection, you know!

5) Huckabee. The mere sound of his name makes me laugh. I picture him and Tom Sawyer eating worms and chasing each other around in straw hats with no shoes or socks. This guy doesn't believe in evolution and thinks that homosexuality is an aberration and unnatural. Hmmm...what do you say about that Mark Foley, Ted Haggard and Larry Craig? How about 3,000 years of human history? Last I checked, gays have the right to vote. We'll see how "unnatural" their ballots are in November.
Advice: Rely on other research material besides the Bible and quit with the subliminal hints in the ads (the HUGE cross in the background). The Roman Catholic Church in Vatican City for centuries had male sex slaves so just validate that homosexuality is not a choice and you might have a chance with the MTV vote.
Prediction: Huckabee is the fall guy, kind of like that really cool African-American guy in a mystery-suspense movie who the white screenwriter kills off first. The RNC is pimping him as the front runner to eventually supplant him with a candidate who is less evangelical but equally in line with those values (possibly McCain). Karl Rove, you are genius!

7) McCain is still the only true Republican. This is the only Republican that if elected would not make me want to move out of the country. I still think he is a very legitimate contender. He may not be the most dynamic speaker or have the best hair cut but he is still moving forward with his "diplomacy first, no torture" platform. That is attractive to the undecideds and to the moderates. If there is anyone who can speak on the subject of war, it's McCain. He is from Arizona so his illegal immigration platform ought to be considered more logical and reliable than that of any other candidates.
Advice: Get Sylvester Stallone to endorse you and get some of your war comrades to speak on your behalf. Show some dialog with Hispanic leaders to reinforce your commitment on immigration reform. And don't say that we'll be in Iraq for 100 years, that will get you unseated as senator in Arizona.

8) Mitt Romney is a great candidate. He supports Bush too much but no one is perfect. He is certainly the best-dressed and best-looking candidate. He was elected governor in a very liberal state. But he's Mormon and if I'm not mistaken, Fox News has unilaterally put Mormons on Bush's Axis of Evil list. If we had to put Iraqi generals on a deck of playing cards so that Fox News viewers could understand the war, you can bet that NO ONE on that side understands the modern day LDS religion. That being said, it's only a matter of time before Mitt throws in the towel. Too bad that we judge candidates before they speak.
Advice: Too late to go Catholic but give it a shot. Just claim you had some vision in a dream and God spoke to you. Worked for Bush in justifying his invasion of Iraq. Get a Boston accent, too. Another guy did that and won an election.
Prediction: It will be sad when he retires from the race. America is not prejudice, right?

Voter turnout for Iowa Caucus:
Democrats - 220,000
Republicans - 115,000

That is not good for the elephants.

If I had a crystal ball...

July of 2008: Clinton and Obama are battling for the Democrat nomination and McCain and Giuliani are duking it out for the Republicans

After the conventions: Obama vs. McCain

Next President: Not Ron Paul

The Project for the New American Century: Sociopaths working hard to ensure the destruction of American principles

I watched yet another frightening documentary on the pre-emptive, unnecessary and illegal war that is Operation Enduring Freedom. This is a fairly appropriate title for this war since it is this administration that our freedoms have had to endure. In this cold, factual documentary, Uncovered: The War in Iraq, director Robert Greenwald has the usual cast of experts who explain how Bush, Cheney, Wolfowitz, Perle and the other axis of evil got away with, well, murder. As this tragedy continues to play out-- and I even hesitate to call it a tragedy because tragedies usually begin well and end sadly-- this constitutional siege began badly and continues to worsen. In this documentary there is a mention of The Project for the New American Century, or as neocons so affectionately call it by its acronym, PNAC (click here for website - caution: material not suitable for truth-seekers!).

William Kristol heads this group of deranged, nerdy wannabe imperialists. If you do not know who William Kristol is, that is perfectly normal. You and 359 million other Americans have at least that in common. Mr. Kristol is also the editor of The Weekly Standard, a very conservative, let's be honest, NEOconservative publication. If I could write The Weekly Standard's motto, it would read: "So what if we made up the intelligence report on Iraq's WMD program in order to go to war? We can't let silly things like truth or facts get in the way of global responsibility!"

Here is PNAC's mission statement, or better yet, a brief glimpse into the minds of individuals who played WAY too much Dungeons and Dragons in their adolescent years:

The Project for the New American Century is a non-profit educational organization dedicated to a few fundamental propositions: that American leadership is good both for America and for the world; and that such leadership requires military strength, diplomatic energy and commitment to moral principle.

The Project for the New American Century intends, through issue briefs, research papers, advocacy journalism, conferences, and seminars, to explain what American world leadership entails. It will also strive to rally support for a vigorous and principled policy of American international involvement and to stimulate useful public debate on foreign and defense policy and America's role in the world. - William Kristol, Chairman

Now, lets play critic for moment and have fun with words! In the first part, Kristol decides to use the combination of "fundamental propositions". This can be interpreted in a variety of ways but here is my "proposition". "Fundamental", meaning, "necessary or essential, basic" is used with a word (proposition) that truly lacks any identity with being true or false. It translates to "essential suggestion". My experience has been that suggestions are merely "suggestive", never necessary. If you and your friends are hungry and are discussing where to eat, if you do not "suggest" a location, will all of you die of starvation? I doubt it.

Next William goes on to say that "American leadership is good both for America and for the world...". This is a bit ambitious, wouldn't you agree? I would "suggest" that the current White House administration has been anything BUT good for America, at least most of America (two beneficiaries: those who have stock in Haliburton and Osama Bin Laden). Ask around about gas prices, the Iraq situation, the surrendered hunt for Bin Laden, health care, the cutting of pay for soldiers or the No Billionaire Left Behind School Program. Ask some middle-class people in Livonia, MI who can't get work because their jobs are in China and... gas being what it is, can't make THAT kind of commute...Livonia is also where The Decider decided to autograph an American Flag for some lucky person. Imagine that...someone autographing the American Flag with a Sharpie, as if it were a concert t-shirt or a Major League Baseball...awwww shucks...humility is not his best quality.

As far as American leadership being good for the world, I'm not so sure Wild Bill. Iraq is certainly not as bucolic as Mr. Kristol's McLean, VA. La fuga del cervello, the flight of the intellect, continues to destroy Iraq from within and our decision to fire 450,000 Iraqi soldiers was not the beginning of a winning streak. Iraq is about as safe as you and I next to Dick Cheney on a hunting trip.

Next, Kristol maintains that, "...such leadership requires military strength, diplomatic energy and commitment to moral principles." Yippeeee....! "Such leadership"....where did he define what it was? He didn't. So what he has not defined still requires something. Sweet genius!
So let's bring our armed forces to enforce ___ and then let's put spread some "diplomatic energy" around___ (as if it were magic dust that may or may not work---hopefully it won't, that way we can have more shock and awe!) and then we can commit to "moral principles".
Ever "committed" to going fishing with one of your drinking buddies at 6AM on a Saturday morning while you are both sauced on Friday at midnight? And neither of you show up, but when you see each other later that day, you don't mention it because you both knew it was a long shot that you would have succeeded to begin with? I have committed to so many things without ever feeling a muscle move or blinking an eye. If there are 4 frogs on a log and one commits to jump off, how many are left?
4 -- that one frog only committed to jumping.

The second paragraph is less confusing but more disturbing. Kristol scribbles, "The Project for the New American Century intends [...] to explain what American world leadership entails."

Whatch you talkin' bout Willis??? Huh??? Did it already happen?? Where were we?
That statement contains no hypothetical words or conditional expressions! (teeth chattering)
I can see William and his fellow non-truth seekers all sitting around playing "Risk" in their Darth Vader/Hans Solo pajamas, pretending to be Napoleon.

The second half of the last statement is rather a bit of an oxymoron. If the objective of this sinister group is that America rules the world, then how or why could that insane, illogical, nonsensical goal "...stimulate useful public debate on foreign and defense policy and America's role in the world."

Wouldn't the debate sound something like this.

Participant X: I feel that American world leadership would curtail the natural order of things, that it would stifle the freedoms and liberties of other nations and their right to govern themselves as they see fit...since they are already a sovereign nation, it would be against our founding fathers' wishes that this democracy partake in such a tyrannical act.

William Kristol: America kicks ass and will continue to do so whether you want us to or not. Come to democracy or it will come to you! Next question please!

Aside from my attempts at humor, I chose to bring this serious issue to the attention of as many people as possible. Why? Because there are individuals who want to do great harm to this country and what it stands for. And not just Bush and Cheney. There is a very powerful neoconservative movement out there that has its eyes set on an Empire. They do not take days off and we cannot afford to either.

Where the leaders in the Democrat Party have failed us, and miserably, we must pick up the banner and continue to carry it for those who founded this country, for those who have fought for it and for those who will follow behind us. We do not want, nor can we allow ourselves, to be the generation that failed in its duty, that in the face of evil from both internal threats as well as external ones, we maintained with dignity our principles of truth and justice and we protected the Constitution with the fierceness of a lioness protecting her young. Even when the tendency was to constrict or eliminate freedoms and liberties, we realized that by doing so would suffocate any hope of victory against those who want to take them away.

The neocons, regarding the War on (of) Terror, often spew the tired rhetoric of "you're either with us or you're against us." My response is parallel to a quote by the great Mark Twain, "Patriotism is supporting your country all the time and your government when it deserves it". I love America, the American Flag and the Statue of Liberty. I love the Constitution, the Bill of Rights and our forefathers who wrote them with our self-preservation in mind.

To PNAC and Bush I say,
"WE DON'T SUPPORT YOU
BECAUSE YOU DON'T DESERVE IT."

Putin is "Time" magazine Person of the Year---neocons get robbed !!

So an American didn't win "Time" magazine Person of the Year? Wait a second...but I thought we ARE the world...the rest of the countries are sub-human, terrorist, primitive, culturally-backward and overall inferior?
That's not the case? Huh??

But we have Kenny Chesney, NASCAR and Wrangler Jeans! I demand a recount! (wait a minute, we all know how recounts turn out - see Florida 2000 Election)

The neocons are screaming in disbelief about Time's choice. The average far right-winger has donned the lemming suit once again and is following the right-wing pundits' proposed selection of General David Petraeus--the man who singlehandedly saved Iraq from the "last throes of the insurgency" (in real terms, the general who saved the White House from further embarassment). Not sure exactly how much of a role General Petraeus is playing in the decline in violence in Iraq. Are we to discount the efforts by those brave men and women dodging bullets? And wasn't it the White House and Fox News who were touting the increase in solidarity among common Iraqi citizens against their own fellow disenfranchised national religious insurgent neighbors...errr...Al-Qaeda?

Forget Petraeus and Putin. Both men certainly had enormous influence on world affairs. But have we so quickly forgotten about the man who brought us to this point in history, who masterminded the fear and propaganda campaign after 9/11? The architect of the "Iraq has WMD/Iraq is behind 9/11"...The man who succeeded in dividing the country in such a way that hasn't been seen since the Civil War? The genius that came up with, "you're either with us or against us"...still no idea?

Karl "Joseph Goebbels" Rove!!!
click on name to see Karl decked out in full fascist gear

That's right ladies and gentlemen, this is the man responsible, primarily, for the following events: this blog, the divisiveness in our country, the unilateral and dangerously arrogant foreign policy of "The Decider", the constant fear of the unknown, the relinquished and surrendered efforts to capture bin Laden, the unnecessary bodily searches at your nearest airport, the illegal wiretapping program, the leaking of Valerie Plame's identity, allowing right-wing religious zealots to hijack the Republican Party, the pre-arranged firing of 8 U.S. Attorneys who wouldn't agree to shredding the Constitution, the planting of lunatics among peaceful protests to highlight civil unrest, the spying on normal, ordinary citizens, the elimination of habeas corpus, Guatanamo-ville, Operation Rendition, the idea of putting Saddam and 51 other Iraqi government officials on a deck of playing cards so that the Hannity and O'Reilly lemmings could understand and play "Shock and Awe" together, the fun and colorful "Terror Alert" seen on Fox News Channel until they realized that even the neocons were getting annoyed with it, the advent of Anthrax (not the muscial group), Bush winning the 2000 Presidential Election, and quite possibly, the curse of Steve Bartman (guy who interfered and caught the infamous foul ball in Cubs playoff game in 2003---okay, a bit of an exaggeration there...thought I could sneak one under the radar).

Quite a resume'. And this is a mere snapshot. This guy would make Hitler say, "Wow...now that IS friggin' evil !!!"

So, Time, I am disappointed, too. I really thought you would have given this a bit more thought. Karl Rove has supposedly retired this year and rode his black horse back to Mordor (click here to view Karl's front lawn).

Perhaps we will someday honor this wicked man-- who in an effort to "protect America and spread democracy" did everything to the contrary.

When men pray to God, they pray that 2 + 2 will not make 4...

Bush and his neo-conservative war hopes...errr... plans for Iran have been foiled by the National Intelligence Estimate!
16 different agencies produced the report and have concluded that Iran stopped its nuclear weapons program in 2003. Damn those wily liberals with all of their facts, truth and data!

Score one for democracy and the Constitution, not to mention mankind and peace.

Many neocons profess it to be God's will that the United States invade other countries to wage war and to the surprise of many, establish lucrative military contracts for Haliburton, Blackwater, Lockheed Martin, Boeing, etc. Who would have thought that God was a merciless, inhumane capitalist?!

With firm conviction in their socio-pathological minds, neo-conservatives claim to be such ardent followers of peaceful religions. So frequently they stereotype ALL Muslims to be replicas of Osama Bin-Laden. I guess that means ALL Christians and/or Jews are peaceful, non-violent, brother-loving, and selfless like....for example Rudy Giuliani's Foreign Policy Adviser, Norman Podhoretz, of Jewish faith. Norman wrote a very loving, peaceful op-ed piece for the Wall Street Journal.

Here is the last paragraph of that "peaceful" article, exact quote:

"Not so George W. Bush, a man who knows evil when he sees it and who has demonstrated an unfailingly courageous willingness to endure vilification and contumely in setting his face against it. It now remains to be seen whether this president, battered more mercilessly and with less justification than any other in living memory, and weakened politically by the enemies of his policy in the Middle East in general and Iraq in particular, will find it possible to take the only action that can stop Iran from following through on its evil intentions both toward us and toward Israel. As an American and as a Jew, I pray with all my heart that he will."

Huh??? Did you just pray for what I thought you just prayed for???

I mean, I've heard of praying for Notre Dame to beat Michigan, for the Cubs to beat the Cardinals...but praying for war...death, destruction, violence, grief and homelessness?

Sorry Norman, that "religion" I want no part of ! (same goes for radical Islamists)

Voting for Rudolph Giuliani for president is like voting for Bush...only with a New York accent, slightly larger vocabulary and instead of saying "nuclear" every 12 seconds, Rudy says "On September 11th, 2001..."

I leave you with this: "an eye for an eye leaves the world blind" - Gandhi

Peace to all this holiday season...even to you Ahmadinejad...I'll love you until you can love yourself!