Karl Rove 101

(From AP)
A House panel Wednesday voted to cite former top White House aide Karl Rove for contempt of Congress as its Senate counterpart explored punishment for alleged Bush administration misdeeds.

Voting 20-14 along party lines, the House Judiciary Committee said that Rove had broken the law by failing to appear at a July 10 hearing on allegations of White House influence over the Justice Department, including whether Rove encouraged prosecutions against Democrats such as former Alabama Gov. Don Siegelman.

ANP produced this great video outlining the story as it is to this point.

Barack Obama, Rick Warren and Issues of Trust

Barack Obama and John McCain will participate in Rick Warren's Civil Forum on Leadership and Compassion on August 16th.

A storm is brewing off the southern California coast. It’s looking like a big one too. Strong systems of Democrats and Evangelicals seem to be on a collision course over the individual and collective souls of Barack Obama and Rick Warren. John McCain will be there too, but he stands to gain or lose little if anything.

Best selling author of ‘The Purpose Driven Life’, Rick Warren quietly sent out a press release last week announcing the lineup for what he is calling the Saddleback Civil Summit to be held at Saddleback Church in Lake Forest, California on August 16th. Warren describes the gathering as designed to “promote civil discourse and the common good of all.” Over Passover this year, the forum hosted five Holocaust survivors who shared their experiences. In September, former British Prime Minister Tony Blair will be featured.

In this forum, Pastor Warren will moderate the discussion with one candidate at a time; Obama will go first. While McCain and Obama will almost certainly been seen together, it appears unlikely that they will participate in the forum at the same time as not to create a debate style atmosphere. The theme of the forum is leadership and compassion. The press release also says, “This is a critical time for our nation and the American people deserve to hear both candidates speak from the heart – without interruption – in a civil and thoughtful format absent the partisan ‘gotcha’ questions that typically produce heat instead of light.”

A forum with such a clear and communicated purpose (pardon the pun) has inadvertently created a vibe of distrust in the outer edges of the two camps at the core of this forum. Liberals have long distrusted Christians for the most part. From a liberal perspective, it’s justified. After all, Evangelicals (along with Ralph Nader and Kathleen Harris) are responsible for cursing the world with eight years of George W. Bush. Even a pastor who seems to rise above the fray, like Warren, is met with a skeptical eye and ear.

Many liberals even distrust Warren; a man who seldom says anything that ruffles feathers or makes waves with anyone. It is for this reason that there is another group that distrusts Warren. The fringe of the Evangelical right has an abundance of problems with him. When Warren invited Obama and Hillary Clinton to speak at Saddleback’s AIDS conference last December, many Christian bloggers and Evangelical activists blasted the decision calling Warren everything from a bad example to a heretic to the anti-Christ himself.

Many of the outskirts of realty based Christians had an issue with Warren long before Obama’s speech from his Saddleback pulpit. It seems that Warren’s non-combative style with “sinners” and liberals on the issues of homosexuality and abortion rubs them the wrong way. His refusal to take on the issues from a “true Biblical perspective” is, well, unforgivable it seems.

To his credit, Warren continues to buck fringe tradition and embrace the ideas and ideals of both parties while not compromising his position as a pastor or Christian. This invitation and offering of a forum to Obama is consistent with what is developing as his way.

Warren makes a conspicuous point to call to attention that he does not endorse candidates or political parties. Although outside Saddleback’s sanctuary after every one of their six weekend services are “information for voters”; pamphlets containing the names of various candidates and where they stand on issues like abortion, gay marriage and stem cell research.

In October, 2004, Warren sent out an email to all of his members outlining the importance of specific political issues. Issues of life such as freedom of choice and stem cells were alluded to without mentioning the names of George W. Bush and John Kerry. Warren’s intention was clear in what at the time looked like a very tight race.

This thought brings back into perspective the anxiety of liberals over Obama’s participation in a forum such as this. On the surface it seems safe and secure with the outside opportunity to woo Evangelicals not enamored with John McCain. However, Warren’s sermon to be delivered directly to his congregation the morning after this forum will be called, “Making up Your Mind: Questions to Consider before the Election.” Both the forum and the subsequent sermon will be streamed on the church’s website. Even the mildest liberal conspiracy theorists will take flight with how that message will go. Certainly the first sign that something is afoot will be if Warren mentions Sunday’s message and its available stream during what will no doubt be at least national cable television audience.

It should be assumed that the Obama campaign has researched the details of their participation in this forum. They have miscalculated almost nothing during this campaign and continue to insist through action that Evangelicals are a demographic that they should be pursuing. Until then, Rick Warren has to this point won Obama’s trust. Should he not use his Sunday message to attempt to deliver the Christian vote to McCain, he will have certainly further damaged his already fragile standing with the right’s fringe, a demographic he doesn’t seem to covet.

With an aging and seldom seen Billy Graham, Warren has seemed poised and positioned to take over as ‘America’s Pastor’. Should he seem sympathetic to an eventually elected Democrat, his case will be made with at least one side of the aisle.

The VP choice for John McCain is a totally different process. While he also is searching for a candidate who offsets his weaknesses (failure to grasp world geography after 1989 and ability to differentiate Sunnis from Kurds and Iranians), he is also charged with finding a running mate who will generate some sense of excitement to help counter the Obama phenomenon.

Bobby Jindal is no doubt a rising star in the Republican party. He is of Indian descent and was elected Governor of Louisiana at the age of thirty-six. McCain seems completely smitten with Jindal and everyone agrees that Jindal is indeed on McCain’s very short list.

YEAH, BUT: Jindal is thirty-seven years-old. To make the “we’re not your father’s Republic party” statement with a guy literally half McCain’s age is a huge risk.

Tim Pawlenty is an enormously popular Governor in a blue-leaning state during a time when the words popular and Republicans are seldom used in the same sentence. He, like Jindal would do nothing to help the McCain argument that Obama lacks experience to be President.

YEAH, BUT: Outside of his time in office, Pawlenty has virtually no political experience.

Charlie Crist is yet another very popular governor. He has significantly more experience than Jindal and Pawlenty and is revered by party insiders. In Florida, he has fostered unity between the parties after a divisive run by Jeb Bush. Besides, what better way for McCain to shore up the shaky Evangelical base than choosing Crist?!

YEAH, BUT: There is a strange but real problem with Crist. He has a great head of white hair. Though far younger (52) than McCain, Crist doesn’t help in overcoming the age issue. Perception is political reality.

Mitt Romney is the candidate that McCain probably wishes wasn’t in the mix. Their mutual disdain for one another was evident in the primaries. McCain’s ‘straight-talk’ image is clearly boosted in Romney’s ‘what’s it gonna take to put you in this car tonight?’ image.

YEAH, BUT: McCain really seems to hate him. These two will make JFK and LBJ look like fraternity brothers.

ODDS ARE: With no real game changer, McCain will be forced to secure the most conservative base of the party and choose Mitt Romney.

Desperate McCain Campaign Settles For Familiar Tactics

The McCain campaign reached into the stand-by Republic playbook Saturday and launched the first of what figures to be a string of attack ads on Barack Obama. The television spot accuses Obama of skipping a visit with wounded troops in Germany in favor of a photo op playing basketball.

The Obama campaign reported on Thursday that the visit with the wounded troops would be scrapped after the Pentagon advised them that the visit would be inappropriate as part of other campaign events. This information did not deter the McCain campaign from releasing the ad, however. The spot shows Obama sinking a three-point shot while playing basketball with troops in Kuwait – not Germany.

This tactic is a re-release of sorts; a familiar and predictable card that Republicans almost always play when momentum shifts. In this case, McCain never has had momentum, and essentially insisted that Obama visit Afghanistan and Iraq. Neither campaign advisors nor McCain could have imagined the size of the international response to the Obama visit, including US troops standing in lines to meet the Senator. Clearly, the McCain campaign in some part created the international media monster against which they now face off. Going deep down and dirty with an old Republican stand-by accentuates just how desperate they are.

With less than a month to go before the Democratic National Convention, the speculation on exactly who John McCain and Barack Obama will choose as their running mates is reaching a fever pitch. Okay, well, maybe not, but it certainly is getting interesting for those of us wake up wondering what on earth Evan Bayh had for breakfast or where Charlie Crist and his bride-to-be are registered.

The time has come for me to weigh in on who I view as the top four candidates on each side, provide a quick scouting report and make my bold, “take it to the bank” predictions.

Let’s start with the Democrats. Before jumping in, let me say this: Barack Obama will not under any circumstances select Hillary Clinton. While she brings a lot to the table, she also brings a lot under the table. If Bill were to run off with a Little Rock Hooters girl and was permanently out of the picture; maybe, but as is, Clinton will not be the pick and will not be discussed any further here.

Evan Bayh supported Hillary Clinton and could bring a few of the more politically engaged Clinton holdouts into the fold. He, as is Obama, is a Senator, however also served as governor in Indiana. He enjoys a tremendous approval rating in the state and would almost certainly rescue it from the Republicans if he were on the ticket.

YEAH, BUT: Indiana is in play without Bayh on the ticket and could tilt for Obama with only Bayh’s endorsement.

Jack Reed hails from Rhode Island (ho-hum), a secure blue state. He is attractive for several reasons. Reed has extensive foreign policy experience and is a senior member of the Senate Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Committee. He traveled with Senator Obama on his trip to the Afghanistan and Iraq. He attended West Point and Harvard and was an Army Ranger. What more do you want?!

YEAH, BUT: Despite the fact that he’s a military man who is against the war, he lacks the national name recognition for it to make a huge impact. Luckily, Obama has the ‘impact’ part of this down.


Tim Kaine is the only (current) governor in the final four. He is considered a rising star in the party and has a solid approval rating in a state that seems to be trending Democrat of late. If Virginia is truly in play for Obama (and it is) then Kaine could seal the deal and deliver it in November.

YEAH, BUT: As with Bayh, Virginia could be within reach without bringing Kaine onto the ticket. He was hot early, but has cooled of late.


Joe Biden is the iron horse of the group. He’s seemingly been running for President since Obama was in diapers. He brings an extensive and undeniable foreign policy resume with him and is a fiery and experienced politician. He fills in nearly all of Obama’s gaps.

YEAH, BUT: He’s a familiar face that America may have grown a little tired of. Though fresh and sharp and effective, he may contradict the message of change in the minds of many.

ODDS ARE: My money is on Evan Bayh. He was my original pick, so I’ll stick with my horse. He should edge out Kaine. The draw securing a traditionally red state in November will prove to be too much to pass up, and both of these choices offer that opportunity.

Tomorrow: John McCain

Obama Restores US Credibility in the World

Barack Obama spoke before his largest audience to date. No electoral votes were at stake and there was no chance that this audience would directly impact anything that happens on November 4th. More than 200,000 Germans stood more than a mile deep to see the Democratic nominee Thursday in Berlin. The tie to historic speeches by John Kennedy and Ronald Reagan were undeniable.

Many critics pounced aggressively suggesting that a mere candidate had no business making such a speech in a foreign country. Everyone, including John McCain seemed mostly perturbed that Obama looked so presidential in his speech. The German crowd revered him and stood in awe, many of them unable to understand much of what the Senator said.

Perhaps the most conspicuous images in the massive crowd were the many American flags being waved and displayed. The Bush administration’s failed policies and massive corruption has rendered the flag seldom seen in Europe outside of an anti-war protest.

Obama seemed respectfully careful not to appear as if he was ‘swinging for the fences’ with a Kennedy or Reagan style moment. In the highlight of his speech, Senator Obama said, “People of Berlin – people of the world – this is our moment, this is our time.”

McCain Inherits Bush's Moral Credibility Crisis

A term has been kicking around in my head over the last few days. Actually it was a term created in my mind when the original version and its true author slipped my mind. My version is ‘moral accountability’. The burden placed on anyone who creates, judges or advances a moral agenda on to anyone else. In other words, if there was a moral accountability insurance policy, item one would say, ‘must not live in a glass house’.

The genesis of what was on my mind is ‘moral legitimacy’. It is a term written by retired Lt. Col. Conrad Crane in the US Army’s new Field Manual on fighting counterinsurgency wars. The full context is simple yet profound and convicting, “lose moral legitimacy, lose the war”. With the Abu Ghraib scandal in its rearview mirror, US troops needed such a basic reminder. Time seems to have revealed that Col. Crane’s wise message has for the most part reached most of the frontlines. The memo didn’t seem to make it to the oval office, however.

The weight of the undeniable conviction of one simple line like this should hit the Bush administration like a ton of bricks. I have no doubt that it doesn’t, but it should. It would anyone else, but then again most of us don’t spew morality on to others, much less the rest of the world. The world watches when a government pimps liberty and polices the moves of every other country yet spies on its own citizens’ emails and listens in on their phone calls. When the Bush administration fights at every turn basic human rights for war prisoners and combats any argument that torture is… well, torture, the rest of the civilized world sees. When newspaper columnists are asked to reveal the identity of covert CIA operatives, everyone else takes note. Moral legitimacy compromised – again and again and again.

Of course the world is not shocked by any of this. They’ve gotten used to our status of ‘morally over-extended’. After all, President Bush chose his administration’s only credible figure in the world, Colin Powell to lie to it in making the case for an unnecessary war. This is starting to sound like a Bush administration Greatest Hits album!

It seems logical that this moral debt be passed on to John McCain since he has chosen to align himself with so many of the morally corrupt policies. It’s sort of a nostalgic way that Bush can screw McCain over one last time - for old time’s sake. It brings back memories of Karl Rove’s strategy during the 2000 Republican primaries when Bush called McCain’s patriotism into question while he was hold up in the Hanoi Hilton. Of course that was during the Vietnam War; an inconvenience Bush chose to avoid. Never mind that, says McCain. Press ahead.

In running a campaign (especially lately) with a position supporting staying in Iraq, John McCain takes on all of the baggage that comes with that position. American voters have proven over time that we are a stupid and simple group only capable of understanding simple issues like patriotism, lapel pins and where the candidate goes to church. Luckily for Barack Obama they also see the war in simple terms: for or against. Obama called shotgun on the ‘against’ position way back, and McCain not only believes in the war effort in Iraq, but he sort of has to. The far right of the party has been very forgiving of McCain’s “liberal leanings” on issues like campaign finance reform, immigration and the environment. For him to drift even slightly to the left on the war isn’t even negotiable.

As Senator Obama has been touring the middle-east with the fanfare of Springsteen in Jersey, the world has shifted their focus on the contrast of the positions of the two candidates. More importantly, the voters have too. US troops are standing in line to see him and Israeli leaders even seem to have a soft spot for him. But more than anything else, the (Bush) hand-picked President of Iraq backs Obama’s plan for staged withdrawals of US troops. The Iraqi people do too, and with no distractions like Tila Tequila, Branjalina’s twins or the new Batman movie, they pay attention to everything.

So as everyone in the region, including the party’s hosts seems to agree with a policy of gradual withdrawal, the only ones in the room protesting are Bush and McCain. Music to every Democrat’s ears; Bush and McCain, McCain and Bush! As Obama garners the support of Iraq and Israel in the same week, John McCain is inheriting the Bush moral credibility crisis.

Proof that the McCain campaign realizes this burden is clearly seen in exactly how they are attacking Obama these days. McCain is rewinding the clock and insisting that Obama did not “believe in the surge” and thought that it would fail. The point is to convince the voter that Obama lacks the international insight and understanding to be President. An assertion that might work if he were not continually referring to Czechoslovakia in the present tense (four times in the last ten days) and skewing the timeline of the war and calling it a “matter of history.” He is asking the voters and the world to never mind the ruckus behind the curtain; ‘President Malaki is delusional and doesn’t really know what Iraq needs. Surely most of the troops want to keep fighting. Why would they want to come home? Obama wants to surrender! The surge has worked!’ We’ll see if American voters prove Col. Crane’s wisdom transferable. Lose moral legitimacy, lose the election.

Dance With Who Brung Ya! (but remember her name)

It would seem to me that if there were a ‘Prom for Dummies’ book that somewhere in chapter one would be the advice to never under and circumstances forget or confuse the name of your date.

John McCain, heeding the advice of the southern proverb that says, “dance with who brung ya!” has apparently forgotten crucial details about who he brung. Perhaps he used the issue that he’s used at every dance over the last several weeks in an effort to slip on by American voters who usually sleep through many of the more complicated issues of the campaign.

Clearly CBS News was sleeping through the details of a taped interview between Senator McCain and Katie Couric. In the interview McCain referred to an amazingly inaccurate timeline on the surge in Iraq and the Sunni Awakening as a “matter of history.”

This is a sizeable mistake given the fact that McCain has been pounding the Obama campaign of his naiveté on issues on the ground in Iraq. He has routinely and regularly accused Senator Obama of preferring to win a campaign over winning a war. McCain's insistance that Obama's failure to truly appreciate the success of the surge is comically legendary.

McCain and the Bush administration have been visibly agitated by how warmly Obama has been received both by troops in Iraq and Afghanistan as well as the Iraqi government. The timing of McCain’s gaffe could not have been worse as Americans are starting to connect Obama with a sensible and widely accepted plan for staged withdrawals.

To hammer Obama as an amateur is fine; especially given McCain’s experience and time served. However, if there is just one requirement of this approach, it would be knowing what you’re talking about – or for the sake of this reference; remembering your date’s name.
Watch more here:

Why So Serious?

Taking a break from the hum-drum of what feels like a welcomed lull in the campaign, I figured I’d weigh in on ‘Dark Knight’, the latest offering from the Batman franchise. It released Friday nationwide, and in larger metropolitan areas; right at midnight. It was the largest midnight opening ever, and is quickly approaching the same stature over the weekend.

I remember seeing the original Batman movie in 1989. Michael Keaton was the caped crusader then, and only a few fleeting flashbacks to ‘Mr. Mom’ hit me during the span of the movie. Keaton’s version was a mix between the original comic version and the occasionally silly television version from the late-60s staring Adam West – fun for the whole family!

This Batman is no such thing. First of all, it must have slid by with its PG-13 rating. Certainly the only saving grace between it and the dreaded ‘R’ was the conspicuous absence of profanity and sex and the fact that almost none of the violence focused on blood or showed a dead victim. This is one film where the ‘13’ part of the rating should be observed and honored; the images and themes are probably too much for younger eyes.

The film itself is very good. The story is deep and complex and holds up to the scrutiny of discerning eyes and tastes. It purposely blurs the line between good and bad and challenges Batman’s status as a hero. Actually, this theme is my only criticism of the film. While the dichotomy and confusion of the issue is a justified theme of the film, they often go to great lengths to remind the viewer that this is intended. It has sort of a ‘laugh track’ effect. By the end of the film, you want to scream at the screen, “okay! We get it!”

The first thing that strikes you about the film is that it is very dark. This of course, is intentional. Batman is not a hero after all… see what I mean? Very quickly we see Batman in action confronting some of the thugs that remain from his conquests in the first film with Christian Bale. While the scene was exciting and intense, you quickly forget about it as soon as Heath Ledger as The Joker appears on screen. Maintaining the dark feel and quick pace of the film is an amazing mosical score that sets and keeps the rapid-fire pace.

My first thought upon seeing Ledger was, “oh my gosh, he’s dead.” It seems so impossible because Ledger is so alive in this role. After seeing Jack Nicholson as the joker way back, many of us didn’t see a need to ever cast the part again. It had been perfected. Tough to imagine that we were wrong, but we were. Ledger perfected this character for this film. Batman becomes secondary and almost an intrusion when he’s onscreen. The only time the film even remotely drags are the periods in between scenes with Ledger.

I’m not going to waste your time by segmenting or summarizing the storyline. It is a good, believable and well made film. Without Ledger as the Joker it would be very good and would be worth the ten bucks to see it. However, Heath Ledger is the film. His perfection makes it as close to perfect as it can be. There is nothing about his performance to change or criticize. Even the small details of his performance are called for and seem absolutely required. From his greasy hair to the way he licks his lips, this Joker is perfected. With all due respect to Jack, now we can retire this role.

The buzz circulating about Ledger winning the Oscar for ‘Best Supporting Actor’ is just. He will almost certainly be nominated – there’s no way to leave him off that list. Also, Hollywood is a tremendously sentimental place that would much rather honor a departed pensive artist over someone who can win one down the road. The big problem with Ledger in this role; the only problem is that it is so early in the Oscar season. Few summer blockbusters are remembered when the academy votes. I do believe that Ledger’s performance will change all that this year. It is impossible to forget and so worthy of remembering.

Obama's Jesse Problem

Could it be that Saturday Night Live had the answer to Barack Obama's 'Jesse problem' last spring?

This little cartoon takes on a whole new perspective after the last couple weeks with Uncle Jesse.

Lie to Us, Please!

I hope Barack Obama is up to no good. I hope and pray that his first order of business in the early hours of his administration will be to undo what I hope is just a good old-fashioned political ploy. Please tell me he’s lying to us right now! How I hope he is insincere and calculating.

I’m going to make believe for a moment: I am President Obama’s chief policy advisor. It is January 20, 2009 and the President and his family are preparing for his inauguration. Michelle is adjusting his tie and his daughters are playing Wii in the background. The Vice President elect just called and asked when we would be headed down to the ceremony. CNN is showing a live feed of Chief Justice Roberts arriving with his wife.

Michelle Obama gathers the girls and their coats and heads out of the room, leaving the President-elect and me alone. As I brush off his lapel and hand him his coat, he looks deep into my eyes like he never has before, “what’s first, Mick?” Surprised by such a big, broad question as we were essentially walking out the door, I figure this might be the only truly private moment I ever have with the man. “You have to undo the FISA bill, sir.” He breaks his stare and glances to the ground with a small chuckle. “That’s done. That was the plan all along. I meant, now. What’s the first part of this process today? Are we going to the car now? What?”

I could actually go on and on with that little role play, but it effectively makes my case for what I hope Barack Obama is planning with regard to FISA. His shift in position in joining the congressional caving in on one of the most obscene and profoundly anti-American bills of our time has been stuck with me like a sliver of rancid meat wedged between my teeth.

Most Americans who truly value the liberties and freedoms that have to this point, been a birth-right, are feeling the same disorientation with Obama’s shift to the center. While a shift to the middle is usually a good political move during a campaign, there are simply some issues on which such a move is a bad idea. A shift to “the middle” on FISA is not a shift to the center at all. Anything specifically protected in the Constitution doesn’t offer any wiggle room when it comes to right and left or right and wrong.

Taking a calculated risk on FISA as a presidential candidate could be debated, I suppose. However in the end, it makes no sense to abandon position on an issue that tragically most Americans know nothing about. When I bring up FISA in casual conversation with friends almost no one knows what it is. That is scary! When I break it down and explain that the Bush administration has been paying telecommunications companies for the access to the phone calls and emails of private citizens, the first response is usually, “he can do that?!” There is the seed of the point. No, he cannot do that. Nor can congress pass a bill giving the President authority to do so without warrants or court orders. It is unconstitutional. Illegal.

So what is to be gained politically by such a move? Am I to believe that more than 10% of the coal miners in West Virginia or Pennsylvania factory workers know anything about FISA? To whom is the Obama campaign pandering? Southern whites? Most of them would scurry to have their children removed from Obama’s soccer team if they showed up to the first day of practice and saw his brown face. The only Americans who care anything about FISA are the Bush administration and any self-respecting Democrat. Obama has them. The choice was essentially made to take his base for granted. He’s going to win them anyway. McCain has done the same thing with Evangelicals. He knows they’ll never vote for a pro-choice black man with a sassy wife who seems arrogantly into book learning.

What has been removed by FISA is the idea of probable cause. Even the most disinterested and moronically content fool understands probable cause. A cop can’t pull you over just because you have a Black Sabbath sticker on your car and the federal government cannot listen to your phone calls because nineteen Saudis knocked down a couple buildings seven years ago. These are the freedoms that George Bush insists that over 4000 young Americans have died for. In fact Iraq and Afghanistan have never threatened any freedom that any of us hold dear and protect. President Bush is the only one threatening such freedom. He and his gang of goons are the only ones taking anything from us. They are the ones who “hate us for our freedom.”

Equally complicit has been the sad and utterly ineffective US congress. When Democrats became the majority in 2006, I thought without pause that the Bush administration would be stopped in their tracks with regard to the reeling back of such liberties. I was wrong. Proving that they have no idea what to do when they get the ball, Congressional Democrats began a predictable and regular rolling over to Bush’s fear mongering, becoming Tina Turner to Bush’s Ike.

Thus far, the ACLU is the only public entity to stand up in collective outrage for this bill. They have filed a lawsuit to prevent the implementation of the law. A full page ad for support of the bill ran in Thursday’s New York Times.

For supporters of Barack Obama, his shift in support of the bill; something he and other Democrats called a compromise, represented the first time he let us down. Our wonderful husband was home at 2am with lipstick on his collar. After his shift he insisted that it was a reasonable compromise, furthering and deepening the hole he was digging. This bill is a compromise in the same way that meth is compromise to cocaine.

My hope is very simple: that Senator Obama has no intention of standing by his support of the FISA “compromise”. My prayer (yes, prayer! As in ‘God, please!!!) is that he is lying to us right now and intends to join the fight to dismantle this atrocity soon after taking office. At least it will be an admirable lie, unlike the one he supports currently.

Campaign Comic Relief

Our friends at Jib Jab offer up another classic!

Send a JibJab Sendables® eCard Today!

Rove's Message to America

By the time the Bush administration disappears into the political sunset they will have left many indisputable marks on the American landscape – scar tissue if you will. While Bush and Cheney and their goons have raped and pillaged among other things, the economy, habeas corpus, civil liberties, rights to privacy, individual economic security and the safety of Americans all over the world, perhaps their most lasting legacy will be their complete and total disregard for the US Constitution in general.

The irrefutable poster boy of their disregard for the Constitution is of course, Karl Rove. No one in American history has been so adept at turning an entire branch of the government into his personal playground and right wing vendetta factory. Rove’s politicizing of the justice department is a shameful chapter in the most pitiful administration in US history. With the blessing of Bush and Cheney, Rove has routinely used the justice department to pursue political enemies with criminal indictments and destroyed good names and good people with whom he often simply disagreed.

Of course Rove has famously used other entities for political persecution. His outing of Valerie Plame as a covert spy by using right wing mole, Robert Novak in the Washington Post would be track one on his greatest hits collection. Of course that one is duet with Scooter Libby.

So with such a rich history of thumbing his nose at our country’s most treasured and revered document figuratively, we shouldn’t be surprised when he does it literally. Rove refused and ignored a House subpoena to testify Thursday, invoking ‘executive privilege’, something a White House advisor cannot even do. Committee chair, Linda Sanchez ruled the invocation invalid, but recent history of the Democrats threatening everything under the Washington sun only to do nothing would lead me to believe that Rove measured this move carefully and with a chuckle under his breath.

Karl Rove belongs in prison. Not jail; prison. He should be shroud in orange and fearing for his prostate’s safety. He should be traded as currency like cigarettes and vintage porn. Rove shouldn’t have a decent meal until his release when he hobbles out with the assistance of a walker. He is a criminal and an awful, arrogant man that should surrender his freedom.

It’s not going to happen, though. Of course if you or I used the courts to punish our enemies we would be arrested and carted off to county. If you or I had given the middle finger to our home owners association, much less the United States Congress, we may never be heard from again. Not Rove. He knows against whom he is facing off. He knows their game and inability to act when it comes to executing the reach and extent of the law. It’s like the sign in the convenience store that says, “we prosecute all shoplifters to the fullest extent of the law”. No they don’t. Neither do the Democrats. Karl Rove knows this better than anyone. So he continues to pilfer from the pages of the constitution with the protection of his president, the wavering attention of the media and the toothless bark of our government.

McCain = Bush = Censorship

The McCain Campaign Messes With the Wrong Librarian

There seems to be a communication breakdown in the McCain campaign. The memo outlining the effort to distance his campaign from George W. Bush’s policies and tactics wasn’t forwarded to event organizers and security detail.

At a town hall meeting event in Denver on Tuesday, a sixty year-old librarian was cited for trespassing and removed from the property by four police officers at the request of McCain campaign organizers. The protester, Carol Kreck was not only removed from the event and cited, she was threatened with arrest if she returned.

Perhaps most amazing is how the McCain security team pressed on despite Kreck’s passivity and the presence of at least two video cameras. Kreck or any other visible protester had yelled or chanted anything at all.

Kreck’s message itself offers an interesting political and social question: what if Kreck’s sign read McCain = Reagan? Would she have been escorted off the property or given a seat in the front row of the event? The idea that Republicans are aware of Bush’s inescapable and soiled legacy is well supported by the fact (yes, fact) that such sentiment would have been permitted, welcomed and even coveted.

Iraq War Silently Claims Another Hero

If you 'Google' Joseph Dwyer you'll get an assortment of returns. There's B-list actor with the name as well as an investor with a boat load of advice featured on Forbes.com.

Sprinkled in your results is a tragically but equally anonymous Joseph Dwyer. You have most certainly seen this one, though. His picture was plastered everywhere in 2003 shortly after the start of the Iraq war. The Bush administrtion no doubt saw Pfc. Dwyer, an Army medic as their war's answer to the flag raising at Iwo Jima from 1945.

Joseph Dwyer was tormented by his experiences in Iraq. He reached out for help many times after returning. It seems no one was more aware of the toll his experience had taken than he was. After his return from the war, Dwyer found himself in legal troubles and involved with scrapes with a police force that reveared him and feared for him. Eventually, he lost his marriage and his daughter and had become addicted to compressed aerosol air, often used to clean computers and electronics.

Dwyer's tale is a tragic although not uncommon one. His photo tapped into what most Americans hoped the war would be; brave young Americans saving the lives of Iraqis. The photo gave even the most cynical anti-war zealot a shot of pride.

In the end, his experinces ate at him to the point that it destroyed his life. He died alone, probably scared, most certainly tormented. I wonder who noticed. I wonder if any of the scores of war hawks who used Dwyer's photograph as support of our occupation noticed. Do you think Karl Rove knew who Joseph Dwyer was? I would love to know if the President or Vice President called the family. I'm guessing not; Mr. Dwyer had served his purpose.
More here:

Nothing Says Summer Like Flip-Flops

The Republican spin machine that appeals to and manipulates the fears of every undereducated American is nearly in full-swing with more than four month until the general election.

Never the party for originality, the spinsters on the right seem to be driving the same bus that undid John Kerry in 2004 – the unforgivable flip-flop. Karl Rove and the Bush campaign nearly made John Kerry’s infamous, “I actually voted for the $87 billion before I voted against it” comment every third southern baby’s first words. Kerry was charged and prosecuted in the courts of uninformed voters everywhere as a flip-flopper. Overnight, changing one’s mind had become the single most disloyal and untrustworthy thing a public servant could do. To dissect Kerry’s words and put them in even the slightest context was too much to ask and way in the rear view mirror of public opinion.

No one seemed to ask the obvious question, “what if President Bush had decided against waging war with Iraq after he decided to do so?!” If only the Bush administration had decided to tell the world the truth instead of lying continually. Clearly Dick Cheney decided to award no-bid contracts to Halliburton after he had originally decided that it might be a conflict of interest.

Instead of fighting back or attacking back, Kerry took cover in the assumption that most Americans would recognize the absurdity in such claims by an administration steeped in corruption and half-truths. The flip-flopper charge along with thugs like the ‘Swift Boat Veterans for Truth’ chipped away at positions and accomplishments that seemed safe in their original integrity.

The McCain campaign is now starting to lob the same charges at Barrack Obama over his stance on ending the war in Iraq. They claim that his comments last Thursday where he said that “events on the ground” would dictate how his policy is refined. Obama’s position is exactly the same position that he outlined clearly in September in a New Hampshire debate. He even refused to commit to bringing all troops home by 2013.


Of course the charge of a flip-flop doesn’t have to be legitimate to stick. The McCain campaign is essentially charging that Obama qualifying his position to bring the troops home at all is in direct contrast to his basic pledge to bring American troops home at all. Such an assertion would suggest that McCain would hold to his pledge to keep troops in Iraq no matter what the events on the ground would reveal simply to avoid changing his position. Would troops stay if the terrorists in Iraq converted to Christianity and turned their car bombs in for Bibles and potluck socials?

To demonize flip-flopping is simply saying that responsible, trustworthy Americans never change their minds no matter what happens. Suggesting such a thing is ground on which the McCain campaign should tread very carefully. John McCain has changed positions on nearly every relevant issue since his campaign started. His position on off-shore drilling alone has changed no fewer than three times alone. It’s actually safe to assume that the John McCain who lost to George W. Bush in the 2000 Republican primary would never have voted for the 2008 John McCain.

I Didn't Want to Say Anything, but Jesse Helms Was a Prick

The always irreverant Christopher Hitchens provides some perspective on the recently departed Jesse Helms' soggy legacy of hate and political hi-jacking of American foreign policy.

More here:

Grief's Antithesis (Post Script)

My new bed time seems to be 2am. Soon after returning from Oklahoma City I just couldn’t sleep. I was stuck in one of the stages of mourning. I still am, I’m sure, but whatever stage I’m in has been balanced by its antithesis.

I went for a midnight walk tonight. While I walk almost every day – mostly with my friend’s dog, Murphy, tonight I walked alone with music blaring into my ears. I skipped from song to song, searching for the specific fit for my mood and mindset. Each song fit perfectly.

The antithesis to my repressed grief has provided me with inspiration and clarity beyond anything I’ve experienced in some time – maybe ever. It’s funny how I avoid words like, ‘never’, ‘ever’ and ‘always’. I seem to be hanging on to them for those undeniable moments of purity and certainty. Using them at all feels foreign, perhaps because the idea of purity and clarity seem so far away.

Yet tonight, on my walk, along with the piercing flashes of the reality that my father is gone forever is the saturating comfort of goodness and the undeniable joy that life can offer. Even in modest doses, joy and love overcomes everything. Love wins. It always wins.

As someone who occasionally feels like he fucks things up for a living, finding a joyous balance in tragedy and the cycle of life is a special thing. Tonight as I walked, the flowing sprinkler water in the gutter seemed significant and redeeming. The beauty of the fact that life and love goes on is a concept simultaneously profound and just out of reach. I understand it, yet it’s far bigger than I am.

I actually stopped and watched the meaningless water flow to the sewer. All I could think was that this water would be doing this whether my dad had lived or died. It just flows. But with death’s antithesis fresh in my heart and soul the water has life and purpose. In my tired and altered mind it represents redemption and renewal. Maybe God is blessing me with a gift he’s been saving for the right moment.

In these moments I am thankful for life’s beauty: loss and love, joy and sorrow. Our nerve endings were meant to be alive and aware of our heart’s gains and losses. Life goes on, and most often beautifully. It’s up to each of us to open our eyes to the details and significance of things like sprinkler water in a gutter.

Rice 'proud' of Decision to go to War With Iraq

In a statement dripping with absurdity and arrogance, Condoleezza Rice told Bloomberg’s Judy Woodruff that she was “proud” of the Bush administration’s decision to go to war with Iraq.

She’s proud. Proud like a mother of her daughter’s perfect report card or a father of his son’s first little league homerun. Proud as a lion or peacock. Proud of 4113 American deaths and over 655,000 Iraqi civilian deaths.

Sit on that number for a moment: 655,000. If the Iraqi dead were a US city it would be the seventeenth most populous city in the country. There are roughly the same number of people in Memphis and Ft. Worth, and significantly more than Milwaukee, Seattle, Boston and Portland.

Considering those numbers perhaps Ms. Rice could have chosen her words a bit more wisely. I wouldn’t dream of speaking for her, but maybe saying that she “defends” the decision to go to war with Iraq would have been a bit more fitting. A “wind-up” to a statement even suggesting pride should be prefaced with heavy doses of contrition and sorrow. But such a cold and calculated statement is par for the Bush administration course. Anyone who even remotely expresses doubt or regret over the cost of the war; whether financially, diplomatically or in loss of life is shown the door to “spend more time with their family.”

The appropriate and seemingly inevitable answer to this statement may be Rice’s predecessor, Colin Powell’s endorsement of Barrack Obama in the coming days. Powell left the administration soon after realizing that President Bush had used his international credibility to add punch to the case for war with Iraq. Instead of taking public issue with his being used, Powell opted to quietly leave the administration.

Conversely, Rice took the office with a respected reputation as a smart and loyal advisor in the run up to the war. Since then she has meticulously and sometimes humorously cashed in that reputation in exchange for a badge of just another neo-con war hawk defending the biggest blunder in modern history.

More here:

Jesse Helms Dies at 86

Former North Carolina Senator, Jesse Helms died today in North Carolina at 86. Some conservatives would suggest that it is fitting that Helms dies on the fourth of July, as many in the far right corner of the party revered his stands against desegregation, gay rights and anything else resembling a progressive issue.

Democrats referred to him as 'Senator No' for his predictable and ardent delivery of his votes of rejection of nearly every bill any one of them sent to the floor.

Helms also took on the emergence of the pornography industry in the early 80s. Unlike many of those to follow him on the right side of the aisle, he was never linked to a gay tryst in an airport bathroom.

In his defense, Helms seemed to be exactly who he claimed to be; unapologetic and uncompromising. He hasn't left mourneres with a lot from which to choose considering his legacy is built on a foundation of fighting against civil rights. While I have nothing good to say about him, Jesse Helms was authentic and thankfully, one of a kind.
More here:

Stephen Baldwin to Leave Country if Obama Elected

John McCain is crying foul as Barrack Obama seems to have stumbled on a reason for all those undecided voters to vote for him in November. Third tier actor, Stephen Baldwin said on Fox News' Laura Ingrham Show that he wil leave the country if Obama is elected.

I checked Baldwin's official website (yes, there is an official website) and it has not been updated since April. Clearly Baldwin has been busy reminding America which brother of Alec's he is.

Obama Testing the Boundaries of his Base

Barrack Obama is making a safe and calculated bet that his base will endure his shift on position on FISA legislation. His pivot on his position more closely aligns him with the White House and is in direct opposition to his original and ongoing opposition of the legislation that would provide immunity to telecommunications companies who participated in illegal wiretaps ordered by the Bush administration.

During the Democratic primaries, Obama actually threatened a Senate filibuster to combat the advance of the bill. This shift is a clear and slightly disturbing move to the center just in time for the general election. A move to the center is a valid and predictable move perfected by Bill Clinton. The voters most angered by Obama’s new position make up his base and aren’t going anywhere. This is the only group that he can actually afford to offend.

Obama has also very carefully ‘hedged his bet’ on FISA by pledging to “carefully monitor the program” as President providing him with the wiggle room needed to shift back after being elected.

The danger is that FISA while a lighting rod for the left is not a hot button issue for undecided voters. It’s not even a top-5 issue for committed Republicans. Obama seems to be coveting the support of voters he’s not going to get anyway. Tuesday was spent pandering to Evangelicals. No truth to the rumor that Obama will be spending the July 4th holiday at an NRA picnic.
More Here:

Shocker: Uneducated Whites Not Crazy About Michelle Obama

In what probably amounts to a sneak peek into at least one the McCain campaign’s tactical strategies for the coming months, an Associate Press poll revealed Monday that Michelle Obama is viewed unfavorably by 35% of Americans while just 30% view her favorably (34% said they didn’t know enough about her to have an opinion).

Among whites Cindy McCain is viewed positively by seventeen points over Mrs. Obama. Blacks see it the opposite, with 80% holding Michelle Obama in a favorable light.

Perhaps the most predictable demographic; uneducated white women seem to hold a particular disdain for Mrs. Obama. They hold her husband in the same contempt. Those numbers analyze themselves. Have a look at the reader comments on the CNN link. It makes for a pretty easy sociology experiment. Read through and place the readers in their appropriate demographic.

These poll numbers reveal a sad irony with regard to the sudden kinship that Michelle Obama suddenly shares with Hillary Clinton. For years Mrs. Clinton has been viewed similarly. A smart, successful, accomplished, outspoken black woman is just a bit too much for most of this country to bear.
More Here:

McCain Camp Practicing Politics of Mass Distraction

While the McCain campaign clings to the mock outrage of General Clark's evaluation of military service not necessarily preparing anyone for elected office, they quietly hired Col. Bud Day, perhaps the most prominent members of the "Swift Boat Veterans For Truth". Day will serve as a campaign adviser and head of the campaign's "Truth Squad," which is "aimed at countering the recent attacks on McCain’s military record."

The hypocritical irony is as thick as it gets. The McCain campaign manufactures outrage over a non attack on his military record by an Army General to justify the hiring of a man intimately familiar with the distortion of a hero's military record.

Arguably no one has ever done a better job of such attacks than Day and his cronies when they single handedly leveled outrageous attack after outrageous attack on Senator John Kerry's military record during the 2004 Presidential campaign. Day actually suggested that Kerry faked injuries and exaggerated accounts in order to inflate his own record.

Clearly the McCain camp assumed that no one would be watching while Day was brought into the fold. No such luck. McCain himself recognizes the problem with this since he was a loud critic of the Swift Boaters tactics in 2004. Looks like the combat boot is on the other foot.

Obama Spinning His Wheels With Evangelicals

For the first time in his Presidential bid Barrack Obama seems to be pandering. While his clear outreach to Evangelicals this week is a valid idea in concept, it is a huge waste of time.

For a Democrat to think that he or she has any real chance of wooing Christian voters in mass or even chunks away from the Republican party is simply delusional. Evangelicals vote one issue, really. While gay marriage and guns may have crept into the shadows of their decision process, God fearing, church going, Clinton hating Americans vote on abortion only.

Certainly their doctrine is steeped in morals and the candidates own faith, but abortion is the dipstick of the entire package. If a candidate is pro-choice, he can not possibly be a real Christian. Most of them believe that there is no such thing as a Christian Democrat. Religious leaders like Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson are imposters, practicing an offshoot of real Christianity. In many mainstream Evangelical churches around the country, these guys are considered false profits.

I had a conversation about the issue of voting as a Christian prior to the 2004 election. I was speaking to a smart and wonderful guy who was active and committed to his church. He believed 100% of the Bible and walked the Christian talk. He described this issue as trust issue between himself and God. God trusts him to choose the candidate that most closely represents Christian values and he in turn trusts God to provide the country with the best leader. When I pushed him on the Iraq war and the lies that led us into it, his answer was that this was an extra layer of trust and that God wants some wars to be fought. He concluded by saying that since (nearly) all politicians claim to be Christian, the abortion issue was the only way to tell who really is and isn’t “walking with the lord.”

The medical professionals who perform abortions are ‘abortionists’ rather than doctors whether they have also performed a heart transplant or an appendectomy or delivered a baby. Abortion is the trump card for this demographic, and everything in any election will come down to where the candidate stands on choice – or murder as they call it. It doesn't matter if the election is for city council, school board or the home owners association.

In the mind of Evangelicals, abortion is murder and electing someone who supports murder is out of the question; unless of course it’s the death penalty. That’s okay.

More Here: