Fighting Windmills

The much-maligned Tom Delay is on the offesive again. This time, he attacks fictional T.V. crime drama, while real-life questions into his campaign fundraising remain.

Poof!! Heartbreak in Posting.

Dabnabit, Blogger! You stole my masterpiece, my magnum opus, my tribute to the late-great Doctor Hunter S. Thompson. I had quotes. I had storyline. I had emotion, spelled out in eloquent prose. This one would have won the Pulitzer.

What did I ever do to you? You all-powerful one.

We were such great friends not so long ago. I took some time off... worked on some other things... But I was ready to come back. I swear. And the way I was going to do it was through Hunter. His unfortunate death by his own pointed pistol happened well over three months ago but I think it touched us all. He was the original blogger...using Gonzo as his voice.

Three nights I worked on Hunter's tribute. Adding a couple of quotes, a couple of sentences each time, from Fear and Loathing to Hey Rube.

I had faith in your technology. I had faith that by saving a work in progress meant "saving a work in progress." Then, in the dark of night, while I was away drinking Heini's with my friend Tre, you stole my beautiful, long-awaited post.

Gone. All of it. I woke in the morning with every intent to return to the Blogosphere and there was my post, empty, all but the title.

Dabnabit Blogger! I don't know if you'll ever have my trust, again.

This Summer I Hear The Drummin . . .

Noe's dead in O-hio.

FLASHBACK - Indeed an odd investment.



Hat Tip: Reluctant Republican ARM

"Kind of a Shame"

How freedom marches.

Crusades Watch

Oh dear.

Tillman Died, Pentagon Lied

E&P, via Kos

Where, in the week after the Great Newsweek Error, is the comparable outrage in the press, in the blogosphere, and at the White House over the military's outright lying in the coverup of the death of former NFL star Pat Tillman? Where are the calls for apologies to the public and the firing of those responsible? Who is demanding that the Pentagon's word should never be trusted unless backed up by numerous named and credible sources?

Where is a Scott McClellan lecture on ethics and credibility?
. . .

Tillman was killed in a barrage of gunfire from his own men, mistaken for the enemy on a hillside near the Pakistan border. "Immediately," the Post reported, "the Army
kept the soldiers on the ground quiet and told Tillman's family and the public that he was killed by enemy fire while storming a hill, barking orders to his fellow Rangers." Tillman posthumously received the Silver Star for his "actions."

The latest military investigation, exposed by the Post earlier this month, "showed that soldiers in Afghanistan knew almost immediately that they had killed Tillman by mistake in what they believed was a firefight with enemies on a tight canyon road. The investigation also revealed that soldiers later burned Tillman's uniform and body armor."
....

"Maybe lying's not a big deal anymore," [Tillman's father] said. "Pat's dead, and this isn't going to bring him back. But these guys should have been held up to scrutiny, right up the chain of command, and no one has."

Mary Tillman, the mother, complained to the Post that the government used her son for weeks after his death. She said she was particularly offended when President Bush offered a taped memorial message to Tillman at a Cardinals football game shortly before the presidential election last fall.

Is Mr. Tillman right? Is it no longer a big deal when the Bush Pentagon flat out lies to us? Do we all just shrug and say, "well, that's the crazy Bush Pentagon for you - - you never know what those rascals are going to tell us."

I say he's wrong. I say it is a big deal. Our young men are occupying two foreign countries and being killed by the hundreds, and the Pentagon has shown us, plain as day, that it is willing to lie, officially, in order to manipulate our opinion.

I say it's a goddamn huge deal.

Are we witnessing a changing of hats over at our favorite right-wing-blog-written-by-a-Republican-friend-and-his-associate-in-Columbus?

As you may know (if you, like me, sometimes cruise the rightie sites), Pepsi's CEO, Indra Nooyi, had the gall to caution new MBA's at Columbia University against abusing the enormous power currently wielded by the United States. Yes, she even said the rest of the world sometimes sees America as overbearing, insensitive and disrespectful. That can't be true! The 101st Fighting Keyboardists went nuts.

TOD, who we used to consider the "moderate" half of CC, unloads with the insults. He calls Ms. Nooyi's speech "hilariously trivial, unusually elementary, & uncommonly stupid. When this woman opens her trap, she actually subtracts from the accumulated sum of human knowledge." Now that's clever.

On the other hand, Superstar actually argues for calling off the hounds.

Cheers, Supe. May we see more of it.

Culture of Life Watch

Digby shows us the fallacy.

Priorities

The White House makes noise about this.

While turning a blind eye to (excusing?) this.

What have they done to our country?

Psst

I believe this is the most touching website I have ever seen.

Amazing.



HT: Sully.

Galloway takes on Republican Senators.

Oh, and related news. (UPDATE: link broken, story fake)

News? Weak.

You might recall that yesterday every right winger on the internet (spurned on by Scotty Mclellan) was crying "Newsweek Lied, People Died." For a reality check regarding this offensive meme, see August. More importantly, let's take a look at the causal connection implicit in this cute little phrase . . .

Q: Do either one of you have anything about the demonstrations in Afghanistan, which were apparently sparked by reports that there was a lack of respect by some interrogators at Guantanamo for the Koran. Do either one of you have anything to say about that?

GEN. MYERS: It's the -- it's a judgment of our commander in Afghanistan, General Eikenberry, that in fact the violence that we saw in Jalalabad was not necessarily the result of the allegations about disrespect for the Koran -- and I'll get to that in just a minute -- but more tied up in the political process and the reconciliation process that President Karzai and his Cabinet is conducting in Afghanistan. So that's -- that was his judgment today in an after- action of that violence. He didn't -- he thought it was not at all tied to the article in the magazine.

(Thanks, Olbermann.) Oh, I get it. So it's not like "people died" BECAUSE "Newsweek lied." It's more like coincidentally "people died" SOMETIME AFTER "Newsweek lied." Sort of like "Bush (s)elected, World Trade Center attacked," except rhymey.

Now about the "Newsweek lied" bit... some on the right are now cautioning that this comes nowhere close to a lie. Even the rabid Michelle Malkin has now inserted a frickin' asterisk after "Newsweek lied" - because, you know, Newsweek, like, didn't lie or anything. In fact, the veracity of the issue - whether a Koran was flushed down the toilet at Guantanamo - is sort of lost in the right-wing hysteria at the moment. So Newsweek didn't lie, but it, you know, based its story on a single source.

And basing your story on a single source is just wrong.

Iraq War Good American Policy? Two Thumbs Up for W.?

Regarding Abe's last post, it's time to put the issue of whether we should or should not have gone into Iraq to rest. Sure, the administration knew what they were doing when they exaggerated intelligence to sell the war to the American people. If you look at the mindset of the current Bush Administration hawks, you easily conclude that they did seek to stabilize the Middle East through democratization. This is Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz and Cheney doctrine and has been something they have envisioned for at least a decade, if not two. They had to put this risky idea into a nice package for the American people to buy. Can you criticize them? Sure, that is not the way a democracy like ours should work. But, if the ends justify the means in this case, then I will agree that it was worth it. The Middle East, and more precisely, Islamic fundamentalism must be quashed in my view. And I am not a hawk by any means. What are the alternatives? Diplomacy? No, these guys believe they are adhering to religious principle, albeit, evil and misguided. They have proven how strongly they believe in their cause by flying suicide missions to spark their jihad. These jihadists, anti-capitalist, anti-westerners or whatever you would like to call them do not understand modern government and negotiation. Their mission is to rid the world of cultures and countries that do not believe in their god. That is the truth, believe it or doubt it, your choice. They respond and, for this matter, back down, only when they are forced. This idea is etched in their psyche that is largely nurtured by Islamic Law practices. What other alternatives do we have? Economic sanctions? Probably not, Saddam and Iran have shown that this is not the best method. The end result is an impoverished populous that only breeds additional anti-American sentiment. Remember, these folks have a different perception of reality due to the propaganda and lies they are told. For instance, whether you believe American troops burned a qouran or not, they believe that is typical of the American goal of ridding them of their god. Stupid? Sure, considering we are a rather religious tolerant society. I don't like the way action was taken in Iraq (through deceptive means), nor did I agree with electing W. for another term because he would handle the war better. If you read Kerry's plan on the mid-east, it is actually bolder that W's. Seriously, take the time. Of course, Kerry had a difficult time presenting his ideas and his credibility, for no good reason, was questioned when it came to war policy. My point, the elections is over, we are in Iraq and we can really make changes if we show the folks in Iraq that they will live better, more prosperous lives under their people's government which was helped along by the United States. I hope history will tell that our soldiers died an honorable death by brushing back the evil of Islamic Fundamentalism and thus promoting a life free from fear. A loyal, partisan Democrat...........

Republican Leader Criticizes White House!

A certain Republican mouthpiece gave the following statement today:

"It's puzzling that while the White House now acknowledges that they got the facts wrong, they refused to retract the story."

"I think there's a certain leadership and intelligence standard that should be met and in this instance it was not."

"The war has had serious consequences." "People have lost their lives. The image of the United States abroad has been damaged."

Just kidding.

The Love Hammer

(with apologies to Rudy's buddies)

"Ladies and gentlemen, please take your seats and it will facilitate the serving of our hammer desserts"

They love him. They really love him.

For more, give this a listen.

Meanwhile, Back in Bozeman...

After a local public school (yes, public school) paid a speaker fifteen hundy to drop in and give a pre-prom assembly about the dangers of prom night, a few local parents have some concerns.

Wells demanded the school give equal time to rebut the "misinformation" his son heard: that condoms lead to cancer, that birth control pills are only 20 percent effective, that sexually transmitted diseases are spread by skin contact alone, that third-trimester fetuses can be aborted, that video games lead to homicide, that human papilloma virus can be transferred through condoms and that teens can achieve "second virginity" through abstinence.

Mr. Wells' son, on the other hand, left school that day well armed for his prom night.

"Come on Brenda, you can always get a second virginity later. A rubber? Are you crazy? You want me to get cancer?"

Hat Tip: Pandagon

Pervert Watch

Will someone please tell me what the hell the deal is with Bush appointees forcing their wives to engage in weird sex? Can't these guys just relax and have a cigar with a friend like a normal guy?

Ames v. Brooks Litigation Concluded

After continuous litigation over the maintenance of the fence between their properties, John Ames and Oliver Brooks appear to have finally resolved the issue.

Next door, Frances Hurt heard the shots — "one, then a hesitation, then five in a row," she said. "I had no idea what had happened. My first thought was, 'That's odd, it's not hunting season.' "

Hat Tip: Princiepants

Governor Approval Ratings

Find them here.

Cheers to Brian Schweitzer (Montana) for landing just outside the top ten. We at 2GL give you our full support, despite your apparent softness for washed up 80's crooners.

Blagojevich (Illinois), you're hurtin. Looks like folks are tired of your efforts to muscle your fellow Dems in the Congress.

And it looks like the folks in Ohio just might be getting sick of their corrupt Republicans.

Leadership Shall Resume Post-Bike Ride

Our good friends over at JP ask the pertinent question: "Who is running this war on terror?"

O'er the Land of the Free...

... and the home of the cheerleaders.

Oh yes. They follow their leader.

RAH RAH RAH!

The Facts and Intelligence Are Being Fixed Around The Policy

Juan Cole puts the British Bush memo in temporal context.

Clinton Conservativism v. The Bush Camp

If you are a true fiscal conservative and social moderate (as most reasonable Republicans like to describe themselves), then you should prefer the presidency of Bill Clinton over that of George Bush.

As far as I can see, only three types of folks have an intellecually honest, policy-based preference for Bush over Clinton:

(1) social conservatives (i.e. those who oppose equal rights for gays, and didn't get enough anti-gay crap from Clinton - who gave plenty);

(2) uber-hawks (those who think we should have been starting pre-emptive wars years ago - although you may be disqualified from this category if you criticized Clinton military endeavors);

(3) ultra-rich, especially if in oil industry (those who have benefitted most from Bush's free-spending policies)

If you prefer Bush's policies and you're not in one of these categories, enlighten me.

All Your Judges Are Belong To Us

The 4th Circuit steps over the line. If Bush is able to push his activist judges through Congress, expect more federal decisions like this.

ht: Atrios

Coulter Has No Opinion On Sanctity of Certain Marriages

Ann Coulter forgets to ingest daily box of trucker speed and is, for the first time, beaten in the race to the bottom of the decency barrel.

Come on, you treasonous tramp. Answer the question.

HTip: ARM

$2.65 Per Gallon Donations To The Republican Party

Why are the gas prices so high? That's easy: the Saudis. Right?

Maybe not.

HAT TIP: Left in the West

Huey Screwus and the Case of the Fish-filled Ditch

When I was in high school, I remember driving through the Boulder Valley in Montana, knocking on rancher's doors and asking permission to hunt on their land. These folks would typically oblige, but let you know where the cattle were grazing and ask you to avoid those areas. Yes, it was private property, but held by folks who understood the tradition of being a neighbor.

If there's one thing that pisses off your average Montanan, it's when wealthy out-of-staters move in, buy up huge tracts of choice property, start nailing up "No Trespassing" signs, and deny all access. Ask a Montanan on the street what he thinks about Californians who come to Big Sky County with unlimited cash and hopes of buying themselves their own little isolated paradise. You'll get an earfull.

One thing Montanans have done in response is pass a Stream Access Law which allows the public to use rivers and streams up to the natural high water mark, regardless of who may own the underlying streambed. That, friends, is good legislation. The water, and the fish in the water are everyone's property.

Well, there's only one way around that law: say a fish-filled, flowing body of water isn't a "stream." That's the tactic employed by one pop has-been and his cohorts in the Bitteroot Valley, in the ongoing saga of the Mitchell Slough, which landowners call a "ditch" and fishermen call a "stream." A recent ruling by the Conservation District in another context went in the landowners' favor.

Following that ruling BRPA staged a "fish in?" at Mitchell Slough, where it enters the property owned by Huey Lewis, to demonstrate their rights of access. Montana Department of Fish Wildlife and Parks (FWP) officials have consistently maintained that there is fishing access into Mitchell Slough. They attended the event and checked the fishing licenses of those participating. Huey Lewis, through an intermediary, threatened the fishermen with "civil trespassing charges" if they entered the slough on his property. Some landowners and their supporters showed up to protest the event. No arrests were made.

That's right. Huey Lewis. And when Huey Lewis speaks, apparently Montana's governor listens.
Now, I don't know the technicalities. Hell, maybe the slough is legally a ditch and not a stream. Either way, screw Huey Lewis and his pals (don't worry, guys from "the News," you're still cool) for trying to keep average Montanans off the water.

A Rare Penny for Your Thoughts...

Perhaps our good Ohio Republican friends from JP and CC can give us the spin on this debacle.