Yellow-bellied Cowards in Seersucker

The new color of the GOP is yellow. Red is a noble color, the color of blood, and much blood has been spilled to appease Republican greed and their depraved right-wing ideology, but the blood is always someone else’s. Chickenhawks like Dick Cheney, Bill Frist and Carl Rove are the first to slander the patriotism of combat veterans who question the validity of a political war based on deception, saying that these veterans want to “cut and run.” The bitter irony is that these Chickenhawks know something about cutting and running for real: they now wave the flag and use the word “patriotism” like a mantra, but where were they when they were asked to shed their blood for their country? Not in combat. Red symbolizes the blood of heroes. Yellow is the color for cowards.

After the devious manipulations by Republicans in the Senate yesterday, it’s pretty damn clear that the Republican Party is the party of cowards. Rather than engage in an open and honest debate on Iraq, Senate Republicans instead chose, once again, to resort to trickery and underhanded manipulation of the process of our government. And they did it in seersucker.

Seriously. Thursday was Seersucker Day in the Senate. “At least 22 senators were spotted sporting seersucker suits yesterday in a bipartisan display of Southern-tinged fashion organized by Sen. Trent Lott (R-Miss.)." Of course, most of the seersuckers senators, including, Frist, Chambliss, Cornyn, Stevens and McConnell, were Republicans.

How quaint. And after they made a mockery of honest debate in the Senate, these pastel-clad Republicans enjoyed a lovely ice cream social in the park. How precious is that? Through deception and collusion they subvert the process for genuine debate on the war and then they go to an ice cream party. They stand in the sun in their seersucker suits while our troops are fighting and dying in a desert far away, in a war that these yellow-bellies won’t even debate. 2500 US troops dead and these pastel cowards eat ice cream in the park. And these spineless lollygaggers have the temerity to accuse combat veterans of undermining the war on terror simply because the veterans question our continued presence in Iraq?

Majority leader Bill Frist (R-Tenn-Chickenhawk) is a real piece of work. Not many people could manage such duplicity with a straight face. In concert with Senators McConnell (R-Ky-Chickenhawk), Cornyn (R-Tx-Chickenhawk), Chambliss (R-Ga-Chickenhawk.) and Stevens (R-Ak-not a Chickenhawk, just an asshole), Frist carefully orchestrated a cowardly and reprehensible ploy to curtail discussion of Iraq by forcing a vote on the Kerry Amendment when the senator was off the floor.

The scene played out as crudely and thinly veiled as a Kangaroo Court. Senators Cornyn, Chamblis and Stevens delivered scathing criticism of the Nelson Resolution. It was almost overkill for such an innocuous amendment.* The republicans argued that the resolution was a political ploy on the part of Democrats to undermine the Administration’s success in Iraq. A few Republican Senators actually stood up and said they were in favor of amnesty for terrorists and that the new Iraqi democracy should be able to offer amnesty to anyone they choose. Senator Stevens went so far as to compare the situation in Iraq to the aftermath of WWII and other wars where enemy troops were given amnesty after the war was over. Haven’t the republicans reminded us time and time again, that terrorists are unlawful enemy combatants? Yesterday, however, the terrorists were discussed as though they were conventional, lawful combatants in a spectacular Republican flip-flop. Apparently terrorists are only unlawful combatants when the Republicans want to torture them and deprive them of and due process. The hypocrisy is stunning.

One didn’t need the nose of a bloodhound to smell the rat in the Senate yesterday. It stank to high heaven. As if anyone with half a brain couldn’t see it coming, the discussion was turned from the issue of amnesty to criticism of “cut and run” Democrats who wanted to discuss a timeframe for withdrawal of our combat troops from Iraq. Minority Leader Harry Reid took the floor and addressed this change of subject, making it clear that the debate was supposed to be about the Nelson Resolution and not some other amendment that might come up at another time.

What happened next is about as low and rotten as it gets in the Senate, at least when the cameras are rolling. McConnell introduced the Kerry Amendment for withdrawal of combat troops from Iraq by year’s end as his own. Leader Frist rushed to the Senate floor to force a vote on the McConnell Amendment. Senator Reid asked for a vote to table the Amendment. Senator Kerry arrived in mid-vote. He had been in conference with other Democratic Senators working on the amendment when Frist pulled this maneuver behind Kerry’s back. Kerry spoke. He was angry and he made it clear that he’d told Senator Warner (R-Va) earlier in the day that his amendment was being hashed out with other Democrats and that he was not ready to present it for a vote. Then Senator Warner stood up and clarified that he did indeed tell Leader Frist that Kerry’s amendment wasn’t ready for a vote and suggested that they vote on something else instead. Warner also pointed out that the decision to propose the Kerry Amendment as the McConnell Amendment was done while he was absent from the Senate. In short, Frist and his cohorts pulled this underhanded stunt behind both Senator Kerry and Senator Warner’s backs.

In essence, these cowards curtailed the debate on Iraq by killing the Kerry Amendment that was to be voted on as an attachment to the Defense Authorization Bill. They were afraid of an honest debate so they chose a dishonest way of making certain the debate did not happen. What a bunch of lily-livered cowards! Any noble ideals the Grand Old Party might have once had are all but a memory. The Republican Party has become the party of corruption and cowardly attacks.

The Kerry Amendment will be resubmitted next week and the Democrats are planning to have an in-depth discussion about bringing our troops home at that time.

The question is: what cowardly stunt can we next expect from the Yellow Party?

*Text of Sense of the Senate resolution:

(1) The Iraqi government should not grant amnesty to persons who have attacked, killed, or wounded members of the U.S. Armed Forces serving heroically in Iraq to provide all Iraqis a better future.

(2) President Bush should immediately notify the government of Iraq that the United States government opposes granting amnesty in the strongest possible terms.

http://www.usnewswire.com/

And then they came for... Jimmy Carter?

Neocons are out of control. What is it, an alien virus that spreads from one conservative to another? While I don't even want to consider the means by which the virus might be transported, I'd advise people to be very careful about getting too close to any potential carriers.

First they swiftboated John Kerry, then they went after the AARP, then Congressman Murtha. Now they are swiftboating Jimmy Carter.

Well conservatives have answered that rhetorical question, "How low will they stoop?" with yet another excess in the asinine. Conservative radio talk show personallity at KSFO in San Francisco, California, Melanie Morgan, is apparently spearheading a group targeting former President Jimmy Carter. They are calling for the censure of Jimmy Carter!

This sounds like a joke, and I wouldn't have believed it unless I saw it myself. HLN News (talk about your media whores) has been airing commercials put out by these idiots calling for Congress to censure a man who hasn't been in office for how many years? They want to censure a private citizen. Way to go conservative nutballs!

This is so outrageous it is almost funny until you think that there are actually people out there funding this crap. Where better could that money be spent? Let's see: helping people? No, conservatives don't do that. Silly me.

Here is some information about the Web site that is behind these ads:

Registrant:
MAF
P.O. Box 1497
Sacramento, CA 95812
US

Domain name: CENSUREJIMMYCARTER.COM

Administrative Contact:
Morgan, Melanie info@censurecarter.com
P.O. Box 1497
Sacramento, CA 95812
US
916-441-6197 Fax: 916-441-6057

Technical Contact:
Morgan, Melanie info@censurecarter.com
P.O. Box 1497
Sacramento, CA 95812
US
916-441-6197 Fax: 916-441-6057

About Melanie Morgan


It will be interesting to find out exactly who is funding this farce and where their ties lead.

More to come. This begs a follow-up.

John Kerry Fighting the Good Fight

John Kerry is one hell of a dynamic dem. As far as I'm concerned, the senator is a super hero. All he needs is a cape. I'm amazed on a daily basis to learn just how many battles he's either leading or right in the thick of. He never gives up and he never gives in.

You can attack him from the left. You can attack him from the right. You can attack him from the middle. He simply keeps on doing what he does best: fighting the good fight. If he tires or becomes discouraged, he never shows it. That's because he's a leader. He is in the front lines taking the hits for us so that we will not tire and so that we will not become discouraged.

Sometimes doubt can creep into even the stoutest of hearts and a seductive voice whispers, "Give up. All is lost. Do not torment yourself. You cannot win. It is better to accept things the way they are. You will be much happier if you accept our reality. Embrace the darkness and forget that there was ever light in the world."

It is difficult to keep on fighting when odds are against us. The enemy has all the power and the odds are stacked against us. We have lost time and time again, battle after battle has gone to those who would destroy everything we believe in. They want us to stay beaten. They want us to lie down. They toss us crumbs and think we will remain silent. We will not.

We have leaders who are standing up to the oppression. Heroes like Senator Kerry will never lie down. They will never fall into line and accept the status quo. We need to listen to their voices, the voices of our heroes. It is easy to know the true voice when you hear it. The voice will never, ever tell you to accept. The true voice will always tell you to speak out and fight back. The voice of truth always tells us that we have power and that our power is unity.

Gas Prices and ANWR

America and our leaders have spoken: we do not want ANWR, the Alaska National Wildlife Refuge to be opened up to the oil companies so that they can drill for oil. We spoke out and our voices were heard.

Now the Republicans are trying to use the high cost of gasoline as a springboard for yet another assault on ANWR. They think the American people are stupid enough to believe yet another Republican LIE. Drilling in ANWR will not make a damn bit of difference in the price we are paying at the pumps.

"Insisting on drilling in the Arctic Refuge is like treating a drinking problem by suggesting the alcoholic do more of his drinking at home." - Senator John Kerry

How much longer do they think that the American people are going to believe their lies? How much longer do they think we are going to keep paying taxes just to have our government hand them over to big oil companies in the form of tax cuts and subsidies?

No longer.

Visit our ANWR Page for informational links and free posters to download.

Senator John Kerry Speaks out on Dissent on the 35th Anniversary of his 1971 Senate Testimony for the VVAW

This was an incredible event that I was honored to attend. The emotion in the crowd was intense. It like being part of history in the making.

Before Senator Kerry took the stage, Jonathan Powers, an Iraq veteran and program manager for "War Kids Relief" spoke about what it was like to serve in Iraq and how his commanding officer told he he wasn't putting him in for a Bronze Star because he was afraid the young captain would toss his medal on the White House Lawn. Then Vietnam war widow, Judith Droz Keys, who is President of the Patriot Project http://www.patriotproject.org took the stage and talked about losing her husband in Vietnam and about how, when she later protested the war that took her husband's life, she was spat upon and called a communist. The tears in her eyes were still fresh after nearly 4 decades. Everyone the the room, those packing the floor and those hanging from the balconies, understood that this is what war does. The wounds never heal.

We then listened to a very angry Senator Kerry who had seen this all before in 1971. The same things are happening again to people who speak out against the war. Not even generals are exempt from being called unpatriotic.

The entire room was unified and the ferver wasn't just anti-war, it was PATRIOTIC. I lost count at about a dozen standing ovations when Senator Kerry was speaking. They weren't for the senator; they were because he was speaking what was in all our our hearts. This day was not about the senator. It was about America. It was about love of country. It was about taking back our values from those who would destroy them by promoting the lie that blind faith in leaders is patriotism. True patriotism puts love of country before faith in leaders.

Here is the entire text of that wonderful speech:

___________________________________________


John Kerry spoke in Boston's historic Faneuil Hall today about patriotism and dissent at a time of war and the assault on free speech in America today. Video is available here.

Senator John Kerry
"Dissent"
Faneuil Hall
April 22, 2006

Thirty-five years ago today, I testified before the Foreign Relations Committee of the United States Senate, and called for an end to the war I had returned from fighting not long before.

It was 1971 - twelve years after the first American died in what was then South Vietnam, seven years after Lyndon Johnson seized on a small and contrived incident in the Tonkin Gulf to launch a full-scale war--and three years after Richard Nixon was elected president on the promise of a secret plan for peace. We didn't know it at the time, but four more years of the War in Vietnam still lay ahead. These were years in which the Nixon administration lied and broke the law--and claimed it was prolonging war to protect our troops as they withdrew--years that ultimately ended only when politicians in Washington decided they would settle for a "decent interval" between the departure of our forces and the inevitable fall of Saigon.

I know that some active duty service members, some veterans, and certainly some politicians scorned those of us who spoke out, suggesting our actions failed to "support the troops"--which to them meant continuing to support the war, or at least keeping our mouths shut. Indeed, some of those critics said the same thing just two years ago during the presidential campaign.

I have come here today to reaffirm that it was right to dissent in 1971 from a war that was wrong. And to affirm that it is both a right and an obligation for Americans today to disagree with a President who is wrong, a policy that is wrong, and a war in Iraq that weakens the nation.

I believed then, just as I believe now, that the best way to support the troops is to oppose a course that squanders their lives, dishonors their sacrifice, and disserves our people and our principles. When brave patriots suffer and die on the altar of stubborn pride, because of the incompetence and self-deception of mere politicians, then the only patriotic choice is to reclaim the moral authority misused by those entrusted with high office.

I believed then, just as I believe now, that it is profoundly wrong to think that fighting for your country overseas and fighting for your country's ideals at home are contradictory or even separate duties. They are, in fact, two sides of the very same patriotic coin. And that's certainly what I felt when I came home from Vietnam convinced that our political leaders were waging war simply to avoid responsibility for the mistakes that doomed our mission in the first place. Indeed, one of the architects of the war, Defense Secretary Robert McNamara, confessed in a recent book that he knew victory was no longer a possibility far earlier than 1971.

By then, it was clear to me that hundreds of thousands of soldiers, sailors, Marines and airmen--disproportionately poor and minority Americans--were being sent into the valley of the shadow of death for an illusion privately abandoned by the very men in Washington who kept sending them there. All the horrors of a jungle war against an invisible enemy indistinguishable from the people we were supposed to be protecting--all the questions associated with quietly sanctioned violence against entire villages and regions--all the confusion and frustration that came from defending a corrupt regime in Saigon that depended on Americans to do too much of the fighting--all that cried out for dissent, demanded truth, and could not be denied by easy slogans like "peace with honor"--or by the politics of fear and smear. It was time for the truth, and time for it all to end, and my only regret in joining the anti-war movement was that it took so long to succeed--for the truth to prevail, and for America to regain confidence in our own deepest values.

The fissures created by Vietnam have long been stubbornly resistant to closure. But I am proud it was the dissenters--and it was our veterans' movement--and people like Judy Droz Keyes--who battled not just to end the war but to combat government secrecy and the willful amnesia of a society that did not want to remember its obligations to the soldiers who fought. We fought the forgetting and pushed our nation to confront the war's surplus of sad legacies--Agent Orange, Amer-Asian orphans, abandoned allies, exiled and imprisoned draft dodgers, doubts about whether all our POWs had come home, and honor at last for those who returned from Vietnam and those who did not. Because we spoke out, the truth was ultimately understood that the faults in Vietnam were those of the war, not the warriors.

Then, and even now, there were many alarmed by dissent--many who thought that staying the course would eventually produce victory--or that admitting the mistake and ending it would embolden our enemies around the world. History disproved them before another decade was gone: Fourteen years elapsed between the first major American commitment of helicopters and pilots to Vietnam and the fall of Saigon. Fourteen years later, the Berlin Wall fell, and with it the Communist threat. You cannot tell me that withdrawing from Vietnam earlier would have changed that outcome.

The lesson here is not that some of us were right about Vietnam, and some of us were wrong. The lesson is that true patriots must defend the right of dissent, and hear the voices of dissenters, especially now, when our leaders have committed us to a pre-emptive "war of choice" that does not involve the defense of our people or our territory against aggressors. The patriotic obligation to speak out becomes even more urgent when politicians refuse to debate their policies or disclose the facts. And even more urgent when they seek, perversely, to use their own military blunders to deflect opposition and answer their own failures with more of the same. Presidents and politicians may worry about losing face, or votes, or legacy; it is time to think about young Americans and innocent civilians who are losing their lives.

This is not the first time in American history when patriotism has been distorted to deflect criticism and mislead the nation.

In the infancy of the Republic, in 1798, Congress enacted the Alien and Sedition Acts to smear Thomas Jefferson and accuse him of treason. Newspapers were shut down, and their editors arrested, including Benjamin Franklin's grandson. No wonder Thomas Jefferson himself said: "Dissent is the greatest form of patriotism."

In the Mexican War, a young Congressman named Abraham Lincoln was driven from public life for raising doubts about official claims. And in World War I, America's values were degraded, not defended, when dissenters were jailed and the teaching of German was banned in public schools in some states. At that time it was apparently sounding German, not looking French, that got you in trouble. And it was panic and prejudice, not true patriotism, that brought the internment of Japanese-Americans during World War II--a measure upheld by Supreme Court Justices who did not uphold their oaths to defend the Constitution. We are stronger today because no less a rock-ribbed conservative than Robert Taft -- "Mr. Republican" himself -- stood up and said at the height of the second World War that, "the maintenance of the right of criticism in the long run will do the country maintaining it a great deal more good than it will do the enemy, and will prevent mistakes which might otherwise occur."

Even during the Cold War--an undeclared war, and often more a war of nerves and diplomacy than of arms--even the mildest dissenters from official policy were sometimes silenced, blacklisted, or arrested, especially during the McCarthy era of the early 1950s. Indeed, it was only when Joseph McCarthy went through the gates of delirium and began accusing distinguished U.S. diplomats and military leaders of treason that the two parties in Washington and the news media realized the common stake they had in the right to dissent. They stood up to a bully and brought down McCarthyism's ugly and contrived appeals to a phony form of 100% Americanism.

Dissenters are not always right, but it is always a warning sign when they are accused of unpatriotic sentiments by politicians seeking a safe harbor from debate, from accountability, or from the simple truth.

Truth is the American bottom line. Truth above all is fundamental to who we are. It is no accident that among the first words of the first declaration of our national existence it is proclaimed: "We hold these truths to be self-evident...".

This hall and this Commonwealth have always been at the forefront of seeking out and living out the truth in the conduct of public life. Here Massachusetts defined human rights by adopting our own Bill of Rights; here we took a stand against slavery, for women's suffrage and civil rights for all Americans. The bedrock of America's greatest advances--the foundation of what we know today are defining values--was formed not by cheering on things as they were, but by taking them on and demanding change.

And here and now we must insist again that fidelity, honor, and love of country demand untrammeled debate and open dissent. At no time is that truer than in the midst of a war rooted in deceit and justified by continuing deception. For what is at stake here is nothing less than life itself. As the statesman Edmund Burke once said: "A conscientious man should be cautious how he dealt in blood."

Think about that now--in a new era that has brought old temptations and tested abiding principles.

America has always embraced the best traditions of civilized conduct toward combatants and non-combatants in war. But today our leaders hold themselves above the law--in the way they not only treat prisoners in Abu Ghraib, but assert unchecked power to spy on American citizens.

America has always rejected war as an instrument of raw power or naked self-interest. We fought when we had to in order to repel grave threats or advance freedom and self-determination in concert with like-minded people everywhere. But our current leadership, for all its rhetoric of freedom and democracy, behaves as though might does make right, enabling us to discard the alliances and institutions that served us so well in the past as nothing more now than impediments to the exercise of unilateral power.

America has always been stronger when we have not only proclaimed free speech, but listened to it. Yes, in every war, there have been those who demand suppression and silencing. And although no one is being jailed today for speaking out against the war in Iraq, the spirit of intolerance for dissent has risen steadily, and the habit of labeling dissenters as unpatriotic has become the common currency of the politicians currently running our country.

Dismissing dissent is not only wrong, but dangerous when America's leadership is unwilling to admit mistakes, unwilling to engage in honest discussion of the nation's direction, and unwilling to hold itself accountable for the consequences of decisions made without genuine disclosure, or genuine debate.

In recent weeks, a number of retired high-ranking military leaders, several of whom played key combat or planning roles in Afghanistan and Iraq, have come forward publicly to call for the resignation of Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld. And across the administration, from the president on down, we've heard these calls dismissed or even attacked as acts of disloyalty, or as threats to civilian control of the armed forces. We have even heard accusations that this dissent gives aid and comfort to the enemy. That is cheap and it is shameful. And once again we have seen personal attacks on the character of those who speak out. How dare those who never wore the uniform in battle attack those who wore it all their lives--and who, retired or not, did not resign their citizenship in order to serve their country.

The former top operating officer at the Pentagon, a Marine Lieutenant General, said "the commitment of our forces to this fight was done with a casualness and swagger that are the special province of those who have never had to execute these missions--or bury the results." It is hard for a career military officer to speak those words. But at a time when the administration cannot let go of the myths and outright lies it broadcast in the rush to war in Iraq, those who know better must speak out.

At a time when mistake after mistake is being compounded by the very civilian leadership in the Pentagon that ignored expert military advice in the invasion and occupation of Iraq, those who understand the price being paid for each mistake by our troops, our country, and Iraq itself must be heard.

Once again we are imprisoned in a failed policy. And once again we are being told that admitting mistakes, not the mistakes themselves, will provide our enemies with an intolerable propaganda victory. Once again we are being told that we have no choice but to stay the course of a failed policy. At a time like this, those who seek to reclaim America's true character and strength must be respected.

The true defeatists today are not those who call for recognizing the facts on the ground in Iraq. The true defeatists are those who believe America is so weak that it must sacrifice its principles to the pursuit of illusory power.

The true pessimists today are not those who know that America can handle the truth about the Administration's boastful claim of "Mission Accomplished" in Iraq. The true pessimists are those who cannot accept that America's power and prestige depend on our credibility at home and around the world. The true pessimists are those who do not understand that fidelity to our principles is as critical to national security as our military power itself.
And the most dangerous defeatists, the most dispiriting pessimists, are those who invoke September 11th to argue that our traditional values are a luxury we can no longer afford.

Let's call it the Bush-Cheney Doctrine.

According to the Bush-Cheney Doctrine, alliances and international institutions are now disposable--and international institutions are dispensable or even despicable.

According to the Bush-Cheney Doctrine, we cannot foreswear the fool's gold of information secured by torturing prisoners or creating a shadow justice system with no rules and no transparency.

According to the Bush-Cheney Doctrine, unwarranted secrecy and illegal spying are now absolute imperatives of our national security.

According to the Bush-Cheney Doctrine, those who question the abuse of power question America itself.

According to the Bush-Cheney doctrine, an Administration should be willing to spend hundreds of billions of dollars on the Iraq war, but unwilling to spend a few billion dollars to secure the American ports through which nuclear materials could make their way to terrorist cells.

According to the Bush-Cheney Doctrine, executive powers trump the constitutional doctrine of separation of powers.

According to the Bush-Cheney Doctrine, smearing administration critics is not only permissible, but necessary--and revealing the identity of a CIA agent is an acceptable means to hide the truth.

The raw justification for abandoning so many American traditions exposes the real danger of the Bush-Cheney Doctrine. We all understand we are in a long struggle against jihadist extremism. It does represent a threat to our vital security interests and our values. Even the Bush-Cheney Administration acknowledges this is preeminently an ideological war, but that's why the Bush-Cheney Doctrine is so ill-equipped to fight and win it.

Our enemies argue that all our claims about advancing universal principles of human rights and mutual respect disguise a raw demand for American dominance. They gain every time we tolerate or cover up abuses of human rights in Abu Ghraib or Guantanamo Bay, or among sectarian militias in Iraq, and especially when we defiantly disdain the rules of international law.

Our enemies argue that our invasion and occupation of Iraq reflect an obsession with oil supplies and commercial opportunities. They gain when our president and vice president, both former oil company executives, continue to pursue an oil-based energy strategy, and provide vast concessions in Iraq to their corporate friends.

And so there's the crowning irony: the Bush-Cheney Doctrine holds that many of our great traditions cannot be maintained; yet the Bush-Cheney policies, by abandoning those traditions, give Osama bin Laden and his associates exactly what they want and need to reinforce their hate-filled ideology of Islamic solidarity against the western world.

I understand fully that Iraq is not Vietnam, and the war on terrorism is not the Cold War. But in one very crucial respect, we are in the same place now as we were thirty five years ago. When I testified in 1971, I spoke out not just against the war itself, but the blindness and cynicism of political leaders who were sending brave young Americans to be killed or maimed for a mission the leaders themselves no longer believed in.

The War in Vietnam and the War in Iraq are now converging in too many tragic respects.

As in Vietnam, we engaged militarily in Iraq based on official deception.

As in Vietnam, we went into Iraq ostensibly to fight a larger global war under the misperception that the particular theater was just a sideshow, but we soon learned that the particular aspects of the place where we fought mattered more than anything else.
And as in Vietnam, we have stayed and fought and died even though it is time for us to go.
We are now in the third war in Iraq in as many years. The first was against Saddam Hussein and his supposed weapons of mass destruction. The second was against terrorists whom, the administration said, it was better to fight over there than here. Now we find our troops in the middle of an escalating civil war.

Half of the service members listed on the Vietnam Memorial Wall died after America's leaders knew our strategy would not work. It was immoral then and it would be immoral now to engage in the same delusion. We want democracy in Iraq, but Iraqis must want it as much as we do. Our valiant soldiers can't bring democracy to Iraq if Iraq's leaders are unwilling themselves to make the compromises that democracy requires.

As our generals have said, the war cannot be won militarily. It must be won politically. No American soldier should be sacrificed because Iraqi politicians refuse to resolve their ethnic and political differences.

Our call to action is clear. Iraqi leaders have responded only to deadlines--a deadline to transfer authority to a provisional government, and a deadline to hold three elections. It was the most intense 11th hour pressure that just pushed aside Prime Minister Jaafari and brought forward a more acceptable candidate. And it will demand deadline toughness to reign in Shiite militias Sunnis say are committing horrific acts of torture every day in Baghdad.
So we must set another deadline to extricate our troops and get Iraq up on its own two feet.
Iraqi politicians should be told that they have until May 15 to deal with these intransigent issues and at last put together an effective unity government or we will immediately withdraw our military. If Iraqis aren't willing to build a unity government in the five months since the election, they're probably not willing to build one at all. The civil war will only get worse, and we will have no choice anyway but to leave.

If Iraq's leaders succeed in putting together a government, then we must agree on another deadline: a schedule for withdrawing American combat forces by year's end. Doing so will actually empower the new Iraqi leadership, put Iraqis in the position of running their own country and undermine support for the insurgency, which is fueled in large measure by the majority of Iraqis who want us to leave their country.

So now, as in 1971, we are engaged in another fight to live the truth and make our own government accountable. As in 1971, this is another moment when American patriotism demands more dissent and less complacency in the face of bland assurances from those in power.

We must insist now that patriotism does not belong to those who defend a President's position--it belongs to those who defend their country. Patriotism is not love of power; it is love of country. And sometimes loving your country demands you must tell the truth to power. This is one of those times.

Lives are on the line. Lives have been lost to bad decisions - not decisions that could have gone either way, but decisions that constitute basic negligence and incompetence. And lives continue to be lost because of stubbornness and pride.

We support the troops--the brave men and women who have always protected us and do so today--in part by honoring their service, and in part by making sure they have everything they need both in battle and after they have borne the burden of battle.

But I believe now as strongly and proudly as I did thirty-five years ago that the most important way to support the troops is to tell the truth, and to ensure we do not ask young
Americans to die in a cause that falls short of the ideals of this country.

When we protested the war in Vietnam some would weigh in against us saying: "My country right or wrong."

Our response was simple: "Yes, my country right or wrong. When right, keep it right and when wrong, make it right." And that's what we must do again today.

Senator Kerry, Shadow President

Senator Kerry didn't mince words when he outlined his exit strategy from Iraq, "Half of the service members listed on the Vietnam Memorial Wall died after America's leaders knew our strategy would not work. It was immoral then and it would be immoral now to engage in the same delusion." Calling for two deadlines for Iraq, Senator John Kerry detailed a plan to hand Iraq over to Iraqis in 2006: "I believe that American combat troops should come home from Iraq in 2006 - not the distant future as President Bush does. Furthermore, I believe we must set a May 15th deadline for the Iraqis to form an effective unity government. And, if the Iraqi politicians choose to ignore that deadline, then I believe things will only get worse and we will have no choice but to withdraw immediately."

Democrats Max Cleland, Russ Feingold and Gary Hart have made statements in support of Senator Kerry's plan and countless other legislators have lined up to demand of the Administration that they get on board with some kind of plan to hand over Iraq to the Iraqi government.
Read Senator Kerry's plan; it is tough, smart and clear cut:
http://www.johnkerry.com/pressroom/news/news_2006_0405.html

This isn't the first time John Kerry has spoken out on Iraq. During his campaign he stated that Iraq was the, "the wrong war in the wrong place at the wrong time."

Last fall, Senator Kerry outlined a plan for phased withdrawal based on benchmarks that, had it been adopted, would have had us out of Iraq in as soon as six months. Well, six months has passed and we are still there. Obviously the Administration thought they had a better plan than Kerry's. As I recall, Republicans scoffed at Kerry's Plan. They thought they could do so much better. Well, six months have passed and we are still there and there is NO end in sight.

As John Kerry said to Secretary of State Rice, after she denied that Iraq was plunging into civil war and urged patience in Iraq a few weeks ago, "So a little patience. The American people have already sustained a war that has gone on longer than World War II, longer than it took us to beat the Axis powers and have invested in ultimately what will be up to $300 billion and some say half a trillion dollars for their defense. That's pretty patient."

Apparently, the Republicans still don't get it. Senator Allard, cowardly chicken and hawk vet that he is (veterinarian), attacked Senator Kerry on the Senate floor yesterday. He was careful to make sure that Kerry was busy in committee at the time, however. A face-to-face confrontation was apparently too "scarey" for the dog doctor. He'd have had to face a man who had actually gone to war for his country and question his patriotism. Senator Kerry was more than a little pissed when he arrived on the Senate floor. He had this to say:

"Mr. President, a little while ago I was fought here. I was at a hearing of the finance committee. I am informed that the Senator from Colorado, Senator Allard, came to the floor to attack my position on Iraq, which is fine by me, but also I think somewhat questionably with respect to the rules and the etiquette of the Senate to attack me personally for my motives with respect to the position I have taken. And the Senator from Colorado suggested that -- quote -- "we're seeing an individual who is being spun in the political winds."

Well, let me make it clear to the Senator from Colorado and anybody who wants to debate Iraq, when it comes to issues of war and peace and of young Americans dying, nobody spins me period. And I’m not going to listen to the Senator from Colorado or anyone else questions my motives when young Americans are dying on a daily basis or losing their limbs because Iraqi politicians won't form a government from an election that they held in December. That is just inexcusable; let me ask the Senator from Colorado, it is okay by him that young Americans are dying right now while politicians in Baghdad are frittering away the time and the opportunity that our soldiers fought to give them? Does he think that's a plan that's working? Does he think that's serving the needs of the American military? A year and a half ago, two years ago I suggested, as did many other people, that it would be inappropriate to set a timetable for American troops to withdraw because we hadn't had election and because most people assumed what we were fighting then was al Qaeda and foreign terrorists. The fact is since then we've trained forces, we've trained police. We listen to this administration consistently come and tell us how great the training is, how many people are up and trained, how much they've been able to make progress, how 70% of the country is indeed peaceful. Well, if that's true, then there shouldn't be a great threat to reducing American forces on a schedule that is also tied to our ability to resolve the other issues with respect to Iraq. I'd ask the Senator from Colorado, let's have a real debate about this issue. Does he ignore what our own generals tell us?"

While the clowns play to the puppet media, America is being let down by our President. The Bush Administration is clueless. They don't understand and they don't listen to the American people. Senator John Kerry does. He's in there fighting for us each and every day. After the crushing defeat in 2004, he promised he'd have our back. He has kept that promise. John Kerry is our Shadow President.

This is a response to David Brooks on his April 2, 2006, NY Times Op-Ed entitled, "On the Road with JK and the V. P."

Dear Mr. Brooks,

It is rather amusing and somewhat sad to find the columnist who "speaks about the issues that shape his perspective" engaging in commentary about Senator Kerry’s dietary and travel requirements. Perhaps this is not your fault. We have become a society that is filled with inane diversions: we are nothing so much as we are a nation obsessing on the trivial while the really important issues get shoved aside. We’re not the first to do so. Didn’t Nero fiddle while Rome burned? Or was that George W. Bush reading a story about a goat?

Mr. Brooks, you can make your digs about staffers and their relationships to their employers. You can turn from serious issues to the tabloid. This is simply a matter of economics: give the people what they want and you will reap the benefits. If we didn’t want garbage, you might actually write about something of serious consequence. Nonetheless, there is one line you should not have crossed: you should not have berated a cancer survivor for watching his diet after his surgery.

I think that it is sad when a man who is recovering from cancer is lampooned for being a non-hedonist because he drinks bottled water and nutritional drinks. I don’t know if you have ever been diagnosed with cancer yourself or if you have had a loved one suffer from this disease, but it certainly is not a laughing matter. At the onset of his presidential campaign, Senator Kerry underwent a radical prostatectomy. It was a conventional surgery, which means that he was sliced open (from navel to pubic bone) with a razor-sharp scapel, his prostrate gland was completely removed and then he was stitched back together. After a too-short recovery, the senator hit the road and maintained a grueling schedule right up until the election.

Surviving cancer depends on a lot of factors and taking care of ones self after cancer treatment is crucial. Eating a healthy diet is important, especially if you’ve had a substantial weight loss. After cancer certain foods taste different and this varies per individual. Additional factors such as stress or a heavy schedule can also affect appetite. The now healthy Senator Kerry is actually quite hedonistic in his love of chocolate and has a well-documented weakness for chocolate chip cookies and Burger King Whoppers. As his campaign progressed, he ate a lot of Fireman’s chili and last week he chowed down on some ziti and meatballs (tomato sauce) at an event in Mass. My guess on the celery: either it tasted funny after his operation, it upset his post-cancer digestion or he just never liked the chewy, green stuff in the first place. Is this really more important than say, the WAR in Iraq?

I’m sorry that it disappoints you that a 60ish man recovering from cancer (and running for President, by the way) isn’t into sex, drugs and rock and roll. Well, not the drugs anyway. Didn’t Bono just give him a guitar and isn’t he married to a very sexy woman? Hey, life on bottled water can’t be all that bad. He flies planes, snowboards, windsurfs, plays hockey and women can’t take their eyes off of him (this is QUITE true, I assure you). Dude, you should have it so good. Let’s see how much of your youth is left when you hit 60. Something tells me you will be one of those guys who settles for the comfy bathrobe.

The Dawn of the Phoenix

"Life is like a shooting star
it don't matter who you are
if you only run for cover, it's just a waste of time
We are lost 'til we are found
this phoenix rises up from the ground
and all these wars are over"
- LIVE


There is a general feeling in this country that with our political system being such that it is, the most qualified person (to be President) can never elected. This has been true for a long time: if we are lucky we get fair to middling. If we are not: we get Bush. John Kerry was the first truly qualified individual to come as close as he did to being President in a long time. And he's bucked the odds: he's come back stronger and smarter than ever. It is amazing. Senator Kerry is amazing.

We can analyze and calculate the odds on just about anything. This is what people do, especially where politics is involved. A true leader; however, transcends the conventional wisdom and transcends the machinations of the political process. John Kerry is that leader. He works both within the system and outside of the system (cutting his own path through the jungle).

For me, it was his concession speech that made me realize what a great man Senator Kerry truly is. It was a sad day, to be sure. But there was a message there, a subtext beneath the words and emotions that day, one that maybe even the senator did not realize at the time. It was something intangible, something that spoke not in words but on a subliminal level. I knew at that moment that what I was witnessing was not an end: it was a beginning, a birth of something that history will chronicle long after we all are gone to dust. 2004 was the baptism by fire. Our hopes went down in flames, but our leader has risen from the ashes like a Phoenix in all its glory. Senator Kerry did not lie down in defeat. He rose and he's pulling us up with him. The Dawn of the Phoenix is about to begin.

Kerry 2008: Polls Schmolls / It's not just a mailing list Stupid!

The polls don't understand John Kerry. Would they have predicted the man could generate a quarter of a MILLION dollars in less than 2 days? Well, he sent out his e-mail for the "Fighting Dems" and that's exactly what happened. His PAC, Keeping America's Promise was a top earner for Democrats last year and his support and campaigning helped put Dems in office in 2005. Wait till you see what he accomplishes in 2006. Then tell me the polls don't like him in 2008.

The people giving money to Senator Kerry's PAC are ordinary people giving small amounts of money. Why are they giving money to John Kerry? Because he has more support than the MSM (mainstream media) or the GOP wants you to believe! It's not just a mailing list! Most of the names on the list are SUPPORTERS and many have been added since the election.

In general, the 2008 polls do not reflect this support. Much of the grassroots support for John Kerry is missed by political polls. What is not missed by these polls; however, is the distortion generated from conflict of interest. There are a lot of Republicans and a lot of other Democrats who want a shot a the Presidency in 2008. And they don't want to have to run against John Kerry, so they are running him down every chance they get.

Who would want to run against John Kerry? He's ten times tougher than he was in 2004 and they already threw everything they had at him and he's still clean. And he's still standing. He's tough: he never gives up and he never gives in. He's also got the ability to generate huge sums of cash from ARDENT supporters. (Trust me: those of us who have hung in there with him through 2004 are among the most loyal of the loyal. We will go to the wall for John Kerry.) Besides money, he can mobilize supporters to action at a moment's notice. And let's not forget the support of all the Democrats across the country who he has helped get into office or re-elected. Then you've got to take the anger factor into consideration. Our gentlemanly Senator is no wimp despite his good manners and sense of honor. To say he's pissed and armed to the teeth is an understatement.

I always enjoy describing Senator Kerry in Star Trek terms: he's a Vulcan on the outside, has the heart of Dr. McCoy but is pure Klingon when he's pissed. He's pissed now. For those of you who never got to see the ass-kicking Kerry during the 2004 campaign, partly due to the MSM spin, let me say this: if he runs in 2008, you are in for a treat!

What is it about those Kerrycrats?

As the number of posts in the John Kerry Group at the Democratic Underground nears the 75,000 mark, I’m reminded of the amazing fact that this ardent group was created in response to the re-election of George W. Bush in 2004. To say that the re-election (coronation) of King George was a crushing defeat is understatement: the highways and byways of our great nation were strewn with the broken hearts and crushed spirits of liberals, moderates and the generally sane. With the loss came bitterness, anger and recriminations. Yet this rag-tag band of renegade Kerry supporters formed a cohesive group, which bonded together in loyalty, strength and determination. The posts in this group average out at over 150 per day for every day since John Kerry conceded the election to the naked emperor in November 2004. And these posts are increasing at a rate that is near exponential! The group is gaining in momentum rather than waning and the 100K milestone will undoubtedly be hit this spring.

The enthusiasm and the passion generated by a group of Kerrycrats is a wonder to behold. It’s like nothing I’ve experienced since Beatlemania. In fact, more than one Kerrycrat has jokingly stated, “John Kerry is my favorite Beatle.” How could there be such a furor over a guy we were continually told was dull, uninspiring and not likeable? It was driven home like an ad for Coke or Pepsi, except Kerry was brand X. Remember those cigarette commercials they used to run on television and how they tried to make us believe smoking was cool? So much for truth in advertising!

Our truth is: Kerrycrats love John Kerry. We love him with our hearts and our souls and our minds. We love him the way an idealist loves an ideal. He’s more than a politician or a public servant: he’s our hero. We believe in heroes and we understand that sometimes it takes a great loss to generate a true hero. To us he’s more than just one man: he’s the embodiment of the very concept of one man standing up with conviction and determination. This archetype strikes a chord that resonates on a personal frequency to each and every Kerrycrat I know, myself included.

This is a tough world. We are surrounded by corruption and greed and it is difficult to believe in anything anymore. When things were darkest, after the battle and the crushing loss, John Kerry did not turn away. Even in defeat, he remembered his promises. For those who still cry foul, who accuse John Kerry of giving up, heed my words and the words of countless Kerrycrats who know the truth: John Kerry never gives up and he never gives in. He lives to fight another day. And he lives to fight for us and beside us. We not only know this, we feel this. It is a fact that we feel in our bones the way old sailors feel a storm brewing. Sometimes you can search your entire life for something as illusive as truth and never realize what it is until it jumps up and slaps you right in the face. We have found our truth and the bearer of that message is Senator Kerry.

Kerry on Kerrycrats! Tomorrow is another day!

A Time for Heroes

The time for heroes is now.






"Where have all the good men gone
And where are all the gods?
Where’s the street-wise Hercules
To fight the rising odds?




Isn’t there a white knight upon a fiery steed?
Late at night I toss and I turn and I dream of what I need




I need a hero
I'm holding out for at hero 'till the end of the night
He's gotta be strong
And he's gotta be fast
And he's gotta be fresh from the fight



I need a hero
I’m holding out for a hero 'till the morning light
He’s gotta be sure
And it’s gotta be soon
And he’s gotta be larger than life
Larger than life




Somewhere after midnight
In my wildest fantasy
Somewhere just beyond my reach
There’s someone reaching back for me




Racing on the thunder and rising with the heat
It’s gonna take a superman to sweep me off my feet




I need a hero
I'm holding out for a hero 'till the end of the night
He's gotta be strong
And he's gotta be fast
And he's gotta be fresh from the fight



I need a hero
I’m holding out for a hero 'till the morning light
He’s gotta be sure
And it’s gotta be soon
And he’s gotta be larger than life





I need a hero
I'm holding out for at hero 'till the the end of the night




Up where the mountains meet the heavens above
Out where the lightning splits the sea
I could swear there is someone somewhere
Watching me




Through the wind and the chill and the rain
And the storm and the flood
I can feel his approach
Like a fire in my blood




I need a hero
I'm holding out for a hero 'till the end of the night
He’s gotta be strong
And he's gotta be fast
And he's gotta be fresh from the fight





I need a hero
I'm holding out for a hero 'till the morning light
He's gotta be sure
And it's gotta be soon
And he's gotta be larger than life




I need a hero
I'm holding out for a hero 'till the end of the night"






Lyrics by Bonnie Tyler

And so it begins.

Et tu, Brute?

When the deeds of the day were done, the senators' knives were red
and a dark stain ran down the Senate steps.

January, 30, 2006

Et tu, Senator Akaka? (D) HI
Et tu, Senator Baucus? (D) MT
Et tu, Senator Bingaman? (D) NM
Et tu, Senator Byrd? (D) WV
Et tu, Senator Cantwell? (D) WA
Et tu, Senator Carper? (D) DE
ET tu, Senator Conrad? (D) ND
Et tu, Senator Dorgan? (D) ND
Et tu, Senator Inouye? (D) HI
Et tu, Senator Johnson? (D) SD
Et tu, Senator Kohl? (D) WI
Et tu, Senator Landrieu? (D) LA
Et tu, Senator Lieberman? (D) CT
Et tu, Senator Lincoln (D)? AZ
Et tu, Senator Nelson (D)? FL
Et tu, Senator Nelson (D)? NE
Et tu, Senator Pryor (D)? AR
Et tu, Senator Rockefeller? (D) WV
Et tu, Senator Salazar? (D) CO