:: Da' Militant One's Lair ::

:: Friday, September 30, 2005 ::

How's Goes It In Iraq?

Well Lemmings you say you support the war and the President. Let's go to the video tape:

Decline in Iraqi Troops' Readiness CitedGenerals Tell Lawmakers They Cannot Predict When U.S. Forces Can Withdraw

By Josh White and Bradley GrahamWashington Post Staff WritersFriday, September 30, 2005; A12

The number of Iraqi army battalions that can fight insurgents without U.S. and coalition help has dropped from three to one, top U.S. generals told Congress yesterday, adding that the security situation in Iraq is too uncertain to predict large-scale American troop withdrawals anytime soon.

Gen. George W. Casey Jr., who oversees U.S. forces in Iraq, said there are fewer Iraqi battalions at "Level 1" readiness than there were a few months ago. Although Casey said the number of troops and overall readiness of Iraqi security forces have steadily increased in recent months, and that there has not been a "step backwards," both Republican and Democratic senators expressed deep concern that the United States is not making enough progress against a resilient insurgency.

Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld and his commanders yesterday publicly hedged their forecasts of U.S. involvement in Iraq, leaving it unclear when troops will be able to come home or how long it will take before Iraqi security forces can defend their homeland. The officials also gave somber forecasts of significant insurgent attacks in the coming weeks as Iraq faces important political milestones.

Yesterday in Iraq, three suicide attackers set off a series of car bombs in a northern, mainly Shiite town, killing at least 40 people and wounding many more. In western Iraq, a roadside bomb killed five U.S. soldiers. Sunni insurgents have said they want to disrupt the constitutional referendum next month and the elections set for December.

On Capitol Hill, Casey and Gen. John P. Abizaid, who leads the U.S. Central Command, told the Senate Armed Services Committee that Iraqi forces are growing steadily but that it could be some time before they can take over large portions of the country. The readiness of Iraqi forces is a key element of the U.S. war strategy to gradually reduce American troops as Iraqi troops are able to effectively replace them.

"Over the past 18 months, we have built enough Iraqi capacity where we can begin talking seriously about transitioning this counterinsurgency mission to them," Casey said. Military figures show that there are about three dozen army and special police battalions rated at Level 2 or above, meaning they are taking the lead in combat as long as they have support from coalition forces.

Officials did not say specifically why two battalions are no longer rated at Level 1 and thus unable to operate on their own. They said generally readiness ratings can change for numerous reasons, such as if a commander resigns, or if more training is needed. Casey also said that the "Iraqi armed forces will not have an independent capability for some time."
In a House Armed Services Committee hearing yesterday afternoon, Rumsfeld and the commanders were pressed for specifics about when troops might withdraw. But the answers were vague, at least the ones provided in public, before members moved into a classified briefing.

"I can tell you, Congressman, it's all going to be conditions-based," Casey said in answering Rep. John M. Spratt Jr. (D-S.C.), who had sought a "reasonable time frame" for Iraqi troops to take over security duties. "It's not going to be like throwing a switch where all of a sudden, one day, the Iraqis are in charge."

Senators bristled at the disclosure that only one of Iraq's 86 army battalions is ready to fight on its own, including rare blunt criticism from Republicans. Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) said he believes the United States has not had enough troops to fend off insurgents permanently. McCain also chastised Air Force Gen. Richard B. Myers, who retires as chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff today, for being overly optimistic because "things have not gone as we had planned or expected nor as we were told by you, General Myers."

Myers replied: "I don't think this committee or the American public has ever heard me say that things are going very well in Iraq. This is a hard struggle." Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine) said she was discouraged by the lack of readiness by the Iraqi security force. She said that it "contributes to a loss of public confidence in how the war is going," and that "it doesn't feel like progress when we hear today that we have only one Iraqi battalion that is fully capable."

Sen. Lindsey O. Graham (R-S.C.) said he doubts that U.S. commanders have a clear handle on the nature of the insurgency and noted that the war has been more difficult than he expected.
Defense officials and military commanders have frequently sounded upbeat since the January elections, at times predicting that significant numbers of U.S. troops might return home by next spring and declaring that the insurgency was waning. As attacks have intensified recently and as the war has become less popular in the United States, that optimism has slipped. Lawmakers have recently expressed concerns about the growing potential for civil war in Iraq.
Sen. Carl M. Levin (Mich.), ranking Democrat on the committee, said he believes that if Iraqis do not join together by the end of the year to reach a political solution that is agreeable to the minority Sunnis, the United States should consider a timetable for withdrawal. Levin said an indefinite U.S. presence could hinder Iraqi progress.

"That's not setting a date for departure at this time," he said. "That's simply conveying clearly and forcefully to the Iraqis that the presence of our forces in Iraq is not unlimited."
Asked whether the insurgency has worsened, Casey said it has not expanded geographically or numerically, "to the extent we can know that." But he noted that current "levels of violence are above norms," exceeding 500 attacks a week.

"I'll tell you that levels of violence are a lagging indicator of success," he added. "And what's really important is the fact that the Iraqis are at 98 percent registered to participate in the referendum, in the elections."

© 2005 The Washington Post Company

__________________________________________________________________

So there you have it. How much incompetence are you going to tolerate? You are even more disgraceful then because if this was a democrat screwing up like this, you would have demanded that impeachment proceedings commence. You say that you support the troops and that dissent ruins morale. Well me and my buddies all went into the service in the early 1980s and I never gave much thought to what civilians said about us, specially men old enough to serve. Why should I care about the opinion of someone

:: DM1 9/30/2005 11:34:00 PM [+] ::
...

The following comment was emailed by MostHigh:

This has been going on for quite sometime now. Bush has been appointing personnel to his administration that are charismatic and the public eats it up. The political propaganda machine in this country is very effective in how it accomplishes its agenda. Question, who's to take responsibilty for the condition of the union when the Bush administration is finished? What can you really hold Bush accountable for when his term is up? What are you going to do, say you can't run for office anymore. He's made his impact (negative of course), he's got his money. George Bush doesn't care about black people, nah, George Bush doesn't care about anyone that can't effectively push his agenda. --Posted by MostHigh to Da' Militant One's Lair at 9/26/2005 11:10:40 AM

How about that, a very good point. What to do, what to do? Any suggestions out there?

:: DM1 9/29/2005 02:39:00 PM [+] ::
...

More on that Crook Tom Delay

So what about it? Have you finally knocked that "log" from your eye? It's not about the liberals, democrats, blacks, or anybody else. It's about you white folks who followed these crooks over the cliff. Behaviour that you would never tolate from black folk has become standard procedure for the republican party and you have enabled it. Delay, Frist, Bush, Cheney, Limbaugh, they have all let you down. Isn;t time to start thinking for yourself? Is this the kind of America you want? While I have a lot of problems with conservatives I am not adverse to a person like Dick Lugar or Chuck Hagel running this country. These are decent men with character and integrity. The clowns that you are supporting are embarassing you. Isn't your support worth more? Don't you deserve politicians with true ethics and morals? Like I've admonished you before, if someone has to keep telling you how christian and moral he is, watch out! It is deeds not words that are the true measure of a human being.

:: DM1 9/28/2005 09:35:00 PM [+] ::
...

Another Taste of that Crook Tom Delay:

Memo to the Democratic Leadership Council (DLC):

Either stop frontin', or change party affiliations. The country doesn't need republican-lite, it needs a viable two-party system. I am a black "liberal" republican and only want my party to get rid of the hustlers and frauds that now occupy the top levels of government. I'm for republicans like Chuck Hagel, Dick Luger, and John "Johnnie Mac" McCain. These are men of character and integrity. Yet, the likes of Ashcroft, Bush, Cheney, and Delay are running the country and running it into a ditch! You, the DLC, are not helping my party or the country as long as you don't stand up to ABCD. Like that? ABCD: A-shcroft, B-ush, C-heney, D-elay. ABCD has given you all of the ammunition you'll ever need to depose them and still you run away like scared rabbits. Is there no sanity? Are there no men of courage remaining? Well, that's why I'm here because it is way past time to turn up the heat and return this nation and it's people back to the road map of prosperity and true liberty!
:: DM1 7/11/2003 09:09:22 AM [+] ::

:: DM1 9/28/2005 09:34:00 PM [+] ::
...

A Note About That Crook Tom Delay

I wrote the following blog more than a year ago:

Messege to Kerry Supporters:

Here's a email that I sent to Mary Tarr a Kerry supporter in Maryland: Mary,It's time to take off the gloves. Kerry and Edwards need to demand debates with Bush and Cheney immediately and if they don't accept curse them for the cowards that they are. We've got troops still dying almost daily. What is Kerry waiting for? He fought in an insane war. He has an obligation to take the fight to Bush now! Also Kerry and Edwards don't need to apologize for the words of anybody that opposes Bush. Use Cheney's behavior on theSenate floor as an example. He said he was glad that he told Leahy to "F--- off." Bush is steadily lying daily. Kerry should call him on it. Look this election is going to be one of the nastiest ones on record. Let Edwards talk about domestic policies. Kerry needs to focus on Bush, hisrecord, and foreign policy. You've got Iraq getting ready to boil over. The Iraqi President is calling for NATO and the Kurds are calling for independence. If Kerry doesn't begin to engage Bush, "forcefully" then events may overwhelm his message. For each issue he debates, Kerry should release a white paper that clearly states his position and views. He is not going to please everybody. So don't try.

Also, it's time to connect that crook Delay to the Bush Administration's criminal culture. Time is of the essence. I told you, I worked in the RNC. I have been a republican for 18 years. I was raised in D.C. so I know when I am in a street fight. I have a blog:

militantone@blogspot.com use any and all information and comments with my blessing. How embarassed are we supposed get over these clowns? Haven't they disgraced us enough? Let's get this party started right!Peace,Da' Militant One
:: DM1 7/13/2004 07:28:21 PM [+] :: ...

:: DM1 9/28/2005 09:30:00 PM [+] ::
...

Affirmative Action for White Conservative Republicans


September 24, 2005Amid Many Fights Over Qualifications, a Bush Nomination Stalls in the Senate
By DAVID E. ROSENBAUM and STEPHEN LABATON

WASHINGTON, Sept. 23 - Faced with accusations that the Bush administration is stocking the government with unqualified cronies, the Republican chairwoman of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee is holding up the nomination of a lawyer with little background in immigration or customs to head the law enforcement agency in charge of those issues.

Democrats have seized on the political fury that developed over the apparent lack of qualifications of Michael D. Brown, the director, and others in the Federal Emergency Management Agency who were called on to deal with the calamity caused by Hurricane Katrina. Day after day, Democratic lawmakers have begun aggressively challenging the credentials of people President Bush wants to place in midlevel government positions.
The homeland security chairwoman, Senator Susan Collins of Maine, says she now wants to inquire further into the qualifications of Julie L. Myers to be assistant secretary of homeland security for immigration and customs enforcement.

The senior Democrat on the Senate committee, Joseph I. Lieberman of Connecticut, said Friday that he was not persuaded by a confirmation hearing last week that Ms. Myers, who has worked the last four years at the White House and in several agencies, satisfied the legal requirement that the official in charge of the immigration agency have at least five years' experience in law enforcement and management.

Ms. Myers, 36, is on her honeymoon and cannot be immediately called to testify again. She has strong Republican connections and is the niece of Gen. Richard B. Myers, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Before she joined the Bush administration, she was a federal prosecutor in Brooklyn.

The White House continued to express support for her Friday.
"Julie Myers is well known and respected throughout the law enforcement community, and she has a proven track record as a strong and effective manager," said Erin Healy, a presidential spokeswoman.

In addition to the questions about Ms. Myers, Senator Carl Levin of Michigan has objected to the nomination of Stewart Baker to be assistant secretary of homeland security for policy. Mr. Baker, who won committee approval despite Mr. Levin's opposition, is an accomplished technology lawyer, but he has little experience in disaster management.

At the same time, the Center for American Progress, a research institute for out-of-office Democratic policy experts, has questioned whether Andrew B. Maner is qualified for his position as chief financial officer of the Homeland Security Department, which has a budget of about $35 billion and more than 180,000 employees. Mr. Maner's main government experience before joining this administration was a job in the White House press office under the first President Bush.

The questions of credentials are not limited to homeland security. For example, the main experience of Brian D. Montgomery, who in June became assistant secretary for housing and federal housing commissioner, was performing advance work in the Bush presidential campaign of 2000 and in the current administration's first term.

Mr. Montgomery's responsibilities now include overseeing the $500 billion Federal Housing Administration insurance portfolio. His background in housing is limited to a few years as communications director of the Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs.
People who have studied the workings of the federal government for years say this administration is no worse than President Bill Clinton's or any other recent ones in the qualifications of political appointees.

"The vast majority of appointees are good, qualified and committed, but in every administration you have people who are not up to the job," said Patricia McGinnis, president of the Council for Excellence in Government, a national nonprofit, nonpartisan organization devoted to improving government performance through better management and leadership.

Paul C. Light, a political scientist at New York University, said, "In every administration, there are certain people you have to find places for: people who worked on your campaign or were contributors or are well connected with other politicians."

Clay Johnson III, who was head of the White House personnel office for the first three years of the current Bush administration and is now deputy budget director, said Mr. Bush's appointees had been "superbly qualified," in large part because the president emphasized selecting candidates who were committed to carrying out his policy objectives.

Across the government, there are more than 3,000 executive positions the president can fill without regard to Civil Service rules. They range from those of cabinet officers to personal secretaries. About 500 are subject to Senate confirmation. The trick for any president, Mr. Light said, is to fill the top jobs and those that require particular expertise with especially qualified people and then find other positions for job seekers with political or personal connections.

Certain departments and agencies tend to become dumping grounds for those with connections. "In a Republican administration," said G. Calvin Mackenzie, a government professor at Colby College, "HUD is like a witness protection program." Democrats are more likely to put their political cronies in the Commerce Department or the Small Business Administration. David E. Lewis, an assistant professor of politics at Princeton, recently published a study of 614 federal programs managed by 245 agencies. He looked at how each program was assessed under the scale the Bush administration's Office of Management and Budget uses to determine how well a program functions. Mr. Lewis found that programs run by political appointees "get systematically lower management grades than bureau chiefs drawn from the Civil Service."
One explanation for Mr. Lewis's finding may be rapid turnover. Political appointees stay on the job an average of only two years or so, then take private-sector jobs where they use the experience and contacts they have gained in the government.

In an essay she wrote shortly after leaving the White House, Constance Horner, who was director of presidential personnel for the first President Bush, said: "The job seekers continue to come in order, as they say in many variations, 'to give something back to the country' that's been good to them. They want only to serve 'this president' and no other. Alternatively (or perhaps more explicitly) they've 'paid their dues' and feel, however genteelly they put it, that they are 'owed something.' "

:: DM1 9/25/2005 07:38:00 AM [+] ::
...

Apocalypse Now!

For all of you Bush supporters, have you had enough yet? The country is going to hell in a handbasket thanks to your support of affirmative action for white folks. Bush never has been and never was qualified to run as dog catcher let alone President of the United States. This is what happens you deny reality and vote ideology. You own the three branches of government yet the country is worse off now than it has ever been. It says a lot about your idiocy and your lack of wisdom. Isn't it time to cut your losses for the sake of the country?

:: DM1 9/24/2005 04:36:00 AM [+] ::
...

Here's a copy of an Email that I sent to Senator Paul Sarbanes of Maryland:

Dear Sir,

I am very dissappointed in the democratic party. Some of the republicans have been showing their bigoted and racist spots with their rhetoric in the past two weeks since the hurricane. Who will denounce them? Who will take to the floor of Congress and stand up to these bullies and scoundrels? Has the Democratic party become so cowed that it can not defend fellow citizens who are being disparaged as well as marginalized by these disgraceful excuses for human beings? I hope that someone will tell them what they can do with their racism and bigotry. We are fighting the good fight out here, but we need all of you to stand with us.

:: DM1 9/10/2005 10:04:00 AM [+] ::
...

Let's Move Forward

Every time Bush f*cks up his minions want folks to forget that he screwed up and move forward. No accountability, no recriminations, no fault, just move forward. The inability to hold the Dauphin accountable is amazing. The chickens have come back to the coop and are now roosting and still the Bush spawn is trying to twist reality and the facts. I wonder what their definition of being an American is? It sure isn't covering day after day for an incompetent administration which they seem to relish. Remember Bill Clinton's "wee wee"? Clinton's "wee wee" had to be punished and he was impeached. What does it take for Bush to be held accountable. He could be caught on tape admitting to a crime holding the gun with a written signed confession and still his supporters would find him guilty of nothing, but would instead praise him for his honesty and willingness to "move forward." It's worst than embarassing, it's criminal and treasonous.

:: DM1 9/06/2005 10:09:00 AM [+] ::
...

Trent Lott never stops amazing me! I just heard a video of him with Anderson Cooper on CNN. He sounded as out of touch and specious as I remember. I reposted a blog a wrote after the Strom Thurmond fiasco. It's just a few blogs down. This was before I heard his interview. What an as*!

:: DM1 9/04/2005 11:24:00 AM [+] ::
...

Article by Frank Rich of the New York Times:

September 4, 2005
Falluja Floods the Superdome
By FRANK RICH

AS the levees cracked open and ushered hell into New Orleans on Tuesday, President Bush once again chose to fly away from Washington, not toward it, while disaster struck. We can all enumerate the many differences between a natural catastrophe and a terrorist attack. But character doesn't change: it is immutable, and it is destiny.

As always, the president's first priority, the one that sped him from Crawford toward California, was saving himself: he had to combat the flood of record-low poll numbers that was as uncontrollable as the surging of Lake Pontchartrain. It was time, therefore, for another disingenuous pep talk, in which he would exploit the cataclysm that defined his first term, 9/11, even at the price of failing to recognize the emerging fiasco likely to engulf Term 2.

After dispatching Katrina with a few sentences of sanctimonious boilerplate ("our hearts and prayers are with our fellow citizens"), he turned to his more important task. The war in Iraq is World War II. George W. Bush is F.D.R. And anyone who refuses to stay his course is soft on terrorism and guilty of a pre-9/11 "mind-set of isolation and retreat." Yet even as Mr. Bush promised "victory" (a word used nine times in this speech on Tuesday), he was standing at the totemic scene of his failure. It was along this same San Diego coastline that he declared "Mission Accomplished" in Iraq on the aircraft carrier Abraham Lincoln more than two years ago. For this return engagement, The Washington Post reported, the president's stage managers made sure he was positioned so that another hulking aircraft carrier nearby would stay off-camera, lest anyone be reminded of that premature end of "major combat operations."

This administration would like us to forget a lot, starting with the simple fact that next Sunday is the fourth anniversary of the day we were attacked by Al Qaeda, not Iraq. Even before Katrina took command of the news, Sept. 11, 2005, was destined to be a half-forgotten occasion, distorted and sullied by a grotesquely inappropriate Pentagon-sponsored country music jamboree on the Mall. But hard as it is to reflect upon so much sorrow at once, we cannot allow ourselves to forget the real history surrounding 9/11; it is the Rosetta stone for what is happening now. If we are to pull ourselves out of the disasters of Katrina and Iraq alike, we must live in the real world, not the fantasyland of the administration's faith-based propaganda. Everything connects.

Though history is supposed to occur first as tragedy, then as farce, even at this early stage we can see that tragedy is being repeated once more as tragedy. From the president's administration's inattention to threats before 9/11 to his disappearing act on the day itself to the reckless blundering in the ill-planned war of choice that was 9/11's bastard offspring, Katrina is déjà vu with a vengeance.

The president's declaration that "I don't think anyone anticipated the breach of the levees" has instantly achieved the notoriety of Condoleezza Rice's "I don't think anybody could have predicted that these people would take an airplane and slam it into the World Trade Center." The administration's complete obliviousness to the possibilities for energy failures, food and water deprivation, and civil disorder in a major city under siege needs only the Donald Rumsfeld punch line of "Stuff happens" for a coup de grâce. How about shared sacrifice, so that this time we might get the job done right? After Mr. Bush's visit on "Good Morning America" on Thursday, Diane Sawyer reported on a postinterview conversation in which he said, "There won't have to be tax increases."

But on a second go-round, even the right isn't so easily fooled by this drill (with the reliable exception of Peggy Noonan, who found much reassurance in Mr. Bush's initial autopilot statement about the hurricane, with its laundry list of tarps and blankets). This time the fecklessness and deceit were all too familiar. They couldn't be obliterated by a bullhorn or by the inspiring initial post-9/11 national unity that bolstered the president until he betrayed it. This time the heartlessness beneath the surface of his actions was more pronounced.

You could almost see Mr. Bush's political base starting to crumble at its very epicenter, Fox News, by Thursday night. Even there it was impossible to ignore that the administration was no more successful at securing New Orleans than it had been at pacifying Falluja.
A visibly exasperated Shepard Smith, covering the story on the ground in Louisiana, went further still, tossing hand grenades of harsh reality into Bill O'Reilly's usually spin-shellacked "No Spin Zone." Among other hard facts, Mr. Smith noted "that the haves of this city, the movers and shakers of this city, evacuated the city either immediately before or immediately after the storm." What he didn't have to say, since it was visible to the entire world, was that it was the poor who were left behind to drown.

In that sense, the inequality of the suffering has not only exposed the sham of the relentless photo-ops with black schoolchildren whom the president trots out at campaign time to sell his "compassionate conservatism"; it has also positioned Katrina before a rapt late-summer audience as a replay of the sinking of the Titanic. New Orleans's first-class passengers made it safely into lifeboats; for those in steerage, it was a horrifying spectacle of every man, woman and child for himself.

THE captain in this case, Michael Chertoff, the homeland security secretary, was so oblivious to those on the lower decks that on Thursday he applauded the federal response to the still rampaging nightmare as "really exceptional." He told NPR that he had "not heard a report of thousands of people in the convention center who don't have food and water" - even though every television viewer in the country had been hearing of those 25,000 stranded refugees for at least a day. This Titanic syndrome, too, precisely echoes the post-9/11 wartime history of an administration that has rewarded the haves at home with economic goodies while leaving the have-nots to fight in Iraq without proper support in manpower or armor. Surely it's only a matter of time before Mr. Chertoff and the equally at sea FEMA director, Michael Brown (who also was among the last to hear about the convention center), are each awarded a Presidential Medal of Freedom in line with past architects of lethal administration calamity like George Tenet and Paul Bremer.

On Thursday morning, the president told Diane Sawyer that he hoped "people don't play politics during this period of time." Presumably that means that the photos of him wistfully surveying the Katrina damage from Air Force One won't be sold to campaign donors as the equivalent 9/11 photos were. Maybe he'll even call off the right-wing attack machine so it won't Swift-boat the Katrina survivors who emerge to ask tough questions as it has Cindy Sheehan and those New Jersey widows who had the gall to demand a formal 9/11 inquiry.

But a president who flew from Crawford to Washington in a heartbeat to intervene in the medical case of a single patient, Terri Schiavo, has no business lecturing anyone about playing politics with tragedy. Eventually we're going to have to examine the administration's behavior before, during and after this storm as closely as its history before, during and after 9/11. We're going to have to ask if troops and matériel of all kinds could have arrived faster without the drain of national resources into a quagmire. We're going to have to ask why it took almost two days of people being without food, shelter and water for Mr. Bush to get back to Washington.
Most of all, we're going to have to face the reality that with this disaster, the administration has again increased our vulnerability to the terrorists we were supposed to be fighting after 9/11. As Richard Clarke, the former counterterrorism czar, pointed out to The Washington Post last week in talking about the fallout from the war in Iraq, there have been twice as many terrorist attacks outside Iraq in the three years after 9/11 than in the three years before. Now, thanks to Mr. Bush's variously incompetent, diffident and hubristic mismanagement of the attack by Katrina, he has sent the entire world a simple and unambiguous message: whatever the explanation, the United States is unable to fight its current war and protect homeland security at the same time.

The answers to what went wrong in Washington and on the Gulf Coast will come later, and, if the history of 9/11 is any guide, all too slowly, after the administration and its apologists erect every possible barrier to keep us from learning the truth. But as Americans dig out from Katrina and slouch toward another anniversary of Al Qaeda's strike, we have to acknowledge the full extent and urgency of our crisis. The world is more perilous than ever, and for now, to paraphrase Mr. Rumsfeld, we have no choice but to fight the war with the president we have.

:: DM1 9/04/2005 11:14:00 AM [+] ::
...

Here is a post from the News Blog: It has STRONG LANGUAGE! The blog is stark and I agree with it 100%. It was never about Bush being a republican. It was about an incompetent individual holding the highest office in the land and being thoroughly unprepared and unfit for the position. It was about the country and the need to maintain our strength, character, and what unity we had. There is another civil war happening and this time it is for the soul of America. You say that God finds favor with the country because we are a Christian nation. well God detests fake Christians more than he does sinners because they should know better. Does anyone wonder why God seemingly hasn't been answering our prayers lating? And this is for the religious folk not the non-believers because according to the folks that are trying to lead our country to the right and a theocracy are telling the rest of us to get right with God. Well we've had 9/11, Iraq, Hurricane Katrina, high gas prices, the largest deficit in history, and on and on. Maybe God is so ashamed of what you purport to do in his name that he is leaving you to your own devices. My disgust for your behavior is palpable. You are a danger to the rest of us through your blindness and slavish devotion to George W. Bush. And now the blog from the News Blog:

WE TOLD YOU SO

Ever wonder why New Yorkers detest George Bush? Because we experienced his incompetence up close and person. We knew this guy was full of sh*t, absolutely full of f*cking sh*t, after they started to play games with the funding and gave Wyoming terrorism money. We knew he was an assclown then. We thought DC 9/11 was a comedy, because the Bush we saw hid in AF One like the scared bitch that he is. But did you listen? F*ck no. Until last week, Ann Coulter was calling New Yorkers cowards for not endorsing Bush's folly in Iraq. We have been screaming for two years that Bush and his team sucked. That they had no clue. They sent soldiers to be wounded in Iraq without armored anything. And you idiots cheered him on from the safety of your keyboards. We told you he was f*cking up Iraq. But no, we supported Saddam, we were racist, we blamed America. You say this isn't about politics? F*ck you, this IS politics, real time, real life politics, where the insanity of all your ideas are exposed to the world for the fraud that they are. Tax cuts kill. Ask the relatives of the dead of the Gulf Coast. Well, motherf*ckers, the alligators are feasting on dead n*gger and there isn't an Iraqi in sight. And Bush is trying to gladhand his way through a mess which has stunned FOX reporters. I mean, Shepard Smith is calling Fox's talking heads liars ON THE AIR.

CNN rips Bush in print and online after nearly five years of sleep. Instead of hearing what we had to say about Bush, you called John Kerry a coward, mocked Max Cleland, blamed everything but herpes on Bill Clinton. You enabled Bush into this mess and now you're shocked?
Now, Fox can be outraged, now, Wash Times and Union Leader call Bush weak? Well, his coward ass disappeared in 2001. But you rather blame Michael Moore for that. He can't even explain the Iraq war to a grieving mother. So what did you do? rite the most vile things about her and her dead son. Attacked her patriotism and her honesty. Well, motherf*ckers, and that means you, fat ass Goldberg and your master, Rich Lowry, PNAC Bitch Beinart, the racist wannabe white Malkin and the little f*cktards at LGF, Bareback Andy and "Diversity" Instacracker, all you backstabbing, fag hating uncle tom ministers, you can see Dear Leader in action. America's largest port is gone, maybe forever, gas is $5+ a gallon and FEMA is coming. Whores come faster with old men than FEMA is getting to NOLA. How did your wartime President react? Like Chiang Kai-Shek when the Yellow River flooded in 1944, with corrupt indifference.

Bush, the man your fever dreams built into the next Winston Churchill when he is really the live action Chauncey Gardiner, has failed to everyone, in plain sight, without question. Rick Perry is trying to save his ass, but it ain't working. NOLA looks like ANGOLA and that ain't flying.
Say 9/11 changed everything now, motherf*ckers. Ooops, 9/11, 9/11. 9/11. Doesn't work anymore? Gee, maybe the sea of alligator MRE's once known as the citizens of New Orleans has something to do with that. Now you can shut the f*ck up about 9/11. Bush just proved what would happen with another 9/11. Dead Americans as far as the nose can smell. Drunken Chris Hitchens muttered some nonsense about blacks having it so good here. The poor man needs to stay in his bottle or go to Betty Ford before someone beats his treasonous ass stupid. Islamofascism means what, now motherf*cker? Shove Islamofascism up your well travelled ass. The most dangerous thing to average Americans is not some mullah in Iraq, not even Osama Bin Laden, but George Bush. If he doesn't get you killed in Iraq, he'll f*ck up saving your city so it turns into Escape from New Orleans. Armed junkies roaming the streets, looking for a fix, robbing and looting like Serb paramilitaries and about as sober. George Bush's ineptitude has killed far more Americans than Osama could have dreamed of. Some of you still try to see the clothes on the Dauphin, but he's as naked as Peter North around Jenna Jameson. Bush f*cked up so bad, FOX turned on him like a rabid dog. You can't hide behind racism forever. Bush f*cked up, Bush is a weak, callous leader and the world knows this like it knows few other things. And all the stolen TV's in the world cannot hide that.

posted by Steve @ 12:01:00 AM

:: DM1 9/04/2005 10:07:00 AM [+] ::
...

Here's Another Blast from the Past

:: Tuesday, January 13, 2004 ::

Why White Conservatives Love George W. Bush

It was just yesterday that a group on whiny, self-righteous hypocrites were telling us about the failings on Bill Clinton. They were especially upset about his "lies". It's been documented on numerous occassions that Bush "lied". Examples are the Iraq/Niger/Uranium fiasco; Saddam had ties to Osama; he would change the tone of the political discourse; etc. However, those same whiny, self-righteous hypocrites are silent in their condemnation of Bush. Why? How about Bush makes white conservative feel like they did in the good old days when white reigned supreme. Why can't a democrat running for president win in the South? A democrat does not appeal to the white conservative, confederate flag-waving bigot who never did like the changes that took place in the 1960s and 1970s.

:: DM1 1/13/2004 08:17:45 PM [+] ::

:: DM1 9/03/2005 10:58:00 PM [+] ::
...

The Hits Just Keep on Coming! Another Blast from the Past

:: Saturday, July 26, 2003 ::

Memo to Republicans:

It feels like the wheels are coming off of the bus. doesn't it? You hitched your wagon to Bush and Cheney and now here you are. Let's hope we find Osama. Let's hope we find Saddam. Where are those WMDs? How about this economy? What is the answer? War and tax cuts. As you can see the combination can be devastating. Deficits where there were surpluses. Well, I've just pulled out my lucky rabbit's foot. Let's all close our eyes and hope!

:: DM1 7/26/2003 01:57:42 AM [+] ::

:: DM1 9/03/2005 10:45:00 PM [+] ::
...

And Another Blast from the Past. I said it all years ago!

Ode to the Sheep:

King George! King George! What have you done?
Our world you've torn asunder
and replaced it with a rumor of war
of cannons, of night, and thunder.

You told us that things would all turn out
You said that you had a plan
Now here we sit broke and unemployed
No jobs to lend a hand.

Cut their taxes! Go to war!
Give me your young for fodder!
For I have plans that don't include you
Shut up! Don't make it harder.

Be the sheep that I raised you to be
And fatter yourselves up well
And when I've finished my plunder and death
I'll see you all in hell!

:: DM1 7/11/2003 09:28:59 AM [+] ::

:: DM1 9/03/2005 10:42:00 PM [+] ::
...

Another Blast from the Past!

ODE TO AMERICA:

I saw a nation standing strong like an Oak in the midst of a storm,
but like a child lost in the woods things started to go wrong.
It took it's soul and blood and tears and sold them to the highest bidder
and here it sits in a smelly old hole, an outhouse some call a shi--er.

Give me liberty! Give me death!
Are words we used to admire
And now here we sit hopeless and lost
at the hands of a country squire!

:: DM1 7/11/2003 09:20:46 AM [+] ::

:: DM1 9/03/2005 10:40:00 PM [+] ::
...

Another Blast From the Past. A Prelude to Kanye West's Indictment of George W. Bush.


Saturday, December 14, 2002 ::

Memo to "Some Folks"

Look, you and I both know that you agree wholeheartedly with Trent Lott. You can't stand black folks and you never will. That's okay. Just be honest. If you think that we can tolerate you any better, you are truly deluding yourselves. Black folks can't afford to have short memories. Once someone has put his boot on your neck even if he raises the boot, you never forget him or the feeling on his boot on your neck. You can do what you want with Lott because he never had most black americans fooled. We knew what he was and what he stood for. Come to think of it so did you. And yet, you continued to vote him into office. He is your conscience. His words are yours. You know it and I know it. Admit what you believe and what you are. Just know that we will never put our guard down because we never trust you in the first place!

Da' Militant One
:: DM1 12/14/2002 10:22:29 AM [+] :: ...

:: DM1 9/03/2005 10:36:00 PM [+] ::
...

Blast from the Past! Written Three Years Ago

Memo to Bush/Cheney Supporters:

Dear Sheep,You are reaping what you sowed. Incompetence, erosion of civil liberties, economic unstability, and on and on. Keep telling yourselves that he is doing a "wonderful" job. I guess only liberals and black folk should be held to some standards. Let's see a black kid trying to get into college must be "qualified" yet you voted for a man who has never had any meaningful accomplishments save for the last name of Bush. Well he is not his father and he is wholly unqualified for the job. "Keep looking for the pony in a room full of sh-t." How many times did Bush supporters acknowledge that Al Gore was smarter. How many times were they dismissve of Gore as a "know-it-all". Was it in April that Bush was seen carrying the book "BIAS" by Bernie Goldberg. For all of his lack of knowledge about everything, he's reading "BIAS" instead of "pick any scholarly subject. Basically, with the elevation of Bush to the presidency, being mediocre, white and conservative with a famous last name, means that you squandered any credibility on what makes anybody qualified for anything. Disgraceful, yes. Surprising, no. I knew that you were frauds all the time.Da' Militant One

:: DM1 8/17/2002 07:55:10 PM [+] :: ...

:: DM1 9/03/2005 10:33:00 PM [+] ::
...

From the Village Voice

Mondo WashingtonPumping Us DryKatrina tragedy is an absolutely perfect storm for oil companies by James RidgewaySeptember 2nd, 2005 9:06 PM

The very first thing George W. Bush did in response to Hurricane Katrina was to offer a helping hand—not to the people stranded on rooftops in New Orleans, but to his friends in the oil industry. These were the same people who gave him $52 million in his last campaign. The president released millions of barrels of oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve so the oil companies would have enough fuel to make gas and keep the country going. But the companies don't need this oil. They're already swimming in it. Pouring more oil into the marketplace didn't reduce gasoline prices, which kept on going up, hitting $4 a gallon in some places.
While crude oil production doubtless was curtailed by the storm, the companies face a surplus, not a shortage, of crude oil. So why dump more on the market?

"Despite growing inventories, U.S. commercial crude oil inventories (excluding the Strategic Petroleum Reserve) increased by nearly 5 million barrels over the past 3 weeks," wrote the federal Energy Information Administration. Continuing in the clipped industry jargon, the agency added, "While this may not appear to be a substantial build, it comes at a time when crude oil inventories typically decline, as refiners use more crude to make gasoline needed for current demand and heating oil as they stock up for the winter." Thus, any crude oil inventory increase during the month of August, much less one of five million barrels over a three-week period, might lead one to expect prices to drop. Yet the price for West Texas Intermediate (WTI) crude oil has risen by $5 per barrel! If prices don't fall under these conditions, what will make them fall?

All over the world this summer, oilmen raced to dump surplus into the U.S. market, where the rigged prices made them a killing. Oil traders in China, the second biggest world market next to the U.S., were shoving oil into the high-priced U.S. market to make more money. (The U.S. consumes 25 percent of the world market; China 7 percent.) Fort Worth Star-Telegram columnist Ed Wallace wrote last week that "there's actually weakening demand in Asia over the past two months, so oil is being diverted to the U.S., where it'll bring higher profits." He quoted Reuters as noting that "Chinese oil trader Unipec resold at least 3 million barrels of August-arriving crude due to reduced refinery demand and was offering more, traders said last week." Mary Rose Brown, a spokeswoman for Valero in San Antonio, was quoted by The Wall Street Journal as saying, "There is no reason for crude oil to be at $65 a barrel other than hype in the market."

To be sure, some oil companies face shortages because of the storm, but the release of oil from the strategic reserve may not help them much. "The Capline, a major crude oil pipeline that feeds many Midwest refineries with crude oil from the Gulf of Mexico, is currently shut down due to lack of electricity at many of its pumping stations," the EIA reported Wednesday. "As a result, one refinery in the Midwest has already reported that it has reduced its production due to a loss in crude oil supply. With the recent Government decision that crude oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR) will be made available to those affected by the hurricane, there may be some relief for refiners that have reduced their production due to loss of crude supply," the government service dryly continues. "However, they will need to find a way to get the crude oil from the SPR to their refineries."

What is going on here? The story goes like this: Refineries are increasing their stocks of crude, yet not increasing production of gasoline. This may help explain the high prices. It is an odd situation, since usually, in the summer, refineries are operating full tilt to lay in supplies of gasoline and home heating oil. The slowing of gasoline production might be due to some unrecognized problems within the refineries. But the industry says it's because of market conditions, with officials noting that while today's crude prices are over $70, in 1999 crude oil was selling at around $12 a barrel. "Refineries lost a lot of money. In fact they lost money for most of the 1990s," Jeff Morris, president of Alon USA, owner of the Big Spring Refinery, told The Wall Street Journal last week. "People chose not to spend on refineries. So what's affecting us now is that we're behind the investment curve and it will take us five to 10 years to catch up." If the companies can't increase their refined products, they could end up turning not to the petroleum reserve but to the European Union. While the U.S. keeps a supply of crude oil in its strategic reserve, the Europeans maintain a stock of gasoline as well as crude. There has been speculation that in a really tight situation, the EU might be called on to export some of that supply to the U.S.

Meanwhile, the high gas prices are adding to the profits of the big companies. Says the watchdog group Public Citizen: "Since George Bush became president in 2001, the top five oil companies [selling gas] in the United States have recorded profits of $254 billion: ExxonMobil: $89 billion, Shell: $60.7 billion, BP: $53 billion, ChevronTexaco: $31 billion, ConocoPhillips: $20 billion." The group adds: "As Americans shell out more dollars at the pump, the profit margin by U.S. oil refiners has shot up 79% from 1999 (the year Exxon and Mobil merged) to 2004."
Bush refuses to increase the energy efficiency standards for motor vehicles, which use 70 percent of total oil production, and he recently signed the energy bill that hands out billions in new subsidies to the industry. Even he seems to recognize what a shuck this is: In April, with prices moving ever higher and the Congress debating the energy bill, Bush said, "With $55 oil, we don't need incentives to oil and gas companies."

But this summer, Congress, with the president's enthusiastic support, adopted a series of new subsidies for the oil and gas industry. "Officially, the energy bill's giveaways are supposed to cost $14.6 billion over the next 10 years, offset in part by $3.1 billion in higher gasoline taxes on consumers," says Robert S. McIntyre of Citizens for Tax Justice. "But that doesn't include the bill's $70 billion in authorized but unfunded subsidies, for which cash will have to be appropriated later." Now they get another handout in the form of the strategic oil reserve. This is a complicated setup whereby rather than paying the federal government (i.e., the general public) for the right to drill oil on public lands, the industry puts some of this oil into the reserve. When times get bad, it then extracts some of the 750 million barrels stored in salt domes under the Texas and Louisiana coasts-with the promise to return it later on. It can therefore get cost-free oil, turn it into gasoline and sell it at high prices, hoping to buy back crude oil later on at lower prices and return it to the reserve.

In addition, the petroleum reserve will buy oil to fill its reservoirs on the market to jack up crude prices. So the industry makes a killing both ways. The public is left shelling out $4 a gallon at the pump.

:: DM1 9/03/2005 10:28:00 PM [+] ::
...

Let them eat cake!

The following is an excerpt of an news article that describes Laura Bush's arrival. The story is by Jan Risher of The Advertiser.

Evacuees at Cajundome wait for first lady, and for lunch.

As the first lady toured the Red Cross shelter at the Cajundome this morning, a line of evacuees waiting to eat their lunch trickled out the door of the Dome. First lady Laura Bush arrived about midday to tour the shelter and meet evacuees.By 12:50 p.m., the trays of food were still covered and hungry evacuees stood in line, holding empty plates. Rice, beans and jambalaya were on the menu. About that time, volunteers began rolling the carts of food into position to serve.

:: DM1 9/03/2005 10:12:00 PM [+] ::
...

The Chickens are Home!

Kanye West said it best, "George Bush does not care about black people!" The world has seen the truth and sees not only how this government treats its less fortunate, but also how in a crisis time is not of the essence. Check out the reporting of Sheppard Smith and Geraldo Rivera on Hannity and Colmes. They know the truth and are speaking it. Bush goes back to Crawford on Wednesday. Condi Rice is seen on 5th Avenue shopping for shoes. Where is Dick Cheney? One of the worst natural disasters in American history and where was the Bush Administration, or Homeland Security? FEMA did a simulation last year and predicted a catastrophe if a Category Five hurricane hit the Gulf Coast and New Orleans was flooded. For years budgets were deferred or cut. I beieve the Head of the Army Corps of engineers stated that strengthening the levees for a Category Five hurricane was NOT COST EFFECTIVE. I wonder if the folks had been republican and white that the Head of the Corps would have come to the same conclusion. Make excuses and pass blame, but the buck stops with Bush and his incompetent cabal of idiots. Do you feel safer, now?

:: DM1 9/03/2005 07:34:00 PM [+] ::
...