Monday, April 03, 2006

Let's see, that's $200 million divided by 20 clinics over 2 years...so ten clinics per year at a cost of $10 million each and 122 that were never finished? 

Makes me wonder how the rebuilding of New Orleans is gonna go?

Update (4/4/06):  Christy Hardin Smith over at Firedoglake notes that Parsons is ranked no.2 in the amount of dollars received for contracts in Iraq in Afghanistan, after KBR/Halliburton, of course.

RM
Monday, April 03, 2006 11:06:23 PM (GMT Daylight Time, UTC+01:00)  #    Disclaimer  |  Comments [0]  |  Trackback
 Saturday, April 01, 2006

Atheist: America's most hated non-religious minority.

big picture:  Not always as promising as those who don't want to talk about the details would have you believe.

bombing campaigns:  Tend to be the next logical step when all other tactics have failed.

censure: One of the least consequential statements of Congressional displeasure.  Synonymous with "impeachment" as currently used.

civil war: You know it when you see it...except in cases where you need to officially deny it.

dead bodies:  Horrible.  Continue to get in the way of more favorable coverage of the situation in Iraq.

energy prices:  What goes up evidently stays up.

fiscal conservatism: Given a bad name by all those routinely referred to as "fiscal conservatives".

Hamas:  Inadvertent beneficiaries of "Democracy on the March" in the Middle East.  Terrorists. 

illegal:  Complicated issue.  Often confused with a situation in which one ignores or purposely breaks laws as enacted by Congress or other legislative bodies. 

immigration reform:  Evidently only applicable to undocumented immigrants from Mexico and Central America.

IstanbulWhat Baghdad would look like if there weren't any car bombings and assassination attempts.  See "dead bodies" or "civil war".

John McCainAlways principled.  Evidently holds the only legitimate claim to term "bipartisanship" on Capitol Hill.  Media darling.

lobbying reform:  Another worthy effort undone by the reformers.

multi-generational commitment:  A term once reserved for social welfare programs but more recently describes the President's position on Iraq.

New Orleans:  Not as compelling a disaster as previously thought.  Current estimates of 25 years to rebuild a major American city put further strain on the term "American Ingenuity".

plagiarism:  Not as big a career killer as previously thought. 

progress:  Great buzzword.  Much kinder in the abstract as opposed to any actual effort at objective measure. 

radical base:  Commonly used to describe those passionate partisans who are pandered to come election time but avoided at all costs afterwards.  Not applicable to the Republican Party.

revisionism:  Inflammatory charge used to attack critics when a previously reported official version of events doesn't actually pan out.

sectarian violence:  Much more palatable description of "civil war", than "civil war".

strategic errors:  Not to be confused with the cumulation of thousands of "tactical" errors.  Think "big picture".

RM
Sunday, April 02, 2006 2:18:41 AM (GMT Daylight Time, UTC+01:00)  #    Disclaimer  |  Comments [0]  |  Trackback
 Friday, March 31, 2006

We need a peace settlement that isolates the al-Qaeda fighters from the rest of Iraq.  In other words, a deal with the Sunni resistance.

RW
Friday, March 31, 2006 9:57:57 AM (GMT Daylight Time, UTC+01:00)  #    Disclaimer  |  Comments [0]  |  Trackback
 Wednesday, March 29, 2006
 Sunday, March 26, 2006

I'm sitting here at my in-laws listening to CNN's Late Edition and they keep playing clips of President Bush saying that if he didn't believe we could succeed in Iraq he wouldn't have ordered the invasion or our troops wouldn't still be there or... well, you get the idea.  My response is that it really doesn't matter what the President "believes", the objective facts on the ground render what he "believes" a cheap rhetorical trick to avoid any sort of accountability for the results of his policies. 

Let's look at it another way, I'm sure that Mr. Bush wouldn't have gone into the oil business if he didn't "believe" that he would make a lot of money.  The results: four or five failed companies, a lot of investors who lost a lot of money and Mr. Bush still makes money as a tax write-off for Bush family friends who continually bail him out.  Looks pretty similar to me.... except I'm not sure about the family friends bailing him out of this one?

RM
Sunday, March 26, 2006 10:25:59 PM (GMT Daylight Time, UTC+01:00)  #    Disclaimer  |  Comments [1]  |  Trackback
 Saturday, March 25, 2006

On the one hand, the United States declared today that we are done paying for the reconstruction of Iraq, on the other hand a Pentagon spokesman fielding a question about the requests for hundred's of millions of dollars that keep popping up in the federal budget for military base construction in Iraq states, "We're building permanent bases in Iraq for Iraqis." 

Now, the White House will point to the elimination of reconstruction funding for Iraq as an example of the new government's ability to take over the rebuilding of the country, however along the same lines the Iraqi government evidently lacks the funds or ability to build large military installations to garrison Iraqi troops?

Oddly enough, if one wanted to deny that we are building permanent US bases in Iraq, you too may have to keep going through these same odd leaps of logic....

RM
Saturday, March 25, 2006 10:21:25 AM (GMT Standard Time, UTC+00:00)  #    Disclaimer  |  Comments [0]  |  Trackback

As usual, Digby is able to cut throught the B.S. commonly referred to as "the administration's pushback strategy on Iraq":

"It's the violence, stupid. Until that stops, there is no good news."

RM
Saturday, March 25, 2006 10:04:04 AM (GMT Standard Time, UTC+00:00)  #    Disclaimer  |  Comments [0]  |  Trackback

For years I've shook my head at the multitude of horror stories of good, honest,  God-fearing Christian Americans (eg. true descendents of our Founding Fathers) being persecuted by a wicked society in the throes of radical secular humanism.  Maybe its being married to a Methodist minister or just an inkling that many conservative Christians want to feel persecuted so as to achieve the kind of unimpeachable moral authority and martyrdom that we associate with the Civil Rights movement of the 50's and 60's? 

No matter, it really comes down to something I realized several years ago watching various political campaigns; it is absolutely impossible for a political candidate in this country to run and win political office if they are an avowed atheist or proudly do not ascribe to any religious faith whatsoever.  One would think that if society was so cruel to Christians and other people of faith, that this wouldn't be the case.  Nevertheless, a University of Minnesota study suggests that self-avowed Atheists are somewhere between Dick Cheney and Islamic terrorists in terms of popularity...which is pretty low.  Kevin Drum tries to massage the numbers but it still looks bad for the non-believers among us.

RM
Saturday, March 25, 2006 8:45:46 AM (GMT Standard Time, UTC+00:00)  #    Disclaimer  |  Comments [0]  |  Trackback
 Friday, March 24, 2006
RW
Friday, March 24, 2006 11:07:01 PM (GMT Standard Time, UTC+00:00)  #    Disclaimer  |  Comments [7]  |  Trackback
 Thursday, March 23, 2006

Opening my Yahoo! e-mail today, I found perhaps 20 fiery e-mails from my family about U.S. politics. So I sent back the following. Hopefully, it will explain some of my views to people who read this blog:

If I may say a few words...

I adore America. I am proud of it, of us. No country has been more innovative.  Take the 20th century. Film and other culture, technology, civil rights, social law….. No other country had close to as much impact on the world. I'm proud of our grandparents for being part of it and helping to build it.

Revolution would be a terrible idea. Democracy is better. We have the power now to vote any government into office we please. I think any political system that calls for force instead of (free, fair) election is wrong. And revolution additionally is unfair to the more vulnerable elements of a society: No one suffers worse from a seized government than the poor, the handicapped, the elderly, those with countercultural ideas.

The U.S.'s innovation in the world arose from our well-designed Constitution, the liberties we have in it and our postcolonial population of people who wanted to do this thing called "the American dream."
 
Socialism is a powerful force, but capitalism is equally so. I would blend the two, which is what the U.S. has been doing for a long time: Social Security, workplace safety, the FDA. But any change must be economicallycompetitive on a world scale, or you will see our standard of life drastically decrease, in which case we will be shouting, "Viva the fresh water supply, viva the jobs we don't have because industry moved overseas, viva the old crime rate before people couldn’t feed themselves anymore." However, I think very good social ideas can be quite economically competitive with enough thoughtful structure.
 
Also, the '60s generation did an awful lot for our country. I'd like to start with the bus boycotts and MLK and note that the decade began in a highly conservative, John Birch Society, repressed, segregated and lynching, foreign war-mongering way and ended up stoking an imaginative "counterculture" that persists to this day. I'm not sure what any baby boomers have done to you recently to get you all worked up -- I find them generally nice.
 
--E.

EK
Thursday, March 23, 2006 11:14:29 PM (GMT Standard Time, UTC+00:00)  #    Disclaimer  |  Comments [2]  |  Trackback

Nothing.

Let me be more specific.  For years the GOP has made plenty of hay by pushing back against mis-characterized versions of the Democrats' party positions.  To take any kind of unified position on anything, especially Iraq is a serious tactical error. 

It is similar to assymetric warfare.  The Republicans' media machine is a finely tuned meatgrinder.  It whirrs into action when it detects anything it can push against.  The machine's existence is the sole reason a minority party whose positions differ widely from the majority of the American public remains in power. 

However, the GOP media machine can only push back.  Its inability to govern is now evident for all to see.  The Republican Party cannot run from its singularly atrocious record of governance.  The GOP can only hope that somehow they can change the subject. 

The worst thing the Democratic party can do now is to try and propose a major program on things which it did not create and cannot possibly hope to create solutions for.  Like Nixon's "Secret Plan" to end the war, this strategy relies on the fact that the election must be about the Republican's record in office, not the Democrats' own plans to fix the many broken windows around the house. 

This seems counterintuitive to many of those inside the Beltway, where I live.  But the simple fact is that the American public is fed up with grand plans and promises of glory.  They want a promise to govern well and that is all.

RW
Thursday, March 23, 2006 8:47:00 AM (GMT Standard Time, UTC+00:00)  #    Disclaimer  |  Comments [0]  |  Trackback