Tuesday’s Mini-Report

Today’s edition of quick hits.

* Russia has apparently finished making its point: “President Dmitri A. Medvedev of Russia agreed on Tuesday to the terms of a cease-fire that could end the clashes in Georgia, saying Russia had ‘punished’ Georgia enough for its aggression against the separatist enclave of South Ossetia. The six-point agreement — which the Georgians had endorsed in an earlier draft — would withdraw troops to the positions they occupied before fighting broke out Thursday.”

* Georgian officials have insisted that Russian forces continued bombing and shelling even after the cease-fire, but those reports are unconfirmed.

* The underlying elements that sparked the five-day conflict remain unresolved: “The Russian and French presidents on Tuesday announced a six-point plan of principles for settling the immediate conflict in Georgia but stopped short of tackling the issues that sparked the violence.”

* Neocon arguments about Russian conquest continue to look pretty shaky.

* Josh Marshall responds to John McCain’s rhetoric on the Russian/Georgian conflict: “I know I’ve made this point in various ways in several posts over the last day or so. But watching John McCain speak about the Georgian crisis in the video below should deeply worry anyone interested in a sane US foreign policy — or the safety of their children…. It’s beyond Obama or political strategy or dinging McCain on this or that policy. This man is simply too dangerous and unstable to be president. People need to wake up and get a look of the preview he’s giving us of a McCain presidency.”

* Al Qaeda keeps losing its top lieutenants: “Al Qaida’s reputed number three commander has been killed in fighting in Pakistan’s wild border region with Afghanistan

antibiotika-online.com

, according to news reports Tuesday. Amid a fierce battle which began a week ago between the Pakistani army and militants in Bajaur, a tribal area known as a hotbed for extremists, it emerged that Abu Saeed al Masri had been killed. It’s thought that his real name is Mustafa Abu al Yazid, al Qaida’s commander in Afghanistan.”

* Congress is running a little short on time, but this could make for an interesting hearing or two: “After pundits have commented about the muted reaction to author Ron Suskind’s explosive allegations last week, the House Judiciary Committee said today it will ‘review’ the reports of White House and CIA misconduct.”

* Oh my: “Two-thirds of U.S. corporations paid no federal income taxes between 1998 and 2005, according to a new report from Congress. The study by the Government Accountability Office, expected to be released Tuesday, said about 68 percent of foreign companies doing business in the U.S. avoided corporate taxes over the same period. Collectively, the companies reported trillions of dollars in sales, according to GAO’s estimate. ‘It’s shameful that so many corporations make big profits and pay nothing to support our country,’ said Sen. Byron Dorgan, D-N.D., who asked for the GAO study with Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich.”

* The McCain campaign denied cribbing from Wikipedia.

* I’d always hoped Valerie Plame’s civil suit had a reasonably good shot. The courts continue to disagree.

* Note to NPR’s Mara Liasson: there is nothing “ironic” about “a liberal Democrat showcasing his faith.” (I get the sense Mara Liasson understands irony about as well as Alanis Morissette.)

* When the FBI improperly accesses reporters’ phone records, “sorry” doesn’t seem to cut it.

* If McCain wants to demonstrate his expertise on foreign policy, and his support for Georgia in the midst of its conflict with Russia, someone probably ought to tell McCain how to pronounce the name of Georgian President Mikheil Saakashvili.

* And finally, the McCain campaign “borrowed” footage from a “Wayne’s World” movie for its latest attack video. It appears, however, that the McCain campaign is not worthy.

Anything to add? Consider this an end-of-the-day open thread.

Now we know (don’t we?) the “real” meaning of No Child Left Behind–or do we?

As if that weren’t enough, could you imagine biodiesel coming from crude jatropha-seed oil?

  • Steve, I really like when page two is yesterday and page one is today… But sometimes today leaks onto page two.

    Would it be possible to make sure that today doesn’t ever leak onto page 2, please?

  • McCain probably thinks that if the Russians succeed in invading Georgia, they’ll be in Alabama and Mississippi before you know it.

    /snark

  • I can imagine what Al Qaeda’s org chart looks like:

    1> Osama Bin Laden
    2> Ayman Al Zawahiri
    3> Everyone else (several thousand people?)

  • Illudium, I just recently uncovered a note from the property manager at the complex in which I reside… It rescinded their earlier request to make sure children were supervised. Apparently the owner company saw the previous notice and reminded them that in this state landlords cannot require occupants to monitor their children on the premises.

    …Which seems really stupid to me, but then again that’s why adults must stop using the pool at seven and yet screaming children can still be found on the playground at ten pm some nights…

  • How many Al Qaeda number threes have we killed at this point? It seems like every few months since 9-11 there’s crowing in the press about having killed Al Qaeda’s number three guy. Surely there’s some other explanation.

    Maybe Al Qaeda sends out a bulletin to the pentagon every time there’s someone they want whacked that declares, “so-and-so is our number three and we dare you to get him.”

    Maybe they mean this literally – the #3 is Al Qaeda’s version of the scarlet letter, anytime someone’s getting troublesome, they plaster a big #3 on his chest and roll him out into a combat zone. “Who’d you shoot today?” “Looks like another #3.” “Call the papers!”

    Maybe we don’t have very good intelligence and anybody we get who looks important is declared a number three.

    Maybe the pentagon feels like it needs to show progress every so often, and number three is vague enough to be believable without substantiation.

    Geez.

  • Would it be possible to make sure that today doesn’t ever leak onto page 2, please? -Crissa

    In other words, take a lunch break! Don’t work so hard! 🙂

    We appreciate it!

  • I guess McCain can’t offer the corporations any more tax cuts if they’re already not paying any taxes.

  • It would be nice if the link to Josh Marshall also linked to the video he referenced. It doesn’t.

  • how about this: drop corporate income taxes to 20%, but actually collect them. I think that’s a reasonable idea that everyone would support, and the companies who have been making up for their “shady” bretheren would get a reward (lower taxes) for actually, you know, following the law. Oh, and of course charge back taxes at the rate that should have been paid in the year they skipped out.

    Also, is anyone else slightly disturbed by the Russian governments suggestion that they were completely within their rights in doing what they did? And let us also tip our cap to Europe for finally solving their own problem without us (’bout time!)

  • How many Al Qaeda number threes have we killed at this point? It seems like every few months since 9-11 there’s crowing in the press about having killed Al Qaeda’s number three guy. Surely there’s some other explanation.

    It’s the red shirt. A dead giveaway. So to speak.

  • Note to NPR’s Mara Liasson: there is nothing “ironic” about “a liberal Democrat showcasing his faith.” (I get the sense Mara Liasson understands irony about as well as Alanis Morissette.)

    Yes, but Alanis Morissette was making a joke and knew she was wrong. Whereas Mara Liasson is simply an idiot.

    When the FBI improperly accesses reporters’ phone records, “sorry” doesn’t seem to cut it.

    Anybody who trusts the NSA or the CIA to NOT abuse their new found spying powers under FISA need look know further then the ADMITTED abuses of FBI’s expanded powers under the Patriot Act.

  • How ironic: Obama Leads Among Christians

    For the most part, the various faith communities of the U.S. currently support Sen. Obama for the presidency. Among the 19 faith segments that The Barna Group tracks, evangelicals were the only segment to throw its support to Sen. McCain. Among the larger faith niches to support Sen. Obama are non-evangelical born again Christians (43% to 31%); notional Christians (44% to 28%); people aligned with faiths other than Christianity (56% to 24%); atheists and agnostics (55% to 17%); Catholics (39% vs. 29%); and Protestants (43% to 34%). In fact, if the current preferences stand pat, this would mark the first time in more than two decades that the born again vote has swung toward the Democratic candidate.

  • By the way, technically, irony means “the outcome is the opposite of expectations,” so she’s right — as long as people expect that liberals are activist atheists, a religious Dem is an irony.

  • impeachcheneythenbush said “t would be nice if the link to Josh Marshall also linked to the video he referenced. It doesn’t.”

    You have to go to the site but it really doesn’t help unless the video is prefaced by reading Kaplan’s article over at Slate. Seems Georgians started shooting first because they believed the US would come to their aid militarily because people like McCain and his Point man lobbyist Shunerman on lobbying for Geogians to start something etc with a bunch of bullshit he’s been feeding them on US involvement etc complicates the matter so the video’s stupidity isn’t apparent unless you read about this stuff first. Then you see McCain’s underlying deceitfulness and the dangerous rhetoric he throws out there.

    McCain is a war candidate…he thinks war brings him power…that is what he dreams of. Putting him anywhere near military weapons is suicidal. He represents the worst traits a soldier can have…hot headedness and stupidity…no patience or tact. He is a military death warrant.

  • Al Quesadilla has many top men! I hope they get # 6 and # 8; they’re both especially foreign Muslim terrorist bastards! I here # 28 sells Amway.

    ; – )

  • “Two-thirds of U.S. corporations paid no federal income taxes between 1998 and 2005, according to a new report from Congress. […] ‘It’s shameful that so many corporations make big profits and pay nothing to support our country,’ said Sen. Byron Dorgan, D-N.D.,[…] — CB

    But if, instead of making big profits they had floundered, the country would have been expected to bail them out. It’s like Krugman said: privatized profits, socialized responsibility.

  • I get the sense Mara Liasson understands irony about as well as Alanis Morissette.

    Good one CB.

  • [Apologies for the length of the following, but I think the number of examples are needed to make my point. This is a continuation of a discussion from yesterday’s Mini-Report, comments 14, 27, 32, and 52 for those who want to see the beginning]

    I have been trying to avoid commenting — and blowing my stack — about the “Bush=Hitler” meme, but yesterday, ‘timeoutofmind’ finally pushed me over the edge with his comments about ‘Adolph-lite’ and his response to my calling him on it: “if you don’t think this guy is just as dangerous as Hitler, minus the concentration camps, YOU need to take another hard look at history.”

    (btw, toom, while I am an admitted ‘amateur in everything’ history — and particularly the history of the ‘time between the wars’ and the fascist movements during them — is a special interest of mine, and not just Hitler and Mussolini, but Codreanu, Szalasi, Mosely and the Academic Karelia Society — to name a few. My incurable — and regrettable — monolingualism does limit my knowledge somewhat, but again, for an amateur I know quite a bit.)

    Now I hope no one will misunderstand this. I condemn Bush & Co. as loudly as anyone for their attacks on the Constitution, their use of torture, their war crimes, etc. But they are not Nazis and using the term seriously weakens the memory of what Nazism really was, the deliberate bringing out of the most evil potential in humanity — and perhaps not coincidentally, the warping of the idealism and irresponsibility of youth into its most dangerous form.

    (We sometimes mistakenly think of Nazis as ‘old men’ but in fact it was an authentic ‘youth movement.’ At the time of Hitler’s taking power — after ten years of working for it — Hitler(44), Goebbels(36), Hess(39), Goering(40), Himmler(33) and the soon-murdered Rohm(46) were all younger than Barack Obama is currently — and their followers were much younger than the leaders. As someone who has believed in the power of youth to transform society positively since I classified as ‘young’ this fact disturbs me, but it is a fact. And, btw, Mussolini was 39 when he took power.)

    Enough with the preliminaries, let’s take some of the actual events of Nazi Germany and translate them into American terms — and I have chosen Muslims as the ‘Jew-equivalent’ for these purposes, but it could just as well have been blacks, or even Jews again. So

    IF BUSH WERE REALLY HITLER:

    Shortly after assuming power, the entire Democratic membership of Congress would have been arrested, and the remaining Republican Congressmen would have voted to suspend the Constitution and grant Bush (as the ’embodiment of the Spirit and Will of the American People”) full dictatorial powers;

    Shortly after that several thousand critics of Bushism would have been hauled from their houses and murdered, publicly, by the Army (including several people who helped put him in power but who were no longer ‘convenient’ — one, a military leader and homosexual would have been shot by Bush’s own hand –and a pro-Bush clergyman who happened to know certain facts about Bush’s personal life that he wished suppressed);

    All female officials would have been removed from office, because the purpose of women was to serve in the home, birth control would have been banned, and women would have been encouraged to have as many children as possible to supply future recruits for the army and party — at first with their husbands, later with Party members and soldiers who were seen as the best exemplars of the ‘true American’;

    All homosexual advocacy groups would have been disbanded — and those leaders not already in jail would have been put there. And homosexuality would be made punishable by death;

    All America would have been divided into districts down to individual towns and city neighborhoods, each under the Administration of a Bushite — and people would have been encouraged to report to such leaders any sign of ‘anti-Bush’ activity, even in their own families (and would have been imprisoned if it were shown they had known of such activity and not reported it);

    Muslims would have been banned from all the Professions, including lawyer and doctor, and citizens would have been encouraged to boycott stores run by Muslims;

    Later, after a minor provocation, citizens in a party-led mob would’ve smashed the windows of and looted stores and businesses that were Muslim-owned and the Muslims would have been billed by the state for the cost of cleaning up;

    Plans would already be in the works for a War that would extend American hegemony over all of Central and South America — for the purpose of providing ‘living space’ for Americans, with the current ‘subhuman’ inhabitants being used as slave labor — who could be worked literally to death and who would survive on starvation rations (not wages) while they still survived;

    All organizations, from the Boy Scouts to bowling leagues to Chambers of Commerce to musical appreciation societies to the Little League would be replaced by similar, but party-run, organizations;

    While some churches would have been allowed to exist, if they did not criticize Bush, a parallel Church, in which Christian symbols were replaced by Party ones would be attempted to be formed;

    Industrial businesses, even those which had supported Bush, would be taken over and, even if the same management were in place, that management would have to answer to Party officials as they were, as well, ‘co-ordinated’;

    I could go on much longer, but that is just some of what hitler did before the beginning of the War. And if you wonder why I have not mentioned the Holocaust, the pinnacle of the evil that was Nazism, I chose not to. The Holocaust was so monumental in people’s eyes — and rightly so — that other Nazi evils get lost in its gigantic shadow.

  • TPM Election Central has a poll up that shows Obama leading McCain 45% to 40% in Alaska.

  • So I don’t know what’s worse, the fact that McCain plagiarized or the fact that he plagiarized from Wikipedia of all places. Actually scratch that, i’m gonna go with the latter. At least if he had plagiarized from a reputable historian we’d at least have the comfort of knowing that he can do some decent research on things… but WIKI*FING*PEDIA?? Talk about an insult to historians everywhere. You’re not even allowed to mention wikipedia in the presence of a history professor for fear of ridicule and banishment to the math department! 😀

  • I second Colin @ 7

    We’ve killed or captured about 20 of Al Qaeda’s number 3s.

    IDK folks, is it me, or have any of you started to lose faith in Bush’s pronouncements on Al Qaeda?

  • I was just watching Hardball and the lady from the Financial Times said that this was a good week for McCain – you know because Russia told the entire western world to BITE IT and McCain doesn’t like Russia.

    Never mind that if we follow his “foreign policy” we will all be deployed to fight some damn where all the damn time. Never mind that he has no economic plans to speak of. Never mind the reason we are being exposed as frauds on the world stage is the Iraq debacle which McCain supported.

    According to the media, EVERYTHING is good for McCain.

    Go figure.

    P.S. I would LOVE to know how much in taxes the corporations that own all of the major networks and cable news have paid in the past 7 1/2 years . . . why do I feel like the number is ZERO?

    P.S.S. John McCain was in on the “blame Iraq for anthrax” hoax . . . and here’s the proof . . .

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tlAUj4s6sT0

  • In re corporate taxes: Hon. Sen. McCain has been spouting this “(second) highest corporate tax rate” idiocy for months (that I’ve personally noticed anyway) but I’ve only once heard anyone call him on the fact that this carefully worded statement is only true if one ignores the effective rate, i.e. the rate that they actually pay.

    It is common knowledge among people who know what they’re talking about that US corporations have it pretty good, tax wise, and I assume that Senator McCain knows this as well and is just being disingenuous. An example of how common this knowledge comes from FT:

    The US – which collects relatively little revenue in spite of having one of the highest corporate tax rates in the world – has a similar problem. That shows up in Americans’ attitudes to the way they as individuals are taxed. In the decades following the second world war, they considered income tax to be the fairest tax in the nation; since 1980, that opinion has been reversed.

  • Prup @ 22. I think that most people would agree that Hitler and Bush/Cheney/Rove operated on different scales, but many people, myself included, see them on closely parallel continuums (continuui?) — at least, too close for comfort for those of us who still think that the liberal, rational ideas that our founders attempted to realize are worth honoring and protecting. Still, folks do get carried away sometimes and your point is well-taken.

  • Thanks again senor Carpetbagger for your extensive and unparalleled commentary. You have given me inspiration to start my own blog. While not just politics, I like to throw up some stuff that some of you might be interested in reading. Politics, foods, politics, music, politics and more fun stuff. Come visit after you get your Carpetbagger fixes!

    http://estibilin.blogspot.com/

  • Two-thirds of U.S. corporations paid no federal income taxes between 1998 and 2005

    It’s time for the media to point this out, and especially every democrat who faces the pundits and opponents, next time republicans whine about corporations already paying too many taxes.

    Maybe here’s where Obama can step into the fray; by doing a speech explaining he will be lowering taxes for ALL corporations, while at the same time closing ALL loop holes that have afforded too many companies to skirt their responsibilities to serve their country like any true patriot does.

    Aaron @ 11 said:

    is anyone else slightly disturbed by the Russian governments suggestion that they were completely within their rights in doing what they did?

    I’m sure plenty of people are disturbed about it. However, Isn’t that pretty much how the Bush Administration has been handling America’s foreign affairs?

  • You think our Mainstream Media fat head Dobbs, Jew boy Blitzer, Neo- Nazi Mathews, or Fox Stanlin Hannity would have the courage to offer America reports on these issues… Republicans just want to jump right past this stuff no debate just vote.

    The latest energy bill requires these reports I am still trying to out what they are…

    Requires the Secretaries to study and report on: (1) congestion and constraints in transmission of electricity, carbon dioxide captured from coal-fired powerplants and coal-to-liquids plants, liquid fuels derived from coal, oil, gas, and hydrogen;
    (2) barriers to access for transmission from renewable energy sources; and

    (3) the need for energy corridors on public lands to address identified congestion or constraints.

    I don’t know about you but I would like to see these reports in detail.
    Seems we know more about Pairs Hilton and her energy plan. Which is pitiful.

    But we should expect this from the Mainstream Media. Fox, CNN, MSNBC trash news fair and balanced bull.

  • “McCain said he spoke to Georgian president Mikhail Saakashvili earlier in the day.

    “He wanted me to say thanks to you, and give you his heartfelt thanks, for the support of the American people for this tiny little democracy far away from the United States of America,” McCain said. “And I told him that I know I speak for every American when I say to him, ‘Today we are all Georgians.’”

    McCain calls the Georgian president. He ‘speaks for all Americans’. Can’t shake the feeling that if Obama claimed that, they’d be all over him for being uppity. Sorry, ‘presumptuous’.

    Does McCain even know that his quote of the day is a bastardized version of the headline from Jean-Marie Colombani’s article in ‘Le Monde’, September 12th, 2001?

    http://www.worldpress.org/1101we_are_all_americans.htm

  • Megalomania: I usually ignore your posts, but anyone who can use “Jew boy” and “neo- Nazi” in the same sentence — both as pejoratives — shows an even greater disconnect from reality than you usually do.

  • “Al Qaida’s reputed number three commander has been killed”

    We’re gonna need a new Timmy!

  • The idea that McCain has the upper hand on Russian affairs is shocking. If McCain was president, we could very well be in World War III right now.

  • So let me get this straight. McCain wants to stay the course in Iraq (even if we don’t know where the course leads us or where it ends), do much the same in Afghanistan, reserves the right to take preemptive action against Iran and wants to get into another Cold War type stand-off with Russia – a position that is more more complicated than it was previously, with all the newly democratic states in the region?

    How many people must be currently looking at Senator Foreign-Policy-Experience and thinking that the prospect of a McCain presidency is frankly terrifying?

  • Paul Camp (@39) said:

    We’re gonna need a new Timmy!

    I was thinking more along the lines of:

    Oh, my gawd, they killed Kenny!! You bastards!!

    That’s okay, though, because he’ll be back again next week.

  • I’m going to jump in here as a corporate apologist. Or, at least, as someone who is offended by the abuse of statistics, even when such abuse is intended to dramatize a legitimate point.

    This is a long post, but if you’re interested in real numbers, you may find it worth your time. A quick lesson in playing fast and loose with numbers. From the breathless summary:

    Two-thirds of U.S. corporations paid no federal income taxes between 1998 and 2005, according to a new report from Congress. The study by the Government Accountability Office, expected to be released Tuesday, said about 68 percent of foreign companies doing business in the U.S. avoided corporate taxes over the same period. Collectively, the companies reported trillions of dollars in sales, according to GAO’s estimate

    The more detailed info:

    More than 38,000 foreign corporations had no tax liability in 2005 and 1.2 million U.S. companies paid no income tax, the GAO said. Combined, the companies had $2.5 trillion in sales. About 25 percent of the U.S. corporations not paying corporate taxes were considered large corporations, meaning they had at least $250 million in assets or $50 million in receipts.

    How is this deceptive? Let me count the ways:

    In the summary, we hear that “68 percent” of foreign companies didn’t pay tax, and 1.2 million US companies. The real number is 38,000 foreign companies, which wouldn’t have sounded as impressive when parked next to 1.2 million, so if we’re going to go after the easy target of “foreign company tax deadbeats”, let’s use the percentage figure. Hmm, what percent of US companies does 1.2 million represent? Darn, the IRS says there were 24 million companies in 2004. 1.2 million is about 5%. That doesn’t sound impresssive, so let’s go with numbers for US companies and percentages for foreign companies.
    In the summary, we hear that these 1,238,000 companies made a “collective” $2.5T in sales. Well, let’s see, I own four non-operating companies that I have not dissolved for various reasons. How many of those 1,238,000 companies had no revenue, and therefore nothing to tax? Well, the IRS says (2005) that 40% of companies made less than $100k. The actual study notes that 25% of “those companies” had assets over $250m or receipts over $50m.
    Of course, that “assets or receipts” language is also a cheat. A company can have huge assets be going out business due to low receipts. Or a company can have significant receipts but a negative net worth, with whatever profit there is on those receipts going to debt service, leaving a net loss and less or no tax liability.
    Well, ok, let’s ignore the fact that we’re talking about much smaller numbers of companies than the hyperventilating report. Let’s focus on the $2.5T in sales from companies who paid no tax. Well, General Motors brought in $180B in sales, but they lost between $6B and $38B. While GM did pay tax, there are probably other high volume businesses that either lost a lot of money or outright went bankrupt, and therefore paid no taxes (if you want to tax companies losing money, be prepared to support the workers they lay off when they close sooner with *your* tax dollars).
    But let’s skip that for a moment and accept the $2.5T in sales as being from profitable companies who should be paying taxes. A typical company is thrilled to make 10% margins. 10% on $2.5T is $250B. Since tax is on profits, not revenue, and a best-case corporate rate is about 30% of that, we’re talking about bringing in another $75B of revenue, at most. That’s real money, of course, but a far cry from the tantalizing $2.5T figure. Exxon alone paid $30B in taxes in 2007, so the best case sum total of this grandstanding is additional tax revenue across the entire economy equivalent to somewhat more than two Exxons.

    Mind you, I pay a *lot* of tax. And I don’t mind, when it’s administered more or less fairly. And as a business guy, I am at a competitive disadvantage to companies who cheat on taxes. So yeah, I am for anything that evens the playing field.

    But the spin on this study is so hugely abusive that it takes a valid point and blows it so far out of proportion that it serves better as an an example of how to deceive with statistics than it does as an argument for that point.

  • Ugh — sorry for the formatting there. The preview mode supports UL’s and LI’s and I had it all pretty, but apparently those go away upon posting.

  • On August 12th, 2008 at 8:28 pm, Prup (aka Jim Benton) said:
    Megalomania: I usually ignore your posts, but anyone who can use “Jew boy” and “neo- Nazi” in the same sentence — both as pejoratives — shows an even greater disconnect from reality than you usually do.

    My mood at the time of this particular comment might have been out your limits, usually, when I write the stuff it is with laugh and an internal giggle. I don’t wonder about my own thoughts, they very inline with many people I talk with just in passing. Sorry, we not did not meet.

    For me, it is a good laugh at the comment of being disconnected, Sheesh, we all have been shorted out in overload bias a long time ago.

    I have been observing most of cable channels for a while and truly believe that the complicity is there with the Bush machine. Most everyone including Keith Olbermann knock Bush and fellow Journalist better than I do. Olbermann knows how to put together jaw-joratives better than anyone for worst persons of the world. You know how Keith says it with that long drawn out “Worst Person Of The World”.

    But I really get a kick out watching that Abramson guy talk about the heterosexual incompatibility of John Edwards, you know Edwards and his fall from grace, after the opinionated comments about anything from Rachael Maddow, a lesbian the whole thing cracks me up.

  • Beep52:
    I realize that it is much more satisfying, when you look at the pile of wreckage that they have left, to assume this was part of some scheme by Bush and/or Cheney, that they do have this ‘fascistic master plan.’ But I just can’t buy it.

    I have a different take on both Bush and Cheney, one that is, admittedly, pure speculation, but one which seems to fit the facts better. Hear me out, and tell me what you think of this. Because I’m — as usual — starting from the fact that they are human beings, warped and evil as they may be.

    Let’s start with Cheney, but first, remember that Hitler — and most of the fascist leaders in various countries — was a ‘monument builder.’ He really did think in terms of a ‘thousand year Reich.’ He did, in his evil and warped way, think about what he thought was best for Germany, long after he would be dead. On a lesser plane, he was a monument builder in the literal sense of the term, constructing gigantic buildings that would glorify himself, long after he was gone.

    Does this sound like Dick Cheney to you? He is an authentically evil man, yes, but his evil is more that of the sociopath, his besetting ‘cardinal sin’ is greed not just for money, though that is important to him, but for the thrill of exercising personal power, even for the thrill of being considered ‘the evilest man in the world.’ I can’t imagine him caring about anything that will happen ‘after he is gone’ from power or from life — and remember, he has had brushes with death, he can’t see himself as immortal as so many people do.

    (A minor bit of evidence of this thesis: his insulting comments about West Virginia a month or so ago — after all the talk about whether they would stay Republican in the Presidential race or revert to the Democratic history they still show Congressionally. Could anyone who cared about this election have said what he did? It wouldn’t even surprise me if he actually voted for Obama, just for the hell of it.)

    No, Cheney is out for Cheney, and nothing else. he’s evil because it benefits him, and if he could figure out an angle that would make ‘being good’ better for him, he’d try and grab a hammer and nails and be a new Jimmy Carter — as horrible as that would be to contemplate.

    This is not a person who has a long-range plan to turn America fascistic — because there’s nothing ‘in it for him.’

    Bush is much more complex a person — you don’t have to be smart to be complex. Remember 1994. Jeb was supposed to beat Reuben Askew, get reelected, and then run for President. And George, oh, he’d run against Ann Richards. If he lost, so what, if he won, he’d be in the least demanding governorship in the country, out of the way, keeping busy.

    After all, he was the ‘stupid brother,’ the ex-drunk who had replaced an addiction to alcohol with an addiction to a religion as weird to his secular Episcopalian family as it is to most of us (and I think that religion, and the type of thinking it produces is important). And I think the family thought of him that way, and he knew it.

    But then the impossible happens, he wins and Jeb loses. He’s now the one to run for President. “Oh, Lord, why me” and for him it really was a prayer. He had no idea what to do with the position, no plans at all — except for one.

    Because there were two key events that effected him. Daddy had invaded Iraq and — despite the fact that he could have overthrown Saddam and everyone would have cheered him doing it — once the ‘mission was complete’ stopped and backed away, leaving Saddam in place. And, six years later, Saddam attempts, unsuccessfully to assassinate Daddy.

    Okay, he’s elected, despite the fact that he’s still the ‘stupid Bush.’ He enjoys the perks of the office, the simple fun of being Mr. President. And he listens to his advisors, many of whom are religious people — of the ugly Falwell-Dobson-Parsley type. And there is Cheney, and Ashcroft — another religious nut.

    But there is ONE thing other than bumbling his way, day to day, planless, even clueless, that he wants. To invade Iraq. For oil, as part of a deep and sinister neocon plan — well, maybe that was his advisors’ idea — though its funny that Daddy didn’t seem to be interested in it — but not George.

    For George it was two things: “Look Daddy, i got back at the guy who tried to kill you” and “Look Daddy, you didn’t have the guts to get rid of Saddam, but look who did. Me, Daddy, who’s the stupid one, now?” But how.

    And then came 9/11, which really was ‘his finest hour.’ The speech he made was what anyone would have said, but he said it, and he got to throw out the first ball at Yankee Stadium, and the whole world, even Qurazy Quaddaffi actually LIKED him, and the US. And he went into Afghanistan, and everybody was on his side.

    But that wasn’t Saddam, if only he could be tied in, if only he had those weapons of mass destruction people talked about. (And here’s where the religion becomes important. Ever spend time talking to or actually listening to a creationist? They aren’t lying when they defend their position. They really believe they HAVE THE TRUTH. And if the evidence doesn’t back them up, that’s okay. Eventually it will show up and prove them right, or they manipulate the actual evidence — usually unconsciously — so they can dismiss it.

    I think he did — and maybe still does — believe in the WMDs, in the link to Al Qaeda, in all the rest, because he HAD to. And off we go into Iraq and — and –and Daddy was right, it was a quagmire, only he couldn’t admit that to himself. And he had these advisors who kept telling him to use torture and to detain the evil terrorists, and since — now more than ever he had to believe — he was doing God’s work, then how could what he was doing be wrong?

    The Constitution? Well that was based on christian principles, surely, whatever those awful, satanic liberals said, it couldn’t be in the way of his doing God’s work.

    Okay, speculation, but doesn’t it make more sense than imagining that Dumb george — and he REALLY is — had some Master Plan to fascisize the country?

    I know, it’s much easier to demonize him, but really, isn’t my suggestion a little more plausible?

  • Thanks Brooks for the explanation on the tax receipt report. Certainly looks different after reading what you posted.

  • Al Qaeda keeps losing its top lieutenants: “Al Qaida’s reputed number three commander has been killed in fighting in Pakistan’s wild border region with Afghanistan, according to news reports Tuesday. Amid a fierce battle which began a week ago between the Pakistani army and militants in Bajaur, a tribal area known as a hotbed for extremists, it emerged that Abu Saeed al Masri had been killed. It’s thought that his real name is Mustafa Abu al Yazid, al Qaida’s commander in Afghanistan.”

    As is well known, getting the Warrior Leaders of the War on Terra tio declare you “Al Qaeda Number Three” is a death sentence. We have nailed what? Twenty AQ #3’s?????

    And doing so has accomplished what?????????

  • I’m going to go ahead and post this anyway, though coming late to the discussion means people may miss it, but it’s still important.

    This is the Stratfor analysis of what’s happened in Georgia, and all it does is strengthen my wish that someone in the campaigns (preferably Obama’s) would go re-read Thucydides History of the Peloponnesian Wars and note how Pericles’ Athens went from Golden Age to destruction by the “loser” Spartans in less that 20 years. It’s instructional for America.

    THE RUSSO-GEORGIAN WAR AND THE BALANCE OF POWER

    August 12, 2008

    By George Friedman

    The Russian invasion of Georgia has not changed the balance of power in Eurasia. It simply announced that the balance of power had already shifted. The United States has been absorbed in its wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, as well as potential conflict with Iran and a destabilizing situation in Pakistan. It has no strategic ground forces in reserve and is in no position to intervene on the Russian periphery. This, as we have argued, has opened a window of opportunity for the Russians to reassert their influence in the former Soviet sphere. Moscow did not have to concern itself with the potential response of the United States or Europe; hence, the invasion did not shift the balance of power. The balance of power had already shifted, and it was up to the Russians when to make this public. They did that Aug. 8.

    Let’s begin simply by reviewing the last few days.

    On the night of Thursday, Aug. 7, forces of the Republic of Georgia drove across the border of South Ossetia, a secessionist region of Georgia that has functioned as an independent entity since the fall of the Soviet Union. The forces drove on to the capital, Tskhinvali, which is close to the border. Georgian forces got bogged down while trying to take the city. In spite of heavy fighting, they never fully secured the city, nor the rest of South Ossetia.

    On the morning of Aug. 8, Russian forces entered South Ossetia, using armored and motorized infantry forces along with air power. South Ossetia was informally aligned with Russia, and Russia acted to prevent the region’s absorption by Georgia. Given the speed with which the Russians responded — within hours of the Georgian attack — the Russians were expecting the Georgian attack and were themselves at their jumping-off points. The counterattack was carefully planned and competently executed, and over the next 48 hours, the Russians succeeded in defeating the main Georgian force and forcing a retreat. By Sunday, Aug. 10, the Russians had consolidated their position in South Ossetia.

    On Monday, the Russians extended their offensive into Georgia proper, attacking on two axes. One was south from South Ossetia to the Georgian city of Gori. The other drive was from Abkhazia, another secessionist region of Georgia aligned with the Russians. This drive was designed to cut the road between the Georgian capital of Tbilisi and its ports. By this point, the Russians had bombed the military airfields at Marneuli and Vaziani and appeared to have disabled radars at the international airport in Tbilisi. These moves brought Russian forces to within 40 miles of the Georgian capital, while making outside reinforcement and resupply of Georgian forces extremely difficult should anyone wish to undertake it.

    The Mystery Behind the Georgian Invasion
    In this simple chronicle, there is something quite mysterious: Why did the Georgians choose to invade South Ossetia on Thursday night? There had been a great deal of shelling by the South Ossetians of Georgian villages for the previous three nights, but while possibly more intense than usual, artillery exchanges were routine. The Georgians might not have fought well, but they committed fairly substantial forces that must have taken at the very least several days to deploy and supply. Georgia’s move was deliberate.

    The United States is Georgia’s closest ally. It maintained about 130 military advisers in Georgia, along with civilian advisers, contractors involved in all aspects of the Georgian government and people doing business in Georgia. It is inconceivable that the Americans were unaware of Georgia’s mobilization and intentions. It is also inconceivable that the Americans were unaware that the Russians had deployed substantial forces on the South Ossetian frontier. U.S. technical intelligence, from satellite imagery and signals intelligence to unmanned aerial vehicles, could not miss the fact that thousands of Russian troops were moving to forward positions. The Russians clearly knew the Georgians were ready to move. How could the United States not be aware of the Russians? Indeed, given the posture of Russian troops, how could intelligence analysts have missed the possibility that t he Russians had laid a trap, hoping for a Georgian invasion to justify its own counterattack?

    It is very difficult to imagine that the Georgians launched their attack against U.S. wishes. The Georgians rely on the United States, and they were in no position to defy it. This leaves two possibilities. The first is a massive breakdown in intelligence, in which the United States either was unaware of the existence of Russian forces, or knew of the Russian forces but — along with the Georgians — miscalculated Russia’s intentions. The United States, along with other countries, has viewed Russia through the prism of the 1990s, when the Russian military was in shambles and the Russian government was paralyzed. The United States has not seen Russia make a decisive military move beyond its borders since the Afghan war of the 1970s-1980s. The Russians had systematically avoided such moves for years. The United States had assumed that the Russians would not risk the consequences of an invasion.

    If this was the case, then it points to the central reality of this situation: The Russians had changed dramatically, along with the balance of power in the region. They welcomed the opportunity to drive home the new reality, which was that they could invade Georgia and the United States and Europe could not respond. As for risk, they did not view the invasion as risky. Militarily, there was no counter. Economically, Russia is an energy exporter doing quite well — indeed, the Europeans need Russian energy even more than the Russians need to sell it to them. Politically, as we shall see, the Americans needed the Russians more than the Russians needed the Americans. Moscow’s calculus was that this was the moment to strike. The Russians had been building up to it for months, as we have discussed, and they struck.

    The Western Encirclement of Russia
    To understand Russian thinking, we need to look at two events. The first is the Orange Revolution in Ukraine. From the U.S. and European point of view, the Orange Revolution represented a triumph of democracy and Western influence. From the Russian point of view, as Moscow made clear, the Orange Revolution was a CIA-funded intrusion into the internal affairs of Ukraine, designed to draw Ukraine into NATO and add to the encirclement of Russia. U.S. Presidents George H.W. Bush and Bill Clinton had promised the Russians that NATO would not expand into the former Soviet Union empire.

    That promise had already been broken in 1998 by NATO’s expansion to Poland, Hungary and the Czech Republic — and again in the 2004 expansion, which absorbed not only the rest of the former Soviet satellites in what is now Central Europe, but also the three Baltic states, which had been components of the Soviet Union.

    The Russians had tolerated all that, but the discussion of including Ukraine in NATO represented a fundamental threat to Russia’s national security. It would have rendered Russia indefensible and threatened to destabilize the Russian Federation itself. When the United States went so far as to suggest that Georgia be included as well, bringing NATO deeper into the Caucasus, the Russian conclusion — publicly stated — was that the United States in particular intended to encircle and break Russia.

    The second and lesser event was the decision by Europe and the United States to back Kosovo’s separation from Serbia. The Russians were friendly with Serbia, but the deeper issue for Russia was this: The principle of Europe since World War II was that, to prevent conflict, national borders would not be changed. If that principle were violated in Kosovo, other border shifts — including demands by various regions for independence from Russia — might follow. The Russians publicly and privately asked that Kosovo not be given formal independence, but instead continue its informal autonomy, which was the same thing in practical terms. Russia’s requests were ignored.

    From the Ukrainian experience, the Russians became convinced that the United States was engaged in a plan of strategic encirclement and strangulation of Russia. From the Kosovo experience, they concluded that the United States and Europe were not prepared to consider Russian wishes even in fairly minor affairs. That was the breaking point. If Russian desires could not be accommodated even in a minor matter like this, then clearly Russia and the West were in conflict. For the Russians, as we said, the question was how to respond. Having declined to respond in Kosovo, the Russians decided to respond where they had all the cards: in South Ossetia.

    Moscow had two motives, the lesser of which was as a tit-for-tat over Kosovo. If Kosovo could be declared independent under Western sponsorship, then South Ossetia and Abkhazia, the two breakaway regions of Georgia, could be declared independent under Russian sponsorship. Any objections from the United States and Europe would simply confirm their hypocrisy. This was important for internal Russian political reasons, but the second motive was far more important.

    Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin once said that the fall of the Soviet Union was a geopolitical disaster. This didn’t mean that he wanted to retain the Soviet state; rather, it meant that the disintegration of the Soviet Union had created a situation in which Russian national security was threatened by Western interests. As an example, consider that during the Cold War, St. Petersburg was about 1,200 miles away from a NATO country. Today it is about 60 miles away from Estonia, a NATO member. The disintegration of the Soviet Union had left Russia surrounded by a group of countries hostile to Russian interests in various degrees and heavily influenced by the United States, Europe and, in some cases, China.

    Resurrecting the Russian Sphere
    Putin did not want to re-establish the Soviet Union, but he did want to re-establish the Russian sphere of influence in the former Soviet Union region. To accomplish that, he had to do two things. First, he had to re-establish the credibility of the Russian army as a fighting force, at least in the context of its region. Second, he had to establish that Western guarantees, including NATO membership, meant nothing in the face of Russian power. He did not want to confront NATO directly, but he did want to confront and defeat a power that was closely aligned with the United States, had U.S. support, aid and advisers and was widely seen as being under American protection. Georgia was the perfect choice.

    By invading Georgia as Russia did (competently if not brilliantly) , Putin re-established the credibility of the Russian army. But far more importantly, by doing this Putin revealed an open secret: While the United States is tied down in the Middle East, American guarantees have no value. This lesson is not for American consumption. It is something that, from the Russian point of view, the Ukrainians, the Balts and the Central Asians need to digest. Indeed, it is a lesson Putin wants to transmit to Poland and the Czech Republic as well. The United States wants to place ballistic missile defense installations in those countries, and the Russians want them to understand that allowing this to happen increases their risk, not their security.

    The Russians knew the United States would denounce their attack. This actually plays into Russian hands. The more vocal senior leaders are, the greater the contrast with their inaction, and the Russians wanted to drive home the idea that American guarantees are empty talk.

    The Russians also know something else that is of vital importance: For the United States, the Middle East is far more important than the Caucasus, and Iran is particularly important. The United States wants the Russians to participate in sanctions against Iran. Even more importantly, they do not want the Russians to sell weapons to Iran, particularly the highly effective S-300 air defense system. Georgia is a marginal issue to the United States; Iran is a central issue. The Russians are in a position to pose serious problems for the United States not only in Iran, but also with weapons sales to other countries, like Syria.

    Therefore, the United States has a problem — it either must reorient its strategy away from the Middle East and toward the Caucasus, or it has to seriously limit its response to Georgia to avoid a Russian counter in Iran. Even if the United States had an appetite for another war in Georgia at this time, it would have to calculate the Russian response in Iran — and possibly in Afghanistan (even though Moscow’s interests there are currently aligned with those of Washington).

    In other words, the Russians have backed the Americans into a corner. The Europeans, who for the most part lack expeditionary militaries and are dependent upon Russian energy exports, have even fewer options. If nothing else happens, the Russians will have demonstrated that they have resumed their role as a regional power. Russia is not a global power by any means, but a significant regional power with lots of nuclear weapons and an economy that isn’t all too shabby at the moment. It has also compelled every state on the Russian periphery to re-evaluate its position relative to Moscow. As for Georgia, the Russians appear ready to demand the resignation of President Mikhail Saakashvili. Militarily, that is their option. That is all they wanted to demonstrate, and they have demonstrated it.

    The war in Georgia, therefore, is Russia’s public return to great power status. This is not something that just happened — it has been unfolding ever since Putin took power, and with growing intensity in the past five years. Part of it has to do with the increase of Russian power, but a great deal of it has to do with the fact that the Middle Eastern wars have left the United States off-balance and short on resources. As we have written, this conflict created a window of opportunity. The Russian goal is to use that window to assert a new reality throughout the region while the Americans are tied down elsewhere and dependent on the Russians. The war was far from a surprise; it has been building for months. But the geopolitical foundations of the war have been building since 1992. Russia has been an empire for centuries. The last 15 years or so were not the new reality, but simply an aberration that would be rectified. And now it is being rectified.

    Tell Stratfor What You Think

    This report may be forwarded or republished on your website with attribution to http://www.stratfor. com

  • Prup, I think you oversimplify what drives Cheney. He is, of course, selfish, power-mad and greedy as you say, and as close to pure evil as we’ve likely ever had in the US government. But to suggest there is no bigger picture, no broader objective is not entirely correct. It has been fairly well reported that his experiences with Nixon’s fall convinced him that the “overreaction” (as he saw it) inappropriately weakened the Presidency. Now, this may well be a high-falutin’ sounding cover story for what really is petty vengeance from a Nixonite, but either way the destruction of Congressional and Judiciary authority in favor of a unitary executive – a “monument” that will last long after he is in any executive (or pseudo-executive fourth branch) position – is certainly a broader goal akin even if admittedly different in scope from the 1000 year Reich.

  • Here’s an interesting ling at Salon and how McCain treats technology. It is worth a read, check it out: the title is John McCain, Internet Dunce.
    Here is a choice quote that will challenge McCain’s expertise and experience mantra:

    …media experts have characterized McCain’s Commerce Committee tenure as a lost opportunity to make progress on telecommunications policy. “The thing that stands out for his entire tenure is that he has never had a priority, and has never had, to my knowledge, any accomplishment of any kind at all.

    and

    …He has served as a member of the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation since coming to the Senate in 1987, and as chairman from 1997 to 2001, and again from 2003 to 2005. He oversaw the committee at a crucial point in history: the explosion of the Internet economy…

    That doesn’t sound very flattering, when you have no accomplishments in all those years, you’re claiming to be having experience.

  • Comments are closed.