Monday Open Thread
The Cavs are struggling against the more experienced Spurs. (link ) President Bush says an immigration bill will be signed and says he, not Congress, will determine Gonzales' fate. (link
)
This is an open thread.
Submitted by Mike Pridmore on Mon, 2007-06-11 07:29
Tags:
Comments :
hey hey
Who enjoyed the welcome that Bush received in Albania and Bulgaria? Didn't it feel good to see all those cheering crowds and Bush working them?
"To discuss evil in a manner implying neutrality, is to sanction it." AR
You'd see those cheering crowds here in the US
if dubya and Darth were to both resign simultaneously.
Maybe they would
like to keep him!
Do they have an army that could help relieve some of the burden on our troops, so they don't have to be redeployed so many times?
I'm only half stupid
well
Unlike some other ungrateful countries, both Albania and Bulgaria have troops in Afghanistan and Iraq. Bulgaria just extended their service until March 2008 I believe from the MSNBC article.
"To discuss evil in a manner implying neutrality, is to sanction it." AR
The world is so ungrateful
Poor Bush.
I'm only half stupid
Don't forget Poland!
Albania and Bulgaria
I saw where Albania actually offered to triple their number of soldiers in Iraq... to 140. By my back of the napkin calculations, that means they have 46 and 2/3rds soldiers currently in Iraq.
Meanwhile Gordon Brown is going to be plotting to withdraw the few thousand British troops that are left in Iraq. All along, Britain has been the only significant partner we have had in this effort. Token commitments of a couple hundred from here and a couple dozen from there just ain't cutting it.
Just compare the numbers of troop and dollar commitments in this war to the previous gulf War. In gulf War I, the international community provided almost 200,000 troops, and the international community donated tens of billions of dollars to defray the cost of the war and it ended up costing the U.S. basically nothing.
So go ahead and gloat about Albania and Bulgaria if you wish, but recognize that the overall record of gathering material support for this effort from the international community was dismal at best. D-I-S-M-A-L.
skymutt: accept no substitutes!
Yes it sent
goosebumps down my back, similar to the ones I get when I see crowds cheering Adolf and Benito circa WW 2.
I love it when
you speak your mind!
I'm only half stupid
I don't see the relevance (nt)
Come, my friends. 'Tis not too late to seek a newer world -- Tennyson
Lieberman.....a twit that keeps on givng.
But the question is giving what and to whom?
Here's Joe, Independent Senator for CT (thank god the Democrats canned his sorry butt) suggesting that what the US needs to do to make the terrible situation in Iraq work is to bomb Iran.
I had a Logic class in school. Joe's logic follows NONE of the rules I had learned. Bombing Iran won't make Iraqi's like the US any better, it won't make Iraqi's more subservient to the US, it'd just piss off more of them. So we'd deepen the cesspool we've now put our GI's in only to widen the pool by adding Iran to it as well.
I can understand why some here feel attacking Iran is a positive. I understand it makes those of you who support that action feel better about the US's place in the world and teaching other nations "a lesson". I understand that making folks feel good by attacking a non-threatening nation is exactly how we've gotten into what we now have in Iraq. I also understand that appeasing those who would act in a manner that is counterproductive to US aims & goals, counterproductive to Armed Forces we now have in the field so as to sooth a bruised ego is the logic of spoiled petty children.
Sometimes, you have to put your chin up, weather the hard stuff and do the right thing. I've yet to see any of that from the bush43 Administration & it's most fevered supporters.
Funny, I never would have guessed!
:) You make a great straight man (comedically speaking).
But given this revelation, what is the logic you are using to deduce that bombing Iran would piss the Iraqis off?
I'm the Bugs Bunny of Swords Crossed!
-4 Strongly Disagree - 0 Meh - Strongly Agree +4Just curious
is logic like a religon (a belief system) to you?
There are logical reasons for everything, but doesn't it always come down to the point of view which you choose to do your evaluation from.
Logic: the premise of argument in support of a belief.
I'm only half stupid
Um, have you been paying attention *at all*?
The people we've been working with in Iraq are heavily connected to Iran. And you have to ask why an unprovoked attack on Iran would alienate them?
I came. I saw. I posted.
Veni, Vidi, Bitchy.
101
The logic is quite simple. If we bomb the Shia, they will be pissed off. QED.
You may feel that the border that divides the Middle East's Shia into Iranian and Iraqi is important, but they don't.
Socialisme ou Barbarie!
Gotta dsagree here
It's been pointed out that most Iraqi Shiites remained loyal to Iraq during the Iran-Iraq war. Because of this, many Iraqi Shiites lost loved ones at the hands of Iran. If there was no sense of Iraqi nationalism and no uneasiness about Iran amongst Iraqi Shiites, southern Iraq would have long ago been a part of Iran.
If there is no Iraqi nationalism whatsoever, no desire amongst Iraqi Shiites to be anything other than Iranians, please explain Iraqi Shiite behavior during the Iran-Iraq war.
skymutt: accept no substitutes!
No one's saying that...
No one is saying that. But you have to remember that the people by and large leading the Shia right now spent many years hiding out in Iran and building connections there. Right after he was made prime minister Jaafari went to Iran and laid flowers on Khomeini's grave.
http://www.gulf-times.com/site/topics/article.asp?cu_no=2&item_no=44924&...
The two main Shia parties are SCIRI and DAWA. DAWA during the Iran-Iraq war functioned as a terrorist group attacking Iraqi targets. Both parties have substantial ties to Iran. Those ties (and hence a portion of their powerbase) are threatened if the US attacks Iran.
I came. I saw. I posted.
Veni, Vidi, Bitchy.
102
I don't see what the Iraq of today has in common with the Iraq of the 80s.
Back then, nobody bothered to notice whether their neighbors were Shia or Sunni. Kurds certainly stood out, being a different ethnicity, but they were tolerated because there was nothing motivating people not to tolerate them (peace and tolerance is a default human value that needs corrupting before a group becomes violent and hateful).
Now religion is the divider, where it used to be Nation. It should be easy to see how being attacked by a foreign country makes one's own country find solidarity real quick. Look how liberals and conservatives rallied around their country despite their differences after 9/11 (until the latter went off deep end and left the country behind). Existential conflicts have a way of doing that.
It's not like Shia and Sunni in Iraq had a history of conflict prior to our arrival. But now, because of Bush's insistance on quotas during the sham elections, we've divided them in a way that makes the Iran-Iraq conflict irrelevant. Nowadays, Shias in Iraq, evidenced everywhere, are far more pro-Shi'ite than pro-Iraqi. Being relentlessly attaced by Sunnis had a little something to do with it (and the Sunnis would not have attacked had we not made it look like Iraq was now a Shi'ite nation).
Socialisme ou Barbarie!
Income inequality in the US.
Two professors — Thomas Piketty of the Paris School of Economics and Emmanuel Saez of the University of California, Berkeley — have found that the share of gross personal income of the top 1 percent of American earners rose to 17.4 percent in 2005 from 8.2 percent in 1980.
...Public policies have played a significant role in contributing to the growth of income inequality. Since 1980 unions have weakened, the minimum wage hasn't come close to keeping up with inflation, and marginal income tax rates have been cut.... A result has been declining bargaining power for workers and the rise of a winner-take-all environment.
Why are those at the top of the chain getting so much?
Pink Floyd's Waters on poverty
Article here
. The amount of money needed to make a significant difference in the lives of people experiencing extreme poverty is minimal.
Come, my friends. 'Tis not too late to seek a newer world -- Tennyson
I so agree with this
And stopping extreme poverty in the end, is the best foreign policy.
I'm only half stupid
Our global war
against Islamic extremism is a carefully constructed cover for a lot of war profiteering. If we could pretend to be doing something about poverty at the same time, what a twofer! I know Ender probably disagrees, but color me cynical with respect to the motives and capabilities of the current inhabitants of 1600 Pennsylvania and their lackies. I do agree with your point Brendan and that of the article you quote. But I don't expect anything meaningful to be done about global poverty, from DC at least, until some serious changes happen. Until then we will have to depend upon genuine philanthropy.
Justice
Harsh sentence
for consensual teen sex is voided by judge.
I mentioned this case before
, and there was a compare/contrast (with Hilton) on dKos 
a few days ago.
Come, my friends. 'Tis not too late to seek a newer world -- Tennyson
that was
a pretty horrible case of perversion of justice. Glad it finally stopped.
"To discuss evil in a manner implying neutrality, is to sanction it." AR
Agreed. n/t
I'm the Bugs Bunny of Swords Crossed!
-4 Strongly Disagree - 0 Meh - Strongly Agree +4Thanks guys (nt)
Come, my friends. 'Tis not too late to seek a newer world -- Tennyson
Is there any word yet
why the state attorney general is appealing? I can't think of a single good reason why, even if there are legitimate legal justifications (e.g. the a.g. could argue that the judge has no authority to apply new laws to old crimes, for example).
Saint, n. A dead sinner revised and edited. - Ambrose Bierce
Appeal coming...
There will be an appeal. From the AJC we see that:
The appeal will most likely fail though. And it should.
http://wealthweekly.blogspot.com
Wii FC:2805-8311-8040-2678 Brawl: 2277-7051-2186
I had missed
some of the particulars of the case. It was definitely a travesty of justice.
Does anyone know...
...the race of the girl in question? It might be pertinent to the question of the disproportionate sentence and continuing hounding by the DA.
I came. I saw. I posted.
Veni, Vidi, Bitchy.
White girl
Edit: Although the AG is black if I'm not mistaken.
http://wealthweekly.blogspot.com
Wii FC:2805-8311-8040-2678 Brawl: 2277-7051-2186
He is.
I don't see the race angle here so much (then again, I wonder how much teen sex goes on in white communities that never gets reported). But I think puritanical notions of sex are the more important factor here.
edit: not so much puritanical as actively fanatical. People can be puritans if they want to, but passing ludicriously punative laws to punish other people is just beyond me.
Saint, n. A dead sinner revised and edited. - Ambrose Bierce
What I find interesting is the...
...reaction to the appeal @ dKos
Some responses were
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/6/11/115740/236
The reaction of many kossacks was to blame conservatives and Republicans. Apparently, they are unaware that Georgia Attorney General Baker is an African American - Democrat!
Hilarious!
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
-Thomas Paine: The American Crisis, No. 4, 1777
How will bombing Iran help Iraq
Is Iran helping AlQueda or the sunni insurgents?
That seems against their nature as Iranians are shiites and Shiites are in power now in Iraq and compose the government and the police and military.
Can someone tell Lieberman that?
Also Lieberman et al talks about war against Islamic extremists? How can military only solution solve that?
For example, Tim McVeigh of Oklahoma bombing--if they were given lots of money and arms like that of Al Queda and had lots of supporters because of perceived persecution then McVeigh will not just be an isolated terrorists but a sigificant big group.
Thus the solution so that McVeigh and all the extremists will be insignificant and minor player is not to provide them money, arms and support and to win hearts and minds of potential supporters because even if you remove and kill McVeigh if their group has money arms and support they will just be replaced.
Thus we are allowing Hezbollah, Hamas and Taliban to grow by not countering what they are doing to their communities. If instead Western world, US or Israel provides the services these terrorists groups give to their communities, these terrorists will be isolated. Then it will be easy to destroy them because they dont have money arms, support, and new recruits.
Joe is an idiot
Here is a good explanation from Professor Cole:
qui tacet consentire
Equally idiotic to promise to stay for 50 years
No sense pretending we are not occupiers.
Isn't that the reason they are fighting us so hard in the first place??? The resent the wests attempts to take over the middle east?
I'm only half stupid
The fallacy in this is ...
that we actually are already doing many of these things. You just don't read about them in the MSM because, well, that would be good news.
I'm the Bugs Bunny of Swords Crossed!
-4 Strongly Disagree - 0 Meh - Strongly Agree +4Care to back that up with some evidence? -nt.
I came. I saw. I posted.
Veni, Vidi, Bitchy.
Sure.
http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/crawford200604100655.asp
Scattered throughout this article are plenty of examples.
That is but one article. Don't tell me that you haven't heard stories from US soldiers complaining that the MSM isn't reporting the good things, because I am sure you have. Many of those stories are related to doing these types of things.
Want more? Do you own research. I know the truth already.
I'm the Bugs Bunny of Swords Crossed!
-4 Strongly Disagree - 0 Meh - Strongly Agree +4Another good ruling
Can't detain
"enemy combatant" who is a legal US resident without charges.
Kind of staggering we're even arguing about this.
Come, my friends. 'Tis not too late to seek a newer world -- Tennyson
Habeus always provokes an interesting exchange.
mind you, I use the term interesting in a polite way.
Gonzales vs. a No Confidence vote.
Well, today's the day we find out which way this one goes. Apparently the vote'll happen this evening EST.
I'm not sure of the importance on the measure. Don't get me wrong. I think it is an important first step to the real solution....Impeach Gonzales, for the good of your children, for the love of America, for the signal it alone will send the Administration that they too must obey the people of these United States.
It helps put pressure
on the President to get rid of him.
Have you been following the details of this.
Pushing past the limits of the law and in my view breaking it all over the place.
Some really good people were trashed along the way.
I'm only half stupid
You mean like Alberto?
I'm the Bugs Bunny of Swords Crossed!
-4 Strongly Disagree - 0 Meh - Strongly Agree +4He serves at the pleasure of the .....
It seems like Alberto is the Mike Brown of Justice.
Justice at the Federal Level is a sacred oath. Partisanship and politics is left at the door.
Ask the Honorable Republican Justice Todd Graves from Missouri.
You won't and don't believe me no matter how many facts are in your face, so I see no point at all in discussing it.
I'm only half stupid
He didn't offer it for a discussion.
It was a throw away line.
If he believed it, he'd tell us why the AG is "good".
I have to feel bad for John Cole
He laments today:
http://www.balloon-juice.com/?p=8118
What was he talking about?
http://www.galluppoll.com/content/?ci=27847
I'm sorry, Mr. Cole. Your (ex-)party drank deep of the koolaid.
I came. I saw. I posted.
Veni, Vidi, Bitchy.
This is news to you?
Given the number of religious people in the party?
I'm the Bugs Bunny of Swords Crossed!
-4 Strongly Disagree - 0 Meh - Strongly Agree +4There's religious...
...and then there's stupid. I don't generally conflate the two.
I came. I saw. I posted.
Veni, Vidi, Bitchy.
That's why the religious folks call it ...
faith, stupid.
I'm the Bugs Bunny of Swords Crossed!
-4 Strongly Disagree - 0 Meh - Strongly Agree +4Calling someone stupid......
Do you think that's appropriate? He didn't call anyone stupid. He made a distinction between faith and stupid.
You called him stupid.
Reps filibuster AGAG no confidence bill
The republicans managed to filibuster the senate vote of no confidence in A.G. Gonzales. Seven reps voted yes. Final was 53-48 against cloture.
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aNQwzVjLiDJ4&refer=home
Of course I have to say that having a vote of no confidence blocked rather than defeated is kind of a no confidence vote in and of itself. Don't you think?
I came. I saw. I posted.
Veni, Vidi, Bitchy.
When are Republicans
who I have seen question Alberton in disgust, literally disgust, and that includes Lindsey Graham, in the Senate hearings going to stop holding onto Bush's coattails as if they are drowning.
Even if it had passed Bush will NEVER get rid of him. Ever. He knows too much.
Imagine what the next AG is gonna step into........!
I'm only half stupid
Why would you say that?
By my way of thinking this means that this poll of the US Senate puts Gonzales at a 52% approval rating amongst the Senators, and a 100% approval rating amongst the US Vice-Presidents! :)
That's way better than the Democrat's approval rating amongst the general population.
For all the left's bluster on the topic, this was a rather anemic showing. Don't you think?
EDIT:
Looks like the dumb chimp is gonna skunk you again! :)
I'm the Bugs Bunny of Swords Crossed!
-4 Strongly Disagree - 0 Meh - Strongly Agree +4Math
Mistake on my part: the vote was 53-38 not 48. Since there's only 100 senators I should have caught that immediately.
Regardless though given that 53 senators voted for cloture I find your estimate of his approval a little high.
I suppose you can look at it like that. more realistically it means one more piece of ammo to be used against the republicans in 2008. Now they've had to vote to support Bush's war and his mendacious AG. I somehow doubt their election opponents will let them forget that.
I came. I saw. I posted.
Veni, Vidi, Bitchy.
Vulture Funds
Google It.
It makes the US Attorney General Scandal look tame...... and someone whose inititials are RG has been sucking up the money from this.
Gordon Brown of the UK, says this has got to stop.
Of course the liberal media in the US has not been covering this.
Will Bono finally get pissed and say something outloud..... like screaming!
Look for a campaign to discredit John Conyers who promises to hold hearings on this.......... issue, which is getting to the meat on the bone of how things have really been working.
I'm only half stupid
:) LOL
I stand corrected. But of course, that IS what I get when I cite YOU as a source for my information! :)
(Come on, even you gotta admit this is funny.)
Even so, the revised estimate puts his approval rating amongst the Senators at 38% with 9% undecided.
I can't put my finger on the Seante approval ratings at the moment, but isn't this higher than the Democratic Senators get amongst the general population?
I'm the Bugs Bunny of Swords Crossed!
-4 Strongly Disagree - 0 Meh - Strongly Agree +4the lieberman vote
is food for thought. The fact that the guy voted NO against all the dems and even some republicans suggests that he is really moving further and further away from the Dem party. If Dems push him too much he will flip.
And despite the idiotic "conventional wisdom" on dkos about some stupid organizing resolution the Dems passed in the beginning of this Congress, the Senate would flip to GOP control as a simple majority would vote to declare that resolution against the rules, with Cheney breaking the tie.
"To discuss evil in a manner implying neutrality, is to sanction it." AR
Lieberman
Good riddance.
Seriously, I hope he does flip. Republicans have marginal control of the senate will actually probably hurt them come 2008. Having a 50-50 split would require Cheney to be on hand for any vote they wanted to actually have a majority on and frankly the more Cheney is in the public eye the better. Not only is he hugely unpopular but it also reduces the number of elderly men he'll shoot in the face this year.
On top of that if Lieberman flips it makes it much less likely he'll win his next senate election assuming he wasn't going to retire. Lastly it means he'll have no more mystique to use to get the press all hot and bothered. He'll be just another typical rep instead of the maverick dem.
I really don't see much of any downside to his flipping.
I came. I saw. I posted.
Veni, Vidi, Bitchy.
I wish Lieberman would go.
When I go back and visit my family in CT this summer, if I find any of them voted for Lieberman I will slap their asses silly. Except for my Aunt as she's the family matriarch and can pretty much do whatever she wants with my blessings.
Seriously, Lieberman is going to vote how he does no matter who runs the Senate. His switching won't affect the Senate Leadership because unlike the House, that doesn't change until the next session of Congress.
the French Right is destroying the Left in the new
parliamentary elections. From Another Win for Sarko
:
That's how you win.
"To discuss evil in a manner implying neutrality, is to sanction it." AR
That's a twist.
Now Ender is suggestin the way to win is
TO BE FRENCH.
heh
this is their chance to redeem themselves.
"To discuss evil in a manner implying neutrality, is to sanction it." AR